# HISTORY OF ZIONISM
1600‒1918

Transcriber’s Notes

The cover image was provided by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.

Punctuation has been standardized.

Most abbreviations have been expanded in tool-tips for screen-readers and may be seen by hovering the mouse over the abbreviation.

The text may show quotations within quotations, all set off by similar quote marks. The inner quotations have been changed to alternate quote marks for improved readability.

This book was written in a period when many words had not become standardized in their spelling. Words may have multiple spelling variations or inconsistent hyphenation in the text. These have been left unchanged unless indicated with a Transcriber’s Note.

Index references have not been checked for accuracy.

The symbol ‘‡’ indicates the description in parenthesis has been added to an illustration. This may be needed if there is no caption or if the caption does not describe the image adequately.

Footnotes are identified in the text with a superscript number and are shown immediately below the paragraph in which they appear.

Transcriber’s Notes are used when making corrections to the text or to provide additional information for the modern reader. These notes are identified by ♦♠♥♣ symbols in the text and are shown immediately below the paragraph in which they appear.

Baron Edmond de Rothschild

BY

M. Aime Moro

From a photograph lent by the Author

History of Zionism

1600‒1918

BY

NAHUM SOKOLOW

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

THE Rᵀ. HON. A. J. BALFOUR, M.P.

WITH NINETY PORTRAITS AND ILLUSTRATIONS

SELECTED AND ARRANGED BY ISRAEL SOLOMONS

IN TWO VOLUMES

VOL II.

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

M. STÉPHEN PICHON

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS FOR FRANCE

LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO.

39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON

FOURTH AVENUE & 30TH STREET, NEW YORK
BOMBAY, CALCUTTA AND MADRAS

1919

## PREFATORY NOTE

The present volume contains the continuation and documentation of Volume I.

After the conclusion of the historical review in its chronological order, it was considered desirable to supplement a portion of the narrative by adding further chapters, which will be found at the beginning of the present volume. These chapters bring the historical narrative up to the outbreak of the War in 1914.

The developments in the Zionist Movement during the War are dealt with in a separate account, which is not claimed to be, in the proper sense of the word, an historical study, but an account of recent activities up to the Peace Conference.

The present volume also contains an introduction, written by the French Ministre des Affaires Etrangères, M. Pichon, which arrived too late to be included in the first volume, and a character sketch of the late Sir Mark Sykes, whose death occurred while the present volume was in the press, to whose memory a tribute is offered.

The appendices contain not only the text of documents referred to in the body of the book, many of them hitherto unpublished, but also essays on subjects related to the main purpose of the work—for instance, Jewish art, and Hebrew literature—and notes of a bibliographical or critical character.

It is desired to point out that the nature of the subject with which this work deals rendered it inevitable that it should to some extent assume an encyclopædic rather than a narrative character. The innumerable sources from which Zionism draws its being, the geographical dispersion of the Jewish people, the many events and phenomena outside of the life of the Jewish people which have had and still have their bearing on the development of the Jewish National idea, give it inevitably the form that it has assumed. The author is well aware that the History of Zionism as narrated in these pages does not appear as altogether a symmetrical structure. Some periods dealt with in the story are somewhat disjointed, and as a necessary consequence the record of those periods reflects the same character. A writer who cared more for the form than for the correctness of the narrative would in such a case have recourse to his imagination in order to fill in the blanks. The present author has not, however, done so. He has attempted rather to let Zionism appear as it really was in the different countries and epochs with which he has dealt. Where his narrative is fragmentary events were fragmentary. In the earliest periods the different elements of Zionism were sometimes completely detached from one another. An exact description of these therefore takes necessarily an encyclopædic character. But Zionism develops as a unity, and at the end it will be found to offer to the reader a united picture.

The present book treats of the History of Zionism especially in England and France, but it has been found both impossible and also undesirable to exclude from the narrative all references to certain important events and personalities of other countries. Zionism in England and France, however, forms the main thesis of these volumes. Furthermore, this book is not only a history of the Zionist efforts among the Jews, it also narrates the history of similar efforts by non-Jews, in connexion with political events and literary manifestations in the countries in which they worked. At the same time the author has endeavoured as little as possible to cover ground that has already been repeatedly traversed, his intention being rather to break new ground and especially to bring to light hitherto unknown sources, old and forgotten prints, unpublished manuscripts and archives. These he has used to illustrate and document his narrative.

The plan which the author has followed falls under three headings:⁠—

(I.)The special treatment of Zionism in England and France;

(II.)A particular consideration of the pro-Zionist efforts outside of Jewry; and

(III.)The publication of previously unknown literary and archival sources.

In accordance with this plan this history begins in the year 1600, although the history of Zionism in reality opened much earlier, even perhaps at the beginning of the Jewish history of the countries dealt with.

Material for a thorough treatment of the History of Zionism in other countries, including many monographs and historical notices which remain in the hands of the author, as well as further recent diplomatic and other documents relating to the most recent development of Zionism and in connexion with the Peace Conference of 1919, will be used as the basis of further volumes.

Publication of an index to the work might well have been deferred until these volumes had been completed, but the author thinks that he ought not to delay one any longer. At the end of the present volume, therefore, the reader will find a thorough index of persons and of subjects, for which Mr. Jacob Mann, M.A., is responsible and to whom he hereby tenders his thanks.

Finally, the author wishes to supplement the expression of thanks addressed to those of his friends who are mentioned in the Preface to the first volume of this work for the assistance they have rendered him in its preparation, and to mention in particular the good services of Mr. Albert M. Hyamson and M. André Spire.

Paris, June, 1919.

## INTRODUCTION
By M. STÉPHEN PICHON

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS FOR FRANCE

Fidèle aux traditions de son histoire, la France vient de montrer une fois de plus, au prix du sang de tant de ses fils, comment elle entend les devoirs que lui impose son rôle séculaire d’émancipatrice des opprimés. Elle sort aujourd’hui victorieuse d’une lutte décisive, soutenue au nom du Droit menacé par la brutalité d’un impérialisme sans scrupules. Champion des grandes idées qu’il a, plus que tout autre, semées à travers le monde, notre pays a puisé dans la conscience d’être un vivant symbôle de justice, la force de terrasser son adversaire. Il a, du moins aujourd’hui, le droit de se dire, non sans fierté, qu’il n’est plus au monde une race ou une nation qui ne puisse faire entendre ses légitimes aspirations, et qui ne sache qu’en France il y aura toujours un cœur pour les adopter.

Dans la paix comme dans la guerre, la France, étroitement unie à ses Alliés, veut demeurer fidèle à sa parole. Elle a promis aux nationalités naguère asservies de défendre leurs intérêts et de faire respecter leurs droits. Elle ne reniera pas une promesse dont la réalisation, en inaugurant une ère nouvelle de l’histoire du monde, justifiera les sacrifices consentis à la cause commune. Elle ne laissera se commettre aucune injustice, d’où qu’elle vienne, et qu’elle qu’en soit la victime. Elle ne saurait permettre, en particulier, sans protester hautement, qu’une majorité ethnique ou confessionnelle puisse désormais abuser impunément de sa force à l’égard d’autres éléments voisins, plus faibles ou plus dispersés.

C’est dire l’écho que ne pourra manquer d’éveiller chez les Français la voix éloquente du représentant le plus autorisé du Sionisme. Monsieur Sokolow, mettant au service de son idéal, un talent qui n’en est plus à son premier essai, s’attache à nous retracer l’histoire des doctrines au triomphe desquelles il n’a cessé de consacrer le meilleur de ses forces. Sachant combien il importe, aujourd’hui, de démontrer historiquement les origines et les antécédents des idées que l’on professe, il a voulu nous exposer les titres que possède le Sionisme à s’imposer à l’attention des Alliés, au moment où ceux-ci procèdent à une reconstitution du monde entier. Monsieur Sokolow, dont la foi dans le succès final de nos armes ne connut jamais de défaillances, possède une foi au moins égale dans l’esprit de justice qui préside à l’œuvre de la Conférence de la Paix. Les sympathies et les concours précieux qu’il a su trouver chez nos amis Britanniques, et dont Mr. Balfour lui renouvelle ici-même l’assurance la plus formelle, sont aux protagonistes du Sionisme un sûr garant de l’accueil que la France réserve à leur généreuse initiative.

Non seulement, en effet la race juive n’a cessé d’être, au cours des siècles, persécutée, décimée, poursuivie sans trêve par une haine incapable de désarmer; plus malheureuse encore que tant d’autres peuples opprimés, qui ont pu conserver au moins un symbôle de leur grand passé, les Juifs n’ont pu sauver ce dernier vestige. D’autres qu’eux mêmes sont devenus les maîtres de la Judée. Dispersés à travers le monde, beaucoup aspirent aujourd’hui plus que jamais à reprendre la chaîne brisée par tant de conquérants successifs, de leurs traditions ethniques et religieuses: ils pensent aussi qu’une telle restauration n’est possible qu’appuyée sur des réalités, c’est à dire, en l’espèce, sur un foyer moral national reconstitué au milieu des ruines de l’antique Judée. Qui donc, sans avoir perdu les plus élémentaires sentiments d’humanité et de justice, pourrait refuser aux exilés de revendiquer leur place, au même titre que les autres éléments indigènes, dans cette Palestine où un contrôle collectif des Puissances européennes assurera désormais à chacun le respect de ses droits les plus sacrés?

Entrée en guerre pour assurer la victoire définitive du Droit sur la force, la France se félicite de l’appui que le Sionisme a rencontré chez elle et chez ses Alliés. Une doctrine qui a pour elle, outre la justice, l’éloquence d’avocats tels que M. Sokolow est assurée de succès. Je suis heureux de l’occasion qui m’est offerte de réitérer les vœux que le Gouvernement de la République n’a cessé de faire pour le triomphe final d’une cause qui rallie tant de sympathies françaises.

## CONTENTS

PREFATORY NOTE

INTRODUCTION by M. Stéphen Pichon

CONTENTS of Volume II.

ILLUSTRATIONS to Volume II.

SIR MARK SYKES⁠—A Tribute

CHAPTER XLIXA. From the Second to the Fourth Congress

Chovevé Zion and Zionists in England—Louis Loewe—Nathan Marcus Adler—Albert Löwy—Abraham Benisch—The Rev. M. J. Raphall—Dr. M. Gaster—Rabbi Samuel Mohilewer—English representation at the Second and Third Congresses—The Fourth Congress in London.

CHAPTER XLIXB. The Death of Herzl

England and Zionism—Sir B. Arnold in the Spectator—Cardinal Vaughan—Lord Rosebery—The death of Herzl—David Wolffsohn—Prof. Otto Warburg—Zionism in the smaller states.

CHAPTER XLIXC. The Pogroms

The year 1906—Pogroms—Emigration—Conder and his activities—An Emigration Conference—The Eighth Congress—The question of the Headquarters.

CHAPTER XLIXD. The Death of Wolffsohn

1910‒14—The Tenth and Eleventh Congresses—Death of Wolffsohn.

CHAPTER XLIXE. On the Eve of the War

Baron Edmond de Rothschild in Palestine—Sir John Gray Hill—Professor S. Schechter—South African Statesmen—A Canadian Statesman—Christian religious literature again.

ZIONISM DURING THE WAR, 1914‒1918—

⭘ General Survey

⭘ Zionist Propaganda in Wartime

⭘ Conferences

⭘ The Jewish National Fund

⭘ Zionism and Jewish Relief Work

⭘ The Russian Revolution

⭘ Political Activities in England and the Allied Countries

⭘ Conference of English Zionist Federation in 1917

⭘ Zionism and Public Opinion in England

⭘ Co-ordination of Zionists’ Reports

⭘ The British Declaration and its Reception

⭘ London Opera House Demonstration

⭘ Manifesto to the Jewish People

⭘ Declarations of the Entente Governments

APPENDICES—

I. | The Prophets and the Idea of a National Restoration
II. | Rev. Paul Knell: Israel and England Paralleled
III. | Matthew Arnold on Righteousness in the Old Testament
IV. | “Esperança de Israel,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
V. | “Spes Israelis,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
VI. | “Hope of Israel—Ten Tribes ... in America—מקוה ישראל—De Hoop Van Israel,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
VII. | The Humble Addresses of Manasseh Ben-Israel
VIII. | “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
IX. | Enseña A Pecadores
X. | “De Termino Vitæ—of the Term of Life,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
XI. | “נשמת חיים—De Immortalitate Animæ,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
XII. | “Rights of the Kingdom,” by John Sadler
XIII. | “Nova Solyma,” edited by the Rev. Walter Begley
XIV. | “Præadamitæ—Men before Adam,” by Isaac de La Peyrère
XV. | Isaac Vossius
XVI. | “Doomes-Day”
XVII. | “Restauration of All Israel And Judah”
XVIII. | “Apology for the Honorable Nation of the Jews—Apologia por la Noble Nacion de los Ivdios—Verantwoordinge voor de edele Volcken der Jooden,” by Edward Nicholas
XIX. | “A Word for the Armie,” by Hugh Peters
XX. | Isaac da Fonseca Aboab
XXI. | Dr. Abraham Zacutus Lusitanus
XXII. | Jacob Judah Aryeh de Leon
XXIII. | Thesouro Dos Dinim
XXIV. | “Rettung der Juden,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel
XXV. | Newes from Rome
XXVI. | “The World’s Great Restauration,” by Sir Henry Finch
XXVII. | “The World’s Great Restauration”—continued
XXVIII. | Philip Ferdinandus
XXIX. | Petition of the Jewes Johanna and Ebenezer Cart(en) (w)right
XXX. | “The Messiah Already Come,” by John Harrison
XXXI. | “Discourse of Mr. John Dury to Mr. Thorowgood—Jewes in America,” by Tho. Thorowgood—“Americans no Jews,” by Hamon l’Estrange
XXXII. | “Whether it be Lawful to Admit Jews into a Christian Commonwealth,” by John Dury
XXXIII. | “Life and Death of Henry Jessey”
XXXIV. | “The Glory of Jehudah and Israel—De Heerlichkeydt ... van Jehuda en Israel,” by Henry Jesse
XXXV. | Of the Late Proceeds at White-Hall, concerning the Jews (Henry Jesse)
XXXVI. | Bishop Thomas Newton and the Restoration of Israel
XXXVII. | “A Call to the Christians and the Hebrews”
XXXVIII. | The Centenary of the British and Foreign Bible Society
XXXIX. | Lord Kitchener and the Palestine Exploration Fund
XL. | Bonaparte’s Call to the Jews
XLI. | Letter addressed by a Jew to his Co-religionists in 1798
XLII. | “Transactions of the Parisian Sanhedrim,” by Diogene Tama
XLIII. | “Signs of the Times”—“A Word in Season”—“Commotions since French Revolution”—“History of Christianity”—“The German Empire”—“Fulfilment of Prophecy,” by Rev. James Bicheno
XLIV. | “Restoration of the Jews”—“Friendly Address to the Jews,” by the Rev. James Bicheno—“Letter to Mr. Bicheno,” by David Levi
XLV. | “Attempt to Remove Prejudices Concerning the Jewish Nation,” by Thomas Witherby
XLVI. | “Observations on Mr. Bicheno’s Book,” by Thomas Witherby
XLVII. | “Letters to the Jews,” by Joseph Priestley
XLVIII. | “An Address to the Jews on the Present State of the World,” by Joseph Priestley
XLIX. | “Letters to Dr. Priestley,” by David Levi
L. | “A Famous Passover Melody,” by the Rev. F. L. Cohen
LI. | “Reminiscences of Lord Byron ... Poetry, etc., of Lady Caroline Lamb,” by Isaac Nathan
LII. | “Selection of Hebrew Melodies,” by John Braham and Isaac Nathan
LIII. | Earl of Shaftesbury’s Zionist Memorandum—Scheme for the Colonisation of Palestine
LIV. | Restoration of the Jews
LV. | Another Zionist Memorandum—Restoration of the Jews
LVI. | Extracts from Autograph and other Letters between Sir Moses Montefiore and Dr. N. M. Adler
LVII. | The Final Exodus
LVIII. | Disraeli and the Purchase of the Suez Canal Shares
LIX. | Cyprus and Palestine
LX. | Disraeli and Heine
LXI. | Disraeli’s Defence of the Jews
LXII. | A Hebrew Address to Queen Victoria (1849)
LXIII. | An Appeal by Ernest Laharanne (1860)
LXIV. | Statistics of the Holy Land
LXV. | An Open Letter of Rabbi Chayyim Zebi Sneersohn of Jerusalem (1863)
LXVI. | The Tragedy of a Minority, as seen by an English Jewish Publicist (1863)
LXVII. | London Hebrew Society for the Colonization of the Holy Land
LXVIII. | An Open Letter of Henri Dunant (1866)
LXIX. | An Appeal of Rabbi Elias Gutmacher and Rabbi Hirsch Kalischer to the Jews of England (1867)
LXX. | Alexandre Dumas (fils) and Zionism
LXXI. | Appeal of Dunant’s Association for the Colonisation of Palestine (1867)
LXXII. | Edward Cazalet’s Zionist Views
LXXIII. | A Collection of Opinions of English Christian Authorities on the Colonization of Palestine
LXXIV. | Petition to the Sultan
LXXV. | (1) Chovevé Zion and Zionist Workers
○ | (2) Modern Hebrew Literature
LXXVI. | Note upon the Alliance Israélite Universelle and the Anglo-Jewish Association
LXXVII. | An Appeal of the Berlin Kadima
LXXVIII. | The Jewish Colonies in Palestine
LXXIX. | The Manifesto of the Bilu (1882)
LXXX. | Zionism and Jewish Art
LXXXI. | Progress of Zionism in the West since 1897
LXXXII. | The Institutions of Zionism
LXXXIII. | David Wolffsohn’s Autobiography
LXXXIV. | Some English Press Comments on the London Zionist Congress (1900)
LXXXV. | Colonel Conder on the Value of the Jewish National Movement (1903)
LXXXVI. | Lord Gwydyr on Zionism and the Arabs
LXXXVII. | Consular Reports
LXXXVIII. | “Advent of the Millennium” (Moore)
LXXXIX. | Crémieux’s Circular to the Jews in Western Europe
XC. | “The Banner of the Jews” (Emma Lazarus)
XCI. | “The Advanced Guard”

ADDENDA

CORRIGENDA

CATALOGUE OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS

BOOKS CONSULTED

INDEX

## ILLUSTRATIONS TO VOL. II.

○ Baron Edmond de Rothschild

○ Lieut.-Col. Sir Mark Sykes, Bart., M.P.

○ Rt. Hon. Arthur J. Balfour, M.P.

○ Gen. Sir Edmund H. H. Allenby

○ M. S. J. M. Pichon

○ M. Jules Cambon

○ H.E. Paolo Boselli

○ H.E. Baron Sidney Sonnino

○ M. A. F. J. Ribot

○ M. G. E. B. Clemenceau

○ President Thomas Woodrow Wilson

○ Rt. Hon. David Lloyd George, M.P.

○ Laying Foundation Stone of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem

○ Newes from Rome.

○ The Kattowitz Conference, 5644 = 1884

Leopold Pilichowski. 1918

Lieut.-Col. Sir Mark Sykes, Bart., M.P.

## SIR MARK SYKES, BART., M.P.
(A TRIBUTE)

A most tragic event took place on the 16th of February, 1919, when the world lost one of the most valiant champions of Zionism, namely Sir Mark Sykes, Bart., M.P. He fell like a hero in the thick of the fight; he was suddenly extinguished, as it were a torch in full blaze. He stood towering above the crowd of sceptics and grumblers, viewing the promised land as from Pisgah’s height, his clear eye fixed on Zion. He was at once a sage and a warrior, a knight in the service of the sacred spirit of the national idea without fear or reproach, whom nothing could overcome but the doom of sudden and premature death. Sir Mark Sykes was but forty years old, physically a giant, a picture of perfect manhood, full of youthful vigour, a soldier and a poet, a fervid patriot and a kindly and self-sacrificing friend of humanity. He was one of the born representatives of that tradition which for centuries has inseparably united the genius of Great Britain with the Zionist ideal of the Jewish people. In him appeared to be harmoniously united the soaring imagination of Byron, the deep mysticism of Thomas Moore, the religious zeal of Cardinal Manning and the statesmanly and wide outlook of Disraeli.

The germs of Sykes’ Zionism lay latent in him in his earliest years. He was scarcely eight years old when his father took him for the first time to Jerusalem. He often related how when many years later he visited a certain spot in Palestine, an elderly Arab told him that years before an English gentleman had been there with a little boy, leaving behind him kindly memories. His father, a wealthy landowner in Yorkshire, was one of the principal churchbuilders in England of his time. He was a gentleman of the old style, a protector of the poor, fired with religious enthusiasm, who devoted untiring labour to the management of his family estate. Every foot of this extensive family estate with its churches and schools, its country houses and old and new farms and dwellings, with its great collections and its old and valuable library, bears the impress not only of marked diligence and refined taste, but also of an unusual sense of continuity and tradition. Long before the traveller from Hull reaches the estate, a high and slender tower strikes his eye. It is the monument that has been erected in memory of the grandfather, the old squire, an original character about whom Sir Mark was wont to tell so many amusing stories. Long after the introduction of railways he used to ride his steed to London, and on the way often used to stop, take the hammer from the navvies who were breaking road-metal, and perform their work for them for hours at a time. Now his statue is to be seen in a chapel-like recess crowned with a high tower on one of the main roads of the estate. His son, Sir Mark’s father, was not less of an original character. He had nothing of the tradition of feudal lords—the family was descended from an old and very rich shipbuilding family in Hull which flourished in the 16th century, had by the 17th century gained a great reputation, and later had business relations with Peter the Great—but he rather represented the type of a fanciful Maecenas, whose hobby it was constantly to remodel buildings or to erect new ones. His ancestors had built ships, he built houses. That amounted to a passion in him, a noble passion, a desire to build, endow and found. And as he was very religious he built churches. He also travelled widely and gathered large collections in his country house. His religion was nominally High Church, but he must have had strong leanings towards Catholicism. His wife, the mother of Sir Mark, was an ardent Catholic. Sir Mark was attached to his mother, and was brought up in the Catholic faith. On his mother’s side Sir Mark had a decided strain of Irish blood, but the English type was predominant in him. His features, however, were of extraordinary gentleness, his eyes large and clear blue in colour, and a wisp of hair would often fall over his brow. He was an English Catholic and cherished in his heart the memory of the not so far distant time when Catholics were persecuted, and restricted in their civil rights. He was a Catholic in a country where the Catholics constitute a small and weak minority, and often he remarked to me that it was his Catholicism that enabled him to understand the tragedy of the Jewish question, since not so long since Catholics had to suffer much in England. His Catholicism did not make him fanatical; it made him rather cosmopolitan, that is to say, catholic in the pure sense of the word. He received an exceptionally careful education and studied hard in Catholic schools before he took his course at Cambridge. The fact that in his early youth he had Jesuit priests among his teachers was often exploited by those who envied him, in a sense which suggested a leaning in him towards Jesuitism. If the term Jesuitism be taken to mean a zeal for Catholicism, then there can be no doubt that this assertion is correct, since Sir Mark was certainly very religious. But if this expression be taken in the customary sense, namely, as equivalent to clerical intrigue, hypocrisy and spiteful hate of other religions, nothing was more remote from the character, the mental outlook and all other attributes of Sir Mark than such a form of Jesuitism. He was incapable equally of dissembling or of servile conduct; he was proud without being arrogant, and was severe and inflexible when truth was at stake. His soul was an open book; he troubled himself neither of career nor of popularity. He possessed an ideal, and this ideal was the sole test of all his thought and actions. At heart he was pious, a good Christian and a good Catholic: he never prided himself upon his faith, which was a sacred thing to him: religious boast and propaganda were alike foreign to him: his relations with God were an intimate personal matter which concerned no stranger; but his faith was the moving force of his life which afforded him courage to go forward and strength to endure and to deny himself.

When I was with Sir Mark in Hull, where we came to speak at a great Zionist meeting last summer, the member for Hull disappeared from my sight for several hours on one occasion. I presumed that he had gone to the old Catholic cathedral to attend a service as he frequently did. On returning he told me that he had visited his old teachers, the Jesuit fathers, and that he had convinced them that it was the duty of Christians to atone for the crime that humanity has not ceased for many centuries to commit against the Jewish people in withholding their old native country from them. “This was not so difficult,” he added, “as one of these fathers is an avowed friend of the Jewish people. When, some years ago, a protest meeting was held in Hull against the Beilis trial (the trumped-up story of ritual murder that had emanated in Kiev from the Russian anti-Semites), this priest had appeared on the platform to declare in the name of his religion that the persecutions of the Jews that took place in Russia under the old régime were a blot upon civilisation.” The meeting which was to be held that same day was to be attended by Jews and Christians equally. He said with a humorous smile that his success with the fathers made him hope for equal success with the whole Christian audience at that meeting. “Perhaps people find fault with me,” he continued, “that I have neglected their local affairs. A member for Hull who gives all his time to Zionism may be rather a puzzle to the good people of Hull, but I think I shall manage them—will you be responsible for the Jews?” I replied, “Very well, I shall be responsible for the Jews, but only with your help; the Jews are more impressed by an English baronet who is a Christian than by a fellow Jew like me.” “It is to be regretted,” he said somewhat sadly, “that the Jews rather than follow leaders of their own race bow and scrape to Gentiles. How do you explain that?” I answered: “That is the spirit of the Exile, that can be combated only by means of Zionism.”

The meeting was most successful. There never had been such a Zionist triumph in Hull. The enthusiasm was shared by both the Christian representatives and the Jewish population, the latter but recently arrived for the most part from Eastern Europe. There was only one discordant note in the speeches, and that probably escaped the notice of most of those present, and did not detract in the least from the success of the meeting; this was an utterance that offended Sir Mark’s religious sentiment. “It is natural,” someone said, “for Sir Mark to be a friend of the Jews as he is such a good Christian, and must be conscious of the fact that the founder of Christianity belonged to the Jewish race; moreover, Sir Mark as a Catholic venerates the Holy Mother who was as we know a daughter of the Jewish people.” This utterance pained Sir Mark and hurt me very much. I afterwards had long talks with Sir Mark about this tactlessness, which could only have been committed by a quasi-assimilated Jew. The speaker may have meant it well, but a Zionist could never have made such a mistake, for to be a Zionist, means not only to desire immediate emigration to Palestine, but also to maintain the proper practical attitude to the non-Jewish world. This attitude is one neither of servility nor of arrogance, it is one of dignified yet modest and noble self-consciousness, self-respect and respect for others.

In order to understand the attitude of such as Sir Mark and others like him in his own and other nations, towards the Jewish problem, it is necessary to study the problem more closely than is common among the unthinking crowd who bandy about the words anti-Semitism and philo-Semitism, and, upon their superficial observations, condemn one man as an anti-Semite and laud another as a philo-Semite, according as whether they hate or love certain individual Jews. The crowd does not understand that one can be a great friend of the Jewish people and a great admirer of the Jewish genius and yet find such things ridiculous and repulsive as the apeing, the servility, the obtrusiveness, the hollowness and the empty display, the desire to intrude everywhere, the excessive zeal of the neophytes and all the unpleasant traits of some assimilated Jews. On the other hand, one may approve of all these qualities and rejoice that certain Jews have become rich, obtained titles or gained high office in so far as one desires the assimilation of the Jewish people and the extinction of the Jewish spirit.

Anti-Semitism is fractricidal in that it implies hatred and contempt for, and the desire to persecute a whole race. It is organised outrage, because it employs the brutal power of a majority to insult a defenceless minority and to deprive it of human rights. It is consciously calumnious because it instigates malice against the Jewish people or religion and exploits for this purpose actual weaknesses or failings belonging in reality to neither the race nor the religion. It is biassed and sophistical because it generalises from the faults of individuals and because it fixes itself upon the mote in another’s eye without perceiving the beam in its own.

Philo-Semitism in the true sense of the word resembles philhellenism. The latter does not mean simply friendly intercourse with parvenu Greeks, but sympathy for the Hellenic people as such, and with the spirit of Hellenism and an endeavour to aid these and to establish them. Of such a kind was the philo-Semitism of Sir Mark Sykes. I will speak plainly, and do not hesitate to state that he had no liking for the hybrid type of the assimilating Jew. He had no wish to interfere with such people; he emphatically condemned any attempt at suppression of rights or chicanery, but he did not like this type just because he was fond of the Jewish people. What was of the Jewish essence, of the Jewish tradition, was sacred to his religious sense and stimulating to his artistic sense. In this lay the secret, not exactly of our personal success with Sykes (for our cause is of too great an importance in the world’s history to be connected with personalities) but of the wonderful concord of minds which was the natural outcome of his outlook. The opposite poles attracted each other with irresistible force. Truly anglicised Jews could not have had the hundredth part of the same success with him, not because of their not being excellent patriots and capable men (for such many of them incontestably are and Sykes was fond of society and of making acquaintances and was amiable to all), but for him there were real Englishmen enough. Concerning English affairs, national questions and parliamentary matters he would discourse with anglicised Jews on the same footing as English non-Jews, but concerning the spirit of Jewish history, the ethos of Hebraism, the national sufferings and aspirations, that emerge only in national Hebrew literature, in the large centres of Jewish population in Eastern Europe and in the new settlements in Palestine—concerning all these matters he would and could seek information only from the fountain source. These are the things that have succeeded with Sykes and others and that will succeed further, not high diplomacy. There is no lack of this latter at the Foreign Office, which swarms with great diplomats, and it would be carrying coals to Newcastle to seek to add more trained specialists to the crowd of busy politicians in Downing Street. There could be no success with Sykes that way. He was, as it were, born to work with us Hebrews for Zionism.

The spirit of the East breathed in this Yorkshire gentleman. In his earliest youth he showed a keen interest for Arabia, for Islam and the Turkish Empire. At Cambridge he studied Arabic under Professor E. G. Browne, and there also he met the lady who was afterwards to be his wife and true helpmeet, a daughter of Sir John Gorst, who was at the time one of the members of parliament for the University. In the year 1898 Sykes, then a young student, undertook a second journey to the East, and stayed much of his time in the Hauran. He devoted himself with the entire freshness and sincerity of his youth (he was then but twenty years old) to his observations as a traveller. In the year 1900 appeared his first book, which recounts his impressions in an elegant style and light form.⁠¹ In this book he ascribes to his guide, a Christian Arab named Isa, the following words apropos of the Jews there, that they were “dirty like Rooshan and robber like Armenian.”⁠² Sykes himself had at that time no clear idea of Jews or of Armenians—of the two peoples for whom he strove and died nineteen years later. He cites an expression of opinion and repeats it in the bad English of an Arab guide. After his return from the East, he devoted his attention to military studies, in which he distinguished himself. He served in the South African War in 1900‒2. He gave a proof of his technical knowledge in his work on strategy and military training which he had compiled in collaboration with Major George d’Ordel.⁠³ In the year 1904 he was travelling again, and the literary product of his later and earlier journeys was his second considerable book on Islam and the Orient.⁠⁴ This book is dedicated to his fellow-soldiers in the South African War.⁠⁵ In this work already speaks to us a young but mature man who had travelled much in four continents and had been through the South African Campaign. Here we already perceive the fundamentals of his later Zionism. As regards the future of the Orient he looks not to modern civilisation and capitalism, but to the latent force of national life. He was not deceived by the specious platitudes so dear to that deplorable product of modern European democracy ‘the man in the street’ as to ‘extending the blessing of Western civilisation’; he regarded rather with unconcealed apprehension the contingency of the Western Asiatics becoming ‘a prey to capitalists of Europe and America,’ “in which case a designing Imperial Boss might, untrammelled by the Government, reduce them to serfdom for the purpose of filling his pockets and gaining the name of Empire-maker.” (Prof. Browne’s Preface, Dar-ul-Islam, p. iv.). He had a great predilection for all national individualities, and detested the desire to imitate and assimilate. “He hated the hybrid Levantine ... and faithfully portrayed the Gosmopaleet (Cosmopolite)” (ibid.). He condemned interfering tutelage. “Orientals hate to be worried and hate to have their welfare attended to.... Oppression they can bear with equanimity, but interference for their own good they never brook with grace” (ibid.). He shows a profound historic sense: “he does not disguise his preference for countries with ‘a past’ over countries with ‘a future’” (ibid.), and finds in the nature of the Oriental the conditions for a true equality. “He recognises the fact that there is more equality because less snobbery and pretence in Asia than in Europe” (ibid.). The only feature that is wanting in this book is a knowledge of Jews and of Zionism. He makes but once mention of this matter, in a short sketch of the Jews at Nisibin. “The Jews at Nisibin ... their appearance is much improved by Oriental costume ... in which they look noble and dignified.” He then adds: “I trust that the Uganda Zionists will adopt my suggestion” (p. 141). One who believes in the assimilation of the Jews may snobbishly consider this also as anti-Semitic, but in fact it is only the harmless joke of an artist, for Sykes was essentially an artist. His drawings were excellent, he was also very musical, and had a great predilection for all true individuality, for the archaic, the original, the unadulterated, for race, nationality, genius loci, for everything racy and natural, and for everything that was not cliché, mechanical and snippety.

This was the foundation of his latent Zionism. From 1904 to 1911 he pursued his military studies, managed his estates and travelled much. In 1911 he entered Parliament as member for Hull. Although nominally a Tory, Sir Mark was at bottom no party man, but a man of convictions. Full of faith, greedy for work, energetic, confident, capable, quick of study, charmed with a fight. Equally ready to defend or attack, he was unselfish. Over the Irish question he fell out with the Conservatives; he was an outspoken champion of Home Rule, and throughout his life he remained a loyal friend of Irish nationalism. His speeches soon made him popular in Parliament; they were never long and yet never trite. He showed the same qualities in his letters to the Press. He had always something to say, some original thought which he expressed in his own individual style. He told me once, how he had learned public speaking at school. He had to prepare the outline of the speech and afterwards to state in short and simple terms the substance of his speech. The latter, he added, was the more difficult task, because a facile speaker can make long speeches, and yet find it impossible to repeat later the essential facts of his speeches. He was not a facile speaker in this sense; he never spoke quite extempore, but always prepared his speeches carefully, often by means only of simple key words or of a few pictures, resembling hieroglyphics, as, for example, the sun with streaming rays. He never spoke to the gallery, never flattered, never perverted the truth under the mask of sincerity, and never sought to create effects. His speeches were full of beauty and deep idealism with a breath of religious fervour, as he leant forward to address himself to the hearts of his audience. This practical man was at bottom a poet. He could tell most fascinating stories. He had not been brought up in the chilling atmosphere of severe Puritanism, but in the medieval glamour of Catholic cathedrals and under the sun of the East. Yet he had remained a proud and staunch Briton. He was a remarkable and extremely unusual combination of a blue-eyed, simple and modest Englishman of childlike sweetness, and of a medieval knight full of Oriental reminiscences, with ardent faith and picturesque imagination. We loved him and he loved us, because his nature was gentle, kind and sympathetic. He chatted freely: he told all about his enthusiasms, his “castles in the air,” his stories about dervishes, his travelling impressions, with a lively dramatic touch with appropriate gesture and expression, often drawing his round, brown stylo pen from his pocket in order to explain the matter more pointedly by means of a rapid sketch. How often I regretted that no shorthand writer was present. His ways were dignified and courteous, his modesty so natural and so frank that he gave the impression of being himself unconscious of it. When the talk took a jesting turn, there was no sting in his witticisms, his jests were easy and never offensive. When he was angered, his emotion lasted but a few seconds, and afterwards he was as light-hearted as a child.

Such was the Mark Sykes of 1914 when the War broke out. He took up his part in the War with all his patriotism and with his idealistic faith in the victory of justice. In 1915 he was with his regiment busy in hard training and ready for the field. He often told me how it had come to pass that the East had become his sphere of action. One day Lord Kitchener said to him: “Sykes, what are you doing in France, you must go to the East.” “What am I to do there?” asked Sykes. “Just go there and then come back,” was Lord Kitchener’s answer. Sykes travelled to the East, made his way through accessible and inaccessible districts, and came back. His observations and experiences constituted the material upon which all the great things that afterwards happened were based. He then voluntarily entered the service of the Government as expert, as adviser, and as draughtsman of their policy. He was one of the pioneers of the new British War Policy in the East, one of the protagonists of the “Eastern School.” In the year 1916 he undertook with M. Georges Picot a journey to Russia. It was then the Czarist Russia with its eye fixed upon Constantinople; that was the occasion upon which the so-called Sykes-Picot agreement was signed. From the standpoint of Zionist interests in Palestine this agreement justly met with severe criticism; but it was Sykes himself who criticised it most sharply and who with the change of circumstances dissociated himself from it entirely. It was a product of the time, a time when there was as yet no decided plan formed of launching a definite campaign in the East, when the prime necessity was some sort of agreement, since otherwise no progress would have been made. This was long before Mr. Balfour’s declaration, and since at this time the Zionist interests in Palestine had as yet received no attention because they were unknown and not debatable, and also as it was essential to come to terms about Constantinople with the old regime in Russia, this agreement was a necessary prelude to action. This agreement Sykes regarded later as an anachronism.

Zionism had been at work in England for two full years without its coming to know anything of Sykes, who himself worked on his own lines for a year and a half, without knowing anything of Zionist organisation or a definite programme of Zionism. What happened resembled the construction of a tunnel begun at two sides at once. As the workers on each side approach one another they can hear the sound of blows through the earth. It seems at first a strange enough story; a certain Sir Mark appears, he makes some enquiries, and then expresses a wish to meet the Zionist leaders. Finally a meeting actually takes place and discussions are entered upon. Sir Mark showed a keen interest and wanted to know the aims of the Zionist Organisation, and who were its representatives. The idea assumed a concrete form; but this acquaintance, however, valuable as it was, had as yet no practical significance. Acquaintanceships were made and discussions took place during the years 1914‒16 by the hundred with influential people and with some who had more voice in affairs than Sir Mark ever had. They constituted certainly a most important introductory chapter, and one without which the book itself could not have been written, but they were naturally fragmentary, preliminary, without cohesion and without sanction. The work itself began only after the 7th of February, 1917.

The subsequent chapters describe this work in general outlines. A thousand details remain for the pen of some future historian, when the time comes for the archives of the Foreign Office, of the Ministries for Foreign Affairs of the other Entente Powers, and of the political offices of the Zionist Organisation in London and Paris to be made public. In the whole proceedings there are no secret treaties, no secret diplomacy, in fact neither diplomacy nor conspiracy; but they constitute a series of negotiations, schemes, suggestions, explanations, measures, journeys, conferences, etc., to which each of those who took a part gave something of the best in himself.

It is my duty both as historian and as one who took an active part in these negotiations and proceedings to record here that Sir Mark Sykes really gave of his best to this work. For more than two wonderful years we were in daily intercourse with him. Our friendship was of the most intimate. We shared in common all the delights and disappointments arising from the Zionist work. We instructed each other; he furnished his knowledge of the East, his profound understanding of the guiding political principles of Great Britain, his personal observations with reference to the possibilities of bringing our aims into harmony with the ideals of the Entente; we supplied Zionism, inspired by Jewish sufferings and hopes. It was not difficult for us to convince him what an excellent cultural type the Hebrew represents, since already in his youth, before he had the slightest idea of Jews and Zionism, he had intuitively perceived that the hybrid Levantine is hopeless in that direction. The idea was latent in him, and but awaited stimulus and direction into the proper channel. He was ready to understand what a great natural force the Jewish genius could be in the reawakening of Palestine, all the more because long before as a man of extraordinarily high culture—English to the last fibre of his thought, saturated with English tradition, English literature and English taste—and yet at the same time a broad-minded humanist, with great ideals not only for his own nation but for all other nations and races, he had seen that the ‘civilising’ of the East by assimilation was idle and superficial prating and a vain delusion. Deep sympathy of ideals had earlier formed an unconscious bond between us. When this sympathy ripened into consciousness through our meeting and soon after the commencement of our common work, the resulting harmony was not one of policy but one of outlook. The idea of a natural alliance between Jews, Arabs and Armenians as peoples of the Near East developed into something quite distinct and found in Sir Mark a convinced champion. He was an enthusiastic protagonist of the Jewish national renaissance in Palestine, an admirer of the Hebrew genius, who could not hear enough from me about national Hebrew literature, who took an interest in every detail of Jewish culture. At the same time he was a sincere friend of the Arabs and Armenians and made strenuous efforts to secure their liberation. We all worked together with him in this direction, but the main idea was his and remained his favourite project till the close of his life. Many superficial and petty individuals in our own ranks, who, not realising the great and difficult task and themselves taking no active part, busied themselves in spreading distrust and discontent, complained that Sykes was too much taken up with the Arabs. I am sure that among many Arabs of the same degree of political maturity Sykes was accused of being too much taken up by the Jews.

Our interchange of ideas resulted in a complete fusion of thought. But Sykes gave us his time and labour as well as ideas. It seemed as though in these two years his whole life’s energy reached its culminating point and spent itself. He worked at constant high pressure. But rarely he allowed himself a week-end in Sledmore with Lady Sykes and the children, and even there he was never idle. It was a constant round of church-going, of devotion to the estate and building repairs, of musicians, old French songs, and of hospitality. Holidays were out of the question. All his excursions were connected with political or Parliamentary business. Even prior to the commencement of his official connection with Zionism, Sir Mark was a man of extraordinarily wide activities. When on the 8th of February, 1917, one day after the first official meeting, our work began with the first conference with M. Georges Picot at Sir Mark’s private house, No. 9 Buckingham Gate, the latter place had already become an important centre for matters concerning the new and at that time scarcely completed plan of a kingdom of the Hedjaz, concerning Armenia and Mesopotamia, and was equipped with all such material as files of correspondence and telegraphic communications, etc. It was then that Zionism took its place in the system and came to dominate the situation more and more as our labours progressed. One was liable to be called upon at any moment, early in the morning or late at night. It became a joke with us to name his sudden telephone calls ‘brain-storms.’ Sir Mark had a ‘brain-storm’ which meant: danger in sight. This may appear as somewhat far-fetched to outsiders, but those who were in the thick of the work knew well what formidable obstacles stood in the way, and how well founded were Sir Mark’s doubts and fears. At every moment dangers had to be guarded against; there were elements that were in favour of the status quo ante in the Near East; vested economic interests that desired to uphold this status quo for their own ends; clerical, anti-Semitic and pan-Islamitic propaganda; certain Arab sections that opposed Zionism because, obsessed by fanaticism or misled by agitators or influenced by narrow and short-sighted considerations of the needs of the moment, they had no proper appreciation of the great idea of a Hebrew-Arabic national alliance; intrigues of certain Syrian concession-hunters who stormed with a ‘holy wrath’ against the Zionist idea; certain factions in England that would have nothing to do with an energetic policy in the East, and indeed ridiculed and belittled the importance of British interests in that region; a by no means small party that warned England against undertaking any new engagements; and finally, be it mentioned with regret, our Jewish circles of the assimilating school. The cause of Zionism was in the same dire case as Laocoon in the grip of snakes. Every day brought a fresh indication of some hostile movement, a new suspicion of enemy schemes each of which caused Sir Mark to sound a warning. These were the ‘brain-storms.’

I should like to record a few impressions of different occasions. The first was a day in April, 1917, in Paris. I was due at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to give information about Zionism. Sir Mark also came; he was a sincere friend of France and was anxious that Zionism should have the same appreciation in France as in England. He came in great haste by motor from the Front, where he had been making a visit, and went to the Hotel Lotti. He arrived early in the morning after a tiring night’s journey. At that time Doctor Weizmann was fully occupied with most important affairs in England. It fell to me to begin the official work in France, after we had together prepared all our plans. Sykes was impatient: in spite of his complete confidence in us, he could not refrain from remaining near me, always ready with advice and help. We worked together for some hours. I departed on my mission and we arranged for him to wait for me at the hotel. But as I was crossing the Quai d’Orsay on my return from the Foreign Office I came across Sykes. He had not had the patience to wait. We walked on together, and I gave him an outline of the proceedings. This did not satisfy him; he studied every detail; I had to give him full notes and he drew up a minute report. “That’s a good day’s work,” he said with shining eyes.

The second was a day in April, 1917, in Rome. Sykes had been there before me and could not wait my arrival. He had gone to the East. I put up at the hotel: Sykes had ordered rooms for me. I went to the British Embassy; letters and instructions from Sykes were waiting for me there. I went to the Italian Government Offices; Sykes had been there too; then to the Vatican, where Sykes had again prepared my way. It seemed to me as if his presence was wherever I went, but all the time he was far away in Arabia, whence I received telegraphic messages.

The third was at the London Opera House Meeting of the 2nd of December, 1917. It was a truly brilliant gathering in a packed house, a festive token of the bond of brotherhood between Great Britain and ancient Israel. Sykes modestly surveyed the assembly. The majority of the audience scarcely knew him, and only a few were aware that this was a great day in his life. When he began to speak the audience recognised that one was addressing them who had made Zionism a part of his life. He showed no flaring enthusiasm, but rather a quiet elation, a devotion to the subject. On leaving, he and I shook hands—no words were necessary because we understood each other.

The fourth was a mass meeting at the end of December in Manchester. In the morning there had been a small gathering with Sykes, and before the meeting a banquet in honour of Mr. C. P. Scott. The meeting itself was one of the largest that ever was held in Manchester. Sir Stuart Samuel was in the chair. Doctor Weizmann made one of his most brilliant speeches, and Mr. James de Rothschild roused the audience to enthusiasm. Then Sykes rose, and made a speech full of the dreamy poetry of an Eastern tale. The audience felt itself transported into another and better world. The poetry of the East diffused itself as a softening charm over the hard-cut lines of high political argument. After the meeting we sat down, tired out, to tea. Sykes hurried in in his rain-coat: he had no time to stay, as he had to catch the night train. He was due in London next morning to send urgent telegrams to Palestine.

The fifth was on a glorious June day in 1918 en route from Paris to London. Sykes insisted on my travelling with him. He was in company with a distinguished party containing nearly all the members of the Government. As there was no time to complete the passport formalities, he simply attached me to himself personally. I felt embarrassed and accepted his proposal with reluctance. But when he told me that it was necessary to remind people constantly of the Declaration, I made up my mind to venture flying if he should think it necessary. The journey almost assumed the form of a Zionist meeting. There were twenty-eight persons in all, the most prominent members of the Government. On deck the Prime Minister was talking with Jellicoe. The tall and imposing figure of Mr. Balfour, with his noble grey-haired head and the well-known small hat, stood above the rest. Sykes urged me to have a word with the Prime Minister. I seized the opportunity and in the course of our conversation I had from him the treasured words: that such a war as this would be in vain if we did not aim at succouring all peoples, the Zionist Jews included. I afterwards told this to Sykes, who was at the other end of the ship, but he knew already. “How, by an indiscretion?” “No, a favourable wind whispered it to me.” The ‘Favourable Wind’ was one of the company who had overheard the conversation.

Sir Mark’s work during the last few years falls into eight successive periods. (1) February‒March, 1917, the collaboration in London with M. Picot, and after the latter’s departure for France, with us; (2) March‒June, 1917, our journey to Paris; his journey to Egypt; (3) June‒November, 1917, preliminary work leading to the Balfour Declaration; (4) November, 1917‒March 1918, from the Declaration to the despatch of the Commission to Palestine; (5) March‒October, 1918, the work in London during the stay of the Commission in Palestine; (6) October‒December, 1918, the work after the return of the Commission; (7) December 1918‒February, 1919, the journey to Syria, and (8) February, 1919, the last days in Paris.

In the first period the foundations were laid; at that time Sir Mark was, so to speak, introduced into the world of Zionist ideas. The second was full of active negotiations with the Entente Governments. During the third Sykes was in busy relations with a number of the friends of our cause. In this period the work of Major Ormsby-Gore was of practically the same importance, as also during the fourth period. In the fifth period, during the time of the important work in Palestine of the Commission under the leadership of Doctor Weizmann, Major Ormsby-Gore was of great service there. The whole of the labours in London connected with the activity of the Commission and with a thousand other matters relating to Zionism fell upon Sykes, and necessitated daily work of an intensely difficult character.

To this period belong a number of most important measures which for the first time gave Zionism both internally and externally its proper position and its necessary prestige. Sir Mark had at that time his office in two rooms, afterwards partitioned into three, on the basement of the back wing of the Foreign Office, connected with the upper storeys by means of a lift, never used by Sir Mark, who mounted the stairs about twenty times daily at a lightning speed, which made it impossible for me to keep pace with him in spite of my most strenuous efforts. The first large room was dark because the big window was blocked with sandbags as a protection against possible air raids; it had long tables and was illuminated artificially. I had to be there often and for long periods at a time: my work, indeed, required my attendance there more than at the Zionist offices, and sometimes I had to go there three times a day and to remain there till late at night. On one of these occasions Sir Mark said to me, “Does not this subterranean room look like a medieval inquisition chamber, with those long tables upon which the victims of the Inquisition might be stretched for torture? Who knows,” added he humorously, “whether some of your forefathers had not to undergo treatment in chambers of this kind?” I answered, “Yes, as Scripture has it: ‘I will make the desolate valley into a door of hope.’” After that we often used to call this room the “Door of Hope.” This room opened into another where Sir Mark spent whole days at work except for the time at Westminster. The duties of Secretary were most ably filled by Mr. Dunlop, a young and energetic man; opposite, in the building in Whitehall Gardens, Sir Mark’s older colleague, the learned and highly experienced Mr. Beck, worked in conjunction with him. Between the two offices the faithful Serjeant Wilson, who accompanied Sir Mark everywhere on land and sea, passed to and fro. It was like a hive; there was a constant coming and going of Foreign Office men, M.P.’s, Armenian politicians, Mahommedan Mullahs, officers, journalists, representatives of Syrian Committees, and deputations from philanthropic societies. In the midst of this busy world Zionism maintained its prominent position. Everything had to pass through Sykes’ hands. In order to avoid confusion and divergence of effort he insisted upon what was readily conceded him, namely that he should pass an opinion on every question and every detail, and in this there was no hesitation, no delay. Among many others a couple of examples will suffice. The Oriental Jews, being Turkish subjects, were under the law regarded as alien enemies. They were certainly only technically such; at heart they were thoroughly pro-British and in any case politically harmless. Exceptions had already been made on the recommendations of personal standing, but no logical plan was followed. I maintained that the Zionist Organisation should be officially empowered to protect the Jews of Palestine and Syria, just as, for example, the Polish Committee protected the Poles from Galicia, who were also technically alien enemies. Sykes obtained this concession after considerable labour. This was an official recognition of the Zionist Organisation as competent authority. When at the time of the most strenuous military efforts, the later categories of the male population were called to the colours, the Zionist Organisation in England was threatened with losing the last of its secretaries, speakers, organisers, etc., and with seeing its activities restricted, if not completely interrupted. None were more patriotic than the Zionists, so many of whom were in the Army, but we had to deal with a number of men who could be of no value to the Army, and who, on the other hand, were indispensable to the Zionist Organisation. Previously some had been left with us, but now it was a question of large numbers. It was a generally recognised principle that people whose occupation was of national importance were allowed to continue at it. I insisted upon having this principle applied to Zionism. This matter could not be settled by any single individual or by any single tribunal. The question concerned a matter of principle, and had nothing to do with individuals. Since we had received the declaration of recognition from the British Government and the whole Entente, and as we had to prepare the field for the realisation of this declaration, this ought surely to have been regarded as a matter of national importance from the official standpoint. Sykes adopted this point of view and made strenuous efforts to have it realised. He was thoroughly convinced that our loyalty to Great Britain and her Allies was boundless, and that in all our demands the interests of both parties had been considered with equal devotion. On the other hand, we recognised that when he denied us something as inadmissible, though like any other man he might sometimes make mistakes, he was open to change of conviction upon good reason being shown, and that any stand taken by him against our proposals was due rather to the fact that he regarded the matter at issue as unfavourable in certain circumstances to Zionism, than that he had the interests of Zionism less at heart than we; thus a community of effort and a mutual trust was established, which led to a complete solidarity of aims. In this way our work in conjunction with Sykes became the foundation for our relations with the higher Government authorities, as also with Sykes’ colleagues and successors.

The most important and politically difficult task that had to be accomplished in London during the stay of the Commission in Palestine was to make possible the official laying of the foundation stone of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The recommendations and the instructions carried by the President of the Commission, Doctor Weizmann, to Palestine were most valuable, and will stand as a lasting token of the generous and kindly feelings of the leading men in the British Government towards Zionism. The influence of the Commission, the excellence of their work, their splendid relations with the authorities had ensured complete success. Nevertheless it was found that, particularly with reference to the foundation-stone ceremony, the instructions had been of too general and too vague a character to overcome the formal and legal administrative obstacles. It is my duty to one who is gone, to record the great services of Sir Mark in this direction. It goes without saying that the final decision lay with a man in higher office. However, before Mr. Balfour gave his decision and before the most detailed instructions had been telegraphed, we had to work strenuously day after day for several weeks, by correspondence and by interviews, with such devotion and enthusiasm as only so magnificent an object as the Hebrew University in Jerusalem could inspire.

During the period that followed, namely the sixth as above described, the Zionist programme was being prepared. The end of the War was in sight, but the cessation of hostilities was not to be expected so very soon. Sykes decided, then, the whole of Palestine and Syria being in British hands, to travel thither to gather fresh information and to bring the results of his latter observations to the Peace Conference. I tried to dissuade him from this journey, because I thought his presence in Europe important: he, on the other hand, wanted me to go with him to Palestine. He finally went alone and wrote to me from there that I should come without delay. His stay in Palestine was, however, only a very short one: he soon passed to Syria and did strenuous work in the direction of restoring order in Aleppo. In the meantime the Peace Conference opened here. We were all of us already assembled—except Sykes. We thought of him every day.

One evening there was a telephone call. On taking up the receiver I heard Sykes’ voice telling me that he had just arrived in Paris, and was staying as usual at the Hôtel Lotti opposite us. I invited him at once to dinner, and he came. He was the same lovable fellow, full of life and humour, but now frightfully thin. He had lived the whole time on “German sausages” and had suffered much from digestive troubles. It only transpired later, that he had spent sixteen hours a day in Aleppo working under almost impossible conditions on behalf of the Arabs and Armenians. He was himself never in the habit of talking about his work. It was two hours after midnight when he left us,—he had so much to tell about the ordinary incapacity for proper administration of the local Syrian population and their marked capacity in that direction under suitable guidance, about the prospects for Palestine, about the steps he had taken against anti-Zionist intrigues in Syria and other matters. From that time forward we saw each other every day. Some days later he went to London to see his family and returned in three days with Lady Sykes. Immediately upon his arrival he was in touch with us. He had a thousand ideas, and had brought reports and instructions from Syria that had to be elaborated. Our days were filled with appointments for visits, interviews, etc. Then Lady Sykes was attacked by influenza, which caused a little dislocation and the postponement of an accepted invitation, but gave no cause for alarm. On the 13th of February, Sir Mark hastily entered my room, and on finding me indisposed, he shouted, “There’s no time now for being ill.” The following morning he sent word to me that Lady Sykes was better, but that he himself was taken ill. “I have got it,” he said to Serjeant Wilson when he went to bed. On the 15th Lady Sykes sent for me, and told me that her husband would have to remain in bed for a few days, that afterwards she intended to go to England for a week or so to recuperate. “To Sledmore?” I asked. “No,” said Lady Sykes, “it is too cold there. I think the South will be better. And my chief reason for troubling you,” she added, “is because my husband wants to know how Zionist matters went yesterday.” I gave full details to Lady Sykes. In the afternoon of the 16th Sir Mark died.

He died on the threshold of the Peace Conference which was destined to make his dream a living thing, died in a hotel in the midst of us, bound up with our deepest affections, a radiant form full of love and sincerity. His life was as a song, almost as a Psalm. He was a man who has won a monument in the future Pantheon of the Jewish people and of whom legends will be told in Palestine, Arabia and Armenia. Just returned from a difficult task in the service of humanity in the service of the idea of nationality, and about to perform great things for the Jewish people, he fell as a hero at our side.

There it ends! Shakespeare himself could use no more than the commonplace to express what is incapable of expression. “The rest is silence!”

We say: “The rest is immortality—in the annals of Zionism.”

Paris, April, 1919.

## CHAPTER XLIXA.

Chovevé Zion and Zionists in England—Louis Loewe—Nathan Marcus Adler—Albert Löwy—Abraham Benisch—The Rev. M. J. Raphall—Dr. M. Gaster—Rabbi Samuel Mohilewer—English representation at the Second and Third Congresses—The Fourth Congress in London.

The Chovevé Zion movement in England was not very powerful, yet it enjoyed a certain amount of popularity. If we examine, for instance, the records for 1892‒7—the years which preceded the First Zionist Congress (Basle, 1897)—we find among the leading representatives not only the Chief Rabbi of the Spanish and Portuguese Communities, Dr. M. Gaster, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Rabbi Professor H. Gollancz, the late Colonel Albert Goldsmid, Dr. S. A. Hirsch, Mr. S. B. Rubenstein, Mr. E. W. Rabbinowicz and other English Jews of standing, who are even now more or less active in the Zionist Organization; but we read the names of the late Chief Rabbi of Great Britain, Dr. H. Adler, the late Lord Swaythling, Mr. Elkan Adler, Albert Jessel, Mr. Joseph Prag (who was one of the most active members), Joseph Nathan, Louis Schloss, Haim Guedalla, Captain H. Lewis-Barned, Bernard Birnbaum, Mr. Herman Landau and other distinguished members of the community, as among those of the prominent enthusiastic supporters of the Chovevé Zion movement who did not join the new Zionist Organization. The same phenomenon strikes us in France. There the new Zionism was confronted on the part of the Chovevé Zion by an opposition that was even stronger than in England.

An impartial historian, desirous of reviewing the facts as they were revealed in Jewish life and literature, would in vain endeavour to discover any essential difference between the Chovevé Zion and the Zionist fundamental principles. He could trace a complete and clear conception of political Zionism through centuries of English history or Jewish history in England, and on the other hand also efforts and undertakings in the direction of colonization pursued with great energy and care by forces that are generally found to be co-operating with political Zionism. A sober and dispassionate examination of all these ideas without regard to mere catchwords must lead to the conclusion that Sir Moses Montefiore’s representations to Mehemet Ali in 1838 were substantially the same as Herzl made to Abdul Hamid in 1898. However, both aimed at a legally assured home and both insisted that Palestine should belong to the Jewish people. And no real student of contemporary Jewish history will imagine that Sir Moses was an isolated dreamer. He never undertook anything in Jewish affairs without consulting the authorities of his time. One of his advisers was Louis Loewe, the well-known Jewish scholar and his secretary for many years.

Dr. Louis Loewe (1809‒88), who was educated at the Yeshibot of Lissa, Nikolsburg, Presburg, and at the University of Berlin, came to England in 1839 and was appointed by the Duke of Sussex to be his Orientalist. He then travelled in the East, where he studied languages. In Cairo he was presented to Mehemet Ali, for whom he translated some hieroglyphic inscriptions. On his return from Palestine he met at Rome Sir Moses and Lady Montefiore, who invited him to travel with them to Palestine. When, in 1840, Sir Moses went on his Damascus expedition, Loewe accompanied him as his interpreter. Since that time Loewe was attached to Sir Moses as his personal friend and secretary. He accompanied Sir Moses on nine different missions. He wrote several valuable works on oriental subjects: The Origin of the Egyptian Language, London, 1837; A Dictionary of the Circassian Language, 1859; a Nubian Grammar and several pamphlets—and translated J. B. Levinsohn’s Efes Damim (1871) and David Nieto’s Matteh Dan (1842). Dr. Loewe was an ardent supporter of all schemes in favour of Palestine and strongly assisted David Gordon, the editor of the Ha-Magid, who was an enthusiastic and outspoken political Zionist years before Herzl.

We have already mentioned to what an extent the Chief Rabbi, Dr. N. M. Adler, influenced Sir Moses’ works in Palestine. Nathan Adler was born at Hanover in 1803. He received his education at the Universities of Göttingen, Erlangen and Würzburg. Already as a youth his abilities proved him to be particularly adapted to the discharge of rabbinical functions. In 1829 he was appointed Chief Rabbi of Oldenburg; in 1830 his jurisdiction was transferred to Hanover and all its provinces. His fame spread beyond the Rhine and reached England just when the Jewish population there was in need of a spiritual leader. In 1844 the election took place for Chief Rabbi of the Ashkenazi Congregations of Great Britain and the choice fell on Dr. Adler. He was inducted into office on July 9th, 1845. His activity and influence during his lengthy career as Chief Rabbi proved a blessing and were attended with most invaluable results. His calling did not prevent him from contributing excellent literary productions, mostly in Hebrew, the principal of which is Nethino La-Ger’s commentary on the Targum of Onkelos. There is no doubt that this famous Rabbi and great Jew was in close touch with Sir Moses in all the steps the latter took for the colonizing of Palestine for a political as well as philanthropic purpose.

Many of the most important Jewish scholars arriving in England, and becoming in course of time the pride of English Jewry, were much attracted by the idea that England was the classical soil for a fruitful work in Palestine. It is worth noting that Dr. Albert Löwy belonged also to this group. He was born on the 10th of December, 1816, at Aussig in Moravia. After his barmizwah (attainment of his religious majority—the age of thirteen) he was sent to a public school at Leipzig. Later he attended the University and Polytechnic at Vienna. There he first met his lifelong friends, Moritz Steinschneider and Abraham Benisch. Löwy and his friends formed “Die Einheit,” a society whose object was to promote the welfare of the Jewish people. In order to realize this object the colonization of Palestine by the Austrian Jews was advocated. The first meeting of the new society was held in 1838, in Löwy’s room. The object, however, had to be kept secret for fear lest it would be defeated by the Government. England was regarded as the country likely to welcome the new movement, and, as an emissary of the Students’ Jewish National Society, Löwy was sent to London in 1841. Years afterwards he took a leading part in London in the foundation of a body with kindred objects, the Anglo-Jewish Association.

To the same group of noble-minded men who raised themselves to the height of a national and Zionist conception of a superior kind belonged also the afore-mentioned Abraham Benisch, one of the creators of the Anglo-Jewish Press, the author of the Jewish School and Family Bible (1851), the translator of Petahiah ben Jacob’s Travels (1856), and for many years editor of the Jewish Chronicle. If there ever was a Jewish nationalist, this important Anglo-Jewish writer was one beyond a doubt. He was a man of great abilities and learning, and rendered valuable assistance in the propaganda for and in the organization of the societies for the colonization of Palestine. In several leading articles written by him, with great tact and sagacity, he expounded—particularly in connection with the political events of 1856 and of 1861—the root principles of political Zionism.

Another remarkable Jewish scholar and pioneer of Zionism in his time was the Rev. M. J. Raphall, who was a brilliant writer and also a pioneer of the Anglo-Jewish Press. He edited the Hebrew Review and Magazine for Jewish Literature in 1837, which was resumed in 1859. Some years later he edited, together with the Rev. A. de Sola, the Voice of Jacob, which had been founded by Jacob Franklin in 1841. He afterwards settled in America and assisted there in the fifties of last century, together with some distinguished American Jews, in establishing in New York a society for the colonization of Palestine. He was later engaged in similar work in Canada. Essentially a student and a scholar, he devoted many years of his life to the propaganda of the Jewish national ideas.

It is impossible to conjure away all the facts showing, firstly, that the supposed differences between the Chovevé Zion movement and the new Zionism are mere phraseology, and, secondly, that the best representatives of Anglo-Jews were nationalist and Zionist. The refusal to accept the new Zionism on the part of some representatives of the Chovevé Zion movement for that reason can only be regarded as a temporary misunderstanding.

The new Zionism made headway in England especially through the efforts of the two organizations: the English Zionist Federation and the Ancient Order of Maccabeans.

The English Zionist Federation was formed in pursuance of a resolution passed by the Clerkenwell Conference of March, 1898, for the purpose of finding a common platform upon which Zionists of all shades of opinion could co-operate. A committee was appointed by the Conference to draw up a scheme, and that committee established the Federation. When the Federation was started it received support from eight societies, representing five towns: after six months, sixteen societies, representing nine towns, had joined: at the time of the Fourth Congress, thirty-eight societies, representing twenty-nine towns, were affiliated. This was the first stage of development prior to the London Congress of the Zionist Organization.

The appearance of English Zionist Delegates at the First Congress has already been alluded to. After the First Congress Dr. Gaster published the following letter in the Times of the 29th of August, 1897:⁠—

“The movement aims at the solution of one of the most complex modern social problems in Europe, and the means which are to be employed towards the solution are the realization of deep-seated religious hopes and ideals. For this very reason men from all the ranks of Jewish society and all shades of Jewish religion are here united in the common, noble, lofty and humanitarian purpose—the restoration of Israel, which is, moreover, the true fulfilment of the words of our Prophets.

“It is surprising to find ... the incorrect statement that the agitation is the outcome of anti-Semitism. It existed long before this word even was coined. It prompted the Jews of Russia and Roumania many years ago to found colonies in Palestine. But this movement is felt to be inadequate to cope with the whole question. The political situation of the Jews has since made enormous strides. The number of Zionists with a definite aim before their eyes has grown rapidly. They are recruited from among the young enthusiasts on the Continent. University Professors and students, scholars and workmen are joining hands. They belong most exclusively to the orthodox and embrace the vast majority of the Jewish people. The Bible and the Prayer Book are the text, and this agitation is merely the practical commentary.... I, as an orthodox Rabbi, beg to differ radically from ... (the anti-Zionist views).... It is not here the place to enter upon dogmatic questions and I therefore refrain from discussing the ‘miracles’ that are to happen on that day when Israel is to return to the land of his fathers. God chooses human agencies to carry out His Will, and it is after it has been accomplished that we become aware of the renewing circumstances, unexpected and unlooked for, which have all contributed to bring about the result, which before would have appeared to be little short of a miracle. Whether the restoration will be accomplished by the purchase of Palestine, or by unexpected political combinations or by other peculiar circumstances, it would be idle to dogmatize about.

“One thing is certain. The whole orthodox and realistic Jewry, which does not volatilize the words of the Prophets, and does not look upon the Divine promises as so many spiritual symbols to be interpreted away according to each one’s fancy, is now assembled in spirit at the Congress and watches its deliberations with sympathy and elevated hope.”

We have already mentioned that Rabbi Mohilewer had sent his congratulations to the Congress. The contents of Rabbi Mohilewer’s expressions may be briefly noted as a supplement to Dr. Gaster’s letter. Rabbi Mohilewer wrote that as the state of his health did not permit him to travel, he sent the Congress his blessing in writing. Harmony and concord should exist among all Zionists, even if their religious views differed. The colonization of Palestine was recommended as a religious duty—religion should therefore be a leading factor in the Zionist movement. They should also bear in mind that it was a duty to construct and not to demolish, and they should preserve the honour of the rabbis, who were thoroughly patriotic as regarded the land in which they lived. For the past two thousand years, the Jews had awaited the advent of the Messiah, who would take them back to the land of their fathers. But in our country men had risen who had abandoned this hope and had eliminated it from the Prayer Book. Several of the rabbis in Western Europe had declared against the Zionist movement, and one of them had gone so far as to assert that the movement was contrary to the biblical prophecies, as the Messiah was only to be symbolized and the Jews were to remain in exile. He declared this to be wholly untrue. Their faith was that God would send a Redeemer to bring back the People to their own land, and that the Jewish people would, once again, be honoured among the nations. Zionism does not interfere with this deep belief; it is rather in harmony with it, and it prepares the way.

These two letters were a sort of profession de foi on the part of two rabbis representing different sections of traditional Jewry in England and Russia respectively.

The Second Zionist Congress at Basle, 1898, was attended much more numerously than the first one. There were over four hundred delegates, and the English Zionists had sent a larger contingent (the Haham, Dr. M. Gaster, had a Roumanian mandate; Jacob de Haas, Leopold J. Greenberg, E. W. Rabbinowicz, B. Ritter, A. Snowman, S. Claff, J. Massel, Dr. Moses Umanski, Herbert Bentwich and others). The presence of Dr. Gaster, who was one of the most energetic spirits of the Congress, was a great gain to the Movement. The English delegates adopted thoroughly English methods. They were not seen standing about in groups and knots in the passages and ante-rooms delivering impassioned speeches. The oratorical contributions of the English delegates were few, and none of them, except Dr. Gaster’s powerful address towards the close of the proceedings, took up more than a few minutes. But the English delegates worked hard in Committee and at special conferences.

At that time the number of Zionist Associations in Great Britain and Ireland had reached twenty-six (Leeds three, Glasgow, London, Liverpool and Manchester two each; Belfast, Cardiff, Cork, Dublin, Edinburgh, Exeter, Hanley, Hull, Limerick, Newcastle, Newport, Norwich, Plymouth, Portsmouth and Sunderland one each), and in France—three, out of the total number of the Associations all over the world of 913.

The Jewish Chronicle, writing about the Second Congress, remarked: “There is the remarkable point of the Congress—in strong relief with the comparative paucity of the personnel of the English representatives is the undoubted English influence that has been exerted. Indeed, the net result of the Second Basle Congress is that Zionism has made a distinct move towards England. Indeed, it would look as if events were so shaping themselves that the Mountain having refused to go to Mahomed, Mahomed is coming to the Mountain. The Bank is to be located in England, so is the Colonization Commission. This may have been the result—probably it was—of England’s supreme position among all the great Continental Nations, not only in regard to its undoubted stability politically, but also its unique position towards Jews.”

The Third Zionist Congress at Basle, 1899, was attended by a still larger number of delegates from the United Kingdom. There were: Dr. M. Gaster, Joseph Cowen, J. de Haas, Murray Rosenberg, Herbert Bentwich, L. J. Greenberg, S. Stungo, J. Massel, Rabbi Yoffey, Rabbi Dagutzky, M. L. Dight, Rabbi Wolf, and others—representing London, Leeds, Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Belfast, Edinburgh, Sheffield, Limerick, Grimsby Associations. According to a report of Mr. L. J. Greenberg, who had already become an energetic propagandist of the new Zionism in England, the work was progressing. He referred also to the activities of Mr. Herbert Bentwich, for if it had not been for him no such organization would have existed in England. The Congress elected as members of the Colonization Committee Dr. Gaster, Mr. Murray Rosenberg and Mr. David Wolffe, and of the Propaganda Committee, Mr. L. J. Greenberg and Mr. J. de Haas.

The Fourth Zionist Congress was held in London at the Queen’s Hall, August 13‒16, 1900. London had been chosen with a view to further influence British public opinion, seeing that in no country had the Zionist propaganda been received more sympathetically and intelligently by the general public. Dr. Herzl said in his inaugural address at the Fourth Congress in London, 1900:⁠—

“I feel there is no necessity for me to justify the holding of the Congress in London. England is one of the last remaining places on earth where there is freedom from Jewish hatred. Throughout the wide world there is but one spot left in which God’s ancient people are not detested and persecuted. But, from the fact that the Jews in this glorious land enjoy full freedom and complete human rights, we must not allow ourselves to draw future conclusions. He would be a poor friend of the Jews in England, as well as of the Jews who reside in other countries, who would advise the persecuted to flee hither. Our brethren here would tremble in their shoes if their position meant the attraction to these shores of our desperate brethren in other lands. Such an immigration would mean disaster equally for the Jews here, as for those who would come here. For the latter, with their miserable bundles, would bring with them that from which they flee—I mean anti-Semitism.”

In the course of his address he uttered the following prophetic words:⁠—

“The land of Palestine is not only the home of the highest ideas and most unhappy nation, but it is also by reason of its geographical position, of immense importance to the whole of Europe. The road of civilization and commerce leads again to Asia.”

According to the report read at this Fourth Congress by M. Oscar Marmorek “they had thirty-eight societies in England as against sixteen last year, and all these Societies had increased their membership. Thanks to the activity of the English Zionist Federation, Zionism had greatly prospered in England and had won the esteem of Christians. In Canada there was scarcely a town with a Hebrew congregation where a Zionist society did not exist.”

## CHAPTER XLIXB.

England and Zionism—Sir B. Arnold in the Spectator—Cardinal Vaughan—Lord Rosebery—The Death of Herzl—David Wolffsohn—Prof. Otto Warburg—Zionism in the smaller states.

The Uganda scheme, which was due to the initiative of Joseph Chamberlain, led to an intimate acquaintance between the Zionist leader and this great English statesman. This project, as well as the El Arish expedition, which failed in consequence of technical difficulties, made Zionism not only a living factor in Judaism from an international standpoint, but also a political factor that was given consideration by one great Government, namely, that of England.

Subsequent events, instead of diminishing, have only more firmly increased Zionist confidence in the sympathy of English public opinion for Palestinian Zionism. There is hardly an appeal so eloquently written as Sir B. Arnold’s address, published in the Spectator, October, 1903: “You have a country, the inheritance of your fathers, finer, more fruitful, better situated for commerce, than many of the most celebrated places of the globe. Environed by the lovely shores of the Mediterranean, the lofty steppes of Arabia and of rocky Sinai, your country extends along the shores of the Mediterranean, crowned by the towering cedars of the Lebanon, the source of rivulets and brooks, which spread fruitfulness over shady dales. A glorious land! situated at the furthest extremity of the sea which connects three-quarters of the globe, over which the Phœnicians sent their numerous fleets to the shores of Britain, near to both the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf: the central country of the commerce between the East and the West. Every country has its peculiarity: every people their own genius. No people of the earth have lived so true to their calling from the first as you have done. The Arab has maintained his language and his original country: on the Nile, in the deserts, as far as Sinai, and beyond the Jordan, he feeds his flocks. In the elevated plains of Asia Minor the Turkoman has conquered for himself a second country, the birthplace of the Osman: but Palestine has a thin population. For centuries the battlefield between the sons of Altai and the Arabian wilderness, the inhabitants of the West and the half-nomadic Persians, none have been able to establish themselves and maintain their nationality: no nation can claim the name of Palestine. A chaotic mixture of tribes and tongues; remnants of migrations from north and south, they disturb one another in the possession of the glorious land where your fathers for so many centuries emptied the cup of joy, and so where every inch is drenched with the blood of your heroes when their bodies were buried under the ruins of Jerusalem.”

It is obvious that these and other similar appeals and encouraging statements made a deep impression upon Zionists. This gave rise to the assumption that Zionism was merely concerned with English interest. It is needless to say that such a statement is as unfounded as the one ascribing to Zionism the pursuance of any other political interest. Zionism is a cause of humanity and justice, altogether remote from any political speculation: it can help the Jews, it can be useful to any country interested in the development of the East, it can be beneficial to all the neighbouring nations. It was only the spirit of the Bible which enabled the English people to appreciate the justice and the moral equity of the endeavour to raise up in the old land a free, united, prosperous and energetic Jewish nation, attached by the closest ties of friendship to European civilization, carrying not only into the East the civilization of the West, just as in the Middle Ages their forefathers brought the torch of culture to the West—that torch of enlightenment which they have borne aloft in their journey from the East, and which has enabled them to accomplish cultural work of their own.

Cardinal Vaughan referred in 1902 most sympathetically to Zionism in the following words: “I have always taken a great interest in the Jews, they were once the chosen people. I marvel at the strength they retain amid most unfavourable conditions. I admire their industry, their domestic virtues and their mental force, and I can only wish success to a plan which promises them such great advantages.”

Lord Rosebery pointed out, in one of his speeches, that the silent campaigns of commerce are at least as decisive of the fate of nations as the noisy operations of the battlefield. Even as the spasms and convulsions of nature, though she works through them, are less important than the slow, silent, everyday forces, so history is made less by the fire and sword of the fighters than by the humble, prosaic working-classes. The Jews were aware of the fact that not by soldiers has the great British Empire been built up, but by Trading Companies: India by the East India Company, Canada by the Hudson Bay Fur Company, South Africa by Mining Companies. The East India Company was incorporated in 1600; a few years later (1607) the earliest permanent settlement of Virginia was founded. The Pilgrim Fathers—a movement somewhat similar to Zionism—began their noble work in 1620; and West Indian colonization was inaugurated with the occupation of the Barbadoes in 1625. Half to three-quarters of a century the work went apace in North America, colony after colony was added to the British Crown. Then other regions began to attract the British, and a new era dawned with the occupation of Gibraltar in 1704.

All the great achievements of British peaceful conquests encouraged the Zionist Movement with its trusts and funds. Cecil Rhodes, with only a million pounds to start with, created Rhodesia with its 750,000 square miles. The British North Borneo Company has a capital of £800,000 and dominates over 31,000 square miles. The British East African Company, which administered 200,000 square miles, began with the same amount as the Jewish Colonial Trust, namely, £250,000.

It is true that the Zionist Palestinian scheme presented other difficulties, but where was any great work undertaken which did not present difficulties? Is not the whole history of the Jews a struggle for existence amid the greatest of difficulties? The Jews in their normal condition were an agricultural people. During the centuries of depression and persecution they had to abandon their old vocation. Dispersed throughout all countries, yet fugitives from every land, the Jews, who could call no place their home, had to turn to commerce or to handicraft for a means of livelihood, and were thus able to carry about with them everywhere that kind of labour power that they knew to be realizable everywhere. Yet, inexorable necessity as it was, it was a breaking with the nation’s own self. And is the present situation without its difficulties? Let those answer who know something of the hardships, the privations, the squalor, the wretchedness amid which three-quarters of the Jewish people live throughout their lives. And, as to financial means, even under present circumstances it is necessary for the continuance of the present misery, to collect millions and millions, whereby indescribable energies are wasted—without any real help being given.

Inspired by these ideas, and with this object in view, the propaganda was continued when suddenly, in 1904, the Zionist Organization sustained the greatest loss ever experienced by any Organization. Herzl had worked too hard; his exertions, his experiences and his emotions had been such as to exhaust the strength of this strongest of physical and intellectual giants. It was too much for one human being to bear; nature was unduly taxed and he broke down. On the 3rd of July, 1904, Herzl breathed his last in the villa “Home, Sweet Home” at Reichenau, on the Semmering Mountain, south of Vienna. His memory will be cherished for ever by the Jewish people.

David Wolffsohn (1856‒1914), the Zionist representative and worker, who had distinguished himself since the very beginning of the movement, succeeded Herzl. David Wolffsohn’s career was eminently that of a self-made man of the kind that old Dr. Smiles would have delighted to portray. A man of attractive and imposing appearance, of a loving disposition and mild grace, and with a real sense of Jewish humour, rare gifts of adaptability and extraordinary capacity for managing and leading forward in active work, he was a splendid type of a self-made man. But, from a Zionist point of view, he was more than that: he was Herzl’s great friend and confidant. His autobiography is given in Appendix LXXXIII.

David Wolffsohn, practically chosen by the Actions Committee and all Zionist authorities, took over the leadership of the Zionist Organization, during the interim between Herzl’s death and the Seventh Congress in 1906. He had first intended to transfer the headquarters to Berlin, but afterwards decided to give Cologne, the city of his home, the preference. He was assisted in this important and responsible work by two distinguished Zionists: Professor O. Warburg of Berlin and M. Jacobus Kann of the Hague. The activities of Professor Warburg have been described elsewhere in this volume: they tended in the direction of colonization, and were almost wholly concentrated upon this domain. M. Jacobus Kann, a member of an old and highly respected banking firm in Holland, was more interested in the financial institutions of the organization. He joined the Zionist Organization at the very beginning and has served the Zionist cause whole-heartedly and devotedly, particularly in the founding of the Jewish Colonial Trust, the Anglo-Palestine Company and all the other financial institutions. He travelled in Palestine, wrote a book (Erez Israel) dealing with his impressions, and is also active in the Zionist work in his own country.

Holland has a well-organized and active Zionist Organization, to which great impetus was given by the Eighth Congress at The Hague, 1909. M. de Liema, Professor Orenstein, Dr. Edersheim, M. Cohen, M. Pool and many others are among the prominent leaders. They take a very active part in the general organization work and in that of the Jewish National Fund, the headquarters of which at present are at The Hague. The Dutch Zionist Federation has an excellent weekly paper, Het Judischer Wachter, which has appeared regularly for several years, and contains much information concerning Zionist and Jewish matters as well as other excellent articles and contributions. It is worthy of note that Zionism in Holland has had for several years now a Zionist University Movement—with some good publications—which was started by Orenstein, Edersheim and others. Mention of Holland reminds one that a place of honour in Zionist history belongs to Belgium, and particularly to Antwerp, which has been for several years a first-class Zionist centre. Messieurs Jean Fischer, Oscar Fischer, S. Tolkowsky, Dr. Wulf, Ruben Cohn, the late Mehrlender, Grunzweig and many others, occupying important positions in the general Zionist Organization, made Zionism a living force in Belgian Jewry. M. Jean Fischer is a member of the Actions Committee and of the great financial institutions of Zionism: he and his friends have taken an important part in colonization undertakings in Palestine of which the devoted pioneer M. S. Tolkowsky is the representative at Rechoboth. M. Fischer visited Palestine and wrote a book containing his observations. Belgian Zionists had also a paper of their own, L’Esperance (Ha-Tikvah), which brought very valuable contributions and information.

In connection with Zionism the smaller countries of Central and Southern Europe, Switzerland and the Scandinavian countries also deserve special mention. Switzerland, the land of the Zionist Congresses, has a good organization, of which Dr. Camille Levy, Dr. Felix Pinkus, M. Levy are the most notable. They were always very active in propaganda, had their delegates at the Congresses and always made their regular contributions. Denmark and Sweden have now had for some years a good Zionist Organization, and, of late, are developing great activity, owing to the Zionist Office which has been established at Copenhagen. Roumania and Bulgaria are still more important as great centres of Zionist activity. Roumania was almost equal to Russia in the Chovevé Zion movement. Now, M. Pineles, M. Schein, M. Schwarzfeld, the learned and well-known Dr. Nacht and Dr. Nemirower, with many other leaders are at work in that country.

## CHAPTER XLIXC.

The Year 1906—The Pogroms—Emigration—Conder and his Activities—An Emigration Conference—The Eighth Congress—The Question of the Headquarters.

The year 1906 was one of the ans terribles in the annals of Jewish history. It was a year of bloodshed and terror. Not even the dark ages extracted so heavy a toll of Jewish blood: something like 1400 pogroms took place all over the Ghetto. In many districts the Jewish population were completely exterminated. The number of persons directly affected, that is to say of those whose houses, shops, or factories were the objects of attack and pillage, reached a total of some 200,000 to 250,000. To this number must be added that of the clerks, workmen, etc., indirectly affected by the destruction of factories and shops, which could not be ascertained. The casualty list was estimated at approximately 20,000 murdered and 100,000 injured. Public opinion was stirred up. Why had those Jews suffered; what sins had they committed? Their loyalty and steadfastness to Judaism, instead of winning respect and admiration for their faithfulness, had called down upon them a treatment so immeasurably atrocious that it outdistanced the conventional words of sorrow and suffering and tempted many thinking men to ask whether the vaunted tolerance of the twentieth century was anything but an extravagant dream. If other nations suffer, they afterwards get freedom and indemnity. If in 1860 the Christians in Syria had suffered, their suffering afterwards brought them an autonomy. But what of the Jews? Every day it becomes clearer that it is impossible to allow the Jews to remain a prey to revolution and counter-revolution, between which they are crushed just as the corn is ground between the upper and nether millstones. “Emigration, then.” But whither? The mass of Jewish emigrants, in spite of all Emigration Committees (which were established in America), resists dispersion; it holds together like a swarm of bees. In New York and elsewhere gigantic Jewish cities have sprung up that have become a menace to the safety of the present inhabitants and therefore to the possibility of further Jewish immigration. Attempts made to substitute agricultural colonies at an enormous expense by philanthropists have met with failure everywhere except in Palestine, where it seems that at last an effective form of organization has been discovered. There alone the immigrant Jew finds himself at ease in language and customs, and to that land he brings the indescribable imperishable feeling of home that elsewhere comes to him but slowly and gradually.

Palestine is not far from Russia and Roumania, and is unquestionably so adapted for cultivation that as soon as the soil has been prepared the main stream of present emigration can be directed thither. And, further, it is the connecting link between the three great human divisions of the earth, while its commercial future promises to be of the brightest. It is therefore natural that the Jews, longing to possess the land of their fathers, should be encouraged to immigrate both on political and industrial grounds.

This great and powerful problem has roused English public opinion, but the Zionist propaganda has made considerable progress since 1900. One of the foremost English authorities who supported a Zionist solution of the Jewish problem was Colonel Claude Reignier Conder, to whom we have referred several times in this book. Some space must be devoted to a brief reference to the activities of this wonderful man in connection with Palestine.

Colonel Conder’s name will always be associated with the exploration of Palestine and with the history of Christian sympathy in this country for the colonization of Palestine by the Jewish people. No other person has ever done as much as he for the correct interpretation of the Bible with reference to Palestine. He was born on December 29, 1848, and was trained for the Royal Engineers. He was associated, almost from its creation, with the Palestine Exploration Fund, which was founded in 1865. He was only twenty-six when, as a Lieutenant, he went out to join in the survey of Western Palestine. He returned to England in September, 1875, having surveyed 4700 square miles. He brought with him a mass of notes, special surveys, observations and drawings, which formed the bulk of the material for a work which may be said to have become historical: Tent Work in Palestine. It is a book which even now well repays perusal, if only for the light it throws upon the geography and topography of Palestine, and the many incidents and experiences it records. The remaining 1300 square miles of the survey were finished by Lieutenant (later Lord) Kitchener in 1877. The scientific results of the work occupied some twenty-six memoirs, one to every sheet of the map. The whole of Western Palestine was mapped out on a scale which showed every ruin and waterway, every road, forest and hillock. More than a hundred and fifty biblical sites were ascertained and from these the boundaries of the tribes were worked out and the routes taken by the invading armies traced. The other books and memoirs on Palestine which Conder published form a library in themselves. In addition to the one already mentioned, there are Heth and Moab and Memoirs of the Survey of Western Palestine in 1883. This was followed in 1890 by Memoirs of the Survey of Eastern Palestine, The Bible in the East in 1896, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1897, The Hittites and their Language in 1898. Besides these must be mentioned his Handbook to the Bible (1879), Primer of Bible Geography (1884), and Palestine (1891), which contained in one small volume a handy summary of all that was known of the geography of the country up to date. His last work, published only a year before he died, was on the City of Jerusalem. Special notice is also due to his Judas Maccabeus and The Jewish Tragedy, in which he deals with Jewish history from a national point of view.

Conder pointed out that Zionists are the natural leaders to whom the destitute and oppressed Jews turn for counsel and guidance, that “emigration has not settled the eternal question,” and that “a nation without a country must be content with toleration as all that it can expect.” He, too, sees the only solution in Palestine, and declares that Englishmen should be “only too glad to see Palestine increasing in civilization and prosperity as an outpost in the neighbourhood of Egypt.” (See Appendix LXXXV.)

The Zionist Organization called, in 1906, mainly under the pressure of the pogroms, a conference of representatives of Jewish organizations at Brussels, to discuss the question of emigration, particularly to the East. A number of organizations—including the Anglo-Jewish Association—sent their delegates; others, probably in consequence of their anti-Zionist tendencies, declined. Resolutions in favour of investigating the condition of the emigration to the East were accepted, and a committee was elected; but nothing practical resulted from these efforts, except a little “rapprochement” between Zionism and the “Hilfsverein” which, however, in consequence of deep differences of principle, was only superficial and of a short duration.

The work of the Zionist Organization, without losing sight of the political aspect, devoted itself more and more to the work in Palestine. The Eighth Zionist Congress at the Hague, August, 1907, with Wolffsohn and Nordau as Presidents, was attended by a considerably increased number of delegates, and among them a number of English Zionist leaders. The report says about Zionism in England: “In England the devoted zeal of the Zionists has removed the difficulties which formerly existed. The Federation worked systematically and well, and the Movement has received a considerable impetus. The old and trusted workers co-operate with the younger spirits.”

The Ninth Zionist Congress at Hamburg, December, 1909, with Wolffsohn and Nordau again as Presidents, was well attended (about four hundred members—and for the first time in the history of the movement, delegates were in attendance from Turkey). The impression driven home with irresistible force was the sustained and unflagging interest of all present in the movement. Among the English delegates were: Dr. Gaster, Dr. Samuel Daiches, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, Mr. L. J. Greenberg, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Mr. Norman Bentwich, Dr. Fuchs, the Rev. J. K. Goldbloom, and Mr. Leon Simon.

The Congress found itself confronted with the problem of organization. Several delegates were of the opinion that the task of leadership was too difficult for a Small Actions Committee, consisting of three persons, and that the headquarters should be removed to a larger centre. This view was not influenced by any personal sympathies or antipathies: it was dictated by considerations of an important character. Others were opposed to any change. This was an internal fight which had to be fought out, as in any other democratic movement, with the weapons of reason and conviction, and it was fought out. This Congress could not radically solve the question and it was left to the next one to bring the solution.

Zionism, however, remained as strong as ever. The disputes, far from being symptoms of weakness, were symptoms of growing interest, devotion and enthusiasm for the common cause.

## CHAPTER XLIXD.

Turkey, 1910‒14—The New Turkish Cabinet of 1912—The Balkan War—The Tenth and Eleventh Congresses—Death of Wolffsohn.

We may as well now cast a glance at the aspect of the general political situation at the period this narrative has reached. Public opinion in England was greatly disappointed when the first enthusiasm for Turkish liberties had passed away. The ship of state in Turkey began to enter very troubled waters, and no one saw safety ahead. The defeat of the Committee of Union and Progress, the displacing of the Said Pasha Cabinet and the downfall of the other leaders of the Young Turkey party of 1908, followed by the amnesty of a number of officials of the Hamidian regime, had naturally led many in Europe to believe that reaction had set in, and that the Young Turks had once more been overthrown and were in danger of being stamped out by the Old Turks or reactionaries. On the other hand, some careful observers asserted that the new Cabinet of 1912 was the best Turkey had had during the past forty years, and that it was in no true sense reactionary, but really constructive and progressive. They maintained also that the Committee of Union and Progress had begun to use old methods and were now hated by a large proportion of their former supporters. But all these allegations were contradicted by rapidly developing events. Hardly at any time within this generation had the political situation in Turkey presented elements of greater uncertainty and danger than in the period 1910‒14.

The greatest misfortune was the impossibility of any improvement. Turkey undoubtedly had the desire for progress along those lines which Europe professedly was so anxious to see her follow; but she needed advice, guidance, credit and patience. She required men—advisers, counsellors—to give her practical help in carrying out the necessary reforms. But, unfortunately, such a development was made impossible by the disturbing political events.

The Balkan War broke out. The Balkan peoples took their fate in their own hands. They did not look for liberators from elsewhere, and asked no help in the settlement of their differences. Whenever the Balkans had flared up and gone into war before it had generally been due to the fact that other nations had drawn them into the struggle. The vital difference of this conflict was that, for the first time for centuries, all the peoples concerned thought themselves strong enough to decide their own future by the sword. A fierce struggle began. The outlook for the Turks was most gloomy from the very outset. The Turks were beaten. They were discarded by all those who in Europe had seemed to have supported them, abandoned by the Powers which once valued their friendship. Speculation as to what would happen was on everybody’s lips. One thing was certain: that the East was getting thoroughly aroused, and that the developments led inevitably to a crisis unparalleled in history. Meanwhile, the Zionist Organization continued its work with great energy.

The Tenth Zionist Congress at Basle, August, 1911, with Wolffsohn and Nordau again as Presidents, had an attendance of about four hundred delegates, including a considerable number of English: Dr. Gaster, Mr. H. Bentwich, Mr. Jacob Moser, Dr. Samuel Daiches, Dr. Weizmann, Mr. J. Cowen, Dr. Hochman, Mr. H. Sacher, Dr. Salis Daiches, Mr. S. B. Rubenstein and others. The question left over from the previous Congress was settled at this one. A new Small Actions’ Committee was elected, and David Wolffsohn retained his influential post as President of the Council, and from that time again devoted his energies mainly to Zionist finances.

The Eleventh Zionist Congress at Vienna, in September, 1913 (preceded by an International Congress of the Hebrew Language Revival Societies), with its attendance of five to six hundred delegates, its enormous mass meetings, exhibitions, lectures, entertainments and demonstrations, such as the visit to Herzl’s grave, the Gymnastic Display with 2500 national Jewish gymnasts and 25,000 Jewish spectators, was the greatest Jewish display of forces that had ever taken place. The importance of practical work in Palestine, the thorough, serious and systematic treatment of all colonization questions, the powerful influence of the Hebrew language, the great number of intellectuals present, the great power of the Students’ movement, were new elements which were apt to give the calmer and older Congress members the impression of something chaotic. In reality, however, that was only the way in which the growth of the movement, its development, and many-sidedness found expression.

Superficial observers, who have but vague ideas of Zionism, in its narrow political and financial aspect, might have been surprised at the sight of this Congress, but those who know how Zionism has grown up out of the Chovevé Zion and literature and education, with the University movement, which we have described elsewhere, will understand why the first “idyll” was bound to give way to a movement as reflected by the Vienna Congress. Dr. Gaster, Mr. J. Moser, Mr. H. Bentwich, Dr. Ch. Weizmann, Mr. J. Cowen, Mr. L. Simon, Mr. H. Sacher, and many other active and well-known members of the English Zionist Federation and of the Order of Ancient Maccabeans attended the Congress as English Delegates.

There was also a large delegation (fourteen members) from Canada. For the first time in the history of the Canadian Zionist Federation no proxies had been given, as all the delegates to whom the Canadian Federation was entitled attended in person.

The general Organization has since then been active in propaganda work, in development work in Palestine through the “Zionist Office,” and also in educational work in that country.

The Organization sustained a great loss by the death of David Wolffsohn. He had been ailing for the past few years and died on the 15th of September, 1914. He served the Zionist Organization with unequalled fidelity, with intense devotion and a singleness of purpose that nothing could divert. His passionate affection for the Zionist idea never wavered. He was proud of the Zionist institutions and watched over them with never-ceasing vigilance. All Zionists fully realize the great devotion to the cause that actuated this remarkable man. Unbounded industry, a passionate love of the work he had to perform, these were the characteristics of Wolffsohn, and won for him wide and deep sympathy and admiration during his life and have secured for him a lasting and cherished memory in the hearts of Zionists throughout the world.

## CHAPTER XLIXE.

Baron Edmond de Rothschild in Palestine—Sir John Gray Hill—Professor S. Schechter—South African Statesmen—A Canadian Statesman—Christian religious literature again.

The events in Turkey did not change Zionist convictions in the least degree, nor lessen the faith in the ultimate triumph of the cause. The colonization of Palestine by Jews is useful and desirable from every point of view. It was as much a necessity when Europe upheld the principle that Turkey was to form an indissoluble and indivisible Empire as in different circumstances. Among Jews themselves it was impossible to fail to notice the complete change of tone and spirit with regard to Zionism. If there was still any feeling of rivalry between Chovevé Zion and Zionists, it has vanished completely in recent years. In this respect Baron de Rothschild’s visit to Palestine in 1913 was significant. The Baron, or “Our Baron” as the great philanthropist is affectionately called by the Palestinian Jews, for whom he has done so much, was received with royal honours: there were triumphal arches, and crowds of people and school children lined the streets singing songs of welcome. He expressed his keen satisfaction with Zionist work, and particularly with the remarkable development of the Hebrew schools and the spread of the Hebrew language in Palestine.

The attitude of English opinion, that is of real opinion based upon knowledge of facts and circumstances, remained unchangeably sympathetic.

For instance, Sir John Gray Hill of Liverpool, who had an intimate and direct knowledge of Palestine, where he used to spend his holidays for many years, and whose reflections and observations were of great value, gave in his address, delivered to the Liverpool Jewish Literary Society, on the 30th of November, 1913, a detailed analysis of the work to be done in Palestine. While admitting that exaggerated hopes were liable to strong objections and indicating the existing limitations, he said: “What you can do is to afford a refuge in Palestine to large numbers of persecuted Jews, and you can teach them to cultivate the soil, and to practise various arts and crafts so as to maintain themselves in the home of their fathers. Now I think it is very important that the English Jews should take a lead in this endeavour, because the English Jews are the leaders in thought, in position and in common sense, and have a calm way of looking at things.” He opposed the most erroneous and absurd idea of a contradiction between Jewish racial self-consciousness and English patriotism. “I am told that there is some feeling amongst the English Jews of there being a want of patriotism in interesting themselves in the Holy Land. That I do not understand. A Scotchman is a Scotchman, full of love for his own land and his own customs, poetry and song, but he is a Briton; so of a Welshman; so of an Irishman; so of a Devonshire man; so of a Lancashire man; we cherish these special local feelings, these feelings of local pride, and yet we remain true to the Great Empire to which we belong.” He offered a suggestion about travelling to Palestine.

“Now the leading Jews in England cannot, of course, go to live in Palestine altogether, but they might visit the country; and those who can afford the time might pass a portion of the year there, and, I think, if they did so they would find an immense interest in the country, and would be able to help their poorer brethren far better than they can by remaining at a distance from it. Travel, open, open your mind, travel to the Holy Land and see the great vision of what the past did for us, that amazingly interesting country, without seeing which I think it is extremely difficult to understand in a full and proper way the meaning of the Bible; at any rate, the sights of that land throw an immense deal of light upon it. Then there is another reason. Englishmen are very much respected in Palestine; they are thought more highly of than people of any other nation. One reason is, that it is known that England is not seeking to exploit the country; England does not seek for greedy concessions, and Englishmen, so far as they have to do with the natives, always treat them considerately and kindly, and, I think, the natives believe that whether the Englishmen are going the right way about it or not, they are trying to help the native to help himself.”

Here he struck a note which might have seemed new to him as a spectator appealing to English Jews. In the Zionist literature and Press this idea has frequently been expressed. Indeed, Palestine is still the land of poetry and enthusiasm, but it has ceased to be that of mystery; and though only the fame of its natural beauty has hitherto reached Western Europe, travellers who have recently visited Palestine have learned to appreciate the progress of this country in colonization. If anybody has hailed with enthusiasm the rising of this new star in the East on account of its brilliancy, beauty and poetical supremacy, he could discover on a visit to the country those pioneers of vigorous frame, with eagle eyes and well-formed, combining the sternness of the present with the subtlety of the intellectual and the simplicity of the child. The best means of becoming a Zionist is—a visit to Palestine. Sir Moses Montefiore was the first European Jew who visited Palestine as a tourist and philanthropist, and he was an English Jew. That was a great traditional example for English Jewry.

Sir John Gray Hill emphasized the importance of the Zionist Jerusalem University scheme: “Now I have to speak of the proposal to have a University in Jerusalem. That is a proposal, I think, in which all Jews might join. Any objection or feeling of apathy that there is on the part of Jews for any reason against Zionism generally, cannot apply to a Jewish University. You want a centre of Jewish culture and instruction in Jerusalem. The Vienna Congress recently started the scheme thoroughly by a good subscription. You would, of course, teach Hebrew, thus preserving the purity of your language, and you would also, I hope, teach medicine, arts and crafts, agriculture and horticulture. Cannot you attract the attention of some very wealthy Jews to this great project? Whatever objections they have to Zionist projects generally cannot possibly apply to this. What a noble monument it would be to a millionaire, or group of millionaires—those mighty kings of finance who are so powerful in Europe—to erect and endow a splendid University for the Hebrew race. If they were appealed to they would, I think, listen. Surely they would not take for their motto the injunction addressed by the followers of Solomon to the Bride from Tyre: ‘Forget also thine own people and thy father’s house.’ No, that cannot be; I think if the matter is properly represented to them a response will come. I believe, also, that a true and wise view of Zionism is growing in force. The cause is moving at last. The long period of slack water has ended. The tide has turned, although we may not yet see that it has done so.

‘For while the tired waves vainly breaking,

Seem here no painful inch to gain;

Far back through creeks and inlets making,

Comes silent flooding in the main.’”

On the other hand, an appreciation of the moral and religious value of the Zionist movement may be quoted. Speaking at a Zionist meeting in 1914, in Cincinnati, the late Professor Solomon Schechter said: “Zionism is now a living fact. We must have Zionism, if we want Judaism, orthodox or reform, to continue to exist. Judaism is at the present time in a very weak condition, not only in America, but also in Europe. The Jew cannot live in his own atmosphere, he is compelled to breathe the spirit of other religions.... The question then arises: What is it that can preserve the Jewish people? ♦How can Judaism be saved from complete annihilation? Jewish history tells us that the Hellenist Jews who settled in Alexandria and other places remained loyal to Judaism, although they had been excellent Greek citizens.... But after the destruction of the Temple, these Hellenist Jews became completely submerged by the Greeks, and nothing remained of their Judaism. That,” said Professor Schechter in conclusion, “was why Jews must have at the present time the Zionist movement. Zionism could effect for the Jew a change in his material life, and it could also create for him a Jewish atmosphere, in which he could breathe freely his religion.” It is worthy of note that the late Professor Schechter did not join the Zionist movement during the first years of its existence, but was then opposed to it. Being, however, unlike the Bourbons, who are said to have learned nothing, and having realized the wonderful effects of this movement as far as the revival of Judaism was concerned, he became in the last years of his life a faithful Zionist. This was the logic of a progressive mind.

The Right Hon. J. X. Merriman said in an address delivered on the 9th of July, 1914, in opening the Zionist Bazaar at Capetown, that “Zionism is a ramshackle movement, because it began in a very small way, and it had gradually spread. This had been achieved by the general effort of the people themselves, who had laudable desires. They had settled a good many people on the land and had brought to bear their remarkable faculty of energy, enterprize and skill in restoring Palestine to its former fertility.” On the following day the Bazaar was opened by Sir Thomas Smartt, M.L.A.: “There could be few,” said Sir Thomas in his eloquent address, “but what admired their great leader, Dr. Herzl, in his lofty ideal for re-establishment as in the days of old, after many years of wanderings, the ancient glories of their race—of establishing a nation which had done more than any other nation for the spread of religious thought throughout the world. Notwithstanding the long and dark ages of suffering and tribulation through which the race had passed, the love and devotion to its traditions were just as strong as ever. Their young men still continued to dream dreams and their old men to see visions of that sun of righteousness which was to rise with healing in its wings.” In seconding, Senator Powel said that it was a great satisfaction to know that the Palestine movement had got beyond the stage of dreams and visions, and was becoming an accomplished fact. He hoped that they would never slacken their efforts in what is one of the greatest movements in the world to-day.

At the General Conference of the Canadian Jews held in Montreal on the 14th of November, 1915, which was unique in the annals of the Jews of Canada (for this was the first time in their history that the representatives of every section and every element of the Canadian Jewish Community came together from all parts of Canada to take part in a conference), a representative of the Canadian Government, Mr. Maighen, brought the Assembly the good wishes of the Government for the success of the Conference and its high appreciation of that spirit of brotherhood which had caused them to come together. He spoke of the history and traditions of the Jewish race and of the debt that mankind owed to it. He referred to Jewish civilization as being the most ancient that influenced the world of to-day and of the wonderful way in which it had endured in spite of the ages of oppression its zealots had suffered. Speaking of the wish cherished so long by the Jews to regain possession of Palestine, Mr. Maighen gave utterance to the following: “I think I can speak for those of the Christian faith when I express the wish that God speed the day when the land of your forefathers shall be yours again. That task will, I hope, be performed by that champion of liberty the world over—the British Empire.” This speech shows how, in the minds of English statesmen, the question of rights for the Jews all over the world, and that of a Jewish homeland for the nation are bound up in one great principle of justice and freedom.

To conclude the way we began mention must be made of Christian religious literature, which continues to support Zionism in its own way. The Rev. Earle Langston published recently his ideas on the subject. The Christadelphians have published ample literature to which the learned Mr. Walker has contributed extensively. Mr. Frank Jannaway, an ardent Christadelphian whose interest in Jews and their homeland dates back some forty years, and who has paid several visits to Palestine at intervals of a few years, and has thus enjoyed some splendid opportunities of watching the gradual development of the Holy Land, has published a book, Palestine and the Jews (1914), of which two new editions, one of them entitled Palestine and the Powers, have since appeared. His knowledge is wide and thorough. He sees Palestine as the land of the future, and every new development is to him the fulfilment of a prophecy. He offers biblical chapter and verse for the happenings that have been convulsing the world, and in a way which reminds one of the oldest English pro-Zionist literature of the seventeenth century, which links up the position of the present and future aspects with sacred prediction. His views favour the Jewish cause and show considerable and correct acquaintance with the Zionist movement. It must finally be observed that during the last two years a great number of excellent articles have appeared in English newspapers and magazines, and some also in the French Press, in which great sympathy is expressed with the Zionist cause from a political, as well as from a humanitarian point of view.

## ZIONISM DURING THE WAR
1914‒1918

### GENERAL SURVEY

The year 1914 will stand out as the Great Divide in contemporary history. It was a year of endings and beginnings. Humanity left an age behind it, and entered upon an age in which old things have passed away and all things had to become new.

Long feared and long foretold, yet never seriously expected, the European War came at last. Nations, great and small, arose in their strength, and gathered, in an avalanche of excitement, all their manhood to battle, all their old age to guard, and all their womanhood, not only as in bygone days, to tend and heal the wounded and sick, but also to do preparatory work for the fighting armies. Generations, young and old, rushed eagerly to defend their countries, leaving home, property, calling; knowing no fear save that here and there one of their fellow-citizens might prove less patriotic than themselves. The world was thrown back to the moral level and the ethical conceptions of thousands of years ago: man became again a wolf to man, as in the Pleistocene Age. On the one hand, the vast and bloody epic produced a sort of ecclesiastical moratorium which, for the duration of the war, annulled all moral obligations and abrogated the Ten Commandments, while on the other hand, it developed, to the highest degree, all the great and noble feelings—sense of honour, unselfishness, magnanimity, courage. Nationality, patriotism, the sense of duty, the spirit of sacrifice, enthusiastic heroism and patriotic martyrdom filled the hearts and created a new atmosphere, in which every kind of human activity was intensified: industry, art, science, and literature. This great storm, the greatest storm that had ever stirred mankind, produced the greatest spiritual tragedy the world has ever known. The most terrible aspect of the war was not the fact that Europe was being bled white, that all the amenities of civilization were breaking down with the strain of the military operations, and that each day some new and more brutal engine of destruction was prepared and brought into use, but—the ethical conflict carried on with minds and nerves on the rack of tense emotion which not only upset mental balance and changed the outlook of peoples, hitherto industrious and peaceful, but developed moral and social fears and passions which will not pass away in a day. This universal catastrophe would indeed have degraded the world into “a sort of malign middle term between a lunatic asylum and a butcher’s stall,” if it had not finally become—as it has become—“a war against war.” The peoples turned their ploughshares into swords, they ceased to make useful, beneficial rails and plates and angles and girders of their iron ore and their coal, and they manufactured harmful, destructive shells and guns to project them to the slaughter of the enemy, hoping that when the time came they would again turn their swords into ploughshares. They realized that the enemy of society is militarist despotism, and that militarist despotism therefore must be ended, or it will end society. A great moral idea arose out of this war: the liberation of oppressed small nations. Another great moral idea arising from it is the de-militarization of humanity. The whole world is now involved in a life or death struggle for righteousness. This is the justification for all the sufferings and all the sacrifices. If this war were not a war of principles and for ideals it would be nothing, and could result in nothing except the further enthronement of the doctrine and worship of force, and the perpetuation of the untold misery and degradation which that form of religion carries with it. It should never be forgotten that this was a war for liberty of the peoples, and in particular of the small peoples.

This great war has aggravated and made terribly clear the position of Jewry and the tragic problem of its existence as a small and oppressed nationality. The war has turned numerous Ghetti of Galicia, Bukovina, Russian Poland, Lithuania, Courland and Roumania into heaps of ashes, and hell would be pleasant compared with the situation of great masses of the Jewish people. In this war, particularly in Eastern Europe, hundreds of thousands of Jews were fighting against one another in the hostile camps of the belligerent countries; and the significant factor is that they were not fighting because they were forced to, but from a sense of supreme duty. Even among those that were fighting in the Russian Army before the Revolution, there were many who were not acting under compulsion: they were giving of their best and from their heart. They wanted to take their places in the virile, the over-virile world—which is also their world, they wanted to live and die taking their place in the great living society which called to them. The spirit of Europe—rather the spirit of present-day Europe, which was the spirit of obstinate conflicts and of extreme courage of devotion—has seized the Jews also: they also have entered into this tremendous catastrophe, into this pilgrimage through chaos towards a new world.

But for the Jews this war meant infinitely worse evil and greater danger; the nations were divided one from another, Jewry was divided against itself; each nation opposed its fixed shape and character, untouched even by defeat, to the overflooding chaos, but the Jewish nationality seemed to be its victim, in its own wavering and chaotic form of the Diaspora. It almost seemed as though there existed Jews, and divided Jews, but no Jewry.

And yet it was not really so. It was a dark time, and the storm was ghastly enough, but the lightning has revealed things that might otherwise have remained hidden. Rather should we believe that the time of the greatest trial for Jewry denoted a high self-recollection, and with it the commencement of a true gathering and union. In times of great stress men discover their own deeper selves. Great trouble somehow digs into the very foundation of a man’s existence, and he cannot explore there without finding what is most essential in him. When some tremendous trouble sends its plough through his heart of hearts, then he becomes aware of wonderful things he has never suspected before.

Now it is well worth our while to weigh all this and to make it part of our outlook and equipment as we face the great present events. Because, for one thing, it should go a long way towards delivering us from the worst of all fears—the fear of to-morrow and the next day, and all the days that the future hides. Nine out of ten of us are perpetually spoiling what is happening by dread of what may happen, so that we can all join Disraeli in saying that we have had many troubles, but the worst have been those that never happened. If only we could let the morrow be anxious for itself! But, to a large extent, we can, if we will, school ourselves to it;

“וכימיך דבאך׃...”

דברים לג׳ כה׳¹

is a promise perpetually justified by the best psychological findings and historic experience in the life of nations. It is really the fact, that our “day” stirs and heightens our strength. Only when challenged, do we know what we are capable of. Modern psychology tells us that “the human individual lives usually far within his limits; he possesses powers of various sorts which he habitually fails to use. He energizes below the maximum, and he behaves below his optimum.” And to rise to our maximum and optimum we need some unusual stimulus or some unusual idea of necessity.

Jewish history has revealed this truth several times. One individual or another, one small group or another—separated from the masses of the people—may fall away from Jewry; whoever can do that to-day has never belonged to it. The majority, however, remain loyal, and are never more loyal than in times of stress. The illusion is destroyed that a man can live a truly moral life in a time of trial while he is only a spectator of the life of society. In the Jews, convulsed by the events of the war, the new unity of Jewry showed itself. The situation was so serious, so full of menace for all that we hold dear, that every thinking Jew saw that he must in these days help to create and maintain the moral energies which alone can carry him through the crisis. At this time the Jew had a duty to his country and a duty to Judaism. To his country he owed, as a citizen, duties which could not be shirked. Every support was to be given to all patriotic efforts for the prosperity, the victory, and the glory of the country. To Judaism he owed the obligation of securing and defending not only the existence, but also the development and the realization of its traditional ideals, and of strengthening its unity. The first expression of this unity was an increase of self-consciousness. Jewry was affected by the war, but the essential problems of the Jews in the modern world were not altered by the war.

When we speak of Jewry, we speak of a living historic, ethnic and cultural—although not political—nationhood, existing potentially in its unity, independently of the Jewries of the countries in the various forms of their divided destinies, and their dissensions at the present moment. We strive to fix and to assure it—as far as external conditions allow it—in the Diaspora. And when we wish to prepare for it a sort of central Metropolis, an organic chef-lieu in Palestine—we are not engaged in adding one more nationality to the existing nationalities which fight against and watch one another suspiciously. It is not the question of introducing Jewry into the divisions of the nations, to be absorbed by them, and thus to contribute to their conflicts, but it is rather a question of aiming at the union of all that is noble and just in the nations and in ourselves. We want our own centre of simple active life, because the spiritual and intellectual element without the simple active life degenerates into subtlety and trickiness. We want—at least, for a section of our nationality—normal life, with its variety and interpretation of different influences of Nature. This is a question in which every Jew should be interested, because not only does the nobility of a nation depend on the presence of the national consciousness, but also the nobility of each individual. Our dignity and our rectitude are proportioned to our sense of relationship to something great, admirable, pregnant with possibilities, worthy of sacrifice, a continual inspiration by the presentation of aims larger than everyday life and personal ease.

What was the attitude of the Zionist Organization with regard to these great events? Why was the Zionist Organization more interested in the war than any other section of Jewry? And why is Zionism at present more up to date than it ever was? In order to answer properly these questions we have to cast a retrospective glance on the history of the last twenty years, and to recall to the minds of the readers a few important facts which, although dealt with in this work in previous chapters, must be again reviewed in their connection with the present political situation.

Twenty years ago several hundred Jews from all parts of the world met in the Swiss town of Basle and held a congress—the first Jewish congress in history.

A strange community of Jews, a representative assembly of the great Jewish Diaspora—from the most modern European writers to teachers in Talmud colleges in small Lithuanian towns, quiet respectable citizens and fiery students, bankers and Hebrew writers—representing all kinds of civilization and all languages—and, nevertheless, some bond unified the whole.

At the head sat a man of the kind which appears like meteors but once in the course of generations—Theodor Herzl. A sage, a hero, a leader of men, an artist? Everything—even more than everything—the embodiment of an idea. In the body of this man there existed a soul, and that soul was Zionism.

At his side there stood (besides other worthies whose titles to honour we may not here linger to mention) a tribune of the people, in the person of Max Nordau—another famous man only just awakened suddenly and with great power to his Jewish nationality.

There the veil was torn away from the tragedy of the Jews. There it was stated that the Jewish problem was a disease, and that against a disease one should not protest and struggle wildly, but one ought to cure it. Moreover, it was said that at times one cannot heal a wound except by cauterizing it. And all were agreed that it was not a good plan to postpone difficulties, but on the contrary that they should be anticipated.

Speakers there indicated the “Galuth”—the serpent with a thousand coils. And they pointed to the Land of Israel, to freedom, to redemption.

In the Land of Israel, it was there affirmed, Zionism could become a living reality.

Nothing new indeed was there discovered. It was simply stated that two and two make four.

Out of the vocabulary of modern political nomenclature the word “national” was adopted. Is Zionism national? Certainly. It can also be called “human”; perhaps still more simply, “natural.” Let us learn, however, from Nature, in its simplicity and honesty, which knows of no sophistries nor manœuvring.

We Jews have become again children of Nature. There exist species in Nature. The eagle does not toil for the pike nor the lion for the cat; neither can the light of the stars replace that of the sun. Each fulfils its own purpose, and thence results the sum total. Behold the trees and the standing corn—would they be so splendidly developed, so rich and so fresh in their growth, if they were forcibly mixed and mingled together so that one drew its sap from the other? They are flourishing and rich and beautiful, because each keeps its own natural form and each draws its nourishment from the breast of mother earth. “Give us our country,” said the Zionists. “Give it to us for our exiled and wandering ones, who unwillingly find themselves mingled in the great seething pot of assimilation, who drag themselves from place to place. Give it to us for those who long and thirst for another kind of life; our garments, our bread, and our freedom we do not wish to have as alms. We wish to work and to obtain the fruits of our honest labour. We love that little country; waters cannot quench and streams cannot drown our love for it. Our love has the power to move mountains, it is stronger than all material obstacles. We demand a peaceful spot for our future and for our children who are becoming lost to us. Beholding this misery, we are willing to sacrifice ourselves. Even a she-wolf throws herself against danger to protect her young ones. Shall our love be weaker then than that of a wolf? And shall those whom we love be worse off than the offspring of animals? We want to rend asunder our chains, to blot out the mark of serfdom upon us, and win for ourselves true human rights, and the privilege of living equal to others, by honest toil.”

This was the Jewish claim—the demand put by Zionists to the world. And then the world turned against us, especially the little Jewish world.

We shall not talk about the levity, the insolence, the egotism, nor about those satiated folk who philosophize with their stomachs, nor about those others who do not know their own minds, whose shallow little heads float like foam in any current. We do not talk about those idle jesters who have found another opportunity of showing the sad wit of the Ghetto which takes pleasure in ridiculing and despising one’s own self. Indeed even respectable, serious and honest, though unfortunately shortsighted and obstinate men, who imagined themselves enthusiastic concerning Judaism, kind-hearted but automatic leaders of Jewish communal life who, though philosophizing about mankind, are inwardly divided from their own people, came to us with “fatherly” advice, with moral lectures, with sonorous phrases about humanity. They wanted to destroy most quickly, annihilate and extinguish the “dangerous chimæra,” the “reaction,” the “chauvinism,” the “Sabbatai-Zvi’ism,” the “decay of religion,” “religious fanaticism,” “tribalism,” and all the other things they ascribed to Zionism in their political delusion and contradictory nomenclature.

“You must scatter yourselves all over the world,” they said, “just as a handful of seeds, scattered by the wind, germinate, grow and ripen, all in different spots, replenishing the earth with their fruits! What do you want with a country of your own? You are made for something better! To be priests, teachers of ethics, missionaries of God—that is a higher ambition! Your contribution to mankind is social justice and the brotherhood of men. Why be a nation and for what purpose? You will be great in the memory of peoples. You have earned a golden throne in history’s temple of fame. You have been, to-day you are no more!”

The Zionists replied: “We want to live. We know better than you do what we are able to do, and how we ought to influence mankind; but we do not wish to abdicate, we do not wish to be destroyed like a broken vessel, whose contents have run out and have drained into the soil without leaving a trace. We do not want to be lost like a falling star, which for a time had shone brightly in space, only to sink into nothingness. Our star is not yet dead. Our ambitions are not very high, but they are based on reality. We do not want to be an exception, and we want to be excused from such a ‘priesthood.’ We want to create a sound settlement, a strong centre where we can develop our own nature and our character to the highest and purest perfection. Should the world wish to learn from us and accept our influence, we shall place no obstacles; on the contrary, we shall be glad of it. But to drag ourselves from place to place, to be the scapegoat of every ‘Azazel,’ and the sacrificial lamb for every calamity, to mix everywhere with others, to lose more and more that which is our own personality, and to imagine that we are a sort of schoolmaster for everyone—for such imposture we are too honest, for such megalomania we are of too normal a mentality, and, morally, too modest. We do not want to be driven ad majorem Dei gloriam (for God’s greater glory) or to be intermingled with others. We do not want to be like the goose that was offered the choice of being either roasted, stewed, or boiled. Neither do we wish to have lavished upon us the pity given to old people, because it is certain that they will not for long continue to disturb the peace of the living. We are old, it is true, but on that account we are experienced. From Pharaoh and Balaam to the foreign Antiochus [Epiphanes] (ob. 164 b.c.e.) and our own Jason,⁠¹ from the Hellenists to the modern Assimilationists, we have been constantly invited, as the spider invited the fly into her parlour, just to get it entangled in her web and afterwards to suck it dry. No! a thousand times no! And if you say the Land of Israel is of no value to any one, then you are not speaking in our name! Speak for yourselves alone! For you the Land of Israel means perchance only a cemetery, a legend, an amulet, an archæological relic; for us its every pebble and grain of sand is beloved, not only in a spirit of worship and of inactive enthusiasm, but also as a necessity to our life labour. And if you believe that the Jewish people are of a similar species to the Mammoth and the Megatherium, which have been devoted to extinction, then please speak only for yourselves! Perhaps the sense of Jewish nationality in you has gone to sleep or has even died entirely. That is your own affair, a personal question which you have to fight out with your own selves. In us it is alive, suffering, fighting, clamouring! Zionism is the movement of the Jewish people to reconstitute itself and to collect again its scattered members, to provide Judaism, the Jewish spirit, the Jewish soul, with a home once again after two thousand years of exile and of wandering. Zionism is the struggle of the Jewish people to preserve its existence. Zionism feels that the raison d’être of Judaism is not ended, that the Jewish race can still contribute its share towards the raising of humanity, but to enable it to do so more efficiently, in an organized form, and in accordance with its own natural affinities and historic traditions, a Jewish milieu is necessary. To create such a Jewish milieu is the purpose of the Zionist movement. Such a Jewish milieu can take root in one land and one land only, for there is one land only that has a real glorious Jewish history and Jewish past. That land is the Land of Israel!”

Both parties had exhausted the discussion—and, as is usual in such cases, did not succeed in convincing each other. Then they each went their own way.

The Zionists began to build straightway. No other colonial settlement in the world is of nobler birth than ours in Palestine. Tradition relates that young Rome was fed by a she-wolf. Some day it will be told in legends that our new settlement on old foundations was fed by a turtle-dove, by love, faithfulness, kindliness, and brotherliness. Not wild animals, but angels, stood round its cradle. Muses and Graces illuminated and crowned the morning star of its noble childhood. Jewish thinkers like Leo Pinsker, Perez Smolenskin, David Gordon; enthusiastic leaders and many others—a kind of Jewish Puritan pioneers, the “Bilu”—had started to build up the settlement even before our first and greatest, our immortal founder and leader of modern Zionism, Theodor Herzl, had drawn up our programme, created our organization, founded our institutions, and had given us the impetus, method and form of the Zionist movement.

The success of a wonderful, personal, magnetic power, the method of large-scale propaganda, the labour through relations with Governments had for a certain time given Zionism a political bias. More considered and everyday experience, on the contrary, pointed to a slow method of practical labour. Different parties amongst the Zionists opposed one another, and we need not be ashamed of that. Jews are inclined to freedom in all their spiritual tendencies, they do not easily submit to formulæ, they criticize, analyse, and search for the truth. Finally, the whole struggle was reduced to a question of tactics. Whether one attempts to reach the goal by means of the plough, plantations, schools, literature, or propaganda, it is a question of time and circumstances. And the essential truth was, that all means must be employed.

What was the result? The net balance was not great; forty settlements, some farms, co-operative societies, Tel Aviv, the new Achuzoth, the Carmel, the Pardes, the Aggudath N’taim, modern machines; new methods of work introduced not only among Jews, but also among Arabs; malaria centres disinfected; the best conditions for planting studied in experimental institutions; our banks, the Bezalel, public health centres, the music school, two well-filled secondary schools, the girls’ school in Jaffa, the Tach’kmoni school in the same place, the Petach-Tikwah school of agriculture, the settlement schools, the committee organization of the settlements, the workers’ associations, the teachers’ union, the Hebrew newspapers and literature, the “Houses of the People”—these represent what Chovevé Zion, Baron Edmond de Rothschild and the Zionists have created, and what we call the new colonization of Palestine. The earlier rivalries have vanished. The Chovevé Zion and the Zionists are at one as to the policy of Zionism. The Zionist Palestine office in Jaffa is the head-quarters of the work of colonisation. The struggle for Hebrew has shown how Palestine is becoming more and more an intellectual centre. The visit of Baron Edmond de Rothschild to Palestine in 1913 had set the seal upon this unanimity. Even the blind could perceive that a true Jewish Home was in process of establishment. No further arguments were needed. The Jewish population in the land, although a minority, is the only one that is growing and has grown during the past generation. It is the only progressive population in the land, the others are stationary in regard to numbers. Let any one go to Palestine, not on one of Cook’s lightning tours, but as a Jew to the land of Israel; let him remain in the settlements but a few weeks—that will be a certain cure for anti-Zionism. If it should happen that any one could not be cured even in this way, then he must unfortunately be regarded as incurable. We, however, know of a great many that have been cured.

Thus the organization grew. It is sufficient to compare the beautiful first Basle Congress of 1897 with the enormous Vienna Congress of 1913; it is sufficient to compare the phantom Jewish National Fund of 1899 with the existing Jewish National Fund, which can show an annual income of over two million francs; it is sufficient to compare the two or three Zionist pamphlets of eighteen years ago with the Zionist press and literature in existence to-day.

Thus Zionism has grown to what it is to-day for the Jewish people: a spring of life, a signpost, the foundation of a mighty edifice.

In a few words the author can give the essence of the personal impressions which he received during the course of his three months’ stay in Palestine, in 1913, before the war: a model factory of modern Jewish national life; a nursery for rearing the fruitful parent-stems for the blossoming tree of a living Hebraism; a laboratory for sociological experiments in self-help and self-government in Jewish economic life; a compendium of elements and corner-stones for the erection of the Home; a systematic, laborious, slow preparation of the preliminary conditions for a great, healthy, original Jewish province; the genesis of a new world, naturally with many defects, with many premature and unripe attempts, but that was just most beautiful and most natural in people who search and strive and venture. And all this was enlightened by a clear understanding, and glowed with a youthful national enthusiasm. That is what Jewish colonization in Palestine is.

Do not try and count it over! The wisdom of the multiplication table is too dull to be able to estimate it. Do not try and weigh it! On the great scales of history a single unit sometimes weighs down a hundred thousand! Enjoy it, as one enjoys art, or as the free soul becomes intoxicated with and rejoices in freedom. As musical natures become enraptured with music, so national natures become enraptured with national life.

And if you will have net results, then do not forget one thing, namely, that all this has been done, not by the entire Jewish people, but by a small handful of Jews. When this small handful has become the entire people, then this edifice will grow even grander. Palestine is a land that stretches forth its hands to the future. For two thousand years it has been ravaged by war and by misgovernment, until a country that was once famous throughout the world for its fertility, has become a desert land, degenerate from lack of cultivation. According to the statistics of the Ottoman Board of Trade less than 9 per cent of the area of European Turkey has been brought under cultivation, and still less of Turkey in Asia. There are in Palestine twenty-seven inhabitants to the square kilometre, and in the valley of the Jordan four; while in the irrigated districts of neighbouring Egypt ten thousand are concentrated within the same area. Why should not Palestine be resettled like Egypt? Why should it not be made a happy home for an unfortunate people?

Now the Zionists, after twenty years of work, plead their case again. They have not succeeded in putting an end to the “Galuth.” Their opponents maintain that they had overestimated their strength. Perhaps so, but this does not prove that their labours have been to no purpose. They have laid a few foundation stones, they have shown the way.

They defend their cause in the midst of a hell-fire. Our ancient people that has lived so long, has now experienced the greatest of wars, such as has never been in the world before. We live to-day in the most critical period of the world’s history. It has been our lot to share in the greatest drama which humanity has as yet lived through, not only as spectators, but also as actors. The history of this world war is written in letters of blood on the ancient and holy parchment, on the brow of the Jew. No seismograph has indicated beforehand the coming of this earthquake, of this outburst of the volcano of the nations. But one thing the Zionists have foreseen: the force of national consciousness; the flood of hate, our pitiful situation, which cause every storm to tear away the ground from under our feet.

Herzl had written his first pamphlet under the influence of the Dreyfus affair. That cry of twenty years ago thunders now in unison with the cries of mothers, wives, orphans, from underneath the pyres and ruins which in their brutal reality leave the worst imaginings of a Jeremiah far behind. The dead arise from their graves, covered with blood, trampled in the dust, with the fiery name of God, the “Shaddai,” on their pale foreheads, and they demand to be heard. They lament, and say:

“Vainly we strove to secure a little life—we could not grasp it. Withered with sufferings, with pain and injury, shivering and frozen with cold, we used to hug the earth closely, but it would not give us warmth. We were teachers of the most ancient peoples, but death and insult were the recompense paid us by our pupils. We shone like the stars, but we were treated like silkworms, which have to die, so soon as they have spun the fine web of their threads, so soon as they have drawn forth and sacrificed their life-blood—they have fulfilled their duty, and farewell!

“On our shoulders we bore the burdens of our masters’ interests, just as the sea bears the little fishing-boats on its waves. We were more faithful in guarding their property than dogs are. For the labour which we performed, for our hard and humble services, for the sacrifice of all our strength on their altars, for the resigned and patient suffering of all the tortures of exile, we did not receive even the reward of protection extended to the beast of burden, to the cow, or to the sheep for its wool. Deprived of all human rights, even stripped of the scantiest rags of toleration, we wandered and fell under the iron yoke of serfdom, like a weary and impotent herd of cattle driven over rocks and brambles. They felled us as a forest is felled, and we went down without the slightest possibility of suitable self-protection, with the dull thud of an old oak prostrated by a storm, yet with the pain of bereaved, insulted and humbled human beings. We are the victims not of the war, but of the ‘Galuth.’ Let no one talk to us about Belgium, Serbia. Theirs is the well-known scourge of mankind taking the shape of tyranny, militarism, war. Had we suffered only from these things, then we should have suffered but in common with others. Our misery, however, is of a peculiar kind. It is a double misery: we suffer with the rest, and in addition we suffer specially as a people without a country. Belgium and Serbia and Montenegro are nations with countries of their own; they cannot be annihilated, they must be restored. We envy Belgium in her misfortune, and sorely assailed Serbia; we behold the strength and health of the Polish peasant. Truly, he has been ruined for the time being, but he has his country, and though he has been driven away ten times by the fury of war he will return, and once again plant himself on his native soil, where his golden corn will grow again. Not only could he not be uprooted, but he will regain more than he had lost: a new, free, independent Poland!

“Everywhere the rights of nations are triumphant. Let it not be said that only countries that had been stolen fifty or a hundred years ago shall be returned to their former lawful owners. Whoever says so, falsifies history, either intentionally or unintentionally. The right of the Greeks to Greece is also a right which has remained through thousands of years. The right of the Armenians to Armenia has also been suppressed by force throughout the centuries. And yet these rights will be granted. Let it not be said either, that a nation robbed of the country must have remained on its native soil, or otherwise it will have lost its rights. That is not true. More Greeks live outside Greece than in Greece, and there are still other nations, the majority of whose citizens dwell outside the frontiers of their old home. Nor let it be said that it is sufficient to grant equal rights to mankind. Were not equal rights given to the Greeks—and yet the problem was not solved till Greece redeemed herself!

“We, the orphans, the disinherited, the playthings in history’s sports, the step-children of a world founded on nationalities—we summon the world before the high court of history.

“For two thousand years past they put us off with excuses and false promises. Civilization has been progressing for thousands of years: mankind now flies loftier than the eagle and dives deeper than the Leviathan. Has it become better for us? Have we not remained the same scapegoats from the time of Rome to the Crusades, from these to the ‘Haidamaks,’ and from them to the Pogroms of the present day?

“We, the wandering souls, demand our rest. Enough of wanderings and being bandied about! Give us back our body, our country! We want to be equal with the rest, suffer with the rest, fight with the rest, live with the rest.”

Thus lament the dead, teaching the living. Will the world not listen to them?

“What do you wish?” the Zionists are asked. They reply: We want a home in the land of Israel. On the day of Judgment, when every historical right—from the smallest to the greatest—is announced, elevated, proclaimed, and demanded; when even the weakest, the most doubtful claims of half-forgotten and but recently-awakened little peoples, based on old, torn, ambiguous and now scarcely legible documents and traditions, assert themselves and demand rights of ownership; when history takes its place as judge on the throne of justice, and the national territorial idea is accepted as the world’s code, in order to resolve every doubt and to arbitrate every dispute; when the great in power penitently declare that every injustice, especially towards suffering peoples, must be righted; when these things come to pass, then (we Zionists say) the Jewish people is in duty bound to proclaim its old, holy, historical right to the heritage of its heroes, its prophets, its civilization, its religion, its language, and its labours!

It is an ancient right, but it has not lapsed. It is the ancient oath, the ancient covenant. No right has been earned more honourably. None has been paid for with more and nobler blood. None is so highly established and deeply founded.

In order not to lay itself open to a verdict of letting its claim go by default, the Jewish people will have to proclaim its immortal right to the land of Israel. It is the sacred duty-right of loyal children towards their parents. Not to demand the land of Israel means that we tacitly waive our rights to it, and this means a waiving of our rights to everything: tradition, honour, justice, the law of Moses, and the general historical idea.

We don’t trust a man who denies his mother, however much of a patriot he may be in his country. He is an opportunist, but no patriot, because patriotism is idealism.

Nothing will daunt us in our resolve to proclaim solemnly our historical right and to demand it with all our energy. Do not trouble us with intimidations, on the score of a possible growth of anti-Semitism, and so on! These fears are senseless. Anti-Semitism is a consequence not of Zionism, but of the “Galuth.” Those who have the courage of their convictions and a sense of honour, are not to be influenced by craven fears. Our duty it is to proclaim our right, and we shall fulfil this duty. Will this bring us sufferings? Good: we are prepared for that. Martyrs from of old as we are, we have been through fire and water during thousands of years, we have been the target of every attack, the victims of every persecution, and we fear no chicanery when it is a question of fulfilling a holy duty of our conscience.

Whoever understands Zionism, knows it is not our intention to raise conflicts. We stand for a peaceful movement. We began in a time of peace and we desire to renew our work and substantially to enlarge it, in the coming time of peace. We did not wish to harm anyone, to wrong anyone, and we wish to do so still less, if possible, now than before. We wish to make our country a model of social justice and human brotherhood; the spirit of our prophets shall fill our land, and the ancient Hebrew genius shall there have its dwelling-place.

We certainly, not less than all the other Jews and all just men, are strongly interested and are anxious that we, wherever we live, wherever we are, and wish to be citizens, should have our rights secured. Where the Jews are not yet emancipated, they shall be emancipated; where they are but half emancipated, their emancipation shall be completed and perfected; and where they are already emancipated, their emancipation shall be in no way checked or diminished. This question of rights we had better formulate in the following manner: Not that rights should be given us, but that our rights shall no longer be filched away, restricted and encroached upon wherever we have our domicile, wherever we fulfil our duties, and bear all burdens in order to defend the soil of the country to the death; wherever we work, live, and die together with its other inhabitants. Not that we should be emancipated, but that people should emancipate themselves from the instinct of persecution, from malice, from envy, which find expression in various forms: in pogroms, in boycott, in social ostracism, in open or masked disabilities; that we should not be shut up in cages like wild animals, whether it be in the brutal form of a Ghetto, a “pale of settlement,” or in the more subtle form of social exclusion and coldly polite hypocritical repulse: whether it be finally, in that cunning form not of Anti-Semitism, but of Asemitism which declares that, as in the case of poisons, the country can at best absorb only a limited quantity of Jews, while any excess is dangerous.

If the civilized world really intends to make an end of war, then, also, this war against the Jews must not be overlooked. It is a war in time of peace, a war that has not the heroic character of a struggle between two opponents equal in arms, but the character of a systematic and brutal oppression of the weak by the strong.

That is the problem of the rights of the Jews in the countries of the Diaspora!

Some sophists have, in their speculative, casuistical way, evolved a strange doctrine. They assert, that when the Jews surrender their claims to the land of Israel, when they deny their own nationality, then they will “receive rights.” Pedants and arm-chair theorists as they are, they paint in their luxurious imagination a picture that recalls the classical example of Paris with the apple: in one hand, Palestine; in the other, rights in the Diaspora. And as they point to this picture, they cry out to the Jews: Choose! One or the other!

Such pictures may please children, but not grown-up men—since children are innocent and do not understand the laws of logic. There are no two kinds of truth, nor of justice, only one. If justice is done to us, then our right to Palestine will be recognized, and we shall also be left in peace in the Diaspora.

Be assured the Land of Israel will not injure our situation in the Diaspora. Only Zionism, not self-betrayal, is calculated to lend us authority and prestige in the world. Avoid the old error, avoid renunciation, stand true to your flag, to righteousness, like men!

We are asked, What are your politics? Others say that politics should be indeed excluded. Zionism must be only either colonization or a spiritual movement. We must be Zionists in colonization, in the spirit, and in religion. In what each says, there is some truth. The error lies only in the fact that in each of these assertions, a partial truth claims to represent the whole truth. Zionism is not a part; it is the totality, the sum, the synthesis of these efforts.

However little Zionists wish to enter into politics they cannot close their eyes to the fact that Zionism is—at least, in part—a political problem. However spiritual its arguments, its origins and its motives may be, however metaphysical its aims may be, and however much its methods may accordingly strive to remain pure, ♦nevertheless, it is concerned with the problem of people desiring to settle in a particular country, under a particular form of social life. They, consequently, have to strive for a certain degree of political self-government, whether it be high or low, and thus they must come into relations with other groups and states already in existence, already formed, already in possession and having rights. The boundaries of rights will have to be drawn up, and these will soon become frontiers of existing spheres of influences, and these again, later on, will need to grow to new forms. Even if Zionism should devote itself entirely and with absolute exclusiveness to spiritual matters, its centre of colonization will have a political aspect, which must be developed as such. It is a good thing that the war has thrust political temptations upon Zionism. Nothing can become of greater advantage to it, than that it should always grow more clearly conscious of being something practical, the creator of life, of being conditioned and limited by frontiers, and not that it should simply fill the rôle of redressing grievances from a single point.

The Zionist policy must always be controlled by the national idea. Great changes will arise in the political situation in the world, the extent of which cannot as yet be surveyed in detail. But one thing is already certain; the national, the historical idea will be victorious. The people that suffer most, the small and weak people, must weigh on the scales of the coming changes in proportion not only to their physical strength, but also to their moral strength, and in proportion to the intensity of their will-power and self-determination—and this will-power and this self-determination, although at all times needing and capable of development, develops most rapidly under the influence of such moments as the present. The first preliminary condition for political success, therefore, is self-determination and will-power. The first and most important political task is the awakening of will-power. Only then commences the policy of finding support in the outer world. And under this head we know of one policy only, namely, truth—absolute and unconditional truth. Out of love for it Zionists desire to be just to all men, even to their opponents. This may be disagreeable to short-sighted people, but it does not trouble Zionists. Should truth beckon in one direction and the greatest successes in the other, Zionists should without a moment’s hesitation choose rather the former and exclaim, “Away with falsehood.” Only truth can be of service to us; wherever any shadow whatsoever falls upon that, there can be no place for us.

No cause that is unjust, even if at the first glance it appears to bring immediate help, and is advanced by people who wish us well, is worthy of Zionist support, and, likewise, every righteous cause, even though it appears to be against us, and is put forward by people who are indifferent and even opposed to us, is deserving of our support. For high above the plans dictated by benevolence or malice, stands the loftiest cause which so rules it that injustice cannot help Zionism, and that justice, on the contrary, must help it.

It is sometimes pointed out that certain among those who profess sympathy for Zionism do not exactly belong to the most trusty friends of the Jews, while, on the contrary, many so-called Liberals seem to be opposed to Zionism. Truly, we say to you: this is of no concern to us. Personal motives have no interest for us; we do not sit in judgment upon individuals. We are neither flattered by friends nor deterred by the envious. The Zionist’s only concern is the righteous cause.

The Zionist policy is one of principles, and not an opportunist policy. A policy founded on principles can only base itself on truth. The assistance of strangers can be of service to us only when it sees in us the truth, sees us as we really are, as we are in the continuity of our history, in our numbers, in our distress and in our hopes. Not the plans of any individual, whether personal or general, only fidelity to the axioms of international morality can help us. And if it be possible to obtain such assistance, then it can be attained only through a leading policy of true equality, but never through assimilation, which is opposed to the truth.

Truly, to be on an equality with others means the solving of our problem on national lines. That in the highest sense is equality of opportunity. If the principle of self-determination is applied to all, then it must be applied to us too. If historical rights are recognized, then ours must also be recognized. It is right and fair that Armenia should become Armenian; it is just as right and fair that the Land of Israel should become Israelitish. Grant equal rights and compensatory justice; all else is hatred, cowardice, hypocrisy, ambiguity.

The error of Jewish policy since the beginning of the last century lay in the fact that it was an opportunist policy. We tried to please different parties, to utilize political situations. Perhaps this was formerly an opportunity—we have now outgrown this standpoint. Human progress, like every development, advances ever further and further. Every new advance leads to a new stage that could be reached only through the earlier stages, and every new stage when reached has been reached only to be left behind in its turn. As soon as a stage has been reached, the time has once more arrived for leaving it. That is the essential reason why the Jewish problem has now become a national problem. Hence it is the purest childishness to wish to solve the problem by the means adopted by the Sanhedrin in Paris, in 1806.

It is not, however, to be supposed that because Zionists hold to a policy of principles they are on this account incapable of profiting from favourable opportunities, of utilizing a fortunate moment, that may come and bring more with it than many years of hard toil. “Whoever wants to sail to the new-discovered isles must use the winds as they blow.” The centre of gravity lies in the Jews alone, in their will-power, in the independence of their spirit.

The Jewish people have seen the dominion of Egypt, Assyria, Babylon and Rome, and still survive. Under the standards of Zion the Jewish people will rise to new life.

What ought Jews to do? To this question we answer: In these serious times all Jews should be united, all Jewish organizations, parties and communities should set to work, by all lawful means, through the press, literature, propaganda and personal connections, to attain the recognition of a national home for our people in the Land of Israel; and at the same time to carry through the abolition of all injustice against the Jews in the countries of the Diaspora.

And in view of the enormous importance of the already existing Jewish colonization in Palestine for our future, and, also, of the salvation of the Jewish people from want and misery accentuated by the war, the greatest possible assistance must be given to Palestine and to the suffering masses of Jews in the Diaspora. For the sake of these causes, and especially for the first, the Zionist Organization all over the world should not only be maintained, but also placed in a position to develop and enlarge its activities.

### ZIONIST PROPAGANDA IN WARTIME

In the above the Zionist policy has been sketched. Experience has by this time shown that in spite of the incredible difficulties of all kinds, Zionism has not only not lost its power, but has also actively developed its work.

The present war has not affected the unity of the Zionist idea nor has it affected the unity of the Zionist Organization. As the Organization was established on the federative principle, it was found possible to continue the essential work of the movement by utilising the separate organizations of the different countries. The work of propaganda and the collection of funds, so far from diminishing, actually made great progress. The societies already in existence continued their work very effectively, and a considerable number of new societies came into being. Die Welt, the central organ of the movement, had, however, to be suspended; but a series of new Zionist publications made their appearance. The Zionist press—in Russia particularly—made great headway. The Zionist weekly, Razswiet, which is published in the Russian language, increased its circulation threefold. Three new dailies, Ha’am in Hebrew, Das Togblatt and Der Telegraf in Yiddish, were established, and rapidly attained a circulation comparable to the great European daily papers. A crowd of new journalists and publicists accepting the Zionist platform, joined the old guard of writers and workers in the cause. The Yiddish Press in Poland, which numbers its readers by the hundred thousand, put themselves at the disposal of the Zionist movement. One in particular, which had hitherto been territorialist, and only lukewarm towards Zionism, declared openly its acceptance of the Zionist programme. In England Zionist activity in press and literature made remarkable progress, such as had scarcely been imagined possible in this country. It is worthy of note that, quite apart from the Zionist Press proper, the Jewish non-Zionist Press evinced a much keener interest in the movement. The world’s general Press, in all languages, devoted to Zionism an amount of space second only to the events of the war. The mere fact that at a time such as the present, when the world is in the throes of a universal struggle, and every nation is concerned for its own safety, and even existence, so much interest was directed to our movement throws a dazzling light upon the naïve absurdity of the anti-Zionist assertion, that the whole movement is nothing more than an Utopia.

The Zionists have long realized the need of public meetings and discussions. The Zionist movement is the only Jewish national and democratic movement to attach great importance to the free exchange of opinions and to break down the somewhat autocratic method of conducting Jewish affairs in favour with the Kehillah leaders. It was the first movement to replace the dry bones of bureaucracy by the introduction of universal Jewish suffrage as a means of dealing with Jewish public affairs. As the Zionist movement in pre-war times found full expression in conferences and public meetings, it was to be feared that the War, by reducing greatly the facilities of communication and intercourse, would seriously affect this form of activity. But this was not the case. The long record of the meetings and conferences held since the outbreak of the war, and which by no means exhausts the total number, gives some notion of the vast scope of this form of propaganda.

We will make a short survey of the most important dates in Zionist activity during the course of the war, in chronological order.

### Conferences.

September, 1915.

Zionist Conference—Dordrecht—Holland.

Roumania. Annual Meeting of the Roumanian Zionist Federation, November 7th and 8th, held in Galatz. Country divided into four districts for Zionist work: Galatz, Bucharest, Jassy, Foscani.

Canada. General Jewish Conference held in Montreal, November 14th and 15th, together with the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Zionist Federation, presided over by Clarence de Sola.

December 5th, 1915.

West Austrian—Galician—and Bukowina Zionist Conferences (Adolf Stand in the chair). Resolutions:⁠—

“The Assembly expects to see the Jewish problem discussed at the peace conference, and trusts that the Actions Committee will find suitable means and ways to create a united manifestation of the Jews of all countries for the demand of securing for the Jews their civil and political equality of rights all over the world, and in the nationality states also recognition of their national existence.

“The Actions Committee is asked to prepare everything in a suitable manner, in order that the interests of political Zionism may be secured before the Forum of the future Peace Congress.”

December 26th and 27th, 1915.

Holland. At Nymegen one hundred and twenty delegates attended.

December, 1915.

Manchester. Conference of English “Poalei Zion.” Delegates from all parts of the country attended.

January 1st, 1916.

England. Conference convened by E.Z.F. attended by Rabbis, delegates of Synagogues, Friendly Societies and Trade Unions.

January 5th, 1916.

America. Annual Conference of the Federation of “Knights of Zion,” at Chicago. The Federation has fifty-three active branches and three thousand members.

January, 1916.

Australia. Annual Conference of the Sydney Zionist Society.

February 6th, 1916.

America. Annual Convention of the Zionist Council of Greater New York.

February 13th, 1916.

England. Annual Conference of the English Zionist Federation at Manchester.

1916.

Mizrachi. The Annual Conference of the “Mizrachi” was held at Chicago, May 26th‒30th. The “Mizrachi” of America comprises one hundred and three associate-societies and twenty-four synagogues. The membership is six thousand.

Some of the principal American Rabbis attended the Conference.

A special Palestine Bureau was created. A new union, called “Achi Samach,” was formed, for the encouragement of the sale of Palestinian products.

1916.

Bombay. A Meeting of the Magen David Congregation was held at Bombay. The proceedings were all in Hebrew. Sir Jacob Elias Sassoon, Bart. (1844‒1916), was re-elected president.

May 28th and 29th, 1916.

Scandinavia. The Twelfth Annual Conference of Scandinavian Zionists was held at Copenhagen. Thirty-one delegates from all parts of the country were present. Various resolutions were passed, expressing confidence in the work of the Central Executive.

1916.

Switzerland. A Conference of the Swiss Zionist Federation was held at Berne on June 1st.

1916.

South Africa. The Annual Conference of the South African Zionist Federation was held at Johannesburg on April 30th. Over one hundred delegates were present.

1916.

Canada. “Poalei Zion” of Montreal had a series of Conferences on June 2nd‒4th.

America. Conference of American Zionist Federation held at Philadelphia on July 2nd. Over five hundred delegates present.

July 8th, 1916.

Conference at New York of the “Young Judea.” The membership is three thousand five hundred.

September 13th‒15th, 1916.

Poland. A Zionist Conference was held in Warsaw, attended by one hundred and twenty-five delegates from Warsaw and the Polish provincial cities.

The following resolution was passed:⁠—

“1. That the Central Committee establish a special Palestine Office, to gather information and material with respect to the present situation in Palestine and with respect to the possibilities for work after the war.

“2. That it elaborate this material and spread it within wide circles. Further, it has to organize pioneer groups, who are willing to go to Palestine, as well as to work out a scheme for the preparation of these pioneers.”

September, 1916.

Russia. “Poalei Zion” Conference—the first since the outbreak of the war. Resolution passed:⁠—

“That we agitate among the Jewish masses instructing them the only solution for the Jewish problem is the creation of a Jewish Home in Palestine.”

September 18th, 1916.

Conference of Zionist speakers, held at New York.

Bohemia. The Annual Conference of Bohemian Zionists was held at Prague on November 1st.

America. Zionist Students’ Organization of America held its Second Annual Conference, November, 1916.

November 14th‒19th.

America. “Poalei Zion” Conference at Boston. Attended by one hundred and nine delegates from the United States and Canada.

(During the year two thousand new members had been enrolled. Juvenile Societies, with eighteen branches and over one thousand members, had been formed.)

1916.

England. On December 24th and 25th the Order of Ancient Maccabeans held their Annual Grand Beacon Meeting in Manchester. Resolution:⁠—

“That this Grand Beacon Meeting reiterates its loyalty to the Zionist programme, as endorsed from Congress to Congress, and expresses the hope that the time may not be far distant when our brethren will be accorded full civil and political rights all over the world, and that the order co-operate with bodies that strive for the above objects.”

1916.

Holland. The Seventeenth Annual Conference of the Dutch Zionist Federation was held at the Hague on December 24th and 25th, 1916.

About one hundred and twenty delegates were present, including representatives of the “Poalei Zion” and the Belgian Zionist Federation.

The Dutch Federation comprises twenty-six societies, with a total membership of one thousand six hundred and sixty.

Collections: Palestine Fund, 11,453 fl.; Central Fund, 913 fl.; National Fund, 10,709 fl.

1917.

Poland. The Annual Meeting of the Warsaw Zionists, held on January 11th, attended by a thousand shekel payers.

1917.

America. In March, a Conference of Jewish Socialist Workers was held in New York, and attended by four hundred delegates. The Basle programme was adopted.

1917.

Mizrachi. Over two hundred delegates attended the “Mizrachi” Convention at Pittsburg, where the deliberations extended for over five days. Fifty of the most prominent orthodox Rabbis of the country attended. The “Mizrachi” has a hundred and nineteen branches in ninety-five cities spread over twenty-eight States.

1917.

America. “Knights of Zion” held their Twentieth Annual Convention at Minneapolis and St. Paul. The “Knights of Zion” had seventy-six societies with a membership of four thousand two hundred.

America. Hebraists Convention took place in New York on February 10th, 11th and 12th. Many Hebrew scholars from all parts of the country were present.

America. The Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Zionist Council of New York was held on February 16th, attended by eighty-eight delegates, representing thirty societies.

1917.

England. The Annual Conference of the E.Z.F. was held in February in London. About sixty delegates were present.

1917.

Switzerland. The Swiss Zionist Federation held a Conference at Berne on February 18th. Thirty-five delegates attended.

1917.

Russia. On March 28th‒30th there was held a Conference of the Central Institutions of the Zionist Organization. About fifty delegates attended.

Conference of all Russian Zionist Organizations, held in Moscow, April 3rd. Dr. E. W. Tschlenow presided.

1917.

Greece. On April 9th a Mass Meeting, attended by over three thousand persons, was held at Salonica. After addresses delivered by several speakers, a resolution was passed urging the restoration of the oldest nation and its regeneration in Palestine.

1917.

Belgian Zionists. On April 29th the Belgian Zionist Federation held a Conference at Scheveningen, Holland.

1917.

Australia. Annual Meeting held at Sydney, March 18th.

1917.

England. Special Conference E.Z.F. in London, May 20th.

1917.

Russia-Turkestan. Early in May a Conference of Turkestan Zionists was held at Samarcand. The delegates were both Ashkenazi and Sephardi. Thirty delegates attended, besides delegates for the Bokhara Jews, and two hundred guests.

A Zionist Central Committee was formed for Turkestan.

1917.

Poland. June 3rd‒5th. Conference of Zionist Central Committee for Poland, held in Warsaw.

1917.

Russia. On May 24th (O.S.) the Seventh Conference of Russian Zionists was held at Petrograd, and was attended by five hundred and fifty-two delegates, representing one hundred and forty thousand shekel payers, from six hundred and forty towns and villages. Eleven delegates came from Siberia. Bokhara and Mountain Jews were represented. Twenty-four delegates were soldiers coming by special permission of the Commander-in-Chief, who got free passes. Five hundred guests came from the country and one thousand guests from Petrograd were present. Ninety representatives of Russian papers were present. The Foreign Secretary, Teretschenko, sent greetings and best wishes for complete success.

Dr. E. W. Tschlenow’s speech was reprinted in half a million copies for the soldiers.

A meeting of Zionist Women was held in the hall of Kiew University in May. More than one thousand five hundred Jewish women attended.

1917.

In 1913 there were only twenty-six thousand shekel payers in Russia—now one hundred and forty thousand. Resolution passed:⁠—

“The Seventh Zionist Russian Conference proclaims its firm conviction that the nations, in settling the bases of the new national and political life, shall be conscious of the clearly manifested will of the Jewish people to colonize Palestine again as their national centre, and that they shall create conditions enabling the unhindered evolutions and concentration of all Jewish forces, for the purpose of bringing about a regeneration of Palestine.”

A representative body of the Jewish people should be admitted to the approaching Peace Conference, which shall obtain attention for the historic and national rights of the Jewish people.

1917.

America. Independent Order “Brith Shalom” held their Thirteenth Annual Conference in Atlantic City on June 13th. Over six hundred delegates were present. The resolution passed commenced thus:⁠—

“Whereas the Independent Order has adopted the Zionist platform in spirit and in fact, and has pledged itself to the furtherance of all principles it stands for, etc., etc.”

1917.

America. The Twentieth Conference of American Zionists opened at Baltimore on June 24th. Over a thousand delegates were present.

1917.

America. Twentieth Annual Convention of Progressive Order of the West was held at Detroit, Michigan. The Order has a membership of twenty thousand, and declared its allegiance to the Zionist cause.

1917.

America. Conference of “Young Judeans.” One hundred and twenty-five delegates present, representing five thousand members. The “Young Judeans” collected 3500 dollars for the Jewish National Fund.

1917.

England. Union of Jewish Friendly Societies, comprising fifty thousand members, adopt the Basle programme.

Conference of the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, held at Manchester, July 17th. Membership of the Order 2200.

1917.

Canada. The Fifteenth Annual Conference of Canadian Zionists took place at Winnipeg in July. Delegates from seventy-seven towns, of three hundred and fourteen Jewish organizations, attended.

The Governor of Manitoba came to the Conference, and expressed his sympathy with Zionism.

1917.

Russia. Poalei Zion. Conference in Kiew—September 8th. More than one hundred and sixty delegates attended.

1917.

Greece. Salonica. Great Meeting, attended by three thousand persons at Salonica, on 9th of Ab.

1917.

America. The “Mizrachi” in America celebrated in August the Six-hundred-and-fiftieth Anniversary of the First Settlement in Palestine by R’ Moses ben Nachman (Ramban). The “Mizrachi” started a Fund of 100,000 dollars, to aid Colonization and Industrial Development in Palestine.

1917.

Poland. The Third Delegates’ Conference of the Zionist Organization in Poland was opened in Warsaw on October 28th, 1917. More than three hundred and sixty delegates attended, representing forty thousand shekel payers.

1917.

Poland. Fifth Conference of the “Poalei Zion” of Poland, was held in Warsaw. Over forty-four delegates, representing twenty-six towns, participated in the Conference. The Organization had forty-six district groups, with a membership of eight thousand.

1917.

America. September 5th. Conference of Rabbis resolved to appeal to various powers, particularly President Wilson, asking them to give their consideration to the question of the Restoration of Palestine to the Jewish people.

1917.

England. In October, Zionist Demonstrations took place all over the country. In seventy-one synagogues, one hundred and twenty-three lodges and associations, and in fifty-four Zionist societies, resolutions were passed requesting the British Government to use its best endeavours to bring about a Restoration of Palestine as a National Home for the Jewish people.

1917.

Holland. Congress of Jews resident in the Netherlands, held in Amsterdam on November 18th, for considering emancipation of Jews, recognition of national rights in national States, and national concentration of the Jewish people in Palestine.

One of the most popular of Zionist funds is the Jewish National Fund. This Fund is outside the realm of discussion, and deals exclusively with hard facts, i.e., financial contributions from all parts of the world. The Jewish National Fund is in a very real sense an index of the people’s will. It would seem that the terrible misery of the Jewish masses occasioned by so many expulsions, evacuations, and loss of life and property would have had the effect of, if not entirely cutting off this source of revenue, at least, seriously reducing it. In point of fact, the reverse is shown by the figures.

The income of the Fund during the last few months of the year 1914 and during the year 1915, was about two-thirds of the previous years. But in the year 1916 the National Fund received about 1,000,000 francs, which equals the amount in 1913. During the first half of 1917 the average monthly contributions were doubled. The latest date up to which exact figures for the various countries are available is September 1st, 1917. During the eight months from January to September, 1917, more than 1,300,000 francs had been recorded. During the last four months of the year approximately the same amount was received, that is, the contributions were doubled once more in relation to the immediately preceding rate. At the present moment the contributions to the National Fund amount to about 150,000 francs per month.

The results attained by the National Fund must be attributed to the general growth of the Zionist movement as well as to the effective organization of its propaganda, to the popularity of its fundamental idea—the acquisition of land as National property—and the importance attached by Jewry at large to the rôle that the National Fund will have to discharge in the forthcoming colonization of Palestine.

Contributions to the Jewish National Fund from the different countries in the year 1917 were as follows: Russia, Rbl. 475,312; United States, $73,502; Holland, Fl. 28,767; England, £1396 1s. 10d.; Argentina, Pesos 13,378; Canada, $4056; South Africa, £639 8s. 4d.; Switzerland, Frs. 11,572; Belgium, Frs. 8,329; France (including Tunis), Frs. 6,978; Egypt, £255 11s. 4d.; Greece, Frs. 6,425; Sweden, Kr. 2,542; Denmark, Kr. 2,447. Various countries, about Frs. 600,000. The total amounts to Frs. 1,747,278. At the rate of exchange before the war it would be Frs. 2,730,011.

### THE JEWISH NATIONAL FUND

Statistical Table of Annual Income in Francs
Country. | 1914. | 1915. | 1916.
--- | --- | --- | ---
United States | 197,311 | 291,604 | 268,317
Russia | 184,334 | 30,120 | 81,336
Holland | 10,662 | 13,972 | 35,921
Argentine | 4,196 | 4,334 | 22,807
England | 24,655 | 12,061 | 20,766
Roumania | 15,532 | 23,997 | 19,021
South Africa | 27,511 | 21,905 | 15,001
Scandinavia | 807 | 1,715 | 4,886
Canada | 21,951 | 23,129 | 10,296
Switzerland | 3,854 | 3,748 | 7,296
Greece | 5,755 | 4,545 | 4,410
Belgium | 10,472 | — | 4,161
Egypt | 2,845 | 832 | 3,382
France | 2,115 | 1,862 | 2,992
Far East | 1,377 | 280 | 2,562
Australia and New Zealand | 3,305 | 1,080 | 1,915
Italy | 1,630 | 2,641 | 1,312
Portugal | — | 280 | 937
Brazil | 1,430 | 1,082 | 125
New Zealand | — | — | 522
Other countries | 224,962 | 197,597 | 425,110
| 744,704 | 636,784 | 933,075

With regard to the Zionist Organization, it must be stated that some of its functions, particularly those which were centralized in the headquarters, such as the periodical meetings of the Greater Actions Committee and the permanent contact and co-operation between the members of the Inner Actions Committee, had to be suspended. The Zionist Congress, the chief organ of the movement, which elects the executive of all the officers of the movement, to decide all questions of policy, could not be held owing to the war, and as a result the position had to remain as settled by the Congress of 1913. As, however, the events of the war threw upon the Organization not less but very much more responsibility than previously, and confronted the existing executive with problems of the greatest urgency and importance, new instruments had necessarily to be created to meet the new situation and to carry on the work of the movement.

In America, where the movement began to spread with great rapidity, the American Provisional Committee for General Zionist Affairs was formed in 1914, very soon after the outbreak of the war, and conducted the affairs of the movement with great skill. Their efforts in connection with Palestine relief were beyond all praise, and constitute one of the brightest pages in the history of the movement.

In Copenhagen, also, a Bureau was opened, which rendered invaluable services to the cause.

### ZIONISM AND JEWISH RELIEF WORK

The greater part of the practical work of the Zionist Organization consisted of Relief Work for Jewish sufferers from the war. The terrible catastrophe which fell upon Russian Poland, Galicia, Bukovina, Lithuania, Zamut and Courland, affected the Jews in a unique way. Hundreds of towns and villages, in which Jewish inhabitants had dwelt and woven into their lives the threads of their own characteristic customs for many generations, in which they had faithfully preserved their ancient spiritual treasures in spite of misery and poverty, which had been a perennial source of inspiration and a rich storehouse for the Judaism of the whole world, which had nourished and sustained almost the whole House of Israel in the Diaspora, suddenly became a field of slaughter and the arena of the grimmest struggle in the world’s history. Troops in numbers never seen before, with weapons of destruction, threatening to reduce the world to ashes, passed like angels of destruction to and fro over the battlefields, leaving not a stone intact, not a blade of grass, or a living man or beast. Thus far the wounds and misfortunes which befell the Jews were no different from the wounds and misfortunes of the other inhabitants. But there must be added the special Jewish affliction in these countries, the persecution and the fierce anti-Jewish feeling which were the special characteristics of the ancient regime in Russia, which was wont to take advantage of every opportunity of avenging itself on the Jews, attacking them and holding them up to scorn on every kind of pretext and false accusation. This made the war a specially terrible phenomenon for the Jews: it produced a war within a war.

The war called upon the Jews to make sacrifices in equal measure with all the other inhabitants of these countries; their youth and their strength were laid on the altar of the land of their birth; they also bore the burden of all the taxes and payments which the other inhabitants had to bear; they put forward tremendous efforts as tradesmen and workers, as doctors and nurses; they were active workers in all departments directly and indirectly connected with the war. Yet side by side with this they had to face an insufferable hatred, they had to wage a separate war with the powerful, who strove to reduce to nothingness the little remnant which the war itself could not utterly destroy.

That this impression became current among the Jews was inevitable, in consequence of an old phenomenon which appeared before them in a new guise. We refer to the curious mixture of expulsion and evacuation, of pogroms and slaughters, of which they were the victims. They were accustomed, from long and bitter experience, to expulsions from without the pale of settlement into the regions of the pale, from villages to towns, and to the suffering occasioned by the Russo-Turkish and Russo-Japanese wars; but these expulsions occurred when conditions in Russia itself were almost normal, and when the Jews who were left untouched by the decree of expulsion were able to render assistance to their unfortunate brethren. The combination of the two forms of trials, of war and of persecution by their fellow-citizens, was more than even a nation inured to suffering could bear. It was as though this nation, which had been a wanderer from time immemorial, had only just begun its wanderings. They were no ordinary wanderers—not merely expelled and outlawed; but they were taken and hurled as out of the middle of a sling from province to province and from district to district. Railway carriages were not enough to hold them, so they were transported in cattle-trucks, the doors of which were locked to prevent escape on the way. The cattle-trucks were not sufficient to cope with the numbers and horse-vans were impressed, and as the horse-vans were not sufficient, even though the Jews paid their last kopecks for places in them, they were sent on foot. Bands of wanderers—consisting of women, children, aged, weak, sick and infirm—were accordingly dragged, driven, knouted along every kind of road and over every kind of obstacle, not like cattle beneath the watchful eye of the herdsman, not even like animals led to the slaughter, on whom some mercy is taken because they can be used, but simply like wild beasts pursued by huntsmen; whoever fell by the way fell without attention, whoever fell sick was ruthlessly left behind. Families were split up, and that iron bond which unites parents and children was snapped; infants died of starvation pressed against their mothers’ shrivelled breasts; weary old greybeards grew faint and stumbled on the way and died without the last consolation of old age, without seeing around them their offspring whose souls were bound up with their own; tender infants were deserted without anyone to take pity on them, and the clamour went forth from one end of the earth to the other, “Where is my father?” “Where is my child?”

This tragedy was not included among the necessary tragedies of the war: it was a Jewish tragedy. When Belgium was ruined, her Jews too were ruined. Had the catastrophe to the Jews in Poland and Lithuania been of such a kind it would have found a place in the general history and not in the separate history of the Jews. When, however, bands of thousands of Jewish fugitives came to Warsaw from the inland towns, in rags and tatters, footsore, hungry and despairing, it was impossible to regard them simply as victims of the war, because it was only the Jews who came. They were not victims of the war, they were victims of the Galuth, these thousands and tens of thousands of Jews who were suddenly transplanted from the midst of their old homes in Lithuania. When whole congregations, including inmates of their Homes for the Aged, of their hospitals, and even of the asylums were evacuated, it was impossible to believe that this was military tactics or a measure of precaution, for it was only the Jewish congregations who were forcibly and suddenly removed in this extraordinarily cruel manner. In many places it happened that the expelled Jews before they left were able to see with their own eyes other people entering and taking possession of the shops which they had left behind them. There was no connection between these sufferings and the events of the universal war. These were incidents in the special campaign which had been waged against the Jews before the war. For centuries the Jews had been living in these places. Brest-Litovsk and Grodno were not only cities in which there were fortresses for the Czar’s army and his Tchinovniks. They were also centres of Jewish life, wherein the Torah dwelt, cities of the Jewish “Council of the Four Provinces,” cities which emanated intellectual light over all the Diaspora, cities with institutions of Jewish congregations, with Yeshiboth, with schools, with synagogues and houses of learning, with old cemeteries, whose tombstones recorded the happenings to Jews for many generations. All that was destroyed and all the Jews who lived and thrived in them have been uprooted and scattered, and that which they left behind them wiped out, and no one knows if these towns will ever be rebuilt, and even if they are rebuilt will the Jews and their communities, with their learning and their traditions, ever be restored?

Accordingly there was but one cry, one intense and bitter cry, which was heard from one end of the world of Jews to the other, a cry for help. “Save all who can yet be saved.”

The Jewish people had realized that it was unwise to depend upon governments or to rely on philanthropic effort in general. The needs of the Jews were great and peculiar, so that only Jews themselves could help their brethren. This help appeared to be necessary in two directions: immediate pressing help and permanent prevention. Immediate pressing assistance consisted in sending money, provisions and clothes to save Jewish lives from hunger, disease and want, to help them to find work and means of livelihood in the places to which they have been driven, as well as in the places in which they have remained. But at the same time, people began to realize more and more that the real help for the Jews would be to rescue them from the unnatural conditions which cause them to be the scapegoat for whatever punishment comes upon the world. A people which dwells in its own land is also wont to be smitten by the sword and the fortunes of war, but it is not accustomed to complete destruction. When a nation has its own land and its own soil beneath its feet, to which it is attached, all the winds of Heaven cannot move it from its place, no weapon can permanently destroy it. A whole nation cannot be driven by oppressors from its country, and even though for generations the hand of the oppressor lie heavy upon it, the day is sure to come in which its fetters fall away, and once again it can breathe freely. Not so with a nation which floats in the air: it cannot rise in time of trouble, for every passing wind carries it away like chaff and makes it turn like the wheel of a windmill. Every page of Jewish history teaches this lesson, and the present war has served but to emphasize it. Therefore if we wish to prevent this evil and to obviate such convulsions in the future, we must establish for the remnant of this people a firm foundation and a safe shelter in the land of their fathers. Thus once again the flame of war and the terrible sufferings of our brethren have revealed the truth of the Zionist idea in all its strength and clarity as being the only true solution of the Jewish problem, that problem whose consequences are written in the blood of myriads of our brethren.

History will relate that the present generation of Jews rose to the height of its responsibility in comprehending both these duties equally. Once again there was revealed the strength of the Jewish quality of mercy. The Jews of Russia and Poland did their duty. With their young ones and their elders they threw themselves into the work of relief: in many places it was the Zionists who were the most ardent in this work. The Zionist Organization had during the last generation become a school of discipline and communal work, from which came forth initiators and leaders. It is not our wish, however, to make in this respect any distinction between Zionists and non-Zionists. Many who stood far removed from the camp returned to their brethren: all sections of Jews united: the icy cloak of indifferentism was melted, the divisions between the observant and the Liberals were obliterated. The shadow of sectarian faction disappeared, and on the scene appeared one people. History will relate that American Jewry, that vigorous young branch of the Jewish tree, made a mighty superhuman effort and performed wonders surpassing the imagination. It was not charity, but greatness. Voluntary effort went as far as self-imposed taxation. The history of Jewish unity has never had a chapter more beautiful, more sublime, more uplifting. America was not alone—a similar spirit rested upon the Jews of every country, and not only with regard to relief work, but also in the more permanent work of prevention, which was Jewry’s second duty. The second duty was to watch over and safeguard the Jewish colonies in Palestine, the colonies from which will spring the National Home. It was necessary to provide the Palestinian Jews with food, and to support the colonization—this small heritage of ours, this child of our sorrow, conceived in anguish and in holiness. The difficulties were enormous. Palestine was cut off from the whole world, by the sea on the West and the desert on the East, without a government able or willing to help; the New colonization is a young plant needing tender care—the Old communities are poor and helpless. If in such circumstances Palestinian Jewry was not entirely wiped out, we must thank the Jewish nationalist heart, which was awakened in our brethren in every country, and especially in America.

### THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION

The downfall of the Czardom in Russia was undoubtedly one of the greatest events in the world’s history. Russia entered into a period of revolution which seemed to bring with it all the blessings of right and liberty. The restrictions affecting nationalities and creeds were removed. But far from destroying Zionism, the new liberty gave it an immense stimulus.

In Moscow a Zionist District Committee was formed, comprising many Provinces: Astrakhan, Vladimir, Vologda, Voronesh, Kazan, Kaluga, Kostrooma, Kursk, Moscow, Nijni-Novgorod, Simbirsk, Smolensk, Tambov, Tula, Ufa, Jaroslav, and the Don District.

At Odessa, a Zionist demonstration took place. Entire battalions of Zionist soldiers bore through the town blue and white banners, with the motto:⁠—

“Liberty in Russia, Land and Liberty in Palestine.”

A hundred and fifty thousand men followed these banners, to which the Military Governor of Odessa insisted on showing honour publicly.

Zionist meetings were also held at Minsk, Saratov, Juriev, Kharkov, Nijni-Novgorod, Ekaterinburg, Homel, Proskurov, Baku Dubrovno, Riazan, Ekaterinoslav, Moscow, etc.

At Kieff, when the procession approached the Town Hall, the Zionist flag was hoisted on the balcony, where the “Hatikvah” was played by the municipal orchestra.

At Berdicheff fifteen thousand Jews marched through the principal streets carrying Zionist banners. The Municipality, the Administration Executive of the town, and the chiefs of Ukraine National Organizations, greeted the Zionist demonstrators.

In Turkestan and Bokhara the Zionist movement made remarkable progress. The entire Sephardi element has adhered to the movement. The Ashkenazim and Sephardim worked together peacefully at the great Zionist Conference held at Samarcand. A meeting of five thousand Jews was held there, and a resolution adopted in favour of a Jewish Palestine.

In Moscow, in the Great Hall, a Jewish Mass Meeting took place. Dr. E. W. Tschlenow was elected president. The following resolution was adopted:⁠—

“The Jewish Mass Meeting in Moscow salutes freedom with great joy. We are firmly convinced that the Constituent Assembly, which is to be elected by universal suffrage, will establish in Russia a thoroughly democratic administration, and that not only civil rights, but also national rights, national autonomy, and a free national evolution, will be secured to the Jewish as well as to all other peoples of Russia. The Meeting resolves to convoke a general Jewish Congress in Russia.”

The Conference at Petrograd on May 24th, 1917, received official recognition. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, M. Teretschenko, wished the Conference success in its deliberations.

Dr. Tschlenow delivered an Address, in the course of which he said, among other things:⁠—

“We beg the Provisional Government to believe that it may fully depend upon our forces and our support in its heroic efforts directed toward the strengthening of the freedom and greatness of Russia.

“What is necessary, and what we strive for, is to create a national territorial centre for our scattered people. The construction of that centre is already begun, and it will continue. The centre will gradually be filled by the forces and means of the Diaspora.

“Who of you has not keenly followed for the last year and a half the life of the youngest branch of the Jewish people: the American? Hundreds of thousands of working men are unified in their demand for national rights in the Diaspora and an autonomous centre in Palestine. The New York Kehillah, representing a million and a quarter Jews, comes forward with the same slogan. Finally, the powerful Congress movement, embracing the entire three million Jewry, is to close the coming autumn with most important decisions. Weigh all the facts, and you will agree that the harmony of which we dream is already coming to pass. With hope and with love we follow the work of our Trans-oceanic champions, and send to them our brotherly greetings.

“But what could not have been prophesied and what fills our hearts with untold joy and pride, is the attitude towards our ideal on the part of the broad stratas of Jewry, which has revealed itself since the time of the Great Revolution.

“From all corners of our great Russia come to us, together with cheers of joy over the emancipation, assurances of unshattered faith in the eternal ideal—the renaissance of our native Palestine. Old and young, rich and poor, from the front and from the rear, orthodox and free-thinkers, declare in one voice: ‘Now, even now, freed from the chains of slavery, shall we be able zealously and gladly to give ourselves to the service of our ideals?’

“I cannot refrain here from underscoring, with the feeling of deepest recognition, the invaluable services which the Government of the United States has so nobly and warmly shown to our pioneers. The noble President of the United States has acted from motives of humanity and brotherly relation of peoples, but at the same time, also, from deep sympathy in our regeneration. The noble impulses of America have found a worthy instrument in the person of the former Ambassador Morgenthau, that faithful son of the Jewish people, whose services in these hard years Jewry will not forget.

“But all this time, while working and building, we have not lost sight of the basic point inscribed upon our banner—the public, legal character of the hearth which we are creating. We are convinced that the moment has come for reiterating our programme.

“We deem it necessary that the nations called upon to establish the standard of the future national political life should reckon with the definitely expressed will of the Jewish people, to populate and regenerate Palestine as its national hearth. We deem it further necessary that all obstacles should be removed from our path, and that guarantees and conditions should be created which will ensure the unobstructed and speedy development of our work in the land.”

The Conference was attended by five hundred and fifty-two delegates from six hundred and forty towns. There were delegates from Turkestan, Bokhara, and the Crimea. In addition, there were present five hundred visitors from provincial towns and over one thousand one hundred visitors from Petrograd.

A unique historic document was placed before the Convention when the Chairman read the full text of the Military Order of the Day, issued and signed by General Alexeieff, Commander-in-Chief of the Western Front, permitting the Jewish soldiers to elect from their number delegates to the Convention, and furnishing passes and transportation to the delegates to facilitate their presence at the gathering.

The spokesman of the soldier-delegates read the following resolution, which had been adopted by his colleagues:⁠—

“We—Jewish soldier-delegates from the Army—who participate in this Convention, avow to the Convention, and to the Jewish people:

“Hundreds and thousands of Jews are in battle in the Russian Army. In a time of outlawry and terrible persecution, under the burden of false accusations, the Jewish soldiers fulfilled their full military duty. In the ocean of blood poured out by the heroic Russian Army, there is no little of Jewish blood.

“Now, having become free citizens of Russia, and fully privileged members of the Army, the Jewish soldiers will continue their efforts in a new spirit of enthusiasm. Believing that the strengthening of the revolution, and the strengthening of the peoples in Russia can be accomplished only through the union of all the peoples and by a strong discipline in the free army, the Jewish soldiers declare triumphantly that they are prepared to follow the call of the revolutionary democracy to defend Russia against her enemies.

“We believe that the Russian democracy, which has assumed the task of freeing all the peoples of the world, will understand the strivings of our people, and will support Jewry in its efforts to create a national centre for the Jewish people, on its historic soil, Palestine.”

The Conference carried the following resolutions:⁠—

“Considering first that the Jewish people, in view of its disposition and dispersion all over the world, can recreate for itself conditions for the normal development of its national, cultural, and economic life, only through the restoration of a national autonomous centre in its historic home, Palestine,

“Secondly, that the Jewish nation has never severed its ties with its ancient home, and has always longed for it, and that its moral and historic right to Palestine is incontestable and irremovable,

“Thirdly, that the aspirations of the Jewish nation, so manifested, fully coincide with the great principle of self-definition, of freedom and independence for the development of all nations proclaimed by the democracies and governments of all countries:

“The Zionist Conference in Russia unanimously expresses its firm belief that when establishing the basis of the future national and political life, the nations will recognize and count with the clearly-stated will of the Jewish nation for the resettlement and rebirth of Palestine as its national centre, and will consequently create conditions guaranteeing the free and successful development of the concentrated Jewish forces and of the restoration of Palestine.

“To ensure the concrete and full manifestation of the will of the Jewish nation, the Conference considers it necessary first to organize among the Jews a referendum on the question; secondly, to lay before the All-Russian Jewish Congress the question of Jewish claims in Palestine; and thirdly, to claim the admission of a representative of the Jewish nation at the future peace conference, to be held upon the closing of hostilities, for the expression of the wishes of the Jewish nation, and for the defence of its historic and national rights and interests.”

The same spirit was revealed also by the Jews of Poland. In May, 1917, a Zionist Conference was held in Warsaw, attended by nearly four hundred delegates representing a large number of committees, synagogues, societies and groups consisting of all classes of the Jewish population. A sort of plebiscite was arranged among the Jews of Poland, with a view to ascertaining their attitude towards Zionism. The plebiscite resulted in the acceptance of a resolution in favour of Zionism.

All these and many other facts prove that the Zionist idea has made great progress among the Jewish masses. But under the new circumstances Zionism required more than the usual propaganda: it required work, political work.

### POLITICAL ACTIVITIES IN ENGLAND AND THE ALLIED COUNTRIES

The introduction into this book of a comprehensive account of the various démarches on behalf of the Zionist cause recently undertaken in English political circles, and also in allied countries, is rendered difficult by the following considerations. In the first place, the publication of pourparlers which have taken place, and of schemes which have been, or are to be, submitted, is impossible, because they are still in progress, and their final issue is dependent on further developments. In the second place, the author feels great embarrassment, being compelled to break the rule hitherto observed of avoiding any reference to his own share in the work of the movement. In this section, however, he has participated so directly in the démarches referred to that it was quite impossible to speak of them at all without referring occasionally to his share in the political activities.

A glance, however, at recent political efforts appeared indispensable, in order to bring the history of Zionism up to date. But there is no claim that the following account is more than an outline of the most important events. With these provisos we pass to the facts themselves.

It was at once clear that England was destined to play a most important part in Zionist politics. London from the beginning was the financial centre of the Zionist Organization and the Mecca of political Zionism. Even at the time of the Chovevé Zion Movement England was regarded, as it were, as the country that stands between the “Galuth” and “Salvation.” When the idea of Palestine had begun to be popularized among the Jews of Russia and Poland—long before the name “Zionism” had become current—Disraeli’s Tancred and George Eliot’s Daniel Deronda were translated into Hebrew. The name of Sir Moses Montefiore was in the mouth of all Jews in Eastern Europe, and his journeys to Palestine, in connection with his great plans, had long since grown legendary. English Jews were valued because of this famous individual; they were considered simply as national Jews, whether they really were so or not. From a distance the observer did not recognize the mediocrity, the parochialism and dissensions; he saw the summits only, and they appeared splendid. A man like Albert Goldsmid, who was an English colonel and also a national Jew, appeared to be a type such as could hardly be found in any other country. That was rich material for the Jewish imagination, which fed upon it and made it much greater than the truth. It was, however, not imagination, pure and simple; a sound political instinct was also at work here. The Jewish Ghetto had for long prophesied that it is England’s destiny to decide the fate of Palestine, and however much one may smile at the speculations of Ghetto politicians, these had, nevertheless, in their quick-wittedness understood much that is sometimes hidden from professional politicians. Moreover, this was not the politics of the Ghetto only. Herzl did not know the Ghetto, and received no information from it; notwithstanding this, all roads led him to London. It was in London that he for the first time in his life publicly took part in Jewish life. At a later period again, the offer of a territory in East Africa was made by the English Government; the El-Arish Expedition was organized by England. Zionist finance was English, and English was the Zionist political outlook.

In the pre-war period the Zionist Organization had everywhere sought connections. True to its programme, desiring a charter from the Ottoman Government, with the approval of the great Powers, it worked without intrigue and adventure, honestly anxious to get this charter with the approval of all nations. In this matter, England always took the first place. Herzl and his followers had worked zealously in England. This work was continued after Herzl’s death. The author also, in his capacity as member of the Zionist Executive, visited this country several times. The impressions gained here were always stimulating and interesting, but the Zionist question was not prominent.

The question became prominent with the outbreak of the war. The thought lay uppermost, that the work must be carried on here in England, that, if possible, it must be concentrated here. If this thought was evident to the Zionists of other countries, was it any wonder that it deeply stirred the English Zionists? Thus it happened that this thought found an excellent champion and representative in the person of Dr. Chaim Weizmann. He took counsel with his colleagues in England, and together with them began to consider the question of what was to be done in England, in order to make the political problem of Zionism a problem of the day. The idea that England was the most important centre, and offered the most promising prospect of success, was neither new nor the opinion of a single party; it had become rather the property of the whole Zionist Organization. But it was now something entirely different from what it used to be formerly. Formerly Zionism was an abstract idea; in spite of all Herzl’s great achievements, the problem remained merely a project. It is the political problem we are talking about, because the intellectual and practical labour of Zionists for Palestine had been a reality during the whole time of the Chovevé Zion and the Zionist movements. Now, however, political Zionism has also become a reality. If the war has taught us anything at all it surely is this, that nothing is more fatal than an attitude of indifference towards problems of international politics. The practical and intellectual members of the Zionist Organization, too, who used to look down upon politics, have changed their attitude towards them. Formerly, they may have been entirely or partially right—the intellectual were undoubtedly right in proclaiming that the spiritual in Zionism must be the soul of the whole movement, and the practical ones also were right in establishing the early colonies, and it is only a pity that more considerable progress was not made—but now all were agreed that, in consideration of the new possibilities, the movement must come into relation with the political forces, and the establishment of actual relations constituted a great many-sided and responsible work, which had to be carried out, at first in England, but also partly in other countries of the Entente.

One of the most distinguished representatives of the Zionist idea in this country is the Very Rev. Dr. Moses Gaster, the late Haham of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews’ congregations in England, who from early youth occupied a respected and influential position, in the time of Chovevé Zion as well as in Zionism, and devoted himself also with great zeal to the political question of Zionism. He also represented the view that a wide field for political efforts lay open here, and he freely gave his time and his eloquence in the service of the cause. In this direction he was very active, especially in the earlier stages.

The Very Rev. Dr. Joseph Herman Hertz, Chief Rabbi of the United Congregations of the British Empire, has evinced a sympathy with the Zionist Movement which at certain pregnant moments was equivalent to declaring himself at one with Zionism. His affiliation with the Zionist idea goes back to Chovevé-Zion days, and subsequently he became one of the founders of the “South African Zionist Federation.” The Spiritual Leader of British Jewry has ever been a sincere friend of the movement, and on various decisive occasions has championed the idea, defending it, explaining it, and encouraging it. In the new development, especially in the months preceding the “Declaration,” his help in connection therewith has been of far-reaching and lasting importance.

The inspiring spirit and the driving force, he who most successfully had made many distinguished non-Jewish personalities familiar with Zionism and who championed with all his energy and enthusiasm a Zionist political programme in England, was Dr. Chaim Weizmann. In the very earliest months of the war he began to collect the threads for the political work, to rouse the Zionist circles with which he was in touch, to revive old connections in non-Jewish circles and to form new ones, to prepare for negotiations—in a word, to open up the work that was destined later on to become a properly-organized programme. Herein he had the support of a group of enthusiastic and deeply sympathetic Zionists, and was strengthened and stimulated in his initiative by them. The first attempts to confer with the Government representatives about Zionism were made: the impressions were satisfactory. One foresaw that this contained the germs of promising possibilities. These impressions led to the conclusion that mere discussions alone were not sufficient, but rather that it was necessary to formulate plans. In order to formulate plans and in order to obtain authority from the Zionist Organization to submit these plans (for such appeared to be the next step) it would be necessary to establish a centre in London, and to obtain the necessary representative powers. It would also be necessary to write more about Zionism: to publish books, to undertake propagandist work—in another and more direct manner. The means were also considered to win over the non-Zionist, perhaps even the anti-Zionist, Jewish elements. All these aims were discussed, weighed, and elaborated by a small circle. It was not the whole of English Jewry, it was not even the then existing English Zionist Federation; it was really a circle of a few Zionists, mostly intellectuals who corresponded with Dr. Weizmann, and met and took counsel with him.

From that time forward the Zionist idea began to occupy the attention of the English Press. The question became topical, the old English traditions found new expression. Most people had no conception that they were speaking in the spirit of old traditions—for few knew of this remote chapter in ♦English history—but they did it unconsciously, which makes their action perhaps even more valuable. Many a journalist among the élite of the intellectuals not only gave assistance to the cause of Zionism in the Press, but went a step further, and helped vigorously in the political work. In connection with this matter the name of the doyen of English journalism, Mr. C. P. Scott, Editor of the Manchester Guardian, may be especially mentioned. Since the very beginning Mr. C. P. Scott has given the whole problem a very careful and sympathetic attention, and was an influential mediator between Zionists and leaders of British politics. He and Dr. Weizmann had conversations with some personalities, who strengthened them in their hopes that the ground was favourable for Zionism. Other Zionist workers in England also shared their view, and Dr. Gaster, too, in conjunction with Dr. Weizmann, had some important conversations with English leaders. The impressions which both had formed confirmed the hope that Zionism has a great future in England.

We can by this time, without committing any indiscretion, take this opportunity of mentioning one of the influential personalities who had given great and never-to-be forgotten services in the cause of the Zionist idea, that is the Rt. Hon. Herbert Samuel, late Home Secretary, who unites in himself the brilliant qualities of an English statesman with an enthusiastic attachment to Judaism, but had never yet taken an active part in essentially Jewish affairs. His wonderful energy, his distinguished talents and his patriotic zeal had for long been devoted to the services of the country, and both in the Asquith ministry and in Parliament he formed one of the most distinctive figures. Although he directed his activities exclusively to questions of Home administration, he turned his mind also from the commencement of the war to the great political problems of foreign politics, and when the opportunity was offered to become more acquainted with the Zionist idea, this idea won his sympathy, and he championed it with the full force of his convictions. It is sufficient to mention the words contained in his speech at the Demonstration of December 2nd at the London Opera House: “that he has stood for Zionism not only in the Cabinet, but also outside it.” These were modest words. As a matter of fact, he has not only stood for Zionism, but he has also done much to elucidate Zionist questions. He merits truly a page of honour in the history of Zionism.

For the sake of historical accuracy, other distinguished persons must be mentioned as well. We refer to some members of the famous House of Rothschild. Volumes could be written concerning what Baron Edmond de Rothschild has done for colonization in Palestine. Far removed from political activity and unwilling to play any official part in the Zionist Organization, devoted with love and attachment to his country, France, and at the same time inspired with the loftiest sentiments for Judaism, this Nestor of true philanthropy cherishes a love for the idea of regenerating Palestine that cannot be too highly valued. That he has made this ideal one of the most beautiful traditions of his family is shown by the fact that his son, James, has followed the example of his father. This stimulating and instructive example could not fail to influence the other branches of this great family also. The late Lord Rothschild of London, who stood at the head of organized English Jewry, was long regarded as an opponent of Zionism. But this opposition was not a matter of principle, it was simply determined by circumstances: the obstacles appeared to him insurmountable, and that was the only reason for his opposition. In view of the different circumstances caused by the war, he revised his former opinions, and shortly before his death he began to take an interest in Zionism. Following this lead, other members of this family also have taken up a favourable view towards Zionism, and this view grew to a complete alliance with the Zionist Organization on the part of the present Lord Rothschild.

In connection with this development, the very great services of Dr. Weizmann in this same direction must be mentioned. Shortly before the outbreak of war Dr. Weizmann had given much attention to the project of founding a University in Jerusalem. This project, which met with great approval, not only in Zionist circles but also elsewhere, brought him into closer relations with the House of Rothschild, and this did much to make the members of this family more closely acquainted with Zionism.

This was the position at the beginning of the war. The outlook was promising, and a sound start had been made. But all this was waiting for development, for deepening, for actualization. The English Zionist Federation, being a local organization, could neither speak in the name of the great masses of Zionists of the Entente countries nor could it undertake the great political labour of propaganda organization. Thus it happened that on the part of Dr. Weizmann, Dr. Gaster, and others, the invitation was sent forth to the main organization to delegate two of its representatives to London.

There was, however, still another matter which caused the coming of the delegates of the general Zionist Organization in London to appear necessary. Although the Organization remained uniform in its principles and aims, an actual collaboration of Zionists throughout the world in the pre-existing form had to be set aside for the time being. The greatest numbers of Zionists live in Russia: there exist the persons who are especially called to make Palestine their home, and there also the majority of the most distinguished Jewish nationalists and the leading spirits of a Hebrew culture are most strongly represented. The great Jewish community in America, which unites the intensity of national consciousness of Russian Jews with the fresh spirit of liberty of the New World, constitutes even more and more a reservoir, not only of powerful material resources, but also of great organizing motive-power, of influential initiative and endeavour, which are doubtless destined to play a decisive part in the solution of the Zionist problem. When, in addition to these facts, it is realized that the great resources for the colonization of Palestine have been contributed from Paris, by Baron Edmond de Rothschild, where also the headquarters of the Jewish Colonization Association are situated, which has the disposal of the millions of the late Baron de Hirsch, and which, if the issues in Palestine are favourable, is destined to develop its colonizing activities in this direction: when finally the fact is remembered that London is the centre of all financial institutions, then it will be easily understood that the whole situation has brought England to a place of first importance in the matter of Zionist activities, that it seemed a logical necessity that certain representatives of the Organization had to move their residence and their work hither, so as not only to maintain what already existed, but also to prepare systematically the conditions for the new and rich possibilities, together with the distinguished personal factors already at work here.

In conclusion, one more circumstance must be mentioned, the importance of which is also not to be under-rated. Though for a long time the Zionist Organization had endeavoured to make Zionism the cause of the entire Jewish people, the consciousness of the need for unity grew as the war progressed. It was very desirable that those Jews who did not consider themselves organized Zionists, should co-operate in the realization of many practical plans. All the peoples involved in the war had managed to create among their parties a so-called “Union Sacrée,” and to form a united front. Why should this be impossible to the Jews?

Soon after the outbreak of the war, the Zionist leaders in England had attempted to come to an understanding with those indifferent to their cause and with the so-called anti-Zionists, in order to render possible, without renouncing the principles of Zionism, collaboration in working out a practical scheme in Palestine.

All these motives led the leaders of English Zionism to request the general organization to delegate here two of their representatives—namely, Dr. Tschlenow of Moscow and the author, for the purpose of assisting in the important work to be done in this country. They arrived in London shortly before the end of the year 1914.

Space does not allow us to describe the work of these three years in detail; we must therefore confine our attention to the chief features. In the course of the first few months the work consisted in a searching test of the attempts in hand: this test yielded a perfect agreement and a verification of all reports made. In the early months of 1915 there were new conferences with many leading personalities, with favourable results. In March, 1915, Dr. Tschlenow, Dr. Weizmann, and the author went to Paris, after Dr. Weizmann had previously visited Paris again and again on Zionist business. Attention was then confined to Jewish circles, and so far as non-Jewish circles were concerned a certain general enquiry appeared to be necessary. At the same time, attempts were made through conferences with a group of leading Jewish personalities in London who stood aloof from Zionism, to bring about an understanding. The Zionist delegation which was in charge of these negotiations and this correspondence was composed of Dr. E. W. Tschlenow, Dr. Moses Gaster, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, and the author. As an understanding just then appeared impossible, the negotiations were postponed until further notice. Dr. Tschlenow shortly afterwards left England, after a stay of five to six months, and returned to Russia. At the meeting of the Zionist Committee in Copenhagen and at the Zionist meetings that took place in Russia, Dr. Tschlenow was able to report that the political efforts in England had filled him with the best hopes. The Author remained in England and devoted himself, in addition to propaganda, to the political task in which Weizmann’s unwearied efforts became more and more important. The period 1915‒1916 was more one of preparation than one of execution: Zionism had to be strengthened from within, the societies in London and the Provinces had to be maintained, new societies had to be created, pamphlets and books had to be written and published; externally, the work consisted in finding new sympathisers, and in an enlightening propaganda wherever a proper opportunity offered itself. The correspondence with the Zionist leaders and organizations in Russia and America became more active and the relations ever closer. In London a number of talented young Zionist writers and workers had grouped themselves round the leaders; many books and many pamphlets which were published during this period had won great popularity for the Zionist writers and publicists who had already proved their worthiness, such as Major Norman Bentwich, who subsequently became the first Procureur-General of Palestine under the British occupation, and Messrs. Paul Goodman, Albert M. Hyamson, Samuel Landman, Harry Sacher, Leon Simon; new personalities joined them, as, for instance, Semmi Tolkowsky and others. The temporary stay in London of many prominent Zionists of Russia and Palestine, such as Boris Goldberg of Wilna, and recently the agriculturist, Jacob Ettinger, and the manager of the Anglo-Palestine Company, David Levontin, who both came over from Palestine, and the great intellectual influence exercised by Achad Haam, who freely gave his invaluable advice in every important question—all these have done very much to make London the real centre of Zionist work.

Towards the end of the year 1916 several months were spent in drafting outlines and projects for the purpose of drawing up a Zionist programme which should be as clear as possible and correspond with the present conditions, in which efforts Dr. Weizmann and the author were supported by a number of notable colleagues. Already in 1915 the work had commenced on the projects and memoranda, the drafting of which received many contributions from several members; and the work was continued from that time onwards. A committee, consisting of Dr. Gaster, Dr. Weizmann, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Mr. Joseph Cowen, and the author, had towards the end of 1916 outlined a preliminary sketch of a programme which was afterwards discussed in a further committee. This programme was intended to serve as a foundation for the official representations which were then in view. At the same time, Dr. Weizmann was constantly occupied independently in preparing the ground for the coming official proposals, by conferences and propaganda; this he was able to do, thanks mostly to his personal connections, though he always acted in conjunction with the author.

The 7th of February, 1917, constitutes a turning-point in the history. Shortly before this date Lieut.-Colonel Sir Mark Sykes, Bart., M.P., had communicated with Dr. Weizmann and the author on the question of the treatment of the Zionist problem. Sir Mark Sykes, who is a distinguished authority on oriental matters and who had earlier given attention to the Arab question, was entrusted with the study of the Zionist problem. In conjunction with a representative of the French Government, M. Georges Picot, he had devoted great attention to the question, and both had had first conversations with Dr. Moses Gaster. At the commencement of the year 1917 Sir Mark Sykes entered into closer relations with Dr. Weizmann and the author, and the discussions held with the latter led to the meeting of February 7th, 1917, which marks the commencement of official negotiations. Besides Sir Mark Sykes, the following took part in this meeting: Lord Rothschild, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Dr. M. Gaster (at whose house the meeting took place), Mr. James de Rothschild, Mr. Harry Sacher, Right Hon. Herbert Samuel, M.P., Dr. Chaim Weizmann, and the author. The deliberations yielded a favourable result, and it was resolved to continue the work. For further regular consultations with Sir Mark Sykes and M. Georges Picot, the author was chosen. Discussions on questions connected with the Zionist programme took place. In consequence of these negotiations and of the great importance of the Zionist question to all the Governments of the Entente Powers, the author was called to Paris in March, 1917, by the French Government. On the 22nd of March he was received at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Paris, where he outlined the principles of the Zionist programme. He received the assurance that the French Government regarded the programme very favourably, and was authorized to inform the Zionist Organizations of Russia and America of this result by telegraph.

After a stay of one month in Paris, during which the author got into touch with the leading Jewish circles, he went to Rome, where he devoted himself to the same task. The conferences which he had with the leading Italian Jews led to the happy result that the programme laid before them by the author was accepted. With regard to the question of the Holy Places, it was considered advisable to enter into negotiations with the Vatican. The Author had conferences with the Cardinals (especially with Cardinal Gasparri), and on the 10th of May he was received in an audience by the Pope. These conferences led to a most satisfactory attitude on the part of the Vatican towards Zionism. Between the 12th and the 18th of May, the author, together with the President of the Jewish Community in Rome, Commendatore Sereni, was received several times at the Italian Consultà, and by the then Prime Minister Boselli, and he was assured that the Italian Government, in conjunction with the Allied Powers, would support the Zionist programme. He was authorized, just as in Paris, to telegraph this result to the Russian and American Zionist organizations.

Having returned to Paris, the author was received on May 28th by the then Prime Minister Ribot, and after that remained another month, during which various negotiations were conducted. He then received a document addressed to him, a statement from the French Government, the text of which, translated from the French original, runs as follows:⁠—

“Paris, June 4, 1917.

“Sir,

“You were good enough to present the project to which you are devoting your efforts, which has for its object the development of Jewish colonization in Palestine. You consider that, circumstances permitting, and the independence of the Holy Places being safeguarded on the other hand, it would be a deed of justice and of reparation to assist, by the protection of the Allied Powers, in the renaissance of the Jewish nationality in that Land from which the people of Israel were exiled so many centuries ago.

“The French Government, which entered this present war to defend a people wrongfully attacked, and which continues the struggle to assure the victory of right over might, can but feel sympathy for your cause, the triumph of which is bound up with that of the Allies.

“I am happy to give you herewith such assurance.

“Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my most distinguished consideration.

“(Signed) Jules Cambon.

“M. N. Sokolow,

Hôtel Meurice, Paris.”

From this statement it is clearly seen:⁠—

(1) that hereby the question of Zionism is recognized as one of those concerning small and persecuted nations;

(2) that the principle of the recognition of Jewish nationality and its historical right to Palestine is here accepted; and

(3) that the French Government is prepared to support this movement.

In the meantime, the Zionists in England—and especially their political leader, Dr. Weizmann—had continued the work with great zeal in this country. After his return, the author again took a share in this work. The great development which the political and propagandist work had in the interval made in England, led to the establishment of a larger consultative committee and to the opening of new offices,⁠¹ and a year earlier Dr. Weizmann had been elected President of the English Zionist Federation, and this did much to bring new life into the Federation. Two periodicals were founded, the monthly Zionist Review, in London, and the weekly Palestine, published by the British Palestine Committee, Manchester, and Zionism reached a popularity such as it never previously had in this country.

### CONFERENCE OF ENGLISH ZIONIST FEDERATION IN 1917

A Special Conference of Delegates from the Constituent Societies was held in London on the 20th of May, 1917, with the President, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, in the chair. The Conference was called partly in consequence of the disturbing news that had been received from Palestine and partly in order that a communication on the political situation, as it affected the Jewish National Movement, might be made to the societies through their delegates. The Conference occupied the whole of the day and was very largely attended. It was opened by the Chairman with an address, in which he reviewed the situation. He said:⁠—

“Grave and great events have taken place since we met last—events which will affect deeply the fate of Jewry all over the world. The first event of colossal magnitude was the Russian Revolution. By a miracle, in one night the chains and fetters which have enslaved a great nation of 150 to 160 millions for centuries have been broken, and a free Russia has emerged. It has become almost a current phrase in the Press that it was a ‘bloodless’ revolution, but those who know Russia, those who have lived in Russia, know very well that although the last act of the drama was comparatively bloodless, much blood has been poured out during many years, and it was this outpouring of blood which has prepared the dramatic developments which we witnessed two months ago. And we Jews know that in this stream of blood there was a considerable fraction—a very considerable fraction—of Jewish blood. It was common knowledge in the years 1905 and 1906 that there was not a single Jewish family in Russia which had not paid the toll in the form of a son or a daughter or a relative to the Moloch of Russian Tsardom. All those Jews who have bought so dearly freedom for themselves and for the rest of Jewry, will go down in history as heroes, as saints, and our hearty congratulations and wishes go out to all those who have fought for the Russian Revolution, and to those who are going to carry on the work under the new régime. It is clear that an event like this cannot pass without convulsions. It is marvellous that things should go in Russia as they do now, but it is equally clear that the fate of Jewry, the fate of the Zionist Movement, largely depends upon stable conditions in that part of the world, and it will be, I am sure, an honourable task for the Zionist Organization all over the world, and especially for our friends in Russia, to contribute as much as it is in their power to the stabilization of conditions in Russia. Some of us—some of our friends even, and especially some of our opponents—are very quick in drawing conclusions as to what will happen to the Zionist Movement after the Russian Revolution. Now, they say, the greatest stimulus for the Zionist Movement has been removed. Russian Jewry is free. They do not need any places of refuge somewhere outside Russia—somewhere in Palestine. Nothing can be more superficial, and nothing can be more wrong, than that. We have never built our Zionist Movement on the sufferings of our people in Russia or elsewhere. Those sufferings were never the cause of Zionism. The fundamental cause of Zionism was, and is, the ineradicable national striving of Jewry to have a home of its own—a national centre, a national home with a national Jewish life. And this remains now stronger than ever. A strong and free Russian Jewry will appreciate more than ever the strivings of the Zionist Organization. And truly we see it even now. Russian Jewry is formulating its national demands in a proud, open, free way, which may well serve as an example and an encouragement to the free Western communities of Jewry. You have all read of meetings which have taken place all over Russia—of a meeting which took place only recently in Moscow, and was attended by seven thousand Jews. Many Western Jews could learn from these meetings how a free and proud Jew ought to speak. We therefore look forward with confidence to the future of Zionism in Russia.

“Now what are our hopes? How do we think they will be realized? Of course, I do not propose to prophesy in this assembly, but I shall try to outline, as much as it is possible to do so, what are our plans, and how we think we shall be able to carry them out. And before I do so let me do away with one or two what I may perhaps call misunderstandings, or what may be called wrong phrases. One reads constantly in the Press and one hears from our friends, both Jewish and non-Jewish, that it is the endeavour of the Zionist Movement immediately to create a Jewish State in Palestine. Our American friends went further than that, and they have even determined the form of this State, by advocating a Jewish Republic. While heartily welcoming all these demonstrations as a genuine manifestation of the Jewish national will, we cannot consider them as safe statesmanship. Strong as the Zionist Movement may be, full of enthusiasm as the Zionists may be, at the present time, it must be obvious to everybody who stands in the midst of the work of the Zionist Organization, and it must be admitted honestly and truly, that the conditions are not yet ripe for the setting up of a State ad hoc. States must be built up slowly, gradually, systematically and patiently. We, therefore, say that while a creation of a Jewish Commonwealth in Palestine is our final ideal—an ideal for which the whole of the Zionist Organization is working—the way to achieve it lies through a series of intermediary stages. And one of those intermediary stages which I hope is going to come about as a result of this war, is that the fair country of Palestine will be protected by such a mighty and a just Power as Great Britain. Under the wing of this Power Jews will be able to develop, and to set up the administrative machinery which, while not interfering with the legitimate interests of the non-Jewish population, would enable us to carry out the Zionist scheme. I am entitled to state in this assembly that His Majesty’s Government is ready to support our plans.

“I would further like to add that the support of the British Government, when given, will be in conjunction and agreement with the Allied Powers. Our friend, chief, and leader, Mr. Sokolow, who, owing to important Zionist duties, is prevented from attending this meeting, has been both in France and in Italy, and from both these Governments he has received assurances of full sympathy and full support. One of the important problems to be considered in connection with the future settlement of Palestine is the delicate question of the Holy Places. I need hardly say, in this Jewish assembly, that we Jews will be meticulously and scrupulously careful to respect the sentiments of any religious group or sect in Palestine. It is not for us to discuss how this complicated question, which forms an important point in international relations, is going to be settled. We trust to the fairness and justice of the nations which are going to build up a better world after this catastrophe, that they will see to it that the arrangements made are fair and satisfactory to everyone. We have assurances from the highest Catholic circles that they will view with favour the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, and from their religious point of view they see no objection to it, and no reason why we should not be good neighbours. And good neighbours I hope we shall be.

“Let us now turn our attention for a few minutes to the internal situation. Confident as we are of our final success, we cannot help feeling some disappointment at the fact that the whole of Jewry does not stand united at this present critical moment. Ladies and Gentlemen, it is not only a matter of regret, but it is a matter of deep humiliation to every Jew that we cannot stand united in this great hour. But it is not the fault of the Zionist Organization. It is, perhaps, not the fault of our opponents. It must be attributed to the conditions of our life in the Dispersion, which has caused in Jewry a cleavage difficult to bridge over even at a time like this. It is unfortunate that there still exists a small minority which disputes the very existence of the Jews as a nation. But there need be no misgivings on that account; for I have no hesitation in saying that if it comes to a plebiscite and a test, there can be no doubt on which side the majority of Jews will be found. And, ladies and gentlemen, I warn you that this test is bound to come—and come sooner, perhaps, than we think. You will have to show, and in this solemn hour I call upon you to prepare for it, that with all your heart and mind you stand united behind those leaders whom you have chosen to carry out, at this critical hour of the world’s history, this work. We do not want to give the world the spectacle of a war of brothers. We are surrounded by too many enemies to give ourselves this luxury. But we warn those who will force an open breach that they will find us prepared to stand up united in the defence of the cause which is sacred to us. We shall not allow anybody to interfere with the hard work that we are doing, and we say to all our opponents, ‘Hands off the Zionist Movement!’”

The statement was received with repeated applause, and aroused great enthusiasm among the delegates, both immediately after its delivery and also in the course of the discussion which ensued.

### ZIONISM AND PUBLIC OPINION IN ENGLAND

All these signs of Zionist activity naturally could not avoid creating a certain opposition. The attempts to bring about agreement, made at the beginning of 1915, had led to nothing, and the Zionists, from their point of view, could not have thought ill of their opponents, if they had limited themselves to a discussion within Jewish circles. But the opposition went so far as to publish a document which reads as follows:⁠—⁠¹

“In view of the statements and discussions lately published in the newspapers relative to a projected Jewish resettlement in Palestine on a national basis, the Conjoint Foreign Committee of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Anglo-Jewish Association deem it necessary to place on record the views they hold on this important question.

“The Holy Land has necessarily a profound and undying interest for all Jews, as the cradle of their religion, the main theatre of Bible history, and the site of its sacred memorials. It is not, however, as a mere shrine or place of pilgrimage that they regard the country. Since the dawn of their political emancipation in Europe, the Jews have made the rehabilitation of the Jewish community in the Holy Land one of their chief cares, and they have always cherished the hope that the result of their labours would be the regeneration on Palestinian soil of a Jewish community, worthy of the great memories of their environment, and a source of spiritual inspiration to the whole of Jewry. Accordingly, the Conjoint Committee have welcomed with deep satisfaction the prospect of a rich fruition of this work, opened to them by the victorious progress of the British Army in Palestine.

“Anxious that on this question all sections and parties in Jewry should be united in a common effort, the committee intimated to the Zionist organizations as far back as the winter of 1914 their readiness to co-operate with them on the basis of the so-called ‘cultural’ policy which had been adopted at the last two Zionist Congresses in 1911 and 1913. This policy aimed primarily at making Palestine a Jewish spiritual centre by securing for the local Jews, and the colonists who might join them, such conditions of life as would best enable them to develop the Jewish genius on lines of its own. Larger political questions, not directly affecting the main purpose, were left to be solved as need and opportunity might render possible. Unfortunately, an agreement on these lines has not proved practicable, and the conjoint committee are consequently compelled to pursue their work alone. They are doing so on the basis of a formula adopted by them in March, 1916, in which they proposed to recommend to his Majesty’s Government the formal recognition of the high historic interest Palestine possesses for the Jewish community, and a public declaration that at the close of the war ‘the Jewish population will be secured in the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, equal political rights with the rest of the population, reasonable facilities for immigration and colonization, and such municipal privileges in the towns and colonies inhabited by them as may be shown to be necessary.’

“That is still the policy of the conjoint committee.

“Meanwhile, the committee have learnt from the published statements of the Zionist leaders in this country that they now favour a much larger scheme of an essentially political character. Two points in this scheme appear to the committee to be open to grave objections on public grounds.

“The first is a claim that the Jewish settlements in Palestine shall be recognized as possessing a national character in a political sense. Were this claim of purely local import, it might well be left to settle itself in accordance with the general political exigencies of the reorganization of the country under a new sovereign power. The conjoint committee, indeed, would have no objections to urge against a local Jewish nationality establishing itself under such conditions. But the present claim is not of this limited scope. It is part and parcel of a wider Zionist theory, which regards all the Jewish communities of the world as constituting one homeless nationality, incapable of complete social and political identification with the nations among whom they dwell, and it is argued that for this homeless nationality a political centre and an always available homeland in Palestine are necessary. Against this theory the conjoint committee strongly and earnestly protest. Emancipated Jews in this country regard themselves primarily as a religious community, and they have always based their claims to political equality with their fellow-citizens of other creeds on this assumption and on its corollary—that they have no separate national aspirations in a political sense. They hold Judaism to be a religious system, with which their political status has no concern, and they maintain that, as citizens of the countries in which they live, they are fully and sincerely identified with the national spirit and interests of those countries. It follows that the establishment of a Jewish nationality in Palestine, founded on this theory of Jewish homelessness, must have the effect throughout the world of stamping the Jews as strangers in their native lands, and of undermining their hard-won position as citizens and nationals of those lands. Moreover, a Jewish political nationality, carried to its logical conclusion, must, in the present circumstances of the world, be an anachronism. The Jewish religion being the only certain test of a Jew, a Jewish nationality must be founded on, and limited by, the religion. It cannot be supposed for a moment that any section of Jews would aim at a commonwealth governed by religious tests, and limited in the matter of freedom of conscience; but can a religious nationality express itself politically in any other way? The only alternative would be a secular Jewish nationality, recruited on some loose and obscure principle of race and ethnographic peculiarity; but this would not be Jewish in any spiritual sense, and its establishment in Palestine would be a denial of all the ideals and hopes by which the revival of Jewish life in that country commends itself to the Jewish consciousness and Jewish sympathy. On these grounds the conjoint committee deprecate most earnestly the national proposals of the Zionists.

“The second point in the Zionist programme which has aroused the misgivings of the conjoint committee is the proposal to invest the Jewish settlers in Palestine with certain special rights in excess of those enjoyed by the rest of the population, these rights to be embodied in a Charter and administered by a Jewish Chartered Company. Whether it is desirable or not to confide any portion of the administration of Palestine to a Chartered Company need not be discussed, but it is certainly very undesirable that Jews should solicit or accept such a concession, on a basis of political privileges and economic preferences. Any such action would prove a veritable calamity for the whole Jewish people. In all the countries in which they live the principle of equal rights for all religious denominations is vital for them. Were they to set an example in Palestine of disregarding this principle they would convict themselves of having appealed to it for purely selfish motives. In the countries in which they are still struggling for equal rights they would find themselves hopelessly compromised, while in other countries, where those rights have been secured, they would have great difficulty in defending them. The proposal is the more inadmissible because the Jews are, and will probably long remain, a minority of the population of Palestine, and because it might involve them in the bitterest feuds with their neighbours of other races and religions, which would seriously retard their progress, and would find deplorable echoes throughout the Orient. Nor is the scheme necessary for the Zionists themselves. If the Jews prevail in a competition based on perfect equality of rights and opportunity they will establish their eventual preponderance in the land on a far sounder foundation than any that can be secured by privileges and monopolies.

“If the conjoint committee can be satisfied with regard to these points they will be prepared to co-operate in securing for the Zionist organization the united support of Jewry.

“(Signed) David L. Alexander,

President, Board of Deputies of British Jews.

“(Signed) Claude G. Montefiore,

President, Anglo-Jewish Association.

“London, May 17, 1917.”

On the day after the appearance of this Manifesto, The Times received more letters than it could make room to print from Jewish correspondents, “taking strong exception” to the statement of the Presidents. Mr. Elkan N. Adler at once resigned from the Conjoint Committee, and described the publication of the Manifesto as “inopportune, if not harmful, but he afterwards withdrew his resignation.” Mr. B. A. Fersht and Mr. S. Gilbert also resigned.

Mr. Gilbert did not resign from the Conjoint Committee, of which he was not a member. He resigned his membership of the Board of Deputies in order that the prospective president, Sir Stuart Samuel, might be elected in his place.

The Chief Rabbi, Dr. J. H. Hertz, wrote to The Times, expressing the following opinion:⁠—

“I do not propose to advance any arguments contesting the extraordinary statement on Zionism and Palestine which you published on Thursday last, signed by Mr. D. L. Alexander, K.C., and Mr. Claude G. Montefiore. But, as Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Empire, I cannot allow your readers to remain under the misconception that the said statement represents in the least the views held either by Anglo-Jewry as a whole or by the Jewries of the Oversea Dominions. Moreover, neither the Board of Deputies nor the Anglo-Jewish Association—on whose behalf their presidents signed the document in question—authorized its publication or had an opportunity of considering its contents.

“It is, indeed, grievously painful to me to write this in your influential columns. But I am impelled to do so in the interests of truth, and in justice to the communities of which I have the honour and privilege of being the spiritual head.”

Dr. M. Gaster, the Haham of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews’ congregations in England, declared:⁠—

“A settlement of the Jewish problem will, no doubt, form part of the general settlement which is to secure to the world a permanent peace resting on ‘national liberty and international amity,’ as Lord Robert Cecil only yesterday declared in the House of Commons. The Jew also wants a permanent peace resting on the same foundations, and he can only find it by the realization of the Zionist programme, a national autonomous life in the Holy Land, publicly recognized and legally secured. It embraces, of course, the religious as well as political and economic life, indissolubly united in the Jewish national consciousness.”

Lord Rothschild replied to several of the objections to Zionism advanced by the two Presidents in a letter which stated:⁠—

“In your issue of the 24th inst. appears a long letter signed on behalf of the Conjoint Committee by Messrs. Alexander and Montefiore and entitled ‘The Future of the Jews.’ As a sincere believer both in the justice and benefits likely to accrue from the Zionist cause and aspirations, I trust you will allow me to reply to this letter. I consider it most unfortunate that this controversy should be raised at the present time, and the members of the Zionist organization are the last people desirous of raising it. Our opponents, although a mere fraction of the Jewish opinion of the world, seek to interfere in the wishes and aspirations of by far the larger mass of the Jewish people. We Zionists cannot see how the establishment of an autonomous Jewish State under the ægis and protection of one of the Allied Powers can be considered for a moment to be in any way subversive to the position or loyalty of the very large part of the Jewish people who have identified themselves thoroughly with the citizenship of the countries in which they live. Our idea from the beginning has been to establish an autonomous centre, both spiritual and ethical, for all those members of the Jewish faith who felt drawn irresistibly to the ancient home of their faith and nationality in Palestine.

“In the letter you have published, the question also is raised of a chartered company. We Zionists have always felt that if Palestine is to be colonized by the Jews some machinery must be set up to receive the immigrants, settle them on the land, and to develop the land, and to be generally a directing agency. I can only again emphasize that we Zionists have no wish for privileges at the expense of other nationalities, but only desire to be allowed to work out our destinies side by side with other nationalities in an autonomous State under the suzerainty of one of the Allied Powers.”

Dr. Weizmann replied to two statements made by the anti-Zionists in a further letter which appeared in The Times:⁠—

“I have no desire to ask for space in your columns to examine with what justification these two gentlemen and the school they speak for claim that they have always hoped and worked for a Jewish regeneration in Palestine. But I am anxious to correct two statements which might possibly generate serious misconception in the minds of those not well informed as to Zionism and Zionist projects.

“1. It may possibly be inconvenient to certain individual Jews that the Jews constitute a nationality. Whether the Jews do constitute a nationality is, however, not a matter to be decided by the convenience of this or that individual. It is strictly a question of fact. The fact that the Jews are a nationality is attested by the conviction of the overwhelming majority of Jews throughout all ages right to the present time, a conviction which has always been shared by non-Jews in all countries.

“2. The Zionists are not demanding in Palestine monopolies or exclusive privileges, nor are they asking that any part of Palestine should be administered by a chartered company to the detriment of others. It always was and remains a cardinal principle of Zionism as a democratic movement that all races and sects in Palestine should enjoy full justice and liberty, and Zionists are confident that the new suzerain whom they hope Palestine will acquire as a result of the war will, in its administration of the country, be guided by the same principle.

“In conclusion I should like to express my regret that there should be even two Jews who think it their duty to exert such influence as they may command against the realization of a hope which has sustained the Jewish nation through 2000 years of exile, persecution, and temptation.”

These letters of protest led to the publication of a leading article entitled “The Future of the Jews” in The Times of 29th May, which showed that this paper is firmly convinced of the justice of the Zionist cause. The article was of so much importance that it is quoted in full:⁠—

“The important controversy which has sprung up in our columns upon the future of the Jews deserves careful and sympathetic attention. The war has given prominence to many questions that seemed formerly to be outside the range of practical politics. None of them is more interesting than that of the bearing of Zionism—that is to say, of the resettlement of a Jewish nationality in Palestine—upon the future of the Jewish people. In the statement which we published last Thursday from the Conjoint Committee of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Anglo-Jewish Association exception was taken to Zionist plans for the creation of a national Jewish community ‘in a political sense,’ and pointed arguments were directed against them. In the opinion of the Committee, such plans are ‘part and parcel of a wider Zionist theory which regards all the Jewish communities of the world as constituting one homeless nationality, incapable of complete social and political identification with the nations among whom they dwell.’ Against this theory the Committee ‘strongly and earnestly protest,’ on grounds which, in so far as they are set forth in the statement, are sufficiently clear. The Committee claim that they are fully alive to the special meaning of Palestine for the Jewish race. They are anxious that in Palestine the civil and religious liberties of Jews should be secured. But they affirm that ‘emancipated Jews’ in this country have no ‘separate national aspirations in a political sense.’ Such Jews regard themselves ‘primarily as a religious community,’ and have always ‘based their claims to political equality with their fellow-citizens of other creeds on this assumption.’ They fear lest the establishment of a Jewish nationality in Palestine stamp the Jews as strangers in their native lands and undermine ‘their hard-won position as citizens and nationals of those lands.’ The Committee proceed to argue that since ‘the Jewish religion’ is ‘the only certain test of a Jew, the Jewish nationality must be founded on, and limited by religion.’ It follows, they believe, that a Jewish nationality would be obliged to ‘express itself politically’ by religious intolerance, and would thus undermine the very principle which Jews have invoked to secure their emancipation. The Committee further insist that the bestowal by Charter of ‘certain special rights in excess of those enjoyed by the rest of the population’ would be a questionable boon to a Jewish community in Palestine, because in all the countries in which Jews live ‘the principle of equal rights for all religious denominations’ is vital to them.

“It seems to us that in attempting to define Jewish nationality in terms of religion the Committee come dangerously near to begging the question which they raise; and no question can be solved by begging it. As Dr. Weizmann, the President of the English Zionist Federation, observes in the letter which we published yesterday, it may possibly be inconvenient to certain individual Jews that the Jews do constitute a nationality. The question is one of fact, not of argument, and the fact that the Jews are a nationality ‘is attested by the conviction of the overwhelming majority of Jews throughout all ages.’ This conviction, he rightly says, ‘has always been shared by non-Jews in all countries.’ But more immediately important than this discussion of a point which cannot seriously be disputed is the denial by eminent and influential Jewish leaders like Lord Rothschild and the Chief Rabbi of the title of the Conjoint Committee to speak for British Jewry, or, indeed, for ‘the larger mass of the Jewish people.’ Lord Rothschild writes: ‘We Zionists cannot see how the establishment of an autonomous Jewish State, under the ægis and protection of one of the Allied Powers, can be considered for a moment to be in any way subversive of the position or loyalty of the very large part of the Jewish people who have identified themselves thoroughly with the citizenship of the countries in which they live.’ The Chief Rabbi insists that the statement of the Conjoint Committee does not represent in the least the views held ‘either by Anglo-Jewry as a whole or by the Jewries of the Oversea Dominions.’

“Authoritative declarations such as these dispose of the contention that Zionism is not representative of Jewish aspirations. We believe it in fact to embody the feelings of the great bulk of Jewry everywhere. The interest of the world outside Jewry is that these aspirations, in so far as they may be susceptible of realization, should be fairly faced on their merits. It is too often imagined that the Jewish question can be solved by the mere removal of all artificial restrictions upon Jewish activities. Even a superficial acquaintance with the conditions of life in the congested Jewish communities of Galicia and Russia suggests the inadequacy of that solution. The truth is that the Jewish question cannot be exhaustively defined either in terms of religion or of race. It has important social, economic, financial, and political sides. The importance of the Zionist movement—apart from its territorial aspect—is that it has fired with a new ideal millions of poverty-stricken Jews cooped up in the ghettoes of the Old World and the New. It has tended to make Jews proud of their race and to claim recognition, as Jews, in virtue of the eminent services rendered by Jewry to the religious development and civilization of mankind. Only an imaginative nervousness suggests that the realization of territorial Zionism, in some form, would cause Christendom to round on the Jews and say, ‘Now you have a land of your own, go to it!’ The Jews who feel themselves to be British, French, or American would, doubtless, tend to identify themselves more than ever with the lands of their political allegiance and to become more and more a solely religious community. The rapid changes of nationality that have been so noticeable among Jews in the past would become increasingly discredited. The international solidarity of Jews would undoubtedly persist—though, with a lessening of the danger of religious persecution, the leading Jews of all countries might feel freer to make a public stand against tendencies which sometimes bring the Jewish name into disrepute. We note with satisfaction the assurance of the Conjoint Committee that, if their specific misgivings can be removed, ‘they will be prepared to co-operate in securing for Zionist organizations the united support of Jewry.’ It is in this direction, we believe, that progress lies.”

On the 1st of June The Times contained a letter adding the names of the Anglo-Jews who supported the view taken by the Conjoint Presidents. The letter read as follows:⁠—

“Sir,—As the representative character of the Jewish Conjoint Committee has been publicly challenged, we, being Jews of British birth and nationality, actively engaged in public work in the Anglo-Jewish community, desire to state that we approve of, and associate ourselves with, the statement on the Palestine question recently issued by the committee, and published in The Times of the 24th inst.

“Your obedient servants,

Swaythling
Chas. S. Henry
Matthew Nathan
Lionel Abrahams⁠¹
Isidore Spielmann
Edward D. Stern
Israel Abrahams
Leonard L. Cohen
Ernest L. Franklin Israel Gollancz
Michael A. Green
H. S. Q. Henriques
Joshua M. Levy
Laurie Magnus
Edmund Sebag-Montefiore
Arthur Reginald Moro
Philip S. Waley
Albert M. Woolf

“May 29th.”

There were soon widespread signs that the congregations supposed to be represented by the Board of Deputies did not agree with the views expressed in the manifesto. Thus the seatholders of the New Synagogue, Stamford Hill, carried a motion calling upon their representatives at the Board of Deputies and the Conjoint Committee to resign. This was passed with only two dissentients. Synagogues in Manchester and Liverpool and the Committee of Deputies in Manchester, Yorkshire and Cheshire expressed regret at the action of the President of the Board of Deputies in “committing the Board to a policy for which the Board has given him no kind of authority.” The Belfast Congregation passed a similar resolution and also expressed confidence in Dr. Weizmann and the Zionist movement. Congregations in Birkenhead, Cardiff, Dublin, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Limerick, Merthyr Tydvil, Middlesbrough, Newcastle, Newport (Mon.), Swansea and Wallasey took similar action. In Leeds a meeting was held representative of all the Jewish congregations and organizations; in Manchester the Jewish representative Council condemned the action of the Conjoint Committee. Indeed, throughout the United Kingdom Synagogues, Friendly Societies, Jewish Charitable Organizations and nearly every kind of Jewish institution made a public protest against the Manifesto, and declared in favour of Zionism.

These widespread signs of dissatisfaction with the existing leadership of the body which had hitherto claimed to be the official spokesman for Jewish opinion in England, was destined to lead to a complete change of government in that body.

It is true that at the meeting of the Anglo-Jewish Association on June 3rd Dr. Gaster’s resolution of censure was not put to the vote. But on Sunday, 17th June, at a meeting of the Board of Deputies a resolution of censure on the Conjoint Committee, calling upon the representatives of the Board to resign from the Conjoint Committee, was carried by fifty-six votes to fifty-one. Mr. H. S. Q. Henriques, the Vice-President of the Board, spoke in defence of the Manifesto. In his speech he said the Conjoint Committee had on the 17th May granted permission to the Presidents to publish the statement when they thought it advisable to do so, but he had himself been surprised that they had published it so soon. Mr. Gilbert said that in October he had asked if any Manifesto then existed or was contemplated and had been told that the suggestion was “malicious and wicked.” Sir Philip Magnus, Bart., said he had heard of the Manifesto a week or so before Mr. Henriques. From these statements it becomes clear that the document was compiled by a few of those thoroughly Anglicized Jews who, themselves very comfortably off in England, and about equally ignorant of the main currents of life in that country and of the main currents of Jewish life anywhere, were in their complacent self-satisfaction of opinion that they expressed the views of English Jews, when in reality they did not in the slightest degree represent the views of the overwhelming majority.

In consequence of the vote of censure, the Honorary Officers, Mr. David L. Alexander, K.C., the President; Mr. H. S. Q. Henriques, M.A., B.C.L., the Vice-President; and Mr. Joshua M. Levy, the Treasurer, resigned.

The Board of Deputies later attempted to restore the irresponsible power of a non-elective and unrepresentative committee having power to speak for the Jews of England. This new Conjoint Committee was to consist of the Foreign Committees of the two bodies, the Board of Deputies and Anglo-Jewish Association, meeting together to deal with Foreign affairs affecting the Jews. “Except in matters of routine or urgency,” the parent bodies have to be consulted before any action is taken. The question of Zionism was declared outside the province of the Joint Committee unless specially delegated to such Committee by both parent bodies. This scheme was adopted at a meeting of the Board of Deputies held on January 20th, 1918.

Meantime the question of a general manifesto in favour of Zionist aims, not only by organized adherents of the movement but by the Anglo-Jewish Community generally, having become of urgent importance, the Council of the English Zionist Federation issued an appeal to Jewish organizations throughout the country to convene meetings in order to pass resolutions in the following terms:⁠—

“(1) That this meeting being unanimously in favour of the reconstruction of Palestine as the National Home of the Jewish People, trusts that His Majesty’s Government will use its best endeavours for the achievement of this object.

“(2) That this Mass Meeting pledges itself to support the Zionist leaders in their efforts towards the realization of the Zionist aims.”

These resolutions were adopted at large meetings in London, at the Queen’s Hall, Monnickendam Rooms, at the Marcus Samuel Hall, New Synagogue, and in Bethnal Green, and at important meetings in Birmingham, Cardiff, Leeds, Hull, Manchester, Swansea, Merthyr Tydvil and Bradford.

The following is the list, so far as we have been able to ascertain, of Synagogues and Institutions, which are known to have adopted these or similar resolutions.

Manchester. The Communal Council (representing 15,000 Jews, members of Synagogues, Trade Unions and Friendly Societies), the Lancashire and Yorkshire and Cheshire members of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, a special meeting of representatives of Synagogues at the opening of the Kovna Synagogue; the following Synagogues: Rydal Mount Hebrew Congregation, Kahal Chassidim, Beth Jacob, United Synagogue and Beth Hamedrash and New Synagogue; the following Friendly Societies: Grand Council of the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, Achei Brith and Shield of Abraham (Frances Annie Frankenburg, King Edward the Seventh, Nathan Laski, and Dr. Herzl Lodges), Independent Order of Achei Brith, Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Modin No. 24, Don Isaac ♦Abrabanel No. 11, ♠Rechoboth No. 29, Mount Horeb No. 9, Mount Lebanon No. 3, and Mattathias No. 14 Beacons), the Maccabean Club, the Order Shield of David (Broughton Lodge), and the Manchester and Salford Jewish Grocers’ Association; and the following Zionist Societies: Manchester Zionist Association, Poale Zion, and Manchester Daughters of Zion.

Leeds. The Leeds Jewish Representative Council (representing all Synagogues, Trade Unions, Friendly Societies, and other Jewish organizations); the following Friendly Societies: Grand Order of Israel (Grosenburg Lodge No. 90 and Dr. Dembo Lodge No. 47), the Pride of Israel Independent Friendly Society, the Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Massodah Beacon and Mount Sinai No. 13 Beacon), and the Independent Order of B’nei Brith (Abraham Frais Lodge No. 35); the Leeds Jewish National Fund Commission, the Leeds Jewish Workmen’s Burial Society, the Leeds Banner of Zion, and the Leeds Young Shomerim; and the following Zionist Societies: Agudas Hazionim, Ladies’ Zionist League, Ladies’ Association, and a Mass Meeting convened by the Joint Zionist Committee.

Liverpool. The following Synagogues: Central Synagogue (Islington), Shaw Street, Nusach Ari, (Great Russell Street), Devon Street, Acheinu B’nei Yisroel, Old Hebrew Congregation (Princess Road), Beth Hamedrash Ayen Jacov, Wallasey Hebrew Congregation, and Fountain Road Hebrew Congregation; the following Friendly Societies and Trade Unions: Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Mount Nebo Erez Yisrael No. 28 and Mount Hermon Beacons), the Amalgamated Orders of Achei Brith and Shield of Abraham (Deborah Lodge No. 70, Dr. Max Nordau Lodge No. 13, and The Very Rev. Dr. Joseph H. Hertz Lodge No. 76), the Grand Order of Israel (Rev. S. Friedeberg Lodge No. 80), the Order of the Shield of David (Max Clapper Lodge No. 44), the Herzl Hebrew Friendly Tontine Society, the London Hebrew Tontine Society, the Montefiore Hebrew Tontine Friendly Society, the Order Shield of David Tontine Society (Joseph Morris Lodge No. 28), the Hebrew Brotherhood Tontine Society, the Brothers of Israel Tontine Society, the Hebrew Somech Noflim Society, the Liverpool Travellers’ Friendly Society, the Jewish Students of Liverpool University, the International Society of Philology, Science and Fine Arts (Liverpool Branch), the Hebrew Higher Grade National League, the Talmudical College, the Jewish Literary Society, the Tailors’ Employees’ Association, the National Amalgamated Furnishing Trades Association, the United Garment Workers’ Trade Union, the Anglo-Jewish Association (Liverpool Branch), the Wholesale Furniture Manufacturers’ Association, the Ladies’ Bikur Cholim Society, the Committee of the Association of Old Boys of the Liverpool Hebrew Schools; and the following Zionist Societies: Liverpool Young Men’s Zionist Association, Liverpool Zionist Central Council, Agudas Zion Society, Liverpool Junior Zionist Association, and Liverpool Ladies’ Zionist Association.

Glasgow. The Jewish Representative Council (representing all Glasgow Jewish Institutions, Synagogues, etc.); the following Synagogues: Chevra Kadisha, Garnet Hill, Beth Hamedrash, Langside Road, Machzikei Hadath, Beth Jacob, Queen’s Park Hebrew Congregation, and South Portland Street; the following Friendly Societies and Trade Unions: Baron Günzburg Lodge, Lord Rothschild Lodge, Montefiore Lodge, Michael Simon Lodge, Dr. Hermann Adler Lodge, King David Lodge, Rev. E. P. Phillips Lodge, Odessa Lodge, Lady Rothschild Lodge No. 67, Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Leo Pinsker Beacon No. 12, and Judas Maccabeus Beacon No. 15), Grand Order of Israel (Dr. Herzl Lodge No. 12), and the Independent Friendly Society; and the following Societies: Jewish Young Men’s Institute, Master Tailors’ Federation, Jewish National Institute (Elgin Street), Hebrew Burial Society, B’nei Zion, Young Girls’ Zionist League, Daughters of Zion, and Queen’s Park Zionist and Literary Society.

Birmingham. The following Friendly Societies: Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Theodor Herzl Beacon), Order of Achei Brith and Shield of Abraham (Isaac Joseph Lodge), Lodge, Lord Swaythling Lodge, Rachel Mendlesohn (Rev. J. Fink Lodge and Rev. G. J. Emanuel Lodge). Grand Order of Israel (Loyal Independent Lodge, Rev. A. Cohen Lodge, and David Davis Lodge).

Bristol. Mass Meeting of Bristol Jews, Oct. 21st.

Cardiff. Mass Meeting of Jewish Community Oct. 21st, 1917; Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Cardiff Branch).

Swansea. Mass Meeting, Oct. 15th (representing Synagogues, Friendly Societies and Zionist Societies), Swansea Hebrew Congregation, Swansea Junior Zionist and Literary Society.

Pontypridd. Mass Meeting of Jewish Community, 21st Oct.

Newport. Mass Meeting of Jewish Community, 21st Oct., 1917.

Merthyr Tydvil. Mass Meeting.

Durham. Zionist Society.

Maidenhead. Hebrew Congregation.

Birkenhead. Hebrew Congregation.

Bolton. Jewish Community, meeting 19th Oct., 1917.

Blackpool. Hebrew Congregation and Belisha Lodge.

Stockport. Jewish Tailors’ Union.

Sunderland. Mass Meeting of Sunderland Community, 21st Oct., 1917.

Grimsby. Hebrew Congregation, and Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Mount Zeisim Beacon No. 7).

Hull. Mass Meeting of Jews of Hull, Oct. 14th, 1917.

Bradford. Zionist Society, Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Jehuda Halevi Beacon No. 30).

Newcastle-on-Tyne. Mass Meeting of all Jewish organizations, Oct. 21st, Ancient Order of Maccabeans (Mount Gilead Beacon), Grand Order of Israel (Duke of Northumberland Lodge No. 14).

Edinburgh. Mass Meeting of Edinburgh Jews, 21st Oct., Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Mount Moriah Beacon).

Sheffield. Mass Meeting of Sheffield Jews, 18th Oct., representing Sheffield Hebrew Congregation, Central Synagogue, Talmud Torah, Board of Guardians, Polish Refugees Fund, Chevra Kadisha, Master Tailors’ Union, B’nei Brith, Grand Order of Israel, Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Levison Lodge), Sheffield Junior Zionist Association, and Worksop Jewish Community.

Nottingham. Mass Meeting, 21st Oct., representing Nottingham Hebrew Congregation, Palestine Association, Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Mount Ephraim Beacon), Independent Order B’nei Brith (Jacob Lasker Lodge), Grand Order of Israel (David Snapper Lodge), United Garment Workers of Great Britain (Nottingham Branch).

Belfast. Belfast Synagogue.

Dublin. Mass Meeting of Dublin Jewry, 21st Oct.; Independent Order of B’nei Brith (King Solomon Lodge No. 17); Order of Ancient Maccabeans (Mount Carmel Beacon No. 10); Agudas Hazionim; and Dublin Daughters of Zion.

The Times, on Oct. 23rd, noticed these demonstrations of sympathy with Zionism under the heading, “Palestine for the Jews: British support of the proposal”; and on Oct. 26th, in an editorial strongly urged on the Government the necessity of making an announcement of its policy in favour of Zionism.

The anti-Zionist views of the representatives of a small section of English Jewry were not only in opposition to Jewish public opinion, but even more in striking contrast with non-Jewish opinion, as revealed by the press of the United Kingdom.

The Westminster Gazette, in its issue of August 26th, 1916, published an article on “Zionism,” in the course of which the writer emphasized that:⁠—

“All they ask for is for a home for the Jewish people—not for all the Jews of the world, but only for the nucleus of the Jewish people, and above all, for their special type of civilization, for Judaism. They have no desire to dispossess any other people. They point to a land, to the land which is historically theirs, which to-day is lying vacant for want of a people to rejuvenate it. There, they say, Judaism will find that freedom which is unattainable elsewhere: at their hands the land which has languished for centuries can again be restored to the circle of bountiful regions, and become as of old, a granary for other nations.”

Lord Cromer, writing in the Spectator on August 12th, 1916, said:⁠—

“What is it that Zionists want? The idea that they wish the Jews of all races to be congregated together in Palestine may at once be dismissed as absurd. Nothing of the sort is proposed. Neither do they want to establish a mere colony in the sense in which that term is usually employed. Zionism stands for a national revival.”

The New Statesman, on July 8th, 1916, dealt editorially with “The Meaning of Zionism”:⁠—

“The creation of an autonomous Jewish State in Palestine, or elsewhere—though only in Palestine is there any prospect of such a State—and its successful progress and development would raise the status of the entire Jewish people and restore self-respect to Jewry as a nation. It would thus be a large part of the solution of the Jewish question.”

The Nation, in the course of a leading article, on June 2nd, 1917, on “What is a Jew?”, considered Zionism as the new force, and said:⁠—

“An assimilated Judaism has little to give to the world, save the individual talents of its adherents. Zionism, on the contrary, is a vivid, positive, picturesque element in the world, a distinctive tradition which adds something to the common stock. We hope to see it recognized, preferably under international institutions in Palestine, but we look askance at proposals to make it subservient to British ends of Empire and strategy.

“But the problem is far wider than Palestine. Zionism is really a challenge to the tolerance of Europe for the modern idea of nationality as culture. If that idea has vitality, the Zionism of the future will be recognized and accepted not merely in Jerusalem but in Warsaw and Vienna, in Paris and in London. If the West expects Austria and Russia to make terms with their many nationalities, it must in its turn hold out a welcome to Jewish nationalism.”

In New Europe, on April 12th, 1917, a writer dealt with the problem of the Jews:⁠—

“Whatever claim the Jews may make, it is clear that autonomous Jewry in Palestine must have an adequate guarantee of existence, whether by international pledge or by the protectorate of a Great Power.”

The same periodical, in its issue of April 19th, had a long article on “Great Britain, Palestine, and the Jews.” The writer gives his reasons for stating that a British Palestine must be a Jewish Palestine, the home of a restored Jewish people, the spiritual centre of the whole Jewish race. He shows what the Jew has already done in Palestine, and concludes:⁠—

“Under a beneficent rule a Jewish Palestine would attract wealth and talent and labour from every Jewish community of the globe, and the progress of Palestine would be much more rapid still. Compared with its past Palestine is an empty land, to which only the Jews can restore its ancient property and glory.”

The New Europe devoted the first pages of its issue of September 27th, 1917, to an article on “Jewry’s Stake in the War.” The writer in speaking of Zionism, said:⁠—

“The value of Zionism is, that it tends to bring the intense pride of the Jew in his own race, and in its all but unrivalled contribution to civilization, into harmony with its public bearing.

“... The existence of a Jewish State would certainly react and react healthily upon the position of Jews who might elect to remain in the Dispersion. The Zionists would fain make of the Jewish name a clear title of honour.”

The Weekly Dispatch of April 1st, 1917, in a leading article on “The New Crusade,” said:⁠—

“If any more romantic prospect than the spectacle of the British Standard flying above the temples and mosques of Jerusalem can be visualized, it is the restoration by Britain, which has always befriended the Jew, of the Jewish polity which fell to pieces in the reign of Hadrian.

“But sentiment must be based on practical considerations. To develop Palestine needs a skilled agricultural race. The dreamers of the Ghetto, yearning for the return of Zion, point to the Jewish farmers of Canada, America, and the Argentine in proof that the instinct of a pastoral people of Biblical time still survives in its sons.”

According to The Sunday Chronicle, in an article, April 15th, 1917, on “British Policy in Palestine—A British Hebrew Necessity”:⁠—

“There is no other race in the whole world who can do these services for us in Palestine but the Jews themselves. In the Zionist Movement, which has caught up within itself some of the best brains and the warmest hearts among the younger generation of Jews, we have the motive force which will make the extension of the British Empire into Palestine, otherwise a disagreeable necessity, a source of pride and a pillar of strength. A source of pride; for after all, if we are fighting for oppressed and homeless nationalities in this war, there is none which has been so horribly oppressed in the past or for so many hundred years without a home of its own as the Jews.

“A pillar of strength; for the fact that the Jews are not only of one nation but of all, will give to the power which is sovereign of its capital Jerusalem a tremendous pull in the councils of the world.”

The Times Literary Supplement of August 16th, 1917, had an article, “After Many Years,” which sketched the history of the Jews in Palestine, and went on to say that:⁠—

“The Palestinian Jew during the past decade has shown a certain capacity for self-government, and has successfully assumed many of the functions of administration which the neglect of Ottoman Mutessarifs had left unperformed. Under the influence of a renovated system of education, imparted in Hebrew, he was rapidly forgetting his German leanings or his Russian or Rumanian traditions, and was becoming a farmer of his own soil. If this process can be resumed and its scope widened after the war, Palestine may slowly grow from a State with the status say of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan—and develop into an autonomous protected State, with its own native sovereign and administration and forming part of the Empire in just the same way as do many States which are in full control of their internal liberties.”

Common Sense, March 10th, 1917, dealt with the Jewish claim to Palestine, and declared that:⁠—

“If, when we make peace, we are to make a just and lasting peace, the terms of the compact must run along the lines of nationality. In such a settlement the Jewish claim cannot be avoided, and we may hope that, as a consequence of the gentle pressure now being applied, the British Government will regard it as a duty to obtain a Hebraic Palestine as one of the terms of peace.”

The Manchester Guardian, in an article on June 25th, 1915, on “Jews and the War,” described the suffering of the Jews scattered amongst the nations, and defines Zionism as follows:⁠—

“Zionism is, from one point of view, the effort of the Jewish spirit to establish a firm ground for its own continuance and development in a changed world, which threatens by degrees to overwhelm it. Such a movement was bound to come so soon as danger threatened a race-life so tough and enduring, and a spirit so distinctive and powerful, and it is, like other spiritual things, essentially independent of material means. But for the early realization of its immediate purpose material means are necessary, and the future of Palestine thus becomes for the Zionist a matter of pressing and capital importance.”

The Manchester Guardian, in a leading article on “The Future of Palestine,” in its issue of October 1st, 1917, asks:⁠—

“How can we as champions of the cause of nationality, refuse our sympathy to the attempt to end age-long exile of the Jewish people from their political home in Palestine?”

The Liverpool Courier of April 24th, 1917, in a leading article, “Rebuilding Zion,” said:⁠—

“A British Palestine must be a Jewish Palestine.... Given the protection of the British flag, and the self-governing system of the British Empire, Palestine might soon become a new and living Zion. Such a consummation would be a triumph of the British spirit. It would be a worthy object to strive for in the great war, for it would fulfil a deep national aspiration among a disinherited people of extraordinary genius, and to that extent would add to the number and the weight of the blows we should deliver against anti-national Prussianism.”

The Liverpool Courier of June 15th, 1917, on “The Future of Palestine”:⁠—

“The Jews could make Palestine once more a land flowing with milk and honey. The country has enormous economic possibilities.

“... It must be the business of the Allies, in pursuance of their policy of liberation, to restore to Palestine its liberties, and to provide a centre of nationhood for the Jewish race.”

In a leading article on “The Land of Promise,” The Liverpool Courier—October 19th, 1917—again dealt with the Jewish claims to Palestine, and says:⁠—

“We may be as certain of a loyal Anglo-Jewry with a Jewish Homeland reconstituted, as we are to-day. Britain has always taken kindly to the idea of the Jewish Resettlement, and the moment seems now at hand when an ideal—cherished both by Britain and by Jewry—is not unlikely to find realization.”

The Glasgow Herald, May 29th, 1917, in an article on “Zion Re-edified,” dealt fully with the anti-Zionist manifesto, and said of the Zionists:⁠—

“They are looking forward now not to a re-edified Zion which the breath of a Turkish Sultan could tumble into ruin, but to the establishment of a Jewish State, under the suzerainty of some strong Christian power.

“Jews in every land have felt that what has been the dream of long ages of exile and persecution may at last become a reality on which their eyes shall gaze.”

The Yorkshire Post, April 12th, 1917, gave the history of “Jewish Colonization in Palestine,” and concluded that:⁠—

“Thus there is some foundation for the claim that in the settlement after the war provision should be made for the unhampered continuance and extension of the colonization of Palestine by the Jews; and should that develop in process of time into the establishment of a Jewish nation there, it will be a result by no means inconsistent with the ideals for which Great Britain and her Allies are fighting.”

The Contemporary Review of June, 1917, had a short note on the “Jewish Claim to Palestine”:⁠—

“Evidently the principle of nationality is itself considered sacred; it is an asset to the world, and it carries its rights, moral rights, which are none the less rights, if they cannot be enforced by the sword.

“The cynic might, perhaps, find more justification had Israel ever forgotten or waived his claim to the Holy Land; but a continuous chain of aspiration and prayer, and even of political activity, binds him to the soil from which he was driven early in the Christian Era.”

The Review of Reviews, September, 1916, thus defined Zionism:⁠—

“Zionism means a complete Jewish, spiritual and national, rebirth in the ancient land—a re-settling of Jews in their own ancient home. To the idealist it is much more even, it is love for the Land of the Shekinah and the Holy Spirit, a mystic rapture of the whole Jewish soul in the quest of rediscovering the ‘Fountain of Living Waters.’

“To this end it is necessary for the Jewish people to have a home in Palestine secured by public laws.”

The military correspondent of The Daily Chronicle on March 30th, 1917, discussed the question of what should be done with Palestine when liberated, and came to the conclusion that:⁠—

“There can be little doubt that we should revive the Jewish Palestine of old, and allow the Jews to realize their dream of Zion in their homeland. All the Jews will not return to Palestine, but many will do so. The new Jewish State, under British or French ægis, would become the spiritual and cultural centre of Jewry throughout the world. The Jews would at least have a homeland and a nationality of their own. The national dream that has sustained them for a score of centuries and more will have been fulfilled.”

In a leading article in the same issue on “The Victory in Palestine” we read:⁠—

“The project for constituting a Zionist State there under British protection has a great deal to commend it. The restoration to Judaism of what must always be the ideal focus of its persistent national and spiritual life would be a noble addition to the programme for emancipating small nations.”

The Daily News, in a leading article, on October 17th, on the “War and the Jews,” dealt with the claim of Zionists in all lands to be a nation, and the desire to see the land of their fathers restored to them. The article concluded:⁠—

“In a word, we are not sure that Zionism would not prove the solution of the obstinate problem of this wandering race that has perplexed the world for so many centuries. Whatever the decision of the Allies in regard to Palestine, it can hardly fail to improve the conditions and enlarge the liberty of life in Palestine, and if the Jews in large numbers choose to take advantage of the fact, the object of Zionism will in due time be accomplished, and the Jewish nation will live again under its own vine and fig-tree. When that happens, the Jewish problem that afflicts the rest of the world will tend to disappear.”

### CO-ORDINATION OF ZIONISTS’ REPORTS

The months August‒November, 1917, were an exceedingly busy time for Zionists in England. They had to defend themselves against the attacks made against them not only in manifestoes, but also behind the scenes. They had to continue the pourparlers and to endeavour to obtain some acceptance of their principle. Dr. Weizmann and the author were actively and energetically assisted in their endeavours not only by a group of representative Zionists of England, but also by a considerable number of Zionists abroad. They were helped, above all, by American Zionists. Between London, New York, and Washington there was constant communication, either by telegraph, or by personal visit, and as a result there was perfect unity among the Zionists of both hemispheres. The strength of conviction, the enthusiasm, the spirit of sacrifice, the enterprise, and the industry and energy of American Zionists, displayed by them in the last few years deserve more than a page of honour in the history of Zionism; they deserve a volume to themselves. The statesmanship, the genius for organization, and the beneficent personal influence of the Honourable Louis D. Brandeis, Justice of the Supreme Court, has raised, strengthened, and secured in every direction the position of American Zionism not only in America, but also has increased its prestige and dignity abroad. His well-weighed counsel, his great experience, his calm judgment, which unites deep democratic principles with the sense of responsibility of a national leader, were an important factor in the conduct of Zionist politics. In this matter he was supported by a number of zealous, expert and devoted fellow-thinkers. The older American Zionists, who had maintained for many years a Zionist Organization with great trouble and exemplary steadfastness, were now, since the outbreak of the war, considerably strengthened by a number of Zionist leaders from Europe. At the head of the latter—who, in the meantime, have become thoroughly Americanised—stood Dr. Shmaria Levin, a member of the “Inner Action Committee”; who, in addition to his distinguished services as a publicist and propagandist, in which directions he displayed a vigour scarcely ever equalled and certainly excelled by no one, also freely gave his knowledge and advice in the discussion of political questions. To this group, enlarged by the leaders newly arrived from Europe, was added another most valuable group, of strongly Zionist feeling, coming from Palestine. After the enforced exile of a number of distinguished pioneers of colonization and of national Hebrew culture from Palestine, many of them went to America to dedicate themselves there to the work of propaganda. Dr. Ben-zion Mossinsohn, Mr. Israel Belkind and Mr. Menachem Mendel Scheinkin—to mention only the best known—have worked zealously in America for the popularizing of the Palestine idea. The oratorical skill of Mossinsohn was most valuable. A number of distinguished workers belonging to the Poale-Zionist Federation also made their headquarters in America, where at the same time the orthodox Zionists of the Mizrachi Federation had made noteworthy progress in the organizing of their forces and in the winning of new members, especially through the efforts of Mr. Belkind. The Jewish Press in America, a popular actor of most widespread dimensions, devoted its main attention to Zionism. With very few exceptions the organs of different opinions vied in the publication of Zionist views and in the promoting of the national Jewish idea, in which matter the non-Jewish Press from time to time gave energetic assistance. The publication of Hebrew literature and press-matter, which previously was too little in evidence in America, was stimulated by the Hebrew authors and journalists recently arrived from Russia and Palestine, who founded new Hebrew weeklies (Ha’toren, Haibri) and established houses for the publication of Hebrew books. The pioneer and veteran leader of the idea of the renaissance of the Hebrew language as the everyday speech in Palestine, namely, Elieser Ben Jehuda of Jerusalem, found supporters and friends in America, who made it possible for him to establish his residence during the war in New York, and there to continue his life-work, the compilation of a great Hebrew dictionary. The rise of the national idea found striking expression in the agitation for the holding of a Jewish-American Congress, an idea which was violently opposed by the anti-Zionists, but was carried by an overwhelming majority. Nationality and democracy—these were the battle-cries of the supporters of the Congress, which carried away the Jewish-American masses with irresistible force.

The separate Zionist federations “Mizrachi” (containing Orthodox Jews) and “Poale Zion” (containing Socialists) have naturally been sorely affected by the war, which greatly impeded their work. They, too, however, have been able to keep up the contact between the various sections of their federations and continue their activities. The “Mizrachi” has been particularly active in America. The central office of the “Poale Zion” has been transferred to the Hague, though its main activities have been carried on in America. In close co-operation with the office of the Federation, the “Jewish Labour Correspondence Bureau” has issued bulletins giving information about Palestine, and the conditions of Jews in various countries, with special reference to labour questions and the needs of the Jewish wage-earner.

This was the milieu in which the political work of the London Zionist centre found great sympathy and ready assistance. The circle grew constantly, new elements joined the older experienced ones: the worthy Elisha Lewin-Epstein, who gave himself entirely to relief work and who for this purpose undertook the most difficult journeys during the course of the war, never lost sight of his leading idea, namely, Zionism. Mr. Nathan Straus, who but a few years ago took up the Palestine scheme, placed himself in the front rank of the promoters of Zionism; Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, one of the most popular of American orators, who many years previously had attended the Zionist Congress as delegate and afterwards left the Movement, returned with renewed strength to labour in the work of propaganda and in the development of the organization with those well-tried fighters, Dr. Harry Friedenwald, Professor Israel Friedlænder, Miss Henrietta Szold, Professor Richard Gottheil, Mr. Jacob de Haas, Mr. Louis Lipsky, and many others. It was a great pleasure to welcome into the Zionist camp a galaxy of new forces of great influence, such for example as Judge Julian W. Mack and Professor Felix Frankfurter. In synagogues and workshops, in the universities and in the clubs of the Associations for Mutual Assistance—everywhere Jewish national life began to throb more strongly than ever. The sphere of Zionism seemed to grow day by day: the great expansion which the Zionist university movement of young men, the “Menorah,” had shown, pointed to a great future national development.

Every idea born in London was tested by the Zionist Organization in America, and every suggestion from America received the most careful attention in London. Many Zionist representatives came from America to London, and others visited America. The negotiations in political circles in England and France were known in America, every success was welcomed there with enthusiasm, and often, also, received further support. Every opportunity was there taken advantage of to hold discussions, not only with the representatives of the Government and the political parties, but also with distinguished statesmen who were staying in America as visitors. The visit of Mr. Balfour, British Foreign Secretary, gave an opportunity to the prominent Canadian Zionist leader, Mr. Clarence de Sola, for a most encouraging conversation, in the course of which the noble intentions of the British Government were expressed. Similar interviews took place on various other occasions. The real work, of course, could only be carried on in London; but it must be observed that the interest, the goodwill, and the helpful efforts on the part of the Zionist organizations in the United States, Russia, Canada, and other countries, have been of considerable value.

In September, 1917, Dr. Tschlenow again came to London, attracted by the importance of the Zionist affairs which were in negotiation. After more than two years of absence, although in uninterrupted contact with London, the work was too advanced, and his health too poor to allow him to be so active as he was at the beginning. But he participated with his advice and influence, and he lived to experience some great moments.

Rt. Hon. Arthur J. Balfour, M.P.

Olive Edis, F.R.P.S.

### THE BRITISH DECLARATION AND ITS RECEPTION

November 2nd, 1917, marks the end of a chapter in Zionist history: it is Declaration Day.

The following are the terms of the letter to Lord Rothschild in which Mr. A. J. Balfour, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, declared the sympathy of the British Government with Zionist aspirations and its favourable attitude towards the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people:⁠—

“Foreign Office,

“November 2, 1917.

“Dear Lord Rothschild,—I have much pleasure in conveying to you on behalf of His Majesty’s Government the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations, which has been submitted to and approved by the Cabinet:

“‘His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.’

“I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

“Yours sincerely,

“(Signed) Arthur James Balfour.”

It was at once clear that a great moment in the history of the Jewish people had arrived through this Declaration. Our ancient home has again arisen for civilization. For nineteen centuries it has been made a desert, for nineteen centuries the Jewish people deprived of their own land sought everywhere a place where they could have freedom of the spirit and room for their work, and generation after generation prayed and dreamt of the return to Zion. Generation after generation drew from this source strength to live and to struggle. Now the dreams of our ancestors are becoming reality. The testament of Herzl was approaching fulfilment. The British Government has spoken in solemn terms to the Jews of the world. The time has arrived to create anew a Jewish homeland on the ashes of the past, to rebuild a national centre and to proceed to work in freedom in a free Jewish land.

Mid storm and fire the people and the land seemed to be born again. The great events of the time of Zerubbabel (fl. 536 b.c.e.) Ezra and Nehemiah repeated themselves. The Third Temple of Jewish freedom is rising before us. The first stones were laid long ago by our heroic pioneers in hard struggle against obstacles without number. They created the first nests of culture in Palestine. With their blood and work they have shown the world that the Jewish people has not only historical claims on the land of its ancestors, but also priority in actual fact in the work of its rebirth. These leader heroes, the fathers of political Zionism, bravely proclaimed to the whole world the right of the nation to a free life in the homeland, and organized productive work in Palestine.

Great new horizons of free national constructive work are revealed before our eyes. The fate of the Jewish land depends not only on the powerful protection of Governments, but first and foremost on the steadfastness and capacity for sacrifice of the Jewish people itself. Zerubbabel’s call to the Jews of the Diaspora was heard once more—to return to the ancient land, to grasp the ploughshare and the hammer, and to forge their own destiny.

The Press was without exception most sympathetic.

“Epoch-making is perhaps not too strong a term to apply to Mr. Balfour’s letter to Lord Rothschild. At any time a formal endorsement of Zionism by a Great Power would command attention if couched in such terms. But at the present moment, when Gaza and Beersheba have fallen to British armies and the distant thunder of our guns is heard in Jerusalem itself, the declaration has a significance that cannot be mistaken.

H. Walter Barnett and Co., Ld.

Gen. Sir Edmund H. H. Allenby

“From the Jewish point of view such a restoration opens the door of wonderful possibilities; the hopes that have never been lost during eighteen centuries of the dispersion will return within the region of fact and accomplishment. Scarcely less important should be the consequences for Europe.... The family of nations would be enriched by the return of one of its oldest and most gifted members to a regular and normal place within the circle.” (Daily Chronicle, Nov. 9th.)

“... In deciding to give the Zionists their chance, the British Government have done a bold thing and a wise thing; and as an honestly inspired and intelligent disinterestedness is sounder policy than the most crafty selfishness, they have incidentally struck in this dark hour a very heavy blow for the cause for which the free peoples of the world are fighting. Considered merely as a gesture, what is there in the war to compare in effectiveness to this decision?... The promise of the restoration of Palestine will count for more in the judgment of the world than all the desolation wrought by the German legions among the nations whom they have trodden under foot.” (Daily News, Nov. 10th.)

“The restoration of Palestine to the Jews will fulfil the centuries old desire of that ancient people. Moreover, it will give them a home for the development of an individual culture, and will not affect other than beneficially the rights which they have won as citizens of the countries in which they have made their homes. Moreover, it will provide refuge for the persecuted, and a centre of Jewish life to which all the race will naturally turn. Then it will be well for the Allies’ interests in the Mediterranean that so important a place should become permanently neutralized and stand no risk of falling into the hands of the Powers which might make a mischievous use of it.” (Pall Mall Gazette.)

“Mr. Balfour’s announcement on the subject of Zionism, which forms an extraordinarily appropriate pendant to General Allenby’s brilliant operations in Southern Palestine, marks the conclusion of a strenuous struggle behind the scenes between the International Jews, to whom this country is much more useful than they are to us, and the National Jews, who are among our most valuable compatriots. For once the right side has gained the day, and the Zionist aspirations of the Chosen People receive for the first time the formal endorsement of a British Government.” (The Globe.)

“No more appropriate moment could have been seized by the British Government to declare itself in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people than the present time, when our Twentieth Century Crusaders have just carried Gaza, the ancient Philistine stronghold, and are pressing on to the capture of the Holy City from the hands of the infidel. British interests have for long made it plain that some buffer state must arise between Egypt and a possibly hostile Turkish Government, and Zionism appears to provide the solution.” (The Evening Standard.)

“Nearly two thousand years after the Dispersion, Zionism has become a practical and integral part of all schemes for a new world-order after the war.... There could not have been at this juncture a stroke of statesmanship more just or more wise. No one need to be told that it will send a mystical thrill through the hearts of the vast majority of Jews throughout the world.... It is no idle dream which anticipates that by the close of another generation the new Zion may become a State, including, no doubt, only a pronounced minority of the entire Jewish race, yet numbering from a million to two million souls, forming a true national people, with its own distinctive, rural, and urban civilization, its own centres of learning and art, making a unique link between East and West. Jews who dwell elsewhere will none the less be animated by a new interest, sympathy, pride, and will be able to contribute powerful help. So much for that aspect. We need hardly point out that for all the higher purposes of the Allies the importance of Mr. Balfour’s declaration is immediate and great. From the United States to Russia, new enthusiasm for the general cause of liberty, restoration, and lasting peace secured by many new international links, moral and practical, will be kindled amongst the extraordinary race, whose influence everywhere is out of all proportion to its numbers.” (The Observer.)

“... A large and thriving Jewish settlement in the Holy Land, under the supervision of Great Britain, our Allies, and America, would make for peace and progress in the Near East, and would thus accord with British policy. It is not to be supposed that Palestine could ever support more than a small proportion of the Jewish race. There are probably more than twelve million Jews in the world, of whom far more than half live in Russia and Austria. Generations may pass before Palestine is capable of maintaining with comfort a million Jewish inhabitants, though it is, as Mr. Albert Hyamson says in his very able new book,⁠¹ a ‘land laid waste’ and not by any means a desert. But a little Jewish state in Palestine would serve as a rallying point for Jews all over the world, and it would confer a benefit also on the Christian and the Moslem worlds, which are equally interested in the Holy Land and its undying religious memories.” (The Spectator.)

“Mr. Balfour’s declaration translates into a binding statement of policy the general wish of British opinion. It emphatically favours ‘the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.’ If we were to analyse this sentiment we should find at its core the simple and humane instinct of reparation. Our own record towards the Jewish race is, from Cromwell’s day downwards, one of relative enlightenment; but it is on the conscience of all Christendom that the burden falls of secular persecution which this enduring race has suffered. One of our solidest reasons for welcoming the Russian Revolution was that it had freed the whole Alliance from complicity in the sins of one of its chief partners towards the Jews. To end this record by restoring the dispersed and downtrodden race to its own cradle is a war aim which lifts the struggle in this region above the sordid level of Imperial competition.” (The Nation.)

“The British Government’s declaration in favour of Zionism is one of the best pieces of statesmanship that we can show in these latter days. Early in the war The New Statesman published an article giving the main reasons why such a step should be taken, and nothing has occurred to change them. The special interest of the British Empire in Palestine is due to the proximity of the Suez Canal. The present has killed the idea that this vital artery ought to be used as a line of defence for Egypt, and there is a general return to the view of Napoleon (and indeed history long before his time) that Egypt must be defended in Palestine. To make Palestine once more prosperous and populous, with a population attached to the British Empire, there is only one hopeful way, and that is to effect a Zionist restoration under British auspices. On the other side of the account it is hard to conceive how anybody with the true instinct for nationality and the desire to see small nations emancipated can fail to be warmed by the prospect of emancipating this most ancient of oppressed nationalities.” (The New Statesman.)

“The forty-six Jewish colonies, with their co-operative societies, their agricultural schools, and their experimental station for agriculture, seem to have prospered before the war. Their wine and oranges were one-fourth of the total export trade of Jaffa, and while the war has set back their development the Turks are likely to have been less destructive than the Germans in France. Their labour—one of the chief difficulties foreseen by critics of Zionism—is partly Arab, but largely supplied by Jews from Russia, Roumania, and the Yemen. With sufficient capital—already furnished in part by Zionist organizations—the removal of the blight of Turkish rule, and the coming shortage of all food products, the economic future of a Jewish Palestine should be bright.” (The Economist.)

“The movement towards Palestine will be slow, and none of those who have sanctioned the great experiment may hope to live to judge it by the fruits; but it is satisfactory to remember that the British Government’s decision meets with the approbation of many Great Powers. President Wilson views the Zionist programme with the keenest sympathy, and has appointed a Jewish Commission to study in Palestine the question of a Jewish State. The Russian Revolutionary Government has declared its willingness to support the Jewish claim to Palestine, and even permitted a Zionist Conference to be held in Petrograd. Those who should be well informed say that the Pope is not opposing the Zionist ideal, and that the French Government favours it; one and all seem to be agreed that when this war is over the horrors of the Jewish situation as it affects the vast majority of the race must come to an end. The persecution and repression practised in Russia and Roumania down to little more than a year ago cannot go on in a world made fit for all to live in.... What will be the spiritual effect of this return to Palestine upon the pious Jew, who for two thousand years has said, If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning; upon the other class of Jew who will recover his Judaism when it has a centre, a point of focus; and upon the non-Jew to whom the return to Palestine is the fulfilment of prophecy and the foreshadowing of the Millennium?” (The Graphic.)

“We speak of Palestine as a country, but it is not a country.... But it will be a country; it will be the country of the Jews. That is the meaning of the letter which we publish to-day written by Mr. Balfour to Lord Rothschild for communication to the Zionist Federation. It is at once the fulfilment of an aspiration, the signpost of a destiny. Never since the days of the Dispersion has the extraordinary people scattered over the earth in every country of modern European and of the old Arabic civilization surrendered the hope of an ultimate return to the historic seat of its national existence. This has formed part of its ideal life, and is the ever-recurring note of its religious ritual.... For fifty years the Jews have been slowly and painfully returning to their ancestral home, and even under the Ottoman yoke and amid the disorder of that effete and crumbling dominion they have succeeded in establishing the beginnings of a real civilization. Scattered and few, they have still brought with them schools and industry and scientific knowledge, and here and there have in truth made the waste places blossom as the rose.... The British victories in Palestine and in the more distant eastern bounds of the ancient Arab Empire are the presage of the downfall of Turkish power; the declaration of policy by the British Government to-day is the security for a new, perhaps a very wonderful, future for Zionism and for the Jewish race.... In declaring that ‘the British Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use its best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object,’ the Government have indeed laid down a policy of great and far-reaching importance, but it is one which can bear its full fruit only by the united efforts of Jews all over the world. What it means is that, assuming our military successes to be continued and the whole of Palestine to be brought securely under our control, then on the conclusion of peace our deliberate policy will be to encourage in every way in our power Jewish immigration, to give full security, and no doubt a large measure of local autonomy, to the Jewish immigrants, with a view to the ultimate establishment of a Jewish State.” (Manchester Guardian.)

The Manchester Daily Dispatch published a sympathetic interview with Sir Stuart Samuel, Bart., on the subject of the pronouncement of the Government.

Both The Liverpool Courier and The Liverpool Daily Post and Mercury devoted leading articles to the subject on the 9th of November. The former said:⁠—

“Mr. Balfour’s letter stating the attitude of the British Government towards the establishment of a National Home for the Jews in Palestine may well be regarded as one of the most historic documents in the 5678 years of Jewish history. Its terms are eminently well considered, and the re-establishment of the Jewish National Home is to be accomplished on lines which are reasonable and just. Indeed, we note with satisfaction that the points to which we have already made reference in our consistent advocacy of the claims of Zionism (which has been thrust to the fore by world-shaking events of the past year or two) have been covered by the terms of the Government declaration.... Zionism has made a great step forward, and the world has now reason to look forward to the rise of an old-new nation in its natural home, where some of its ancient greatness may be revived in a national sense.”

The views of The Post took the following form:⁠—

“The important official letter from Mr. Balfour, as Foreign Secretary, to Lord Rothschild, as representing the Jews, more than justifies the suggestion we lately made in a leading article that our Government might be expected to encourage the Jewish national aspiration for a home in Palestine. We further said at that time that a ‘Palestine re-peopled by a Jewry bound to the Allies, and not least to Britain, by ties of affection for righting the oldest national wrong, would be a friendly neighbour to Egypt and to the newly enfranchised territories abutting upon the Holy Land.’”

The Edinburgh Evening Dispatch expressed the following views:⁠—

“The aspirations of the Jewish race to return to the Holy Land seem not unlikely of fulfilment. Scattered over the face of the earth, they daily turn their eyes towards Jerusalem and pray for the day when they will be restored to the land of their origin. We are fighting to-day not for aggrandizement, not for the acquisition of territory, but for the liberation of peoples crushed by the tyrant, and there is no just and reasonable demand which would not be sympathetically considered by the British Government. Our progress in Palestine has awakened in the breasts of the ‘chosen people’ fresh hopes of re-establishment in their Fatherland.”

The Glasgow Herald, writing in a similar vein, said:⁠—

“From their aeroplanes British aviators may have obtained a glimpse of the white domes and towers of the Holy City, high upon the crest of the Palestinian ridge. That possibility is symbolic of the effect upon the Jewish world of the British Cabinet’s declaration in favour of Zionism. What has long been the dream of virtually the whole Jewish race—even of those whose inward despair expressed itself outwardly by a cynical dismissal of Zionism as the mirage of over-heated fancy—has now taken definite shape on the horizon of practical politics.”

In the further article in the same issue the Government adoption of the Zionist policy was further commented upon:⁠—

“With singular timeliness, for it coincides with the victories of Gaza and Tekrit, Mr. Balfour has written a letter to Lord Rothschild announcing the adhesion of the British Government to Zionism. With the reservation of the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and without prejudice to the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country, Palestine, when it has been conquered, is to become a national home for the Jewish people. With numerically small exceptions this decision—on which we comment more fully elsewhere—will be accepted with joy by all the Jews of the Dispersion throughout the world. It will have an immediate political effect in America and in Russia, no less than in Poland and Hungary. It will tell to the advantage of the Allies even in Bagdad. In the Levant generally it should unite the Jews with the Arabs, Greeks, and Italians in revolt against the Turks. But its great ultimate influence, as all will pray, will be to affect for the better in many subtle ways the relations of Christian and Jew throughout the world. If that should happen one of the most insidious diseases from which civilization has suffered will have been cured.”

According to The Aberdeen Free Press:⁠—

“This is the first time that any Government has definitely put itself in touch with Zionist ideals, and the new departure is as important as it is timely.”

“... In many ways the moment appears to be a peculiarly favourable one for preparing to launch the scheme for providing ‘a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine’ in the sphere of the practical. The Zionist idea has passed through many changes, and may pass through many more.... Never until now have time and place and opportunity been in accord with the dream of returning and building up Zion. Mr. Balfour’s letter, read in the light of General Allenby’s march upon Hebron, may well sound like the long-postponed answer to the prayer of the exiled and persecuted race, ‘Next year, O Lord, in Jerusalem!’” (Scotsman.)

The Dundee Advertiser also put itself in line with its contemporaries which commented on the Government’s pronouncement:⁠—

“Palestine will, therefore, be a suitable field for immigration, and by tradition and inclination the Jews are the people to occupy it. Already before the war a number of colony settlements had been established, chiefly by Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe, and without exception these settlements were thriving. One and all they were agricultural, and contradicted the prevailing belief that the Jew is bound to become a trader or an artisan, and will never undertake the tillage of the soil. The Jewish colonies were models of up-to-date agricultural enterprise, in which the best scientific knowledge of irrigation and dry-farming was applied. A very pleasing prospect is therefore opening up.... In the fulness of time a new page in the history of the Holy Land is being opened by Allenby’s army.”

The Irish Times expressed its views in the following passage:⁠—

“These fortunate circumstances invest with especial significance the important declaration of British policy in Palestine which we printed yesterday.... In this endorsement of Zionist aspirations at a moment when Jerusalem can hear the distant thunder of British guns the Government has declared a policy of great and far-reaching importance. It is at last an attainable policy, and it is from every point of view a desirable policy. From the British point of view the defence of the Suez Canal can best be secured by the establishment in Palestine of a people attached to us, and the restoration of the Jews under British auspices can alone secure it in this way. From the European point of view it would be a great gain that the Jews should become, in the words of The Jewish Chronicle, ‘a nation, and not a hyphenation.’”

A leading article in The Western Daily Press ran in part as follows:⁠—

“... There is no other solution so much demanded by historical association and living sentiment as that, if it be possible, the Jewish people should retake possession of the small but intensely interesting country over which they ruled, with some interruptions, for nearly two thousand years. Mr. Balfour’s declaration has delighted many influential British Jews. It can hardly fail to delight equally the Jews of Poland and Russia, who have suffered so much from the ‘religious’ bigotry of ignorant people, and the Jews of Germany and Austria, often very wealthy and influential, will be forced to ask themselves why they are at present helping to preserve Turkish rule over a country which the British are anxious to restore to the Jewish race.”

The Hull Daily Mail said:⁠—

“It is a wise and sagacious offer, and has given great satisfaction in Jewish communities. It will be a great thing if Palestine is delivered from the blighting, blasting influence of the Turk, and he must never again be given possession if it is finally won from his grasp. The Jews were a pastoral people, and, once they were in possession, this land, under the blessing of Providence, would again flow ‘with milk and honey,’ and blossom as the rose under the protecting hand of Britain and other guaranteeing Powers.”

And The Newcastle Daily Journal:⁠—

“The Zionist project has, at last, the prospect of achieving its purpose, under the very highest auspices, humanly speaking. It looks like a first step towards the restoration representatively of the long-persecuted and widely-scattered Jewish race.”

Other provincial newspapers that commented on the Government’s announcement were The Dublin Express, The Northern Whig, The Belfast Newsletter, The Bulletin, The South Wales Daily News, and The Northern Daily Telegraph.

The African World also welcomed the proposals whole-heartedly:⁠—

“The announcement yesterday that the British Government ‘view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people’ and the Cabinet’s intention to further the scheme cherished by Zionists is an event of world-wide importance. A home for Jews on the soil traditionally sacred to them, and under British auspices and protection, is the happiest outcome of the dream of ages.”

The Shipping World said:⁠—

“For a number of decades there has been a movement, partly idealistic, partly practical, for restoring the Jewish race to their ancient territorial home. That movement is known as Zionism, and is strongly supported in the Jewish communities both in Europe and in America. Assisted by funds subscribed by the wealthier members of the race, some settlers had already formed under Turkish rule Zionist settlements in the Holy Land. But colonization under Turkish tolerance is a precarious thing. Now appears the dawn of promise, and Mr. Balfour has just addressed a letter to Lord Rothschild expressing the sympathy of the Cabinet with Jewish Zionist aspirations. The Government favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of that object. What form the endeavour is to take is, at this point, left obscure, purposely, no doubt. But we may in this hint perhaps see the nucleus of a free State where the children of Israel, gathered once more from the ends of the earth, shall again possess the land of their ancestors and live free from alien oppression.”

The Near East devoted its leading article to “The Land of Promise”:⁠—

“On the other hand, Palestine is for all true Jews a spiritual centre, and deep down in their being they associate with it, if not their own individual place of residence, at least the home of a sufficient number of Jewish people to make it the focus of Jewish life and Jewish civilization. Such a Jewish commonwealth can only grow up to fulfil its destiny under the protection of a strong and ordered State, which will guarantee it immunity from outside interference, security of life and property, and the impartial administration of justice. For its own material development it must look to itself, and in this connection it will be recalled that Jewish agricultural and urban settlements already exist in Palestine, and are a nucleus ready to hand for the new commonwealth. They point to the probable lines on which the development of the country will take place, expedited or retarded, according to the degree of assistance on which Zionism can count. The valley is full of bones, and, lo! they are very dry; many stages have to be passed through before these dry bones stand upon their feet, an exceeding great army. Of Palestine it will then be true that ‘This land that was desolate is become like the Garden of Eden, and the waste and desolate and ruined cities are become fenced and are inhabited.’ Towards that consummation it would seem that Great Britain in the dispensation of Providence will have played no small part.”

Palestine, the organ of the British Palestine Committee, was, not surprisingly, filled with enthusiasm and eloquence, for the Government pronouncement is the culmination of all its efforts:⁠—

“The decision of the British Government marks a turning-point in the history of the Jewish people, and will, we believe, be for ever memorable in the history of the British Empire.... The declaration is complete in form and substance. It can provoke no opposition from any quarter, and it will bind the Jews of the world in sympathy to the country which has thus taken the lead in their national redemption.... And when the Declaration becomes an act, when a Jewish Palestine from being an aim becomes a fact, then all the complex of strategic, political, and commercial interests which are concentrated for the British Empire in the Suez Canal and Palestine will have found their solution. This declaration is a memorable event in the history of the British Empire as it is in the history of the Jewish people and of humanity. We may be of good hope that it will at no very distant date become a fact, for the army of England has even now battered in the gates of Palestine. The statesmanship of this declaration of the Jewish nation’s right to Palestine is a statesmanship of deed, not of words.”

The Church, Catholic, and Nonconformist papers have devoted much space to the Government decision. In the opinion of The Challenge:⁠—

“If there is a considerable part of the Jewish people eager to make Palestine again their home, then we are glad that the Allied Governments should have made it possible for them to do so, supposing that the course of the war leaves that possibility still open. It must be for the Jewish people themselves to decide how much or how little advantage they will take of the offer which is made to them. Meanwhile no one can avoid feeling a thrill at a prospect so closely affecting the destiny of the chosen race. That wonderful people pursues its way through all the history of the world, and whatever concerns them is of universal interest.”

According to The Christian:⁠—

“By this dramatic declaration an age-long dream comes within the view of actual fulfilment. It ought to be apparent to everybody that the persistence of a people like the Jews during two thousand years—a fact unparalleled in history—despite every attempt to crush them, holds a meaning far deeper than that which the secular historian offers. The purposes of God are being worked out, and we can begin to see light.”

In The Church Family Newspaper the Rev. E. L. Langston, under the heading “Jews and Palestine: Epoch-making Announcement,” said:⁠—

“The declaration of His Majesty’s Government as to the future of Palestine must have far-reaching and vital effects....”

In the words of The Catholic Times:⁠—

“The settling down of Jews from Great Britain, America, and the Continent of Europe in the Holy Land is something like a romance of a war in the main features of which scarcely any romantic element has, so far, appeared.”

The Christian Commonwealth said:⁠—

“The historical interest and the religious importance of this promise will appeal nearly as much to non-Jewish people as to the Jews themselves.... We may yet live to see Palestine become the centre of trade and travel for the three continents of the Old World. The early colonization movement has crystallized into something more dramatic—the re-establishment of a whole people on the soil of the land where their national history began. Their long exile is drawing to an end. From this redeemed and rejuvenated people what new message may we not expect, seeing that their faith has so manifestly been justified and the vision of their prophets realized!”

“We are quite unable to find words,” said The Life of Faith, “wherewith to express the wonderful importance of the above declaration made by His Majesty’s Government.... It is not too much to say that this great declaration contains the making of history, even as it forms a new epoch for the Jewish race.... We welcome the declaration all the more because we, too, have an inborn love for the Holy Land, and because we can so deeply sympathize with the Jewish people, whose passionate affection for the land of their fathers has never been torn from their hearts, in spite of centuries of persecution and wanderings. There is, after all, some little excuse for the sentimental yearnings of the Rabbis who expressed their heartfelt passion in such sayings as:

“‘The very air of Palestine makes one wise.’⁠¹

“‘To live in Palestine is equal to the observance of all the commandments.’⁠²

“‘He that hath his permanent abode in Palestine is sure of the life to come.’”⁠³

The Methodist Times said:⁠—

“Naturally this declaration, which will be celebrated in history, has given the liveliest satisfaction to Jewry throughout the world. The pledge is as sagacious as it is opportune.” And prints in addition a long article by Mr. C. W. Andrews, entitled: “Palestine for the Jews: the Triumph of Zionism.”

And in the words of The Sunday School Chronicle:⁠—

“For two thousand years the Jews have been wandering among the nations. It looks as though a new day were dawning for them and for the world.... Apart from the moral significance of such a return, an independent Jewish State would make the Holy Land a centre of commercial and political influence of far-reaching importance to the British Empire and to the Far East.”

The British Weekly, The Church Times, The Christian World, The Inquirer, and The Guardian also commented editorially on the Government’s pronouncement.

The Jewish Chronicle, in a leading article, said:⁠—

“... It is the perceptible lifting of the cloud of centuries, the palpable sign that the Jew—condemned for two thousand years to unparalleled wrong—is at last coming to his right. The prospect has at last definitely opened of a rectification of the Jew’s anomalous position among the nations of the earth. He is to be given the opportunity and the means whereby, in place of being a hyphenation, he can become a nation. Instead of, as Jew, filling a place at best equivocal and doubtful, even to himself, and always with an apologetic cringing inseparable from his position, he can—as Jew—stand proud and erect, endowed with national being. In place of being a wanderer in every clime, there is to be a home for him in his ancient land. The day of his exile is to be ended. In this joyous hour we English Jews turn with feelings of deepest pride and reverence to great and glorious Britain, mother of free nations and protectress of the oppressed, who has thus taken the lead in the Jewish restoration. The friend of our people for generations, who has raised her voice times out of number for our suffering martyrs, never was she truer to her noble traditions than to-day—never more England than now! In the time to come, when Jewry, free and prosperous, lives a contented and, as we all hope, a lofty life in Palestine, it will look with never-failing gratitude to the Power which crowned its centuries of humanitarianism by a grand act that linked Jewish destinies with those of the freest democracy in the world.”

The Jewish people all over the world was deeply impressed by the Declaration. As the correspondent of the London Jewish Chronicle puts it, “The Jewish masses were literally dazzled.” A great demonstration, unparalleled for enthusiasm, occurred at Petrograd, and was addressed by M. Boris Goldberg and M. Aleinikoff, who styled England the “advanced guard of humanity.” He spoke in the highest praise of the English Labour Party for its sympathetic attitude toward the movement, and of the American Zionists for their defence of the Jewish colonies in Palestine since the outbreak of the war. Tributes were paid to the memory of Dr. Theodor Herzl and other leaders of the Movement who have passed away, of the British soldiers killed in the Campaign in Palestine, and to the Hashomerim who have died in defence of the Jewish colonies. Two soldiers, Levitzky and Kotlarevsky, greeted the Declaration on behalf of the Jewish Soldiers’ Union.

Tremendous enthusiasm prevailed throughout Russian Jewry because of the British Declaration; and reports received from Moscow, Minsk, Ekaterinoslav, Kieff, Kharkoff, Odessa and Kherson are to the effect that tens of thousands of Jews who had hitherto been either neutral or inimical, joined the Zionist Movement. Special services of thanksgiving were held in many synagogues and many mass meetings, vieing with one another in enthusiasm, were held almost everywhere. Many organizations of Jewish youth signified their intention to make whatever sacrifices might be demanded of them for the Zionist ideal. The Russian Press, with practical unanimity, spoke of the great importance of the Declaration, and described it as a momentous event for the Jews, offering the longed-for opportunity to build a national Jewish homeland in Palestine.

The enthusiasm in America found expression in thousands of telegrams, public meetings, resolutions, thanksgiving services. At the Baltimore Zionist Conference on December 15th a resolution was passed thanking the British Government for the Declaration, which stated, “Deeply we rejoice in the triumph of the British arms in Palestine, and the taking over of Palestine as another step in the march of the Allied Forces which is to establish throughout the world the principle of the liberty of smaller nationalities.” In all other countries the Declaration was discussed by public opinion in a most favourable sense.

On November 18, 1917, a reception was held by the English Zionist Federation at which Lord Rothschild officially communicated to the Federation the Declaration of the English government. Hundreds of congratulatory telegrams received from all parts of the world aroused enthusiasm. Lord Rothschild, Dr. Tschlenow, Dr. Weizmann, Mr. James de Rothschild, and the author delivered addresses in commemoration of this historic event in the life of the Jewish people.

### LONDON OPERA HOUSE DEMONSTRATION

Some account must be given of the Demonstration at the London Opera House of the 2nd December held in order to express gratitude to the British Government. This great demonstration was attended by thousands of persons. The resolution read by Lord Rothschild, who presided over the meeting, expressed gratitude from all sections of Anglo-Jewry for the Government declaration in favour of establishing in Palestine a national home for the Jewish people. Every member of the audience seemed to feel the greatness of the occasion.

Lord Rothschild said they were met on the most momentous occasion in the history of Judaism for the last eighteen hundred years. They were there to return thanks to His Majesty’s Government for a declaration which marked an epoch in Jewish history of outstanding importance. For the first time since the Dispersion the Jewish people had received its proper status by the Declaration of one of the great Powers. That Declaration, while acknowledging and approving of the aspirations of the Jewish people for a National Home, at the same time placed Jews on their honour to respect the rights and privileges not only of their prospective non-Jewish neighbours in Palestine, but also of those of their own people who did not see eye to eye with the Zionist cause. Feeling as he did that the aims of Zionism were in no way incompatible with the highest patriotism and loyal citizenship of the Jews in the various countries in which they were dwelling, he would like the meeting in passing the resolution which would be submitted to them to assure the Government that they would, one and all, faithfully observe both the spirit and the letter of their gracious declaration. He felt sure that the principal aim of the Zionists was to provide a National Home for those portions of the Jewish people who wished to escape the possibilities in the future of such oppression and ill-treatment as they had endured in the past, and he therefore held that all and every section of opinion in the Jewish people could work together for the establishment in Palestine of such a home, so as to make it a triumphant success.

It had often been said that the repeopling of Palestine by the Jews was bound to fail in so far as they were not an agricultural people, but they might dismiss that fear from their minds in view of the success of the great Jewish agricultural colonies which were established in Palestine before the war. The only thing necessary to achieve success in the movement was a thoroughly up-to-date organization for the development of the land, and for the guidance and selection of the settlers, who must act as pioneers. The aims of what now appeared to be antagonistic bodies of opinion, seemed to him to be so similar that he felt sure that when those objects had been properly examined in the light of experience they would find, sooner or later, that a common ground would present itself for all of those professing these apparently divergent opinions to work together in a common effort to make the re-settlement of Palestine a great and lasting success. Lord Rothschild then moved the following resolution:⁠—

“That this mass meeting, representing all sections of the Jewish Community in the United Kingdom, conveys to His Majesty’s Government an expression of heartfelt gratitude for their Declaration in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. It assures His Majesty’s Government that their historic action in support of the national aspirations of the Jewish people has evoked among Jews the most profound sentiments of joy. This meeting further pledges its utmost endeavours to give its whole-hearted support to the Zionist cause.”

The Right Hon. Lord Robert Cecil, P.C., K.C., M.P., who was received with loud cheering, said: “I have come here with the greatest possible pleasure at the request of those who represent, or who have led the representation of the Zionist movement of this country, to offer to you, and to all Zionism, my hearty congratulation on the event which you are celebrating to-day. And perhaps you will allow me to mention in connection with these congratulations, not only your Chairman, but also Mr. Nahum Sokolow and Dr. C. Weizmann, who have done so much for the cause that we all have at heart this afternoon. Surely all of us must feel what a very striking gathering the present one is. The keynote of our meeting this afternoon is liberation. We welcome among us not only the many thousands of Jews that I see, but also representatives of the Arabian and Armenian races who are also in this great struggle struggling to be free. Our wish is that Arabian countries shall be for the Arabs, Armenia for the Armenians, and Judea for the Jews. Yes, and let us add, if it can be so, let Turkey, real Turkey, be for the Turks. I should like to be allowed to say that the part that this country is taking in this movement is not a new thing. I venture to claim for this country that in supporting Zionism it has been merely carrying out its traditional policy. To me, at any rate, it seems that there are two great foundations upon which the policy of this country has always been based. I believe that they are often described by the two words ‘Liberty and Justice.’ Perhaps, more accurately they may be called the supremacy of the Law and Liberty, for, be well assured, if we are ever to obtain that security which we have been recently told is so important for us, if we are ever to lift European civilization and national relations in Europe out of the anarchy in which they at present are, it must be by the same means by which we have secured liberty and happiness in each country, namely, by the supremacy of Law. And it was because the invasion of Belgium, the lawless invasion of Belgium, was felt by the true instincts of the British people to be an attack upon the principle of Law, because they recognized that that was a real blow at the heart of civilization, that they felt then, and they feel now, that until that outrage has been expiated it is impossible even to think of talking of the terms of peace. As for the second foundation of which I have spoken, and which has more practical bearing on our proceedings this afternoon, may I say this, we hear a great deal of a new word: ‘self-determination.’ Well, I don’t know that it is a new thing. It certainly is not new in the British Empire. The Empire has always striven to give to all the peoples that make it up the fullest measure of self-government of which they are capable. We have always striven to give to all peoples within our bounds complete liberty and equality before the Law. We are adjured to respect the principle of self-determination, but I say that the British Empire was the first organization to teach that principle to the world, and one of the great causes for which we are in this war is to secure to all peoples the right to govern themselves and to work out their own destiny, irrespective of the threats and menaces of their greater neighbour. One of the great steps—in my judgment, in some ways the greatest step—we have taken in carrying out this principle is the recognition of Zionism. This is the first constructive effort that we have made in what I hope will be the new settlement of the world after the war. I do not say that that is the only thing involved. It is not only the recognition of a nationality, it is much more than that. It has great underlying ideals of which you will hear this afternoon, and of which it would be impertinent of me to speak. It is, indeed, not the birth of a nation, for the Jewish nation through centuries of oppression and captivity have preserved their sentiment of nationality as few peoples could; but if it is not the birth of a nation, I believe we may say it is the re-birth of a nation. I don’t like to prophesy what ultimate results that great event may have, but for myself I believe it will have a far-reaching influence on the history of the world and consequences which none can foresee on the future history of the human race.”

The Right Hon. Herbert Samuel, M.P., who received an enthusiastic welcome, said: “I rejoice whole-heartedly in the pronouncement that has been made by the British Government with respect to Palestine. It is a policy which for nearly three years I have urged in the Cabinet and out of the Cabinet at every opportunity that arose. The fears and the doubts which this policy has evoked are, I firmly believe, unfounded. Three conditions must indeed be observed in any new development that may take place in Palestine. In the first place, there must be full, just recognition of the rights of the Arabs, who now constitute the majority of the population of that country. Secondly, there must be a reverent respect for the Christian and Mohammedan holy places, which in all eventualities should always remain in the control and charge of representatives of those faiths. In the third place, there must be no attempt now or in the future to establish anything in the nature of political authority from Palestine over the Jews scattered in other countries of the world, who must probably always remain the great majority of the Jewish race. There should be no disturbance, large or small, direct or indirect, in their national status or in their national rights and duties in the countries of which they are, or should be, full and equal citizens. On all these matters there is no divergence of opinion in any quarter, and the controversies that have taken place, I venture to think, are disputes over differences that do not exist. The reason why, for my own part, I support the policy which we are here to-day to approve and celebrate, are chiefly these. First, it may be that the genius of the Jewish race will again be able to give the world a brilliant and distinctive civilization. The richness of mankind lies in its diversity. We do not want the world to be like some great library, consisting of nothing but innumerable copies of one and the same book. The Jewish mind is a distinctive thing. It combines in remarkable degree the imaginative and the practical, the ideal and the positive. This combination of qualities enabled it for one thousand five hundred years in Palestine to produce an almost unbroken series of statesmen and soldiers, judges and poets, prophets and seers—thinkers and leaders who have left for all time their impress upon the world. The Jewish mind is tenacious and persists, and now, when all the powerful Empires that over-ran that land have been overthrown and almost forgotten, the Jewish people exists and is more numerous to-day than it ever has been at any period of its history. Who knows, I say, but that if it again finds a spiritual centre of its own, soundly based on an industrious population, untrammelled, self-contained, inspired by the memories of a splendid past, it may again produce golden fruits in the fields of intellect for the enrichment of the whole world. And my other reason is this: If this comes to be, what a helpful effect it would have upon the Jewish proletariat that will still remain scattered in other countries of the world. I see in my mind’s eye those millions in Eastern Europe all through the centuries, crowded, cramped, proscribed, bent with oppression, suffering all the miseries of active minds denied scope, of talent not allowed to speak, of genius that cannot act. I see them enduring, suffering everything, sacrificing everything in order to keep alight the flame of which they knew themselves to be the lamp, to keep alive the idea of which they knew themselves to be the vessel, to preserve the soul of which they knew themselves to be the body; their eyes always set upon one distant point, always believing that somehow, some day, the ancient greatness would be restored; always saying when they met in their families on Passover Night, ‘Next year in Jerusalem.’ Year after year, generation following generation, century succeeding century, till the time that has elapsed is counted in thousands of years, still they said, ‘Next year in Jerusalem.’ If that cherished vision is at last to be realized, if on the Hills of Zion a Jewish civilization is restored with something of its old intellectual and moral force, then among those left in the other countries of the world, I can see growing a new confidence and a new greatness. There will be a fresh light in those eyes, those bent backs will at last stand erect, there will be a greater dignity in the Jew throughout the world. That is why we meet to-day to thank the British Government—our own Government—that has made all this possible, that we shall be able to say, not as a pious and distant wish, but as a near and confident hope:

“‘לשנה הבאה בירושלם.’ ‘Next year in Jerusalem!’”

The Chief Rabbi said it was indeed a rare privilege to take part in that wonderful meeting called together to express the heartfelt thanks of British Jewry for the striking sympathy of His Majesty’s Government with Jewish aspirations. The epoch-making Declaration on Palestine was an assurance given by the mightiest of empires that the new order which the Allies are now creating at such sacrifice of life and treasure shall be rooted in righteousness, and broad-based on the liberty of, and reverence for, every oppressed nationality. It was a solemn pledge that the oldest of national tragedies shall be ended in the coming readjustment of the nations which shall console mankind for the slaughter and waste and torment of this terrible world-war.

In the face of an event of such infinite importance to the Jewish people, ordinary words of appreciation or the usual phrases of gratitude were hopelessly weak and inadequate. For the interpretation of their true feelings to-day they must turn to Scripture. Twenty-five hundred years ago Cyrus issued his edict of liberation to the Jewish exiles in Babylon; and an eye-witness of that glorious day had left them in the 126th Psalm a record of how their fathers received the announcement of their deliverance:⁠—

“When the Lord brought back those that returned to Zion,

We were like unto them that dream.

Then was our mouth filled with laughter,

And our tongue with singing;

Then said they among the nations:

‘The Lord hath done great things with these.’

The Lord hath done great things with us;

We are rejoiced.”

Theirs was a similar feeling of joy and wonder. With them likewise it was the astonishment of the nations, the reassuring approbation of statesmen and rulers that caused them to exclaim: “We will see it done, and done consummately, the thing so many have thought could never be done!”

The spirit of the Declaration was that of absolute justice, whether to Jews out of Palestine, or to non-Jews in Palestine. They especially welcomed in it the reference to the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. That was but a translation of the basic principles of the Mosaic legislation. But it was the substance of the Declaration—the promise of a National Home for the Jewish people—that filled their souls with gladness. For only on its own soil could the Jewish people live its own life, and make, as in the past it had made, its characteristic and specific contributions to the spiritual treasure of humanity.

After the proclamation issued by Cyrus, the mass of the Jewish people still remained in Babylon. All told, only forty-two thousand men, women and children took advantage of the king’s proclamation and followed Ezra back to Zion, the land of their fathers. But that handful of Zionists and their descendants, because living on their own soil, changed the entire future of mankind. They edited and collected the Prophets, wrote some of the fairest portions of the Scriptures, formed the canon of the Bible, and gave the world its monotheistic religions. Now, as then, שאר ישוב “A remnant shall return.” But now, as then, it was the national rejuvenation of that remnant that is to open a new chapter in the annals of the human spirit.

Difficulties? Of course there were difficulties. The task of laying the foundations of a new Israel must be one of long toil and severe trial. But a people that for twenty-five centuries had stood victoriously against the storm of time, possessed vitality enough, patience enough, idealism enough, with the help of God, to rise to the level of this unique, world-historic opportunity.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir Mark Sykes, Bart., M.P., said: “My lords, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to say, before I say one other word, that the reason I am interested in this movement is that I met one some two years ago who is now upon this platform, and who opened my eyes as to what this movement meant. He is on the list of speakers; you will hear him presently; his name is known to most in the records of Zionism: I mean Dr. Gaster. I speak as one from without, as a watcher, but I feel, as everyone present must feel, that this meeting here to-day marks not a turning-point in the history of your own race, but I think certainly a turning-point in the history of the whole world. When one thinks of the years that have passed, of the immense spaces of history which stand between what was—and now is—promised, one is truly dazzled by the possibilities and prospects which open before us. I see, speaking to you as a watcher—now you, in a sense, are perhaps watchers also—perhaps you see something, perhaps you see three nations stricken with plague, cumbered with ruin, and Europe a welter of blood. Perhaps you see these three nations, and you realize that it may be your destiny to be a bridge between Asia and Europe, to bring the spirituality of Asia to Europe, and the vitality of Europe to Asia. That I firmly believe is the mission of Zionism. I see here something which is greater than a dream or a League of Nations. It is a league of continents, a league of races, and finally a league of ideals. That is a great vision. That is what I believe lies before you, but no one present realizes more than I do—I know the ground, some of it—and boldly I dare to say that there lie before you dangers, difficulties, possibly obstructions, but, ladies and gentlemen, your time of probation has been long, you are schooled in adversity, you can look to difficulties with calm, and you will overcome them. I do not look for a sudden magic transformation, but I believe you are beginning a great beneficial and irresistible transition. That is what you are beginning. Now, I believe, I hope you are going to set up a power that is not the domination of blood, not the domination of gold, but the domination of a great intellectual force. I believe you will see Palestine the great centre of ideals, radiating out to every country in the world where your people are, and if there is one thing that gives me pleasure to be here to-day, it is to feel that at this turning-point of your history, when the Government made its Declaration, you not only thought of yourselves but you thought also of others, and you will always look back with joy to the fact that when the promise, when the hope was held out to you of redemption, you thought not only of yourselves, but thought of your fellows in adversity, the Armenians and the Syrian Arabs. It is said that the Jewish people have a long memory. I believe that you remember Cordova, where your influence on modern civilization was at its zenith, and I think you remember what you owed to the Arabs in Cordova. You remember in the days when the Jews were so oppressed in Russia what you owed to the Armenians, who were your companions in oppression. These tragedies are very different in their nature, and three tragedies destined to unite in one triumph. If all three hold together, the realization of your ideal is certain. There are evil people who will desire that you should fail. If these three forces should be dismissed, there will be the danger of any one of them becoming the prey of a political adventurer, militarist, or the financier. For Palestine to be a success you must have a satisfied and tranquil Syria. For liberty to be certain in Palestine, you must have guarantees that no savage races shall return there. You want to see Armenia free because you want to know that all people are free. You want to know the Arab is free, because he is, and always will be, your neighbour. Lastly, I would also say this: I look forward through difficulty and through pain to see Armenia free, and to prove the inevitable triumph of right over the greatest might there may be. I look to see the Arab civilization restored once more in Bagdad and in Damascus, and I look to see the return of Israel, with his majesty and tolerance, hushing mockery and dispelling doubt; and all three nations giving out to the world the good that God has infused into them.”

Dr. M. Gaster said he stood before them not as a new Zionist, but as an old friend. He stood before them, the old Zionist, deeply imbued with the spirit of faith, believing in the truth of the word of God and the glorious promise in store for our people, a dreamer of visions, if they would. People had mocked at their visions and ideals, at their aspirations and their hopes, and yet they continued their work, unswerving in their enthusiasm. What appeared to so many as a dream had now become a reality—and they were gathered there to begin to reap in joy what they had sown in tears and sorrow. He had originally acclaimed Herzl as the leader of the movement, and he had had to bear the burden of the difficulties, but he had been true to the trust and had kept the flag of Zion flying, and it was now for him, and for all of them, a day of joy to see the fruits which they had so long wished for. They had come together to thank the British Government for le beau geste, in the inimitable French, for their declaration of sympathy with their national aspirations. But Zionism was neither a local question nor did it affect English Jewry, except in a very small proportion. It was a movement which affected the whole of the race. Every Jew, therefore, wherever he might be, was united in that sentiment of gratitude. They were there, representing the feeling which animated the Jews of all the world. Therein lay the greatness of the British Government—that it had lifted the problem from its local geographical character and given to it that universally valued importance which they attached to it. But what Zionism stands for must be clearly apprehended, and also what the Declaration of the British Government was expected to embody. The term “National Home” was a circumlocution of the original word which formed part of the Basle programme, the foundation-stone of Zionism, and that word had been chosen when no definite political meaning could be assigned to it. Circumstances had changed. It was for them to give to the word its true original meaning. What they wished to obtain in Palestine was not merely a right to establish colonies, or educational, cultural, or industrial institutions. They wanted to establish in Palestine an autonomous Jewish Commonwealth in the fullest sense of the word. They wanted Palestine to be Palestine of the Jews and not merely a Palestine for Jews. They wished the land to be again what it was in olden times and what it had been for Jews in their prayers and in their Bible—a land of Israel. The ground must be theirs. They stood, indeed, as a people for the same programme as British statesmen were standing to-day in a larger sphere. Jews stood for reparation, restitution, and guarantees, and it was in the very application of those principles that the greatness and importance of the Declaration of the British Government stood out so luminously. England owed to Jews no reparation. Here they had liberty, full freedom, equality of right and equality of duty, and they had risen to the responsibility which had thus been placed upon them. For many of them there had their children now fighting the battles of England. But the British Government had now made itself the champion of reparation to the Jewish people for the wrongs done to them by the world. It had made itself a champion, too, of the restitution of the land to our nation for whom it is the old inheritance, and it had given them a guarantee—security of tenure, independence, right and freedom of action as a people, in their ancient land. The establishment of a Jewish Commonwealth in the land of their fathers would also consolidate and clarify the position of the rest of the Jews throughout the world. He believed that a new world was to arise in which the Jew as Jew would find himself a free man. In conclusion, he reminded them of an old legend which told that when the Temple was destroyed the stones were split into splinters and each one entered the heart of a Jew. It was this memorial of our fallen nation which the Jew carried in his bosom, and which bent his back. But they were coming together once again as a nation in Palestine, and they would take the splinters of the stones from out of their hearts—“and,” exclaimed Dr. Gaster, “I feel the stone in my heart already loosening.”

Sheikh Ismail-Abdul-al-Akki then addressed the meeting. He spoke in Arabic, which was translated by Mr. Israel Sieff, who mentioned that the speaker was under sentence of death by the Turkish Government for having joined the Arab national movement. Sheikh Ismail said he desired to tender deep gratitude to the British nation and the British Government for affording his countrymen and himself help and asylum in their hour of persecution. His country was held in chains by the Turks, who were supplied with German gold, and he looked with confidence to England and France to deliver them from bondage, as he believed in the ultimate good over evil, and was confident in the victory of the Allies. He not only spoke as an Arab, but as a “Moslem” Arab, having studied five years in theological schools and being granted a degree, and it was the duty of every Moslem to participate in the movement for the liberation of their countrymen. The meeting was to celebrate the great act of the British Government in recognizing the aspirations of the Jewish people, and he appealed to them not to forget in the days of their happiness that the sons of Ishmael suffered also. They had been scattered and confounded as the Jews had been, and now began to arise, fortified with the sense of martyrs. He hoped that Palestine would again flow with milk and honey.

M. Wadia Kesrawani, another Arabian representative, spoke in French, also to the effect that his countrymen appealed to England and France for their liberation, and applauded the Declaration of the Government.

Mr. Israel Zangwill, in supporting the resolution, said: “In my capacity of President of the Jewish Territorial Organization, I have been honoured with an invitation to appear on your platform on this momentous occasion. In that capacity I have often criticized your leaders. But to-day I am here not for criticism, but for congratulation and co-operation. I congratulate them, and especially Dr. Weizmann and Mr. Sokolow, upon their historic achievement in the region of diplomacy. To see that this is followed by a similar achievement in the more difficult region of practice is the duty of all Israel. Particularly is it the duty of the Ito, founded as it was to procure a territory upon an autonomous basis. For the Ito to oppose any really practicable plan for a Jewish territory would be not only treason to the Jewish people, but to its own programme. And as a first-fruit of the friendly negotiations with Zionism, which began in July, I am happy to be able to join with you this afternoon in welcoming the sympathy of the Government with Jewish aspirations.”

Mr. Zangwill, of whose speech the above were the opening words, spoke at great length, and with even more than his usual brilliancy. It is with great regret that we are unable, owing to lack of space, to include the rest of his oration, with the exception of the concluding paragraph, which ran as follows:⁠—

“And though our goal be yet far, yet already when I recall how our small nation sustained the mailed might of all the great Empires of antiquity, how we saw our Temple in flames and were scattered like its ashes, how we endured the long night of the Middle Ages, illumined by the glare of our martyrs’ fires, how but yesterday we wandered in our millions, torn between the ruthless Prussian and the pitiless Russian, yet have lived to see to-day the bloody Empire of the Czars dissolve, and the mountains of Zion glimmer on the horizon. Already I feel we may say to the nations: Comfort ye, comfort ye, too, poor suffering peoples. Learn from the long patience of Israel that the spirit is mightier than the sword, and that the seer who foretold his people’s resurrection was not less prophetic when he proclaimed also for all peoples the peace of Jerusalem.”

Capt. the Hon. W. Ormsby-Gore, M.P., said he was particularly glad the Zionist Declaration had been made by the British Government at a moment when British arms were saving that land, because it showed that the British Government was not out for gain. The Jewish claim to Palestine was, to his mind, overwhelming, and he rejoiced to see what an overwhelming mass of British representative opinions in the House of Commons was now supporting the movement. He supported it as a member of the Church of England, as Sir Mark Sykes had supported it as a Roman Catholic. In the return of Palestine to be the Jewish home, he held out the hand of friendship to the Zionists, who sought to bring it into effect. He felt that behind it all was the finger of Almighty God. From the moment he met their Zionist leaders, whether in Egypt or in this country, he felt there was in them something so sincere, so British, so straightforward, that at once his heart went out to them. They had in their leader in this country a man of great qualities, a statesman who had shown a skill, a determination, and a patience which had endeared him to everyone. He (the speaker) had done what little he could to help forward the movement, and in the future, if they were looking out for a friend, they could count him as one of them.

Mr. H. N. Mostditchian, a member of the Armenian delegation, said he availed himself of the opportunity of giving their Jewish brethren the heartiest greetings of the Armenians and sincerest congratulations for the dawn about to break upon the glad valleys of their ancestral land. He made a comparison of the two nations, who had gone through the same persecutions, but who notwithstanding were not willing to die, and had not died, and who stood to-day hand-in-hand on the eve of a new era, when both of them would be able to live once more their national lives, of which they had given good evidence in the past. They all knew that Armenia was one of the first countries mentioned in the History of the Jews, and there had reigned one thousand two hundred years ago a Dynasty of Armenian Kings who had in their veins a good deal of Jewish blood. After the loss of their independence the Jews had continued to live a life of captivity and exile, and the Armenians, after the loss of their independence, had suffered the same exile. It was not the time to say what the Armenians had suffered during the last three years, a state of things to which the worst pogrom was a heaven, but they, as well as the Jews, looked towards ‘to-morrow’ with great fervour as a result of the Declaration. They had waited long enough with their Jewish brethren, for centuries and centuries, and these two nations, as well as the Arabs, would make Palestine another promised land and a garden of Eden—a centre to which humanity might look up.

The author then proceeded to read a statement in behalf of the Executive of the Zionist Organization. The text of that statement is given later.

Mr. James de Rothschild said he stood there as the son of one who had spent his life in endeavouring to bring about what they were celebrating that day. Jewish ideals up to that time had been met at the gate, but they could not get through. With one stroke of the pen the English Government had flung open these gates. Therefore in every Jewish heart gratitude was overflowing, and they must not forget that all their aims of the future had been strengthened by the country whose Government had framed the generous and just Declaration.

Dr. Ch. Weizmann, President of the English Zionist Federation, referred to the many good and brilliant words which had been said about the Jews, and he hoped that the Jews of to-day and the Jews of to-morrow would rise to the occasion in the needed power and dignity, and give their answer to the great resolution, not only in words, but in deeds. It was a fact, and no metaphor, that twenty centuries looked to see if their actions were worthy of the opportunity which the British Government had given them. The present generation had upon its shoulders the greatest responsibility of the last two thousand years, and he prayed that they might be worthy of that responsibility.

He then called upon the meeting to rise, and with hands uplifted to take the old historic oath—each man and woman of them—

אם־אשכחך ירושלם תשכח ימיני.¹

The meeting rose en masse, repeating the words of the psalm amid great enthusiasm, which culminated in the singing of “Hatikvah” (the Jewish national song) and “God Save the King” by the Precentors’ Association.

Lord Rothschild, in rising to put the resolution, said it was a great honour for all of them to feel that they as Jews had met with a sincere welcome that day from representatives of no fewer than five different religions. He then read the resolution, which was carried with acclamation, the whole audience rising.

Among those who sent messages to the meeting were the following:⁠—

From the Right Hon. Viscount Grey of Falloden, K.G.⁠¹

I am in entire sympathy with the Declaration made by Mr. Balfour, and am very glad that this has been announced publicly as the view of the British Government.

From the Right Hon. Walter Long, M.P.⁠¹

Mr. Long desires me to thank you for your letter of the 14th ult., and to say that he wishes all success to the Zionist movement.

From the Right Hon. Arthur Henderson, M.P.⁠¹

Labour recognizes the claims generally of Jews in all countries to the elementary rights of tolerance, freedom of residence and trade, and equal citizenship, that ought to be extended to all the inhabitants of every nation’s territory. Further, it trusts that an understanding may be reached at the close of the war, whereby Palestine may be set free and form a State under an International Agreement, to which Jewish people may return and work out their own salvation without interference by those of alien race or religion.

From the Right Hon. the Marquess of Crewe, K.G.⁠¹

I have long hoped that it would be possible to make such a Declaration; and it is now pronounced in terms that should be equally welcome to those Jews who have found happy homes on friendly shores, and to those who have longed for the re-establishment of their race in the ancient land. Within its borders even now triumphs are being won, and noble lives laid down, for the common cause of which this hope forms part.

From the Right Hon. Viscount Bryce.⁠¹

For years past, and especially since my visit to Palestine in 1914, I have been in cordial sympathy with the movement for re-establishing the Jewish population in its ancient home, and rejoice to see that His Majesty’s Government have recently expressed their approval of the idea, which will, I hope, take practical shape in measures to be put through after the war is over. It will be a great benefit to the Jewish race everywhere to have this ancient home to look to as the centre of its national life, even though a comparatively small part of the race can actually find room to dwell in Palestine. The country seems to have been recently terribly devastated, but when its resources have been developed, it can support a much larger population than it has under the blighting rule of the Turk. Syrians, Arabs and Armenians are also interested in being delivered for ever from the alien domination of the Turkish invaders.

From the Right Hon. the Earl of Selborne, K.G., G.C.M.G.⁠¹

I warmly and altogether adhere to the policy of His Majesty’s Government, in sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations as announced by Mr. Arthur Balfour.

From the late John Edward Redmond, M.P.⁠¹

I am in complete sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations as I understand them.

From the Right Hon. Lord Balfour of Burleigh, K.T., G.C.M.G., G.C.V.O.⁠¹

I am in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, and sincerely trust the policy will be successfully carried out.

From the Right Hon. John Hodge, M.P.⁠¹

I fully sympathize with the view expressed in Mr. Balfour’s letter to Lord Rothschild, and further, may I express the hope that the end of the war may speedily see the realization of the Zionist dream.

From Lord Hugh Cecil, M.P.

... I very cordially sympathize with the purpose of it, and heartily rejoice that there is good prospect of securing to the Jewish people a National Home in their own country.

From Lord Sydenham of Combe, G.C.M.G., G.C.I.E., G.C.S.I.⁠¹

... I am in fullest sympathy with the object, and I am glad to know that Palestine may again become the National Home of the Jewish people. This would be one of the many happy results which, we may hope, will arise from the appalling sacrifices and the abiding sorrow which the war has brought upon the world.

From the Right Hon. Lord Emmott, G.C.M.G.⁠¹

... The movement for the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people is one which has my most cordial sympathy, and I sincerely hope that your demonstration may be a success.

From the Right Hon. Lord Tennyson, G.C.M.G.⁠¹

... It seems to me that the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people would make for the peace of the world. This Jewish State should be, as George Eliot finely says, “a republic where the Jewish spirit manifests itself in a new order founded on the old.”

From the Rt. Rev. James Cooper, D.D., Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

The Church of Scotland cordially endorses the Declaration of the Cabinet in favour alike of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, and of the maintenance of the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in a land so dear to Christians and Jews, rejoices in the prospect of this double honour being given to Great Britain, and prays that it may usher in a day of the richest blessings to the whole Israel of God.

From His Excellency Boghos Nubar Pasha, President of the Armenian National Delegation.

On the occasion of the Zionist meeting, organized by your Committee, I am happy, as President of the Armenian National Delegation, to renew the sincere congratulations of the Armenians for the Declaration which His Britannic Majesty’s Government has made to you. We participate in a great measure in the joy which the powerful support gives you which permits us to hope that in the day of victory of those who are fighting for the liberation of oppressed peoples, the Armenian aspirations will be realized at the same time as the Jewish people will attain the reconstruction of its nationality and the realization of its historic claim to the soil of its ancestors.

The Jewish Chronicle gave a list of several hundred Jewish institutions in England which sent congratulatory messages to the meeting, as well as of an immense number of such institutions which were represented at the meeting in person.

An overflow meeting, over which Mr. P. Horowitz presided, was held in the Kingsway Theatre, which was crowded in every part. Among those who addressed the audience were the Chief Rabbi: Lord Lamington, G.C.M.G., G.C.I.E., Mr. Israel Zangwill, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Dr. Selig Brodetsky, Dr. David Jochelmann, and Mr. Israel Cohen.

In the course of his observations, Lord Lamington, who was very cordially received, expressed his pleasure at the opportunity afforded him to express his sympathy with and support of the Zionist movement. He cordially agreed with the statement made by Lord Robert Cecil at the Opera House, that the Declaration represented the first act of constructive statesmanship which the allied nations had so far carried out on the basis of the great principles of freedom and justice for the smaller nationalities, for which they stood. The Declaration was as much in the British interest as in the Jewish interest. Both races, as well as the East in general, stood to gain, and gain substantially, from an active British and Jewish co-operation in the Near East.

A resolution in identical terms with that carried at the London Opera House was passed with much enthusiasm.

The Author’s statement ran as follows:⁠—

The Zionist Organization in the Entente countries which I have the honour of representing is filled with feelings of the deepest and keenest satisfaction caused by the Declaration of His Majesty’s Government of November 2nd. The Zionist masses are grateful to His Majesty’s Government for their official and formal statement of their intentions in clear and unmistakable terms. Posterity will praise the qualities which are revealed by this historic document; the strength of will, the sentiment of uprightness, the unshakable fidelity to the spirit of Justice, and the beneficent and generous sympathy for the oppressed.

But the feeling of joy evoked by the Declaration is much more than the legitimate satisfaction aroused by the successful result of our representations to the British Government. Quite apart from and above all written conventions, we realize that the Declaration symbolizes that harmonious union of spiritual ideals and political considerations which have made and will make of the Zionist Movement a precious instrument working for civilization and for the brotherhood and emancipation of all oppressed peoples and for their final deliverance from the sad heritage of age-long hatreds and misunderstandings, which have dismembered them and subjected them to the forces of oppression.

Three problems confront the world at this hour: the problem of nationality, the problem of territory, and the problem of liberty. Nationalities are being reconstituted; peoples are seeking one another, joining together, or separating from one another; territories are being redistributed; the spirit of freedom is spreading, seeking incarnation in new forms, and giving a new lease of life to ancient peoples. Everywhere is instability, ferment, movement; from all sides are heard complaints, demands, claims; all things are being recast in new moulds; everywhere new groupings are forming round new interests. The world is fighting for the untrammelled self-expression of nations and races, for an unaggressive international order; the hundreds or thousands of years’ old aspirations, purposes, and aims of nations have become the demands of the moment and the programmes for the future. He only would be certain of harvesting nothing who had not sown during the present world storm. In this noise, in this welter, in this struggle, ancient Judea awakes, claiming her right to live again. This right is inalienable and unalterable. All the force of the indestructible Jewish race is in it. All the sadness of the two thousand years of Jewish martyrdom is in it. Is this right to be denied because of its being so old? Humanity, real humanity, will not extinguish old rights. It has not extinguished it in the case of Greece; neither will it extinguish it in the case of Judea.

History has demonstrated that a nation deprived of its heritage and liberty, which is determined to live and regain her lost country, no matter how long she suffers, cannot be exterminated by any conceivable means employed by her persecutors. And the Jewish people is determined to live and to work for all that is good and ennobling, believing firmly that justice would be but a word of mockery if the sun of liberty could not shine over it again.

In the midst of universal war, amid grief and desolation which go beyond the most tragic imaginings, Great Britain has proclaimed the idea of creating a centre of the arts of peace, and a model of justice. The idea is not only extremely practical, it is profoundly poetical. We are living in the most critical time in history. It is our fate to be spectators of and actors in the greatest drama ever known to humanity. The present war will take its place in history as one of the events which irrevocably divide two epochs. The Jewish people is fortunate in being able to consider itself one of the models which have inspired the noble initiative of Great Britain and her Allies. It is still more fortunate in having been found worthy of the generous protection of His Majesty’s Government, manifested in so striking a manner by the recent Declaration. And what glory awaits, on the other hand, Great Britain and her Allies, if they will be instrumental in the creation of a Jewish National Home in Palestine!

What is it that we wish to preserve in our National Home? Our own precious heritage. You all know it. The sacred Jewish home-life, the intimately personal sentiment of our qualities and of our inner freedom. That is our heritage which we have been able to preserve intact during the eighteen centuries of our Dispersion, untouched by the ambition and hatred which sought to undermine them. We wish to live and to live by our labour and untiring efforts. We want to be invigorated by that force which the children of the soil absorb from contact with it. We want to give form and visibility to our mental conceptions. We desire to perform Israel’s allotted part in the purpose of the eternal progress of humanity in all branches of life, in all human activities. The Jewish National Home will stand out in the world as an inspiring symbol of the triumph of justice over tyranny, as a proof of the right of nationality to be itself. It will be a priceless monument to the future at a time when ruins of the past are everywhere, and the whole world stands in need of rebuilding.

Our object in establishing the Jewish National Home on the sacred soil of our fathers is to carry on the noblest traditions of our race in all their beauty and plenitude. Judea it was which revealed to humanity the path of progress, it was Judea which taught the greatest and noblest lessons in the life of nations—the lessons of Freedom and Right—and it is Judea which will become a centre of liberty and a blessing for the nations. Palestine is not to be weighed down by military powers. She is a home for a small and free nation, and not for a troop of subjects. The glory of invaders is to be conquered by humanity. The glory of tyrants is to yield to civilization. The glory of the land of shadows is to receive the lamp of light. The cloud passed and the star reappeared. And this star is not one of wrath. Nor is it one of hatred, or fanaticism. Christendom has its great sanctuaries in Palestine. Islam has there some of its important sanctuaries. All our glorious holy places are there. They will be respected and safeguarded with reverence and devotion, in peace and mutual love. But around the places of worship life will spring—honest, simple, pure life. We are a peaceful people. We are going to cultivate the soil; we are going to cultivate our ideas. Our future is the ploughshare, and not the sword; the book, and not the bullet. The beneficent spiritual influence of a regenerated Palestine is undoubted; its future, which is boundless, belongs to you; each of you already possesses a portion within himself. Let us but work together so that our people may preserve and improve its title to be considered the conscience of the human race.

We realize, however, that our position needs to be clearly defined. We must be fully conversant with every side of the problem. Vague complaints or expressions of yearning are not enough. There is, first of all, the problem of Emancipation. We have been accused of endangering by our aspirations towards a National Home the position of the Jews in the various countries of the world. We have racked our brains in trying to discover how the establishment of a National Home in Palestine could possibly harm the emancipation of Jews in the world. We have failed to solve this mystery. The British Government in their Declaration have put to flight this fear, which is a pure figment of the imagination without foundation in theory or fact. It would undoubtedly be a great elevation of the Jewish character in the eyes of the world at large, could the Jews prove themselves capable of conducting a Commonwealth harmoniously and successfully; and we are sure they will be able to do so. This is our belief, our ambition, our Jewish optimism. It is because we believe in Israel’s genius that we are Zionists. This will help emancipation. The Jews of the various countries who do not wish to participate actively in the work, who do not desire to take advantage of the right to settle in Palestine, can remain where they are at the present time. We are not emigration agents. We are apostles of a historic ideal, and we want the Jewish people to help in its realization.

It would be a crime at a stage of Jewish history like the present to paralyse by internal dissension a movement which may be productive of so much good. This should not be. Unity of Judaism before all, above all! The majority will support the efforts of their fellow-Jews with great enthusiasm for Judaism, and those who refuse to take any part (a type which is doomed to disappear, like the mammoth, from the face of the earth) must keep the peace. The least we can demand of them is not to disturb us or hinder us in our efforts. Where is the Jew who could neglect this duty which is inspired no less by reason and well-understood interest than by conscience and honour? Where is the Jew who would fail to offer the tribute of his humble share of effort, of help, and of faith to the old land of Israel, now so downtrodden, but all the greater and more beautiful, as its sufferings and trials—so heroically endured—are approaching their end and leading to its renascence which, far from being a mere satisfaction of national egoism, is an exaltation of the noblest Jewish and human ideal?

The attempt has also been made to put forward the non-Jewish population of Palestine and the neighbouring countries as an obstacle in our way. The breath of intriguers tends to poison every noble aspiration; they seek to create among us also a spirit of dissension, a spirit of destruction. We are firmly resolved to refuse them this satisfaction. In vain do they raise this kind of bogey. The deep sense of the realities before us guards us from any error of this kind. We have work to do which will prevent our interests from clashing with those of the Arabs. Are we, then, anti-Semitic?

The relations between the Jews and the Arabs have hitherto been scanty and spasmodic, largely owing to mutual ignorance and indifference. There were no relations whatever between the two nations as such because the oppressive bureaucracy did not recognize either of them, and whenever points of connection began to develop they were destroyed by intrigue to the detriment of both nationalities.

We believe that the present hour of crisis and the opening of a large perspective for epoch-making developments offers a fruitful opportunity for a broad basis of permanent, cordial relations between the peoples who are inspired by a common purpose. We mean a real entente cordiale between the Jews, the Arabs, and the Armenians. Such entente cordiale has already been accepted in principle by leading representatives of these three nations. From such a beginning we look forward with confidence to a future of intellectual, social, and economic co-operation. We are one with the Arabs and Armenians to-day in the determination to secure for each of us the free choice of their own destinies. We look with fraternal love at the creation of an Arab kingdom re-establishing the ancient Semitic nationality in its glory and freedom, and our heartfelt wishes go out to the noble, hardly-tried Armenian nationality for the realization of their national hopes in their old Armenia.

Our roots were united in the past, our destinies will be bound together in the future.

This is our declaration to our future neighbours. And now, one more word to our brethren. We Jews, we who hoped for a better future, an era in which moral rights would count, what were we before the present situation? Dreamers and madmen. Material power believed itself unconquerable. It produced an atmosphere of indifference in which all hope seemed Utopian. We slept in the general decadence. Now we arise, endowed with an unconquerable moral force by the Declaration of His Majesty’s Government. Our first and immortal leader, Theodor Herzl, insisted, many years ago, in having the institutions of Zionism established in this great, blessed country, for which every Jew has a warm corner in his heart. Was he a statesman or a prophet? I think he was both a statesman and a prophet. There is an old Talmudical saying:⁠—

הניחו להן לישראל אם אין נביאים הן בני נביאים הן׃
פסחים סו׃⁠¹

Twenty years ago 220 Jews from all the countries of the world met at the First Zionist Congress at Basle. They possessed, though everything else was wanting, that wonderful power of improvising things. And such was the power of right these 220 men, having nothing to support them but the goodness of their cause, made headway against millions of opponents among their people. During the long duration of the struggle, a struggle without truce, where all the strength and rage was on one side and all the right on the other, not a single section of those 220 men failed to respond to the call of duty, and, although divided in their views, not one section drew back from the fundamental national idea, not one gave way. They increased in numbers and they increased in activity. Let me, at this solemn hour, render honour to those men, to that insulted, calumniated and misunderstood Zionist Organization which always stepped gallantly into the breach, which never took rest for a single day, and which defended Zionism even when abandoned and momentarily hopeless, and that not only with tongue and brains, but also with heavy sacrifices. Thanks to them we exist, and thanks to the progress we made here new life and new energy will enter not only into our Zionist Organization, but into the whole Jewish people. Mr. Balfour has sent the Declaration to Lord Rothschild for the Zionist Organization. We received and accepted it joyfully; but, I am afraid—or I am rather glad—that we shall have to re-address it to the Jewish people, and I hope they will receive and accept it as joyfully as ourselves, the Zionists. This is perhaps the greatest achievement of the British Government that before having given us Palestine they already gave us something which is very precious and very necessary—Jewish unity. History will record that Mr. Balfour was the greatest peace-maker among the Jewish people, greater than many Rabbis and Conjoint Committees.

We were divided, distracted; and now we are indissolubly united, all one band of brothers in arms for Liberty! I welcome the representatives of the Jewish Territorial Organization, with their famous leader, Israel Zangwill. I welcome the oldest Jewish organization of this country, the Board of Deputies, and all other organizations which are represented at this meeting. The opponents of yesterday are our allies of to-day, and the opponents of to-day will be our allies of to-morrow, if they will read the signs of the time. Much is still to be done in this direction, but much has already been done. Yes; this is the miracle which has brought about our spiritual rebirth.

What does this mean if not that wrong has always feet of clay: that right, truth and liberty are from this time forward the true paths of the earth, the only ways which no physical force will ever dishonour?

Friends, brothers, our new society makes of you new men. This is a day of alliance and of reconciliation. Old words—Virtue, Love, Liberty—which had lost their brightness by long disuse have regained their lustre as on the day when they were first engraved on the heart of man. Awake from the long night. It is a new dawn which arises. The Jewish people which has endured, and will still endure, with great firmness of heart the heaviest sacrifices, rising to the heights of the great arguments of this War of Nationalities, affirms that it is ready and determined to work with all its power and full loyalty for Governments and peoples until the realization of its destiny. May this destiny be one in which Liberty will triumph—one from which man and humanity, the individual and the Nation, will derive benefit, one bringing to the Jewish people as to every oppressed people the possibility of living and of realizing its ideal. It is in this spirit that the Zionist Organisation recommends to you the resolution.

On the 14th of December the Zionist representatives, Lord Rothschild, Mr. James de Rothschild, Dr. E. W. Tschlenow, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, and the Author, were received by the War Cabinet. They offered to the British Government the gratitude of the Jewish people for the Declaration of the 2nd November and at the same time expressed their congratulations on the occasion of the capture of Jerusalem. Mr. Bonar Law, who replied to the deputation on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, thanked them for the kind sentiments they had expressed.

The following Manifesto was issued shortly after the British Declaration:⁠—

### To the Jewish People.

The 17th of Marcheshvan, 5678 (2nd November, 1917), is an important milestone on the road to our national future; it marks the end of an epoch, and it opens out the beginning of a new era. The Jewish people has but one other such day in its annals: the 28th August, 1897, the birthday of the New Zionist Organization at the first Basle Congress. But the analogy is incomplete, because the period which then began was Expectation, whereas the period which now begins is Fulfilment.

From then till now, for over twenty years, the Jewish people has been trying to find itself, to achieve a national resurrection. The advance-guard was the organized Zionist party, which in 1897 by its programme demanded a home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured by public law. A great deal was written, spoken, and done to get this demand recognized. The work was carried out by the Zionist Organization on a much greater scale and in a more systematic manner than had been possible for the Chovevé Zion, the first heralds of the national ideal, who had tried to give practical shape to the yearning which had burnt like a light in the Jewish spirit during two thousand years of exile and had flamed out at various periods in various forms. The Chovevé Zion had the greatest share in the practical colonization. The Zionist movement wrestled with its opponents and with itself. It collected means outside Palestine, and laboured with all its strength in Palestine. It founded institutions of all kinds for colonization in Palestine. That was a preface, full of hope and faith, full of experiments and illusions, inspired by a sacred and elevating ideal, and productive of many valuable and enduring results.

The time has come to cast the balance of the account. That chapter of propaganda and experiments is complete, and the glory of immortality rests upon it. But we must go further. To look back is the function of the historian; life looks forwards.

The turning-point is the Declaration of the British Government that they “view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object.”

The progress which our idea has made is so colossal and so obvious that it is scarcely necessary to describe it in words. None the less, a few words must be addressed to the Jewish people, not so much by way of explanation, as to demand the new and greater efforts which are imperative.

The outstanding feature of the Declaration is, that what has been a beautiful ideal—and according to our opponents an empty dream—has now been given the possibility of becoming a reality. The aspirations of 1897 now find solid ground in the British Government’s official Declaration of the 2nd November, 1917. That in itself is a gigantic step forward. The world’s history, and particularly Jewish history, will not fail to inscribe in golden letters upon its bronze tablets that Great Britain, the shield of civilization, the country which is pre-eminent in colonization, the school of constitutionalism and freedom, has given us an official promise of support and help in the realization of our ideal of liberty in Palestine. And Great Britain will certainly carry with her the whole political world.

The Declaration of His Majesty’s Government coincides with the triumphant march of the British Army in Palestine. The flag of Great Britain waves over Jerusalem and all Judea. It is at such a moment, while the army of Great Britain is taking possession of Palestine, that Mr. Balfour assures us that Great Britain will help us in the establishment of a National Home in Palestine. This is the beginning of the fulfilment.

To appreciate and to understand accurately is the first essential, but it is not all. It is necessary to go further, to determine what is the next step. This must be set forth in plain words.

The Declaration puts in the hands of the Jewish people the key to a new freedom and happiness. All depends on you, the Jewish people, and on you only. The Declaration is the threshold, from which you can place your foot upon holy ground. After eighteen hundred years of suffering your recompense is offered to you. You can come to your haven and your heritage, you can show that the noble blood of our race is still fresh in your veins. But to do that you must begin work anew, with new power and with new means—the ideas and the phrases and the methods of the first period no longer suffice. That would be an anachronism. We need new conceptions, new words, new acts. The methods of the period of realization cannot be the methods of the time of expectation.

In the first place, the whole Jewish people must now unite. Now that fulfilment is displacing expectation, that which was potential in the will of the Jewish people must become actual and reveal itself in strenuous labour. The whole Jewish people must come into the Zionist Organization.

Secondly, a word to our brothers in Palestine. The moment has come to lay the foundations of a national home. You are now under the protection of the British military authorities, who will guard your lives, your property, your freedom. Be worthy of that protection, and begin immediately to build the Jewish National Home upon sound foundations, thoroughly Hebrew, thoroughly national, thoroughly free and democratic. The beginning may decide all that follows.

Thirdly, our loyal acknowledgment of the support of Great Britain must be spontaneous and unmeasured. But it must be the acknowledgment of free men to a country which breeds and loves free men. We must show that what Great Britain has given us through her generosity, is ours by virtue of our intelligence, skill, and courage.

Fourthly, we must have ample means. The means of yesterday are ridiculously small compared with the needs of to-day. Propaganda, the study of practical problems, expeditions, the founding of new offices and commissions, negotiations, preparations for settlement, relief and reconstruction in Palestine—for all these, and other indispensable tasks, colossal material means are necessary, and necessary forthwith. Small and great, poor and rich, must rise to answer the call of this hour with the necessary personal sacrifice.

Fifthly, we need discipline and unity. This is no time for hair-splitting controversy. It is a time for action. We ask for confidence. Be united and tenacious, be quick but not impatient, be free men, but well-disciplined, firm as steel. From now onwards every gathering of Jews must have a practical aim, every speech must deal with a project, every thought must be a brick with which to build the National Home.

These are the directions for your work to-day.

Worn and weary through your two thousand years of wandering over desert and ocean, driven by every storm and carried on every wave, outcasts and refugees, you may now pass from the misery of exile to a secure home; a home where the Jewish spirit and the old Hebrew genius, which so long have hovered broken-winged over strange nests, can also find healing and be quickened into new life.

M. Sokolow.
E. W. Tschlenow.
Ch. Weizmann.

### DECLARATIONS OF THE ENTENTE GOVERNMENTS

After this most important achievement which is considered as the foundation-stone of future policy in and regarding Palestine, it was found necessary to come into closer political relations with the other Entente countries, in the light of the new situation created by the British Declaration.

Negotiations were carried on with the proper authorities in the French and Italian Governments: the negotiations were crowned with success, and the official endorsements by France and Italy of the British Declaration were communicated to the world in the following official documents:⁠—

The following is the text of the French Government’s Declaration communicated in a letter to the author:⁠—

République française.

Ministère des Affaires Étrangères:

Direction des Affaires Politiques et Commerciales.

Paris, le 14me février, 1918.

Monsieur,

Comme il a été convenu au cours de notre entretien le Samedi 9 de ce mois, le Gouvernement de la République, en vue de préciser son attitude vis-à-vis des aspirations sionistes, tendant à créer pour les juifs en Palestine un foyer national, a publié un communiqué dans la presse.

En vous communiquant ce texte, je saisis avec empressement l’occasion de vous féliciter du généreux dévouement avec lequel vous poursuiviez la réalisation des vœux de vos co-religionnaires, et de vous remercier du zèle que vous apportez à leur faire connaître les sentiments de sympathie que leurs efforts éveillent dans les pays de l’entente et notamment en France.

Veuillez agréer, Monsieur, l’assurance de ma consideration.

(Signed) Pichon.

M. Sokolow,

Hôtel Meurice, Paris.

Le Communiqué.

Monsieur Sokolow, représentant des Organisations Sionistes, a été reçu ce matin au Ministère des Affaires Etrangères par Monsieur Stéphen Pichon, qui a été heureux de lui confirmer que l’Entente est complète entre les Gouvernements français et britannique en ce qui concerne la question d’un établissement juif en Palestine.

[Translation.]

République française.

Ministère des Affaires Étrangères:

Direction des Affaires Politiques et Commerciales.

Paris, 14th February, 1918.

Sir,

As arranged at our meeting on Saturday, the 9th of this month, the Government of the Republic, so as to make definite its views on the subject of Zionist aspirations with regard to the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine, has sent a communication to the Press.

In sending you this text, I wish to take the opportunity of congratulating you on the splendid devotion with which you are furthering the aspirations of your co-religionists, and of thanking you for the way in which you have made known to them the sympathy with which all the countries of the Entente, and especially France, are watching their efforts.

Please accept assurances of my most cordial sympathy.

(Signed) Pichon.

M. Sokolow,

Hôtel Meurice, Paris.

Mr. Sokolow, representing the Zionist Organizations, was this morning received by Mons. Pichon, Minister for Foreign Affairs, who was happy to inform him that there is complete agreement between the French and British Governments in all matters which concern the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine.

The following is the Declaration which was made by the Italian Government to myself as representative of the Zionist Organization, through the Italian Ambassador in London:⁠—

Londra,

li 9 Maggio, 1918.

Pregiatissimo Signore,

D’ordine di Sua Eccellenza il Barone Sonnino, Ministro per gli Affari Estri del Re, ho l’onore d’informarla che, in relazione alle domande che gli sono state rivolti, il Governo di Sua Maestà è lieto di confermare le precedenti dichiarazioni già fatte a mezzo dei suoi rappresentanti a Washington, l’Aja e Salonicco, di essere cioè disposto ad adoperarsi con piacere per facilitare lo stabilirsi in Palestina di un centro nazionale ebraico, nell’intesa pero che non ne venga nessun pregiudizio allo stato giuridico e politico delle già esistenti comunita’ religiose ed ai diritti civili e politici che gl’ Israeliti già godono in ogni altro paese.

Gradisca, Pregiatissimo Signore, gli atti della mia Distintissima considerazione.

(Signed) Imperiali.

Signor Nahum Sokolow,

35‒38 Empire House,

175 Piccadilly, W. 1.

[Translation.]

Italian Embassy, London,

9th May, 1918.

My dear Sir,

On the instructions of His Excellency, Baron Sonnino, His Majesty’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, I have the honour to inform you that with reference to your representations His Majesty’s Government are pleased to confirm the Declaration already made through their representatives in Washington, The Hague, and Salonica, to the effect that they will use their best endeavours to facilitate the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish National Centre, it being understood that this shall not prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the legal or political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

Pray accept, my dear sir, the assurance of my distinguished consideration.

(Signed) Imperiali.

M. Nahum Sokolow,

175 Piccadilly, W. 1.

In ♦President Wilson’s address to Congress of January 8th, 1918, a speech commonly regarded as a complete statement of the objects for which the Allied Powers were fighting, the twelfth of the articles in the programme of the world’s peace was stated thus:⁠—

“The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.”

This statement was regarded by Zionists as signifying the sympathetic attitude of the American Government, and especially of its President, to the Zionist movement. President Wilson is regarded as the spokesman of the Entente principles, and it is well known to Zionists that his attitude is favourable to the realization of Zionist aims, because the latter are in complete harmony with the principle of justice to small nationalities, of which President Wilson is the clearest and most outspoken exponent. His address makes no specific reference to the Jewish question or to Palestine, but his intention is perfectly clear.

In August, 1918, President Wilson wrote the following letter:⁠—

“I have watched with deep and sincere interest the reconstructive work which the Weizmann Commission has done in Palestine at the instance of the British Government, and I welcome an opportunity to express the satisfaction I have felt in the progress of the Zionist Movement in the United States and in the Allied countries since the Declaration by Mr. Balfour on behalf of the British Government of Great Britain’s approval of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, and his promise that the British Government would use its best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of that object, with the understanding that nothing would be done to prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish people in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in other countries. I think that all Americans will be deeply moved by the report that even in this time of stress the Weizmann Commission has been able to lay the foundation of the Hebrew University at Jerusalem with the promise that that bears of spiritual rebirth.”

Dover Street Studios

President
Thomas Woodrow Wilson

Public opinion in America regarded this letter as a precious document embodying full American support of the Zionist aims, in harmony with the British Declaration.

Many opportunities have been taken by British statesmen to refer to the British Declaration in terms which show that they attach the very greatest value to it. Thus, the Rt. Hon. George N. Barnes said, in a speech delivered on the 14th of July, a full extract of which appears below:⁠—

“The British Government proclaimed its policy of Zionism because it believed that Zionism was identified with the policy and aims for which good men and women are struggling everywhere. That policy is the policy of the Allies in the war. It is the policy to which we are pledged; it is the policy which we believe accords with the wishes of vast numbers of the Jewish people, many of whom have cast wistful eyes to Palestine as again destined to be their national home.”

Lord Robert Cecil, in regretting his inability to be present at the meeting held on July 14th to welcome the American Zionist Medical Unit, wrote:⁠—

“The Zionist movement represents a great ideal which may have incalculable consequences for the future welfare of the world.”

The Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour, in his address to a deputation of the Medical Unit (given in full further on), said:⁠—

“The destruction of Judea that occurred nineteen centuries ago is one of the great wrongs which the Allied Powers are trying to redress.”

Mr. Lloyd George wrote to the Author, on the 29th of June, in connection with the Government declaration safeguarding the rights of the Roumanian Jews:⁠—

Dear Sir,

I am desired by the Prime Minister to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 21st inst., and the enclosure. Mr. Lloyd George wishes me to thank you for what you say in regard to the friendship which exists between this country and the Jewish people, of which there has lately been such abundant evidence, and to reiterate the hope that the triumph of the Allies’ cause will make possible the realization of your people’s aim to establish for themselves once again a national home in Palestine.

Yours faithfully,

(Signed) F. L. Stevenson.

N. Sokolow, Esq.

On Wednesday, September 11th, the Prime Minister, Mr. Lloyd George, visited Manchester for the purpose of receiving the freedom of that city and of other towns. The Zionists took the opportunity of presenting to him the following address:⁠—

“The undersigned representatives of the Jewish Community of Manchester, headed by our distinguished Zionist leader, Mr. Nahum Sokolow, gladly avail ourselves of the opportunity of your visit to Manchester to place on record the gratitude which the Jewish people feels for the interest shown by the Government, of which you are the head, in the fulfilment of Jewish national aspirations.

“We are confident that the Government’s historic declaration of 2nd November, 1917, expresses not only its own considered policy at the present time, but the permanent attitude of the British nation to our people. We look forward to the early fruition of the hopes which we build on that declaration, and we know that in the brighter days of peace the restored and revived Hebrew nation will show in practical form its regard for Great Britain and for the British tradition of help and justice to small nations. For the sake of the Jewish nation and of the cause of the free peoples throughout the world, struggling to escape from the pitiless desire for conquest of the German people, who have been intoxicated with the belief that their army can override all obstacles and all rights, we trust that Great Britain and her Allies will, at an early date, see the downfall of the German power as an indispensable preliminary to the commencement of the new era of peace and justice, foretold by our national prophets and seers in that great Jewish Bible which has become part of the patrimony of the peoples of this great Empire.

“We venture to think that among the many triumphs which it will be your privilege to recall in after days you will remember, with, perhaps, a unique pride and pleasure, that it was under the guidance of your statesmanship that Great Britain extended its right hand in friendship to the Jewish people to help it to regain its ancient national home and to realize its age-long aspirations.”

The Zionists’ address was signed by Mr. E. H. Langdon, the Rabbi Dr. Berendt Salomon, Mr. Nathan Laski, J.P., Mr. S. J. Cohen, Councillor S. Finburgh, Mr. L. Friedson, Captain Dulberg, and Mr. Simon Marks.

Vandyke, photo.

Rᵗ. Hon. David Lloyd George

Mr. Lloyd George gave the following reply:⁠—

“It is with feelings of the greatest satisfaction that I accept the address which you have done me the privilege of presenting to me. The aspirations which you share with multitudes of your race scattered throughout the world found a natural response in the minds of those responsible for the government of this country, because they are in permanent accord with the sentiments of the people of Great Britain. I have to-day had the honour of receiving addresses from the representatives of three elements most intimately concerned in the establishment of a rule of order and justice in an area which has hitherto been the prey of tyranny and outrage. The fulfilment of the historic hopes and aspirations to which you refer in your address is, I believe, an essential corollary to the necessary enfranchisement of the oppressed peoples of the Near East.”

Considerable interest was taken everywhere in the evidences of the effect produced in America by the political success of the Zionist movement. The Zionists of America, unable to participate in many of the Zionist activities of the day, owing to the fact that America was not at war with Turkey, conceived the idea of helping in the reconstruction and extension of the Jewish colonies after they were relieved from disasters due to the war, by sending a Medical Unit to the Holy Land.

The Unit was organized by and at the expense of American Zionists, the principal promoters being a group of women Zionists who are banded together under the name of the Hadassah. It consisted of about forty-five persons—doctors, nurses, mechanics, chemists, specialists, secretaries, dentists, a social expert, an administrator, and a representative of the Hadassah. The Provisional Executive Committee for General Zionist Affairs in America voted a sum of fifty thousand pounds from their Palestine Restoration Fund for its equipment. The plans in Palestine will necessarily depend upon the conditions prevailing in that country at the time of the arrival of the Unit, but the present intention is to set up a central hospital of one hundred beds in Jerusalem, a branch hospital in Jaffa, as well as dispensaries and a nursing school, and several travelling hospitals, which will be equipped for service in the colonies and wherever needed and will be supplied from permanent dispensaries in the large cities. A hospital in Jerusalem, originally owned by a German society, the L’maan Zion, was handed over to this Unit, as well as the Shaare Zedek Hospital. In connexion with the equipment of these “Red Cross” ambulances for the relief of civilians, the Hadassah collected quantities of clothes, bed-linen and towels, as well as medical stores for the use of the destitute of Palestine. Eighty-six cases, containing twenty-four thousand garments, one thousand pairs of boots, thirteen thousand men’s socks, and two tons of soap, have been sent out. Mrs. Mary Fels contributed largely to this stock.

The Unit is under the general control of Mr. Lewin Epstein, Treasurer of the American Zionist Organization.

On its way to Palestine the Unit passed through London, where it was welcomed by a great meeting at the London Opera House, on July 14th. The Right Hon. George N. Barnes, a member of the War Cabinet, in a speech then delivered, said:⁠—

“Palestine has for three hundred years been under the tyranny of Ottoman oppression, and I take it that it is now ready for the word of the teacher, and the knowledge of the scientist, to make the desert places again into smiling villages. Our visitors will take part in that transformation. They will link together the knowledge, the science, and material resources of the present and the future. It is a great thought and a happy augury that the first definite act of Zionism is to go East and to take part in the realization of a great ideal for the uplifting of all the people, irrespective of class or creed, or condition of any kind whatsoever. That is indeed a great ideal, and I congratulate our visitors in being pioneers in its achievement. They are going to help to lay in Palestine that basis of sanitation and conditions of healthy life which are the chief foundations of civilization. It is a work not only of interest to the Jewish race; it is a work which is of interest and value to the whole world, because the prosperity of Palestine is the concern of us all. Irrespective of race or religion, we look to Palestine as the Holy Land. From it there came those great moral inspirations which still guide the life and conduct of half the world. From it there issued forth those wondrous influences of which the mind of man can scarcely yet conceive the full meaning. It has been the inestimable privilege of the Allies in this war to have rescued this land, consecrated by religion and history, from the sacrilegious hands of the German and the Turk, who have slain and enslaved the people. It will be their greater privilege to rebuild the holy places, to create conditions under which opportunities will be given to all peoples to live together in tolerance and mutual help. It will be the aim of Zionism once more to make Palestine a fountain of knowledge and idealism, and by the creating of places of knowledge and education, open to all, again to clothe ancient truths in modern garb. The British Government proclaimed its policy of Zionism because it believed that Zionism was identified with the policy and aims for which good men and women are struggling everywhere. That policy is the policy of the Allies in this war. It is the policy to which we are pledged; it is the policy which we believe accords with the wishes of vast numbers of the Jewish people, many of whom have cast wistful eyes to Palestine as again destined to be their national home. Using the word in its largest and best sense, they are going on an errand of mercy, being the harbingers of health and happiness to a people who have been long oppressed and heavy laden. They have, I doubt not, many difficulties in front of them—perhaps a long road to travel, but I feel sure they will be borne up by the consciousness of what they are doing, and that they have the good wishes of all good men and women.”

In addressing the Unit in Paris, M. Tardieu, High Commissioner of the Government of the French Republic in the United States, said:⁠—

“Vous savez avec quel intérêt sympathique le gouvernement français a suivi le progrès de l’idéal sioniste. De cet intérêt, le gouvernement français a donné des preuves dès le printemps de 1916, aussitôt que l’amélioration de la situation en Palestine nous a permis de regarder du côté de l’avenir. J’ai à peine besoin, ensuite, de vous rappeler la déclaration publique et officielle que le Ministre des Affaires Étrangères, M. Pichon, publiait si heureusement l’année dernière. S’il existe une nation naturellement faite pour comprendre la cause des Juifs et l’idéal juif, cela a été assurément toujours la nation française.”

Shortly before they left England the American Zionist Medical Unit were received by Mr. Balfour, who said he was very happy to be able to address the deputation of the Unit on their way to Palestine, where they were going to contribute their share to the beginnings of a great National undertaking. The far-reaching importance of the idea represented by Zionism was not sufficiently understood; the influence of that great National revival would be felt not only by those Jews who would settle in Palestine, but also by Jewry in every country of the world, and even by the other nations of humanity, for though Palestine was but a small country, the good which it had done for mankind was immeasurable. The destruction of Judea nineteen centuries ago was one of the great wrongs which the Allied Powers were trying to redress. This destruction was a national tragedy. It deprived the Jews of the opportunities enjoyed by other nations, to develop their national genius and their own spirit to the full extent of which it was capable. The Jews occupied a unique position among nations of the present day, because they lacked that element of nationality which appeared to be indispensable to a complete National life—to the possession of a National Home. The present moment witnessed the entrance on the world’s stage of great and important National factors, and he felt sure that among these the Zionist idea, which had already accomplished so much in Palestine, would play a noble and beneficial part. He congratulated the members of the Unit on their great humanitarian mission. He knew they were moved by a high idea and not by any self-seeking. Nothing, he said, could be accomplished in this world except under the inspiration of a great ideal. He wished them Godspeed and complete success.

Direct evidence of the spread of Zionism in America was furnished by a resolution of the American Jewish Committee, a body which has hitherto been held to represent the assimilated American Jews and to be hostile to Jewish nationalism, at a special meeting held on Sunday, April 28th, which was attended by, among others, Mr. Jacob Schiff, Mr. Louis Marshall, Dr. Cyrus Adler, ex-Judge Mack, and ex-Judge Sulzberger.

The Committee declared by the resolution that it could not be unmindful of the fact that there are Jews everywhere throughout the world who, moved by traditional Jewish sentiment, yearn for a Home in the Holy Land for the Jewish people. This hope, which has been nurtured for centuries, had the Committee’s whole-hearted sympathy. When therefore, the British Government made the Declaration which is now supported by the French Government, that it views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish People, and will use its best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, the announcement was received by the members of the Committee with profound appreciation.

The Committee regards as of essential importance the conditions annexed to the Declaration, “that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” The latter of these conditions corresponded entirely with the general principles on the basis of which the Committee had ever striven to attain civil and political rights for Jews the world over, and with the ideals of all American Jewry.

The opportunity foreshadowed by Mr. Balfour’s letter was welcomed by the Committee, which would help to the best of its power to realise in Palestine, placed under such protectorate or suzerainty as the Peace Congress may determine, the objects set forth in the Declaration; and the Committee resolved to co-operate with all those who, attracted by religious or historic associations, shall seek to establish in Palestine a centre for Judaism for the stimulating of our faith, the pursuit and development of literature, science, and art in a Jewish environment, and the rehabilitation of the Land.

The British and Italian Governments indicated to the Zionist Organization their interest in the welfare of the Jewish people by the opinion they expressed with regard to the clause in the Rumanian-German Treaty referring to Jewish rights. Ever since the Treaty of Berlin, the position of the Rumanian Jews had been one of the scandals of Europe. That Treaty forbade all legal discriminations on account of religious faith. This clause was made a useless “scrap of paper” by Rumania considering its Jews “aliens not subject to alien protection.” The Jew has been prevented from living in country districts or owning land outside towns. This does not prevent it from being a standing accusation against the Jews of Rumania that they do not work as agricultural labourers. They have been excluded from the civil service and the liberal professions; they have been disfranchised; factories and mills were forbidden to employ more Jewish workers than one quarter of their entire staff. Yet the Jews in Rumania by no means gave rise to this state of affairs by obvious separatism; the younger generation all spoke Rumanian, both at home and in intercourse with the outer world, and they wore no distinctive dress.

It should be stated that the Rumanians are a peasant people; the landowners, all Christians, are largely an absentee class, spending their money in Western Europe. Anti-Semitism has been a convenient safety-valve for diverting the discontent of the peasants from the real authors of their misery.

These anti-Jewish laws have caused an immense exodus of Jews from Rumania.

Rumania continued its anti-Jewish policy during the war. Rumanian Jews were registered and supervised as aliens, because, owing to defective registration, they could not prove that they were born in Rumania. Many elderly persons were born in places where no registers were kept. There were no registers before 1866, and it was only in 1880 that the whole country began to keep such registers. This brings us directly to the Jewish clause of the treaty with Germany. The German Government had led the Jews in Germany to believe that it would protect the rights of Jews in the treaty. But the treaty merely stated that those Jews hitherto considered aliens were to be naturalized by law if they could prove that they and their parents were born in Rumania, or that they had taken part in the war, either in active service or in army service (Hilfsdienst). Such a clause could only open the way to further equivocations. By the addition of this clause to the general statement that differences of religious faith shall have no influence on the legal rights of inhabitants, and in particular on their political and civil rights, the treaty of 1918 actually went back from the position taken by the treaty of 1878. It is not even found possible to make the officers of a regiment in Rumania give a Jewish soldier the paper necessary to prove that he has served in the army.

The letters to the Author, in which the two Entente Powers (England and Italy) expressed their desire to rectify this unjust state of affairs, are as follows:⁠—

Foreign Office,
June 15th, 1918.

Sir,

In reply to your letter of the 3rd instant, relative to the question of Jewish rights in Rumania, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Balfour to state that His Majesty’s Government fully realize that the enfranchisement promised to the Jews in Rumania under the recent treaty is less liberal than that by which the former Rumanian Government had publicly pledged themselves. They take this opportunity of assuring your Organization that they are most anxious to do everything in their power to secure a just and permanent settlement of the Jewish question in that country.

I am, Sir,

Your most obedient, humble Servant,

(Signed) W. Langley.

N. Sokolow, Esq.,

35 Empire House,

175 Piccadilly, W. 1.

The Italian Ambassador, the Marquis Imperiali, honoured me with a communication to a like effect, of which the following is a translation:⁠—

London,

August 2nd, 1918.

Dear Sir,

On the instructions of His Excellency, Baron Sonnino, I have pleasure in communicating to you the following:

“The Italian Government recognizing that the provision contained in the Treaty of Bucharest of May 7th, 1918, between Rumania and the Central Empires, relating to religious equality in Rumania, are, so far as the Jews are concerned, less liberal than those which the Rumanian Government itself had spontaneously promised to grant, now declares that at the final settlement of the Rumanian question, it will use its best endeavours to secure for the Jews in Rumania a settlement which will definitely assure them of a permanent position of equality.”

Accept, dear Sir, the expression of my most distinguished consideration.

(Signed) Imperiali.

N. Sokolow, Esq.

One of the first practical results of the British Government’s declaration was the appointment in March, 1918, of a Zionist Commission for Palestine.

The objects and status of the Commission were laid down as follows:⁠—

The Commission should represent the Zionist Organization.

It should act as an advisory body to the British authorities in Palestine in all matters relating to Jews, or which may affect the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in accordance with the Declaration of His Majesty’s Government.

The objects of the Commission were:⁠—

1. To form a link between the British authorities and the Jewish population of Palestine.

2. To co-ordinate the relief work in Palestine and to assist in the repatriation of exiled and evacuated persons and refugees.

3. To assist in restoring and developing the Colonies and in organizing the Jewish population in general.

4. To assist the Jewish organization and institutions in Palestine in the resumption of their activities.

5. To help in establishing friendly relations with the Arabs and other non-Jewish communities.

6. To collect information, and report upon the possibilities of the further development of the Jewish settlement and of the country in general.

7. To inquire into the feasibility of the scheme of establishing a Jewish University.

In order to be able to achieve the foregoing objects the Commission obtained permission, subject to military necessities, to travel, investigate, and make reports upon the above-mentioned matters.

The Commission left London on March 8th. It consisted of:⁠—

Dr. Chaim Weizmann, the Chairman of the Commission; Mr. Joseph Cowen, Director of the Anglo-Palestine Company; Dr. Eder, Medical Adviser, Representative of the Jewish Territorial Organization; Mr. Leon Simon, selected to be Chairman of the Relief Committee of the Commission; and Professor Sylvain Lévi, Collège de France. Mr. Israel M. Sieff, of Manchester, acted as Secretary to the Commission.

Two representatives of Italian Jewry joined the Commission after an interval of some time—Commendatore Bianchini and Dr. Artom.

The Commission was accompanied by the following gentlemen: Mr. Aaron Aaronsohn, Agricultural Expert, formerly of the Jewish Colony of Zichron Jacob; Mr. David Levontin, Manager of the Jaffa branch of the Anglo-Palestine Bank; Mr. Rosenack, Agent of the Jewish Colonization Association, and Mr. Walter Meyer of New York.

Major the Hon. W. Ormsby-Gore acted as Political Officer and communicated the Commission’s views and requirements to the Government and the military authorities.

It had been intended that representatives of the Jews of Russia should join the Commission, but the disorganization of communications in Russia caused by the revolution prevented them from doing so until about October, 1918, when Mr. Isaac Goldberg and Mr. Israel Rosoff started for Palestine.

A few isolated incidents alone can be referred to here out of a large amount of work which was done by the Commissioners. They succeeded in obliterating the ill effects of warfare, they restored refugees to their homes, restarted the normal course of peaceful activities, reorganized the hitherto unsatisfactory and disunited Jerusalem communities belonging to the old settlements of pre-Zionist times and pre-Zionist feelings, and extended the Hebrew system of schools.

The Commission started part of its work in Egypt before it reached Palestine. The Arabs had been given wrong ideas concerning the meaning of the British declaration and the intention of the Zionists: pro-German agents had spread rumours intended to be both anti-English and anti-Jewish. They declared that rich Jews would exploit the land of Palestine and would destroy Moslem holy places. Dr. Weizmann met certain Arab leaders in Egypt and succeeded in removing their fears and anxieties. It was found that the Felaheen cultivators in Palestine do not fear the Jews. They realize that the Jewish colonies increase the prosperity of the country by introducing improved agricultural methods. But the Effendi Arabs, who are landlords, fear the establishment of a just rule over the land. These Effendi are largely cosmopolitans and absentee landlords, living in Syria and Egypt. The Zionists are anxious to prevent, if they can, any speculation in land, whether by natives of Palestine or by foreigners. The prosperity of the colonies is bound up with a just land policy, which will prevent the fruits of a man’s labour enriching others and will place at the disposal of the Jewish colonies unused and State lands as well as badly cultivated large estates.

The Zionists have been fortunate in gaining the confidence of the King of the Hedjaz and of Prince Feisal.

Although by the Hague Convention the military authorities could not make any alteration in the laws of the land, they did in two matters of administration increase the power of self-government possessed by the Jews. They allowed certain colonies to appoint their own police and their own Jewish tax-collectors. So corrupt had the Turkish tax-collectors been, that the Jewish tax-collectors, while taking less from the colonists, were able to hand a larger sum to the Government.

Much consideration was given by the Commission to the work of strengthening and supporting the organizations for relieving distress—orphanages, hospitals, and so on: a work much needed owing to war conditions. Special reports on the utilities of the various hospitals, schools, and orphanages were drawn up. In Jerusalem great distress was found. The Halukah Jews, settled in Jerusalem to study and pray and entirely dependent on the support of the Jews of other countries, had been by the war cut off from their means of livelihood. Widows and orphans were many, the adult men having suffered excessively from epidemics. The Commission opened laundries and a kind of shirt factory to provide employment for women and did its best to find employment for the men, although the importation of raw materials was very difficult.

On 17th June there was opened at Jaffa the first conference of Jews of the liberated area of Palestine. Major Ormsby-Gore, the Political Officer in charge of the Zionist Commission, delivered the following speech:⁠—

“You have asked me, as Political Officer in charge of the Zionist Commission which has been sent out to Palestine by H.M. Government, to attend this historic gathering and to say a few words of good wishes to you, the representatives of all Jewry in the occupied part of Palestine, on behalf of my Government. I do so with a full heart. My Government—the British Government—has said one or two important things during this war concerning Palestine.

“My Government has said that, if England and her Allies win this war, the future Government of Palestine shall not be Turkish, because in this war England and her Allies are fighting, not for the extension of any Empire, nor for the acquisition of further power or further territory, but they are fighting for an ideal, shared by all our Allies, namely, that countries shall be governed in the interests and according to the wishes and the aspirations of the inhabitants of those countries. We are satisfied when we look at the results of Turkish rule upon the land and the people of Palestine, that such rule ought to disappear in the interests of Palestine and of civilization. The Turkish rule in Palestine was an alien rule, and was not in the best interests of any of the inhabitants of Palestine, and, moreover, such a rule crippled the free development, economic and political, of this country.

“My Government has said that it wishes to see the people of Palestine among others freed from the rule of the Turks, but it has as yet said nothing as to what Government should take its place—that is a matter for the Peace Conference. But Mr. Balfour has made an historic declaration with regard to the Zionists, that he wishes to see created and built up in Palestine a National Home for the Jewish people.

“What do we understand by this? We mean that those Jews who voluntarily come to live in Palestine should live in Palestine as Jewish nationalists, i.e. that they should be regarded as Jews and nothing else, and that they should be absolutely free to develop Hebrew education, to develop the country, and live their own life in their own way in Palestine freely, but only submitting equally with all others to the laws of the land.

“I shall tell the British Government, when I go back, what the Jews of Palestine have done already to realize their ideals, and what they feel with regard to this National Home. I can say when I go back that I can see in this gathering to-day the pioneer work of the National Home, i.e. a National Home built up on a Hebrew foundation with a definite consciousness and ideal of its own. I can say that whether you come from Russia, from Salonica, from Bokhara, from Poland, from America, from England, or from Yemen, you are bound together in Palestine by the ideal of building up a Jewish nation in all its various aspects in Palestine, a national centre for Jewry all over the world to look to. This is the ideal of the future, an ideal which I am convinced will be realized without doing any injustice or injury to any of your neighbours here. But while I look forward to the realization of this ideal, I must remind you of the grim realities of the present.

“We can still hear the guns, and we are in the midst of a desperate struggle—not merely between nations, but between ideals. Be patient with the British Government, who wish you well. Do not expect a great deal from them, but expect a great deal from yourselves. At present we are bound to carry on the Turkish system of law, taxation, and Government. We are bound to do this by international law, and England has always tried to respect this international law. England set its seal to the Hague Convention, which said that when an advance was made into enemy country, the administration should be military and not political, and that such military administration should make no attempt to alter or change the institutions of the occupied country; it is not our wish that this is so, but it is so by the rule of law, and we shall do our best to respect this law no matter who else breaks it.

“It is difficult for a military administration to make radical changes or to do much to help you and others in the country. Nevertheless, some great things have been done already; the British Government has given opportunity to the young men to join the battalion of Jews from other countries to liberate this country. This splendid response of your young men will have a great moral value when history comes to be written. Every one of these fine and splendid recruits now enrolled and who are going to the battalions which have come from England and America, will go as missionaries of Jewish nationalism in Palestine, so that these men will stay in Palestine and help to develop it on just and right lines. The British Government has done something more of great service to you. The Government has sent out to Palestine the Zionist Commission. It has sent out Dr. Weizmann, i.e. the British Government has sent out a man in whom it has confidence to help the Jews in Palestine in their greatest hour of need. What this help has meant to you I need not go into in detail. The Zionist Commission speaks for itself. Dr. Weizmann came here as a stranger to the British authorities, but in a few weeks he has won for himself, and for the people whom he represents, a position among the British authorities and amongst all with whom he has come into contact in Egypt, Arabia, and Palestine; a position which is not merely a help, but a corner stone of the work which lies before you. The Zionist Commission is in a position to do much to acquaint not only Jewry throughout the world, but also the Governments of the Allied countries, with the needs, ideals, and aspirations of Palestine Jewry. It is, therefore, only right that you should be guided in patience by him, your leader, and accept his advice and direction. Dr. Weizmann is a leader who will see you through. He is a man worthy of your confidence, as well as of the confidence of all of the Allied Governments.

“The work of the conference which I am addressing is very important. You have a great deal to prepare for. You have to prepare for peace, for the day when war is no more, and when there will be, please God, a free Palestine. Gentlemen, make sure that your foundation-stones are truly laid in your agricultural, cultural, and educational work. So much depends for civilization on the work for which you are now preparing and which you will perform during the next few months. You will be faced with all the difficult trivialities of life, but in the Zionist movement there is a spirit, and just as good transcends evil, so does the spiritual transcend the material. You can build up a centre of civilization here. We English owe all that is best in our civilization to the Bible, and that is why we feel a deep interest and a bond of sympathy in the work which you are doing. The Zionist movement is not merely a political move, but it is a spiritual force, and if it succeeds I feel it will bring something great and noble to the world, a message which will not only do so much for the sad but beautiful land, but for the scattered hosts of Israel and for humanity.”

Photo by בן־דוב בצלאל ירושלם

Laying Foundation Stone of the Hebrew University,
Mount Scopus, Jerusalem

15 Ab, 5678 24 July, 1918

On 24th July, 1918, the foundation-stones of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem were laid. This was an event which Zionists had conceived long before, an event likely to be of great importance in enabling Jerusalem to become a spiritual centre for the still dispersed communities of Israel, and destined, let us hope, to influence and elevate the mental life, social aspirations and religious conceptions of the Jews of the world.

The site of the University is a beautiful one. It is on Mount Scopus, on an estate purchased from the late Sir John Gray Hill of Liverpool, who was personally in deep sympathy with the scheme. It faces Jerusalem on the one side and the valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea on the other.

At the ceremony of laying the foundation-stones those present included, besides the members of the Zionist Commission, the Commander-in-Chief and senior members of his staff, the Military Governor of Jerusalem, staff representatives of the French and Italian military detachments in Palestine and other officers, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Bishop MacInnes, Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, the representatives of the Armenian and Greek Churches, the Mayor and Vice-Mayor of Jerusalem, Baron and Baroness Felix Menasce of Alexandria, Maurice Cattaui Pacha, President of the Cairo Jewish Community, Mr. Victor Mosseri, the Chief Rabbis of Cairo and Alexandria, the Sephardi and Ashkenazi Chief Rabbis, and representatives of all Jewish organizations and committees in Jerusalem, Jaffa, and the colonies. The day was declared a public Jewish holiday in Jerusalem, and a crowd numbering about six thousand people witnessed the ceremony.

After the ceremony had been opened by a chant of praise, Dr. Weizmann laid the first foundation-stone of the University on behalf of the Zionist Organization. He was followed by the two Chief Rabbis of Jerusalem and the heads of the United Council, who laid a stone on behalf of the Jerusalem Community. The Mufti then laid a stone, and was followed by the Anglican Bishop. Stones were also laid on behalf of the following: The Zionist Organization, the Jewish Regiment, Baron Edmond de Rothschild, the town of Jaffa, the Colonies, Hebrew Literature, Hebrew Teachers, Hebrew Science, Jewish Artisans and Labourers, Isaac Goldberg (whose generosity it was that provided so largely for the purchase of the site), and the Future Generations.

Dr. Weizmann then added his signature to a parchment scroll inscribed with the blessing:⁠¹

ברוך אתה יי אלהינו מלך העולם שהחינו וקימנו והגיענו לזמן הזה׃

“Wednesday, the fifteenth day of the fifth month, the month of Menachem-Ab, being in the year Five Thousand six hundred and seventy-eight from the creation of the World, One thousand eight hundred and forty-nine from the destruction of our second Temple, and the twenty-first year after the first Zionist Congress called by Dr. Benjamin Zeeb ben Jacob Herzl, the first year of the Declaration of the British Government issued through the Rt. Hon. Arthur James Balfour promising to grant a National Home to the Jewish People in the land of Israel,—the day on which was laid the first stone of the building which shall become the first Hebrew University in Jerusalem. In testimony of which we add our signatures.” The signatures included that of the Sephardi Chief Rabbi Nissim Elyashar, the Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Zerach Epstein, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Bishop MacInnes, Chief Rabbi Uziel of Jaffa in the name of Baron Edmond de Rothschild, M. Libowitz, one of the last of the heroic band of Bilu, Dr. Thon, Mr. D. Levontin, and some boys and girls in the name of the future generation.

The signed scroll was buried under the first stone.

Dr. Weizmann then delivered an address. He said:⁠—

“We have to-day laid the foundation-stone of the first Jewish University, which is to be erected on this hill, overlooking the city of Jerusalem. Many of us will have had their thoughts cast back to the great historic scenes associated with Jerusalem, scenes that have become part of the heritage of mankind. It is not too fanciful to picture the souls of those who have made our history here with us to-day inspiring us, urging us onwards, to greater and ever greater tasks. Many again will have had their attention riveted on the apparent contrast between to-day’s ceremony and the scenes of warfare within a few miles of us. For only a brief moment we are allowing ourselves to indulge in a mental armistice, and in laying aside all thoughts of strife we try to pierce the veil of war and glance into the future. A week ago we were keeping the Fast of Ab, reminding us that the Temple had been utterly destroyed and the Jewish national political existence extinguished apparently for ever. But throughout the long centuries we, the stiff-necked people, have refused to acknowledge defeat, and ‘Judæa Capta’ is once more on the eve of triumph. Here, out of the misery and the desolation of war, is being created the first germ of a new life. Hitherto we have been content to speak of Reconstruction and Restoration. We know that ravished Belgium, devastated France, Poland and Russia must and will be restored. In this University, however, we have gone beyond Restoration and Reconstruction, we are creating during the period of war something which is to serve as a symbol of a better future. It is fitting that Great Britain, aided by her great Allies, in the midst of tribulation and sorrow, should stand sponsor to this University. Great Britain has understood that it is just because these are times of stress, just because men tend to become lost in the events of the day, that there is a need to overlay these details by this bold appeal to the world’s imagination. Here what seemed but a dream a few years ago is now becoming a reality.

“What is the significance of a Hebrew University—what are going to be its functions, whence will it draw its students, and what languages will it speak? It seems at first sight paradoxical that in a land with so sparse a population, in a land where everything still remains to be done, in a land crying out for such simple things as ploughs, roads, and harbours, we should begin by creating a centre of spiritual and intellectual development. But it is no paradox for those who know the soul of the Jew. It is true that great social and political problems still face us and will demand their solution from us. We Jews know that when the mind is given fullest play, when we have a centre for the development of Jewish consciousness, then coincidently we shall attain the fulfilment of our material needs. In the darkest ages of our existence we found protection and shelter within the walls of our schools and colleges, and in devoted study of Jewish science the tormented Jew found relief and consolation. Amid all the sordid squalor of the Ghetto there stood schools of learning where numbers of young Jews sat at the feet of our Rabbis and teachers. Those schools and colleges served as large reservoirs where there was stored up during the long ages of persecution an intellectual and spiritual energy which on the one hand helped to maintain our national existence, and on the other hand blossomed forth for the benefit of mankind when once the walls of the Ghetto fell. The sages of Babylon and Jerusalem, Maimonides and the Gaon of Wilna, the lens polisher of Amsterdam and Karl Marx, Heinrich Heine and Paul Ehrlich are some of the links in the long, unbroken chain of intellectual development.

“The University, as its name implies, is to teach everything the mind of man embraces. No teaching can be fruitful nowadays unless it is strengthened by a spirit of enquiry and research; and a modern University must not only produce highly trained professional men, but give ample opportunity to those capable and ready to devote themselves to scientific research to do so unhindered and undisturbed. Our University will thus become the home of those hundreds of talented young Jews in whom the thirst for learning and critical enquiry has been engrained by heredity throughout ages, and who in the great multitude of cases are at present compelled to satisfy this their burning need amid un-Jewish, very often unfriendly surroundings.

“A Hebrew University! I do not suppose that there is anyone here who can conceive of a University in Jerusalem being other than a Hebrew one. The claim that the University should be a Hebrew one rests upon the values the Jews have transmitted to the world from this land. Here in the presence of adherents of the three great religions of the world, which amid many diversities build their faith upon the Lord who made Himself known unto Moses, before this world which has founded itself on Jewish law, has paid reverence to Hebrew seers, has acknowledged the great mental and spiritual values the Jewish people have given to it, the question is answered. The University is to stimulate the Jewish people to reach further truth. Am I too bold if here to-day in this place among the hills of Ephraim and Judah, I state my conviction that the seers of Israel have not utterly perished, that under the ægis of this University there will be a renaissance of the Divine power of prophetic wisdom that once was ours? The University will be the focus of the rehabilitation of our Jewish consciousness now so tenuous, because it has become so world-diffused. Under the atmospheric pressure of this Mount, our Jewish consciousness can become diffused without becoming feeble, our consciousness will be rekindled and our Jewish youth will be reinvigorated from Jewish sources.

“Since it is to be a Hebrew University, the question hardly arises as to its language. By a strange error, people have regarded Hebrew as one of the dead languages, whilst in fact it has never died off the lips of mankind. True, to many of us Jews it has become a second language, but for thousands of my people Hebrew is and always has been the sacred tongue, and in the streets of Tel Aviv, in the orchards of Rischon and Rechoboth, on the farms of Hulda and Ben Shemen, it has already become the mother tongue. Here in Palestine, amid the Babel of languages, Hebrew stands out as the one language in which every Jew can communicate with every other Jew. Upon the technical difficulties connected with Hebrew instruction it is unnecessary for me to dwell at the moment. We are alive to them; but the experience of our Palestinian schools has already shown to us that these difficulties are surmountable. These are all matters of detail which have been carefully examined and will be dealt with at the appropriate time. I have spoken of the Jewish University where the language will be Hebrew, just as French is used at the Sorbonne, or English at Oxford. Naturally, other languages, ancient and modern, will be taught in the respective faculties; among these languages we may expect that prominent attention will be given to Arabic and other Semitic languages.

“The Hebrew University, though intended primarily for Jews, will, of course, give an affectionate welcome to the members of every race and creed. ‘For my house will be called a house of prayer for all the nations.’ Besides the usual schools and institutions which go to form a modern University, there will be certain branches of science which it will be peculiarly appropriate to associate with our University. Archæological Research, which has revealed so much of the mysterious past of Egypt and of Greece, has a harvest still to be reaped in Palestine, and our University is destined to play an important part in this field of knowledge.

“The question as to the faculties with which our University may begin its career is limited to some extent by practical considerations. The beginnings of our University are not entirely lacking. We have in Jerusalem the elements of a Pasteur Institute and a Jewish Health Bureau, whence valuable contributions to bacteriology and sanitation have already been issued. There is the school of Technology at Haifa, and the beginning of an agricultural experimental station at Athlit. It is to scientific research and its application that we can confidently look for the banishment of those twin plagues of Palestine, malaria and trachoma; for the eradication of other indigenous diseases; it is to true scientific method that we may look for the full cultivation of this fair and fertile land, now so unproductive. Here, chemistry and bacteriology, geology and climatology, will be required to join forces, so that the great value of the University in the building up of our National Home is apparent. All that again reminds us of the fact which one is likely to forget after four years of a terrible war, with its misapplication of scientific methods, that we must look to science as to the healer of many wounds and the redeemer of many evils. Side by side with scientific research the humanities will occupy a distinguished place. Ancient Jewish learning, the accumulated, half-hidden treasures of our ancient philosophical, religious and juridic literature, are to be brought to light again and freed from the dust of ages. They will be incorporated in the new life now about to develop in this country, and so our past will be linked up with the present.

“May I be allowed, before concluding, to point to one very important aspect of our University? The University, while trying to maintain the highest scientific level, must, at the same time, be rendered accessible to all classes of the people. The Jewish workman and farm labourer must be enabled to find there a possibility of continuing and completing their education in their free hours. The doors of our libraries, lecture rooms, and laboratories, must be opened widely to them all. Thus the University will exercise its beneficial influence on the nation as a whole. The bare nucleus of the library is already in existence here, and very valuable additions to it are at present stored up in Russia and elsewhere. The setting-up of a University library and of a University press are contemplated soon after the war. Manifold are the preparations yet to be made. Some of them are already in progress; some, like the actual building, must necessarily be postponed until the happy day of peace arrives. But from this day the Hebrew University is a reality. Our University, formed by Jewish learning and Jewish energy, will mould itself into an integral part of our national structure which is in process of erection. It will have a centripetal force, attracting all that is noblest in Jewry throughout the world; a unifying centre for our scattered elements. There will go forth, too, inspiration and strength, that shall revivify the powers now latent in our scattered communities. Here the wandering soul of Israel shall reach its haven; its strength no longer consumed in restless and vain wanderings. Israel shall at last remain at peace within itself and with the world. There is a Talmudic legend that tells of the Jewish soul deprived of its body, hovering between heaven and earth. Such is our soul to-day; to-morrow it shall come to rest, in this our sanctuary. That is our faith.”

Dr. Weizmann then read the following message from Mr. Balfour:⁠—

“Please accept my cordial good wishes for the future of the Hebrew University on Mount Scopus. May it carry out its noble purpose with ever-increasing success as the years go on. I offer my warm congratulations to all who have laboured so assiduously to found this school of learning, which should be an addition to the forces of progress throughout the world.”

Captain Coulandre, on behalf of the French Government, presented the following message:⁠—

“Le Gouvernement de la République est heureux d’exprimer les sentiments de sympathie avec lesquels il accueille la fondation de l’Université Juive. Il forme des vœux sincères pour que de là rayonnent les grandes pensées de fraternité et d’idéal auxquels le Judaisme s’est si fermement attaché à travers les siècles au cours desquels il a resisté à toutes les persécutions, et pour que dans un monde débarassé des violences engendrées par les ambitions forcenées du régime Prussien les Juifs qui le desireront puissent trouver en Palestine en parfaite entente avec les autres groupements ethniques un foyer à la fois intellectuel et social.”

The whole ceremony was a deeply moving one, and produced an effect which will long remain with those who witnessed it.

The work of the Commission was made possible by the work of the British Army and its scope was greatly increased by General Allenby’s complete conquest of the country. In September, 1918, General Allenby secured a victory which resounded throughout the world by its completeness as well as by its brilliance. By most skilful procedure the Turkish line was broken in several places and Nablus and Beisan were captured. The bridge of the Daughters of Jacob over the Jordan was seized and British troops wheeling round by quick marches along the coastal plain, passed through the defile of Megiddo and cut off the greater portion of the Turkish army. The strong Turkish positions in the hills about Nablus were surrounded and positions which if directly attacked would have cost thousands of lives were taken with comparatively few losses.

Eighty thousand prisoners were captured and a vast amount of guns, munitions, and stores. The cavalry swept northward and captured Damascus within a few days, and even moved on to Beirout and Sidon on the coast, while the Arabs under the King of the Hedjaz defeated the Turks in the south-east of Palestine and Jewish troops were sent forward to the capture of Amman and Es-Salt. In a period of a fortnight, three armies were defeated and ceased to exist. Turkey’s military power was destroyed instantaneously. The only defences left to the Turkish Empire were bad communications, immense distances, and the submarines in the Eastern Mediterranean. The victories in Palestine stirred the world and gave new vigour to Zionist efforts. To the outside world, these victories marked the first decisive step in the final defeat of the German federation. To the Zionists, they brought great joy because they definitely ended the corrupt rule of Turkey. Supported by the most powerful nations in the world, the Jews are asked to create in Palestine a typically Hebrew society. A great responsibility and a great opportunity are thus offered to us. We have to consider many new and difficult problems. But for the solution of these practical problems, we confidently expect to receive much help from Jews all over the world. The Declaration of the Allies has been like a trumpet-call. Our wonderful successes in the world of diplomacy fascinate all to whom the fate of Israel is of importance. The history of the past few years, which has transformed, at the cost of terrible injuries to humanity, what seemed dreams into plain facts, and made what were facts into dream-like memories, will surely bring us active help from all who sympathize with our ideal, the ideal for which Jews have unceasingly prayed and hoped for twenty centuries.

This mighty war has now come to an end and the world breathes freely once more. The cruelties and horrors of more than four years seem now like a nightmare. That nightmare has vanished—let us hope for ever. Day has dawned again, a day of victory, whose power for good outweighs the evil powers let loose by the world-war. The great armies of the Western Allies and of the United States of America have been victorious. In consequence of this victory an old world order has been destroyed and a new and a better one brought into being. State organizations which had forced diverse nations into their artificial and incongruous structures only by power are collapsing like houses of cards. Those who ruled by the sword perished by the sword. Despotism, supported by militarism, is shattered. The victory of the Allies ought to be more than a victory of one group of states over another; this ought to be the victory of what is good in man over what is evil. This victory must benefit the conquered not less than the conquerors. One great idea has been victorious in this war, namely, the national principle: liberty, equality, and self-determination of all peoples, great and small, old and young. Every nation has the right to live, given the will to do so. Every nation has a right to the land in which it grew to be a nation. It is all one, whether this was accomplished a hundred years ago as in Belgium, or many hundreds of years ago as in Armenia, or as in Greece some thousands of years ago. The right of a people to its historical home cannot be limited by time.

On the basis of this principle a new Europe is shaping itself. Every nation must have its own land, its share in human civilization, with its own speech and customs, its right to do as it wills. Alsace-Lorraine wants to be French, and therefore it shall be French again. The Czechs and the Southern Slavs wish to form independent states; Poland, Belgium, Serbia, and others, too, are reasserting their independence. Wherever historical rights exist, these must now be realized. Every nation regains now its Zion for which it has longed and suffered. Although this is a great progress in itself, it would be a poor safeguard unless the other great principle were also adopted, the principle of freedom. With the regeneration of national freedom it follows also that the progress of human liberty, equality, and social justice both in the existing states and in the old ones now to be re-established will be assured. No despotism, no subjection of minorities, but liberty, equality, and fraternity for all citizens, equal duties and equal rights.

For this ideal seven millions of men, the vigorous youth of mankind, have sacrificed their lives, and many millions more have been crippled. For this ideal of justice several countries have been laid waste and civilization itself has been threatened with complete destruction. This great ideal of justice, however, will be worthy of the terrible sacrifices which have been made; it must now be attained.

A new Europe and—a new Asia. Light is shining again from the East. The glorious British Army has reconquered ancient East for civilization. The Arabs, our Semitic kindred, the descendants of a chivalrous and one-time famous race, side by side with inspired Jewish volunteer forces who had flocked together to fight with love and enthusiasm for the Land of Promise, have, with the assistance of French and Italian reinforcements, done their duty in assisting the British Army. Mesopotamia, Arabia, Syria, and Palestine are now freed for their nations. An Arabian Kingdom, a free, well-ordered Syria, the remnants of the unfortunate, hard-tried Armenian nation established as an Armenian State, and a new Erez Israel, all these will have to be created on a basis of historical rights and of the realization of the national principle, each under the protection of, and receiving assistance from, some suitable Great Power, in accordance with their own desire, in their gradual and peaceful progress towards their ultimate goal.

What, we ask, will now be the position of the Jews at this juncture? What will the great victory bring to this people who have been so hard hit by this war? Hundreds of thousands of Jews have lost their lives, most of them in countries where they had no share in human rights, and nothing to fight for. Dying on the Carpathian mountains or in the plains of Moldavia, the last glance of their closing eyes was turned to the East, to the hills of Zion. Innumerable masses have been maimed, millions nerve-shattered and starved out, tens of thousands of Jewish homes, thousands of old Jewish communities wiped out, never to be reconstructed. Will all this not be taken into account in the general reckoning of the great victory? Jews live in larger or smaller numbers in different countries, where they are faithful and devoted citizens. The majority of the Jewish people have suffered too long and too bitterly in many countries, and it must be the task of the nations and their governments, once and for all, to put an end to these unspeakable sufferings in the old states and in those soon to be founded, by solemn declarations and binding obligations. The Jews desire to be emancipated, that is, released from servile tutelage; in a free state they do not wish to be the only pariahs and slaves. They demand to be free; that means in the first place that they want to breathe freely, to breathe wherever they wish without fear that a policeman or a neighbour should point out to them that a Jew may not breathe everywhere. They demand to be free; that means in the second place, that they should have the right to use their powers of mind and body unhindered in any honest calling, in any useful art, in any branch of science; so that they can be active and industrious, follow skilled employments, or discharge the functions of office in order to maintain themselves and their families and not be a burden upon others. This they desire without having to fear that the Gentile competitor should be able to say to them: only Gentile hands, only Gentile craftsmen may be employed in skilled trades, only Gentile applicants are admitted to official positions, only Gentile abilities can assert themselves. And as there are too many of you, we must make laws to limit your activities—otherwise we shall boycott you! They demand to be free; that means in the third place that they must be free also as regards their conscience: if their sons possess sufficient talent and knowledge to serve the country as scholars or as public officials, they should be able to do so as honest Jews, and not be compelled to parade as dishonest Christians, that is to profane the ceremony of baptism and to use the certificate of baptism as a passport to office; they do not wish to act as hypocrites, they do not wish to enter Christian communities by lying and knavery, or to smuggle themselves in that way into civic life. They wish to live as Jews, that means to maintain and to develop undisturbed in their true spirit their customs, their traditions, their system of education, their communities, etc. In short, they wish to be human beings, since he that may not be a citizen with a citizen’s full rights in the place where he lives and works and bears his share in all social burdens, has been denied the right to be a human being; or if rights are granted to a man under the condition that he should become assimilated and cease to be what he has been, thanks to his race and the traditions sacred to him, against that man’s manhood the crime of murder has been committed. They wish to be free human beings.

This question indeed concerns humanity. It was raised at the end of the eighteenth century by the great French Revolution, and in some states with small Jewish populations it has been solved in a spirit of liberty. France, England, Italy were the pioneers of equal rights for all. The United States of America were an example in establishing the freedom of citizenship. Nevertheless the majority of the Jews presented during the course of the nineteenth century a pitiful spectacle of unceasing martyrdom—with many shades from semi-emancipation linked with anti-semitism, to boycott and massacres.

The world is changing all its values, and should there be in any country a continuation of tyranny, oppression, and barbarous persecution with regard to the Jews, under any pretext—of which there has never and nowhere seemed to be a lack—then the great ideal of this world-war will remain an idle dream. For justice can never exist together with injustice. This problem of humanity must now be and will be solved.

But the essential problem of modern political evolution lies deeper than this: it is the problem of the peoples that have been robbed of their lands. No matter how the position of the Jews may be ameliorated, and although many Jews may find a home here and there, nevertheless the genius of the Jewish people, the energy of its constructive power, its creative force will have no adequate means of expression. To have a strong impulse to live their own full life and not to be able to do so—that is the heart-breaking tragedy of this people. This essential dilemma is left untouched by the vague formula of Emancipation. Zionism is the only remedy for the deeper Jewish problem, because Zionism alone goes to the real root of the trouble. There can be no Emancipation worthy of the name without a homeland. The greatest danger to Zionism as well as to anti-Zionism is that the ideal of Zionism on the one hand and that of Emancipation on the other should be separated, and that people should come to regard as antagonistic objects which are essentially related and complementary to one another. Not all Jews will return to Palestine, but large numbers will. Zionism represents one of the highest manifestations of that aspiration to free national existence which is the basis of the reconstruction of the world. When a people, uprooted for centuries from its soil, scattered like dust over the whole world, wants to restore its homeland to-day, to have a land where it can be reunited, then we have before us a proof of the new power that lies in the national idea. Millions of Jews are attached to Palestine with all their soul and strength, just as on the first day of the forced expulsion of their ancestors from their old home: their prayers, their lamentations, their dreams have centred for generations upon this magnetic pole of their love and reverence. Hundreds of times they made desperate efforts to return, but were prevented by powerful circumstances from doing so, and as soon as they had the opportunity of beginning again the re-settlement of Palestine, notwithstanding unspeakable sufferings and the greatest sacrifices, they instantly and energetically availed themselves of it. If the millions of Jewish emigrants who formed the new ghettoes of Europe and America from about 1880 to now had had the possibility of going to Palestine, they would have gladly seized it, because they wished to live as a nation, but that was not possible at that time. Israel must have its own home. Palestine must become the spiritual and cultural centre of the Jews. Properly developed, it can hold millions of homeless Jews who will at last have their own homeland and their own full nationality. If it is a misfortune for a people to be robbed of its country, where it could live in peace and prosperity as a nation and enjoy in common with the rest of the family of nations the fruits of its labour, then this misfortune is not smaller but rather has become greater for having existed two thousand years. If it is an injustice to withhold from a people a land to which they have a right, then this injustice is not the smaller, but rather the greater, when a people has suffered it for two thousand years. Never has a nation governed its own home for a longer period; no nation’s history, religion, literature, and traditions are more closely bound up with its land; and no nation has ever suffered a more terrible martyrdom after having been disinherited. Can anyone doubt the right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel? The validity of the Jewish title to Palestine rests on the same basis as the title of any nation to any particular area of the world where it has ruled and existed for centuries. The Jews’ historical right on the Land of Israel, with due consideration for the rights and interests of the non-Jewish population which will be safe-guarded and respected, must become the decisive factor in the question of Palestine.

At last the time has come. The spirit of freedom is on the wing, the Great Creative Spirit is once more moving among the nations. The new territorial settlement is going to lay the foundations of the world’s peace on a basis of justice and national union. The liberation of oppressed nationalities, the restoration of territories violently annexed in the past, the recognition of the desire of racial units and groups for autonomy are the great objects in view. The wrongs of the centuries are going to be righted, and the Jewish race to be placed on an equal footing with other races. The Jewish people is standing at a momentous turning point in its history of four thousand years, to which the determined labour of Zionism has paved the way. The very roots of Jewish nationality are set in that soil which after being for ages in shadow is again turning to light. With the victory of the national idea Zionism also has won a victory. Now that Palestine is freed, much is possible which formerly was only an aspiration. The field is immense and ready. The evil demon of the Pharaohs and of Antiochus Epiphanes has been cast out; the glorious genius of Cyrus the Great hovers with wings of love over the wonderful destiny of the Jewish people. Powerful nations and governments—the guardians of freedom and the champions of justice—have solemnly pledged themselves to further with all the forces at their disposal the revival of the Jewish nation in the land of Israel. Under this guiding symbol the problem of Palestine will be discussed and settled by the Peace Conference among all the important questions before it. The work is stupendous in its implications and its responsibilities. No one imagines that this result can be speedily attained. Its accomplishment will take time, and quite possibly a long time. To restore a scattered people to a land long neglected is not an easy task. The Jewish colonization of Palestine must be carefully built, stone upon stone, by the steady hands of Zionists with that spirit of self-sacrificing endurance which saved our nationality, with wisdom and self-restraint. Zionists are aware of what the Holy Places of Palestine, places of traditional associations and religious faith, consecrated by a thousand cherished memories, are to the great religions. These places will receive equal respect; they will be, not less, but more than hitherto reverently exalted as places of the rarest and sweetest memories in the world. Zionists have the most scrupulous regard for all spiritual things and needs of all religions, and are confident that all Holy Places will be safeguarded by arrangements to be introduced. Zionists are also alive to the legitimate interests and needs of the non-Jewish population, whose liberty and welfare, in peace and harmony and mutual respect, are most essential for the success of the Jewish national rebirth. The new Jewish centre must be made worthy of its glorious past. The noblest ambitions of Jews all over the world are concentrated on this point.

Zionists have now an opportunity never dreamt of—an opportunity that may never return. The Jewish masses, all those who want to live their own life, the clean, free life of farmers and settlers, will be enabled to cultivate all the possibilities of their nature. Industry, art, and science are to join hands in this great work. The long-desired goal of the Jewish people, the rehabilitation of the old national home in the land of their fathers, is nearing realization. This is a great historical event which must touch and stimulate the imagination of all for whom history, right of nations, and justice for small nationalities have any meaning or any message. Ancient Israel, reawakened to new life, is preparing itself to enter the family of nations as a small but free nation in its old home.

Zionism is not a mere abstract idea. It is connected by every bond with modern democracy and aspirations for liberty. All peoples for whom democracy is not a vain word owe it moral and material support. The Peace Conference must permit it to attain its ends. The League of Nations will not be complete if the oldest and most oppressed Jewish nationality will not have its place there. Of all the consequences of the Great War and the still greater Victory, none could be invested with so splendid a degree of romance as the re-establishment of Israel. Of all the small nations which shall spring full fledged from this world crisis, none will have so ancient a claim, so fascinating a history as the Hebrew people reinstalled among the consecrated hills of Judah and by the sacred waters of Galilee. This will be an everlasting memorial to the principle for which the free peoples of the earth have made the greatest sacrifice in the history of the human race. And the names of all those who have given their support and help towards this work of Peace, Justice, and Liberty will live for ever in the annals of the world and of Israel.

## APPENDICES

B. M.: British Museum Library.

I. S.: Israel Solomons’ Collection.

### I.

The Prophets and the Idea of a National Restoration

The first prophet who has left any definite revelation concerning the Dispersion of the Jews and their ultimate restoration in Palestine was Moses, our Law-giver.

“And I will bring the land into desolation; and your enemies that dwell therein shall be astonished at it.” (Leviticus xxvi. 32.)

“And you will I scatter among the nations, and I will draw out the sword after you; and your land shall be a desolation, and your cities shall be a waste.” (Ibid. 33.)

“And yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break My covenant with them; for I am the Lord their God.” (Ibid. 44.)

“But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: I am the Lord.” (Ibid. 45.)

Here we have a promise not to abhor or utterly destroy the Jewish people, but to remember the covenant which God made with their ancestors. We find the purport of this covenant in an early chapter of the Pentateuch:⁠—

“And the Lord said unto Abram, ... ‘Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art, northward and southward and eastward and westward;’” (Genesis xiii. 14.)

“for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever:” (Ibid. 15.)

It is impossible to understand how it can be said that this covenant will be remembered, if the Jewish people is to continue dispersed, and is to be for ever excluded from the land here spoken of. As to the return from Babylonian captivity, that will not answer the intention of the covenant at all. For to restore a small part of the Jewish people to its own land for a few centuries, and afterwards disperse it among all nations for many times as long, without any hope of return, cannot be the meaning of giving that land to the seed of Abram for ever.

Again we read:⁠—

“And the Lord shall scatter you among the peoples,...” (Deuteronomy iv. 27.)

“But from thence ye will seek the Lord thy God; and thou shalt find Him, if thou search after Him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.” (Ibid. 29.)

“In thy distress, when all these things are come upon thee, in the end of days, thou wilt return to the Lord thy God, and hearken unto His voice;” (Ibid. 30.)

“for the Lord thy God is a merciful God; He will not fail thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which He swore unto them.” (Ibid. 31.)

This prophecy refers to the thirteenth chapter of Genesis, as is shown by this thirty-first verse; and confirms again the return to the Holy Land, and its possession for ever:⁠—

“And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt bethink thyself among all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath driven thee,” (Deuteronomy xxx. 1.)

“and shalt return unto the Lord thy God, and hearken to His voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul;” (Ibid. 2.)

“that then the Lord thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the peoples, whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee.” (Ibid. 3.)

“If any of thine that are dispersed be in the uttermost parts of heaven, from thence will the Lord thy God gather thee, and from thence will He fetch thee.” (Ibid. 4.)

“And the Lord thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and He will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers.” (Ibid. 5.)

Amongst the “things which should come upon them,” which are described at large in the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapters of Deuteronomy, it is particularly said:⁠—

“And the Lord shall scatter thee among all peoples, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;...” (Ibid. xxviii. 64.)

But observe that subsequently we are told:⁠—

“And the Lord thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and He will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers.” (Ibid. xxx. 5.)

which promises do not appear to have been fulfilled during the time of the Babylonian captivity, or after the return from Babylon.

Here we have in plain words, simple and clear, the fundamental idea of Moses: the Jewish national future and the possession of the land for ever. This cannot be explained away by sophistry. In vain some Jews declare: We are not nationalist Jews, we are religious Jews! What is the Jewish religion if the Bible is not accepted as an Inspired Revelation? It is strange and sadly amusing that some Jews, adherents of the monotheistic principle, describe themselves as Germans, Magyars, and so on, “of the persuasion of Moses.” If this is not blasphemy, it is irony. The real Moses, the Moses of the Pentateuch, brands Dispersion as a curse, and his whole religious conception, with all the laws, ceremonies, feasts, etc., is built up on the basis of the covenant with the ancestors, a covenant immovable and unalterable. No matter whether Jews call themselves religious or nationalist: the Jewish religion cannot be separated from nationalism, unless another Bible is invented.

Judaism, or the Jewish religion, is based first upon the teaching of Moses, and next upon that of the prophets, and it is a favourite claim of the modern school of Jewish reform that their Judaism is “Prophetic Judaism,” in opposition to the Judaism of orthodox Jews, who lay particular stress upon the Talmud. But what do the prophets teach?

The next revelation in chronological order after the inspired predictions of Moses, is that of Joel the son of Pethuel, who began to prophesy to the Kingdom of Judah about eight hundred years before the civil era:⁠—

“Then was the Lord jealous for His land,

And had pity on His people.” (Joel ii. 18.)

“And the Lord answered and said unto His people:

Behold, I will send you corn, and wine, and oil,

And ye shall be satisfied therewith;

And I will no more make you a reproach among the nations;” (Ibid. 19.)

“For, behold, in those days, and in that time,

When I shall bring back the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,” (Ibid. iv. 1.)

“So shall ye know that I am the Lord your God,

Dwelling in Zion My holy mountain;

Then shall Jerusalem be holy,...” (Ibid. 17.)

“But Judah shall be inhabited for ever,

And Jerusalem from generation to generation.” (Ibid. 20.)

Amos, who was among the herdmen of Tekoa, lived in the days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, King of Israel, and prophesied to the Kingdom of Israel from eight hundred and eight, to seven hundred and eighty-three years before the civil era:⁠—

“And I will turn the captivity of My people Israel,

And they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them;...” (Amos ix. 14.)

“And I will plant them upon their land,

And they shall no more be plucked up

Out of their land which I have given them,

Saith the Lord thy God.” (Ibid. 15.)

Hosea, the son of Beeri, prophesied to the Kingdom of Israel, in the days of the same Jeroboam from about seven hundred and eighty-five, to seven hundred and twenty-five years before the civil era:⁠—

“For the children of Israel shall sit solitary many days without king, and without prince,...” (Hosea iii. 4.)

“afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king;...” (Ibid. 5.)

This prophecy, being given to the Kingdom of Israel in particular, cannot be applied to the return of Judah from Babylon.

Isaiah the son of Amoz (The First Isaiah) was the foremost of the four who are called the greater prophets. He lived in the time of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, Kings of Judah, and prophesied about seven hundred and sixty, to six hundred and ninety-eight years before the civil era:⁠—

“And it shall come to pass in that day,

That the Lord will set His hand again the second time

To recover the remnant of His people,

That shall remain from Assyria, and from Egypt,

And from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam,

And from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.” (Isaiah xi. 11.)

“And he will set up an ensign for the nations,

And will assemble the dispersed of Israel,

And gather together the scattered of Judah

From the four corners of the earth.” (Ibid. 12.)

“The envy also of Ephraim shall depart,

And they that harass Judah shall be cut off;

Ephraim shall not envy Judah,

And Judah shall not vex Ephraim.” (Ibid. 13.)

This prophecy, alone, is sufficiently definite with regard to a second restoration of Israel, as appears from the eleventh verse, even if there were no other to be found.

As to the second Isaiah, his prophecies may be called the “Song of Songs” of the restoration of Israel:⁠—

“Lift up thine eyes round about, and see:

They all are gathered together, and come to thee;

Thy sons come from far,

And thy daughters are borne on the side.” (Isaiah lx. 4.)

“Who are these that fly as a cloud,

And as the doves to their cotes?” (Ibid. 8.)

“Surely the isles shall wait for Me,

And the ships of Tarshish first,

To bring thy sons from far,

Their silver and their gold with them,

For the name of the Lord thy God,

And for the Holy One of Israel, because He hath glorified thee.” (Ibid. 9.)

“For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before Me, said the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.” (Ibid. lxvi. 22.)

Micah the Morashtite prophesied in the days of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, about 750 years before the civil era:⁠—

“I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee;

I will surely gather the remnant of Israel;...” (Micah ii. 12.)

“In that day, saith the Lord, will I assemble her that halteth,

And I will gather her that is driven away,

And her that I have afflicted;” (Ibid. iv. 6.)

“And I will make her that halted a remnant,

And her that was cast far off a mighty nation;

And the Lord shall reign over them in Mount Zion from thenceforth even for ever.” (Ibid. 7.)

“Thou wilt show faithfulness to Jacob, mercy to Abraham,

As Thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.” (Ibid. vii. 20.)

Here we again meet the covenant of Truth and Mercy sworn unto Abraham, that the land Abraham then stood upon should be given to him and to his seed for ever.

Zephaniah, the son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah, the son of Hezekiah, prophesied in the days of Josiah, the son of Amon, king of Judah, about six hundred and thirty years before the ♦civil era:⁠—

“At that time will I bring you in,

And at that time will I gather you;

For I will make you to be a name and a praise

Among all the peoples of the earth,

When I turn your captivity before your eyes,

Saith the Lord.” (Zephaniah iii. 20.)

Jeremiah the son of Hilkiah, of the priests that were in Anathoth, in the land of Benjamin, also prophesied in the days of Josiah, about six hundred and twenty-nine to five hundred and eighty-eight years before the civil era:⁠—

“In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers.” (Jeremiah iii. 18.)

“In his days Judah shall be saved,

And Israel shall dwell safely;...” (Ibid. xxiii. 6.)

“Thus saith the Lord,

Who giveth the sun for a light by day,

And the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night,

Who stirreth up the sea, that the waves thereof roar,

The Lord of hosts is His name:” (Ibid. xxxi. 35.)

“If these ordinances depart from before Me,

Saith the Lord,

Then the seed of Israel also shall cease

From being a nation before Me for ever.” (Ibid. 36.)

“Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying: The two families which the Lord did choose, He hath cast them off? and they contemn My people, that they should be no more a nation before them.” (Ibid. xxxiii. 24.)

“Thus saith the Lord: If My covenant be not with day and night, if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth;” (Ibid. 25.)

“then will I also cast away the seed of Jacob, and of David My servant,...” (Ibid. 26.)

“But fear not thou, O Jacob My servant,

Neither be dismayed, O Israel;

For, lo, I will save thee from afar,

And thy seed from the land of their captivity;

And Jacob shall again be quiet and at ease,

And none shall make him afraid.” (Ibid. xlvi. 27.)

Ezekiel the Priest, the son of Buzi, prophesied in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Cebar, about five hundred and ninety-five, to five hundred and seventy-four years before the civil era. In the thirty-sixth chapter he describes the restoration of Judah and Israel in words so plain and clear that nobody could possibly mistake them, and in the next chapter, by the wonderful vision of dry bones reviving, he shows that, however unpromising the state of Israel may seem, while they are dispersed through the world, yet will God most certainly effect the reunion of the tribes which is here foretold:⁠—

“Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them—it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; and I will establish them, and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in the midst of them for ever.” (Ibid. xxxvii. 26.)

Chapters thirty-eight and thirty-nine give a most circumstantial description of the return, which excluded the possibility of an allegorical explanation.

Obadiah prophesied about five hundred and eighty-seven years before the civil era:⁠—

“But in Mount Zion there shall be those that escape,

And it shall be holy;

And the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions.” (Obadiah i. 17.)

“And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel,

That are among the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath,

And the captivity of Jerusalem, that is in Sepharad,

Shall possess the cities of the South.” (Ibid. 20.)

Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo, prophesied about five hundred and twenty years before the civil era, to those that had returned from captivity. He had the idea of a great future restoration.

“And it shall come to pass that, as ye were a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing; fear not, but let your hands be strong.” (Zechariah viii. 13.)

“I will bring them back also out of the land of Egypt,

And gather them out of Assyria;

And I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon,

And place shall not suffice them.” (Ibid. x. 10.)

Malachi prophesied about four hundred and twenty years before the civil era:⁠—

“And all nations shall call you happy;

For ye shall be a delightsome land,

Saith the Lord of hosts.” (Malachi iii. 12.)

“Behold, I will send you

Elijah the prophet

Before the coming

Of the great and terrible day of the Lord.” (Ibid. 23.)

Daniel’s (Belteshazzar) prophecies from about five hundred and thirty-four, to five hundred and seven years before the civil era relate not only to the affairs of Judah and Israel, but also to the various monarchies and kingdoms that are to arise successively in the world. In the following verses he foretells the national future of his own people:⁠—

“And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed; nor shall the kingdom be left to another people; ..., but it shall stand for ever.” (Daniel ii. 44.)

“And the kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High; their kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey them.” (Ibid. vii. 27.)

“... and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was seen since there was a nation even to that same time; and at that time thy people shall be delivered,...” (Ibid. xii. 1.)

These predictions undoubtedly signify that the Children of Israel shall enjoy a kingdom and dominion under the whole heaven, i.e. upon the earth, which shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people.⁠¹

### II.

Rev. Paul Knell (1615‒64), Israel and England Paralleled

Israel | And | England | ♦Paralleled, | In a Sermon preached before | the honourable society of Grayes-|Inne, upon Sunday in the | afternoon, Aprill 16. 1648. |

By Paul Knell, Master in Arts of Clare-Hall | in Cambridge. | Sometimes Chaplaine to a Regiment of Curiasiers | in his Majesties Army.

London, | Printed in the Yeare 1648.⁠¹

(4to. 2 ll. + 20 pp.) [B. M.]

pp. 16‒17. “... first, we may compare with Israel for a fruitfull scituation, being neither under the torrid nor the frozen Zone, neither burned away with parching heat, nor benummed away with pinching cold, but seated in a temperate climate & fertile soile; our folds are full of sheep, our vallies stand so thick with corne that we may laugh & sing. God hath also fenced us about, like the Israelites in the red sea, with a wall of water, the waters are as a wall unto us, on our right hand, & on our left,... And now, England, what doth thy Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all his waies, and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soule? But here God may as justly complaine of us as he did of Israel,...”

### III.

Matthew Arnold on Righteousness in the Old Testament

Matthew Arnold, in his Literature and Dogma, insists that righteousness is in a special manner the object of Bible religion. The word “righteousness” is a master word in the Old Testament. What would England have been were it not for the importance which Jeshurun, the upright, attached to the thought and practice of righteousness? She might have been eminent in law, in arts and sciences borrowed from the Romans and the Greeks, but she would have been addicted to idolatry and the gratification of the senses, and would have borne the doom of destruction within herself. He draws a vivid imaginary picture of the authorities of one of the English great Universities, the vice-Chancellor, beadles, masters, scholars, and all, nay, their very professor of moral philosophy, going in procession to worship at the shrine of Aphrodite.

“If it had not been for Israel,” he continues, “and the stern check which Israel put upon the glorification and divinization of this natural bend of mankind.... And as long as the world lasts, all who want to make progress in righteousness will come to Israel for inspiration, as to the people who have had the sense for righteousness most glowing and strongest; and in hearing and reading the words Israel has uttered for us, carers for conduct will find a glow and a force they would find nowhere else. As well imagine a man with a sense for sculpture not cultivating it by the help of the remains of Greek art, or a man with a sense for poetry not cultivating it by the help of Homer and Shakespeare, as a man with a sense for conduct not cultivating it by the help of the Bible.”⁠¹

### IV.

“Esperança de Israel,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

מקוה ישראל | Esto es, | Esperança | De Israel. |

Obra con suma curiosidad conpuesta | por | Menasseh Ben Israel | Theologo, y Philosopho Hebreo. |

Trata del admirable esparzimiento de los diez | Tribus, y su infalible reduccion con los de | mas, a la patria: con muchos puntos, | y Historias curiosas, y declara-|cion de varias Prophecias, | por el Author rectamen-|te interpretadas. |

Dirigido a los señores Parnassim del K.K. | de Talmvd Tora. | En Amsterdam. | En la Imprension de | Semvel Ben Israel Soeiro.⁠¹ | Año. 5410. |

(sm. 8º. 7 ll. + 126 pp.)⁠² [I. S.]

### V.

“Spes Israelis,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

מקוה ישראל | Hoc est, | Spes | Israelis. |

Authore | Menasseh Ben Israel | Theologo & Philosopho Hebræo. Amstelodami. | Anno 1650. |

(sm. 8º. 6 ll. + 111 pp.) [I. S.]

sig. [A2] Svpremo Angliæ Consessvs Parlamento, ejusdemque Reipublicæ Status Consilio Honorando, Salutem, ac felicitatem omnem, a Deo apprecatur Menasseh Ben Israel.⁠¹

### VI.

“Hope of Israel—Ten Tribes ... in America—מקוה ישראל De Hoop Van Israel,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

The | Hope of Israel: |

Written | By Menasseh Ben Israel, | an Hebrew Divine, and Philosopher. |

Newly extant, and Printed in | Amsterdam, and Dedicated by the | Author to the High Court, the | Parliament of England, and | to the | Councell of State. |

Translated into English, and | published by Authority. |

In this Treatise is shewed the place where the ten | Tribes at this present are, proved, partly by | the strange relation of one Antony Monte-|zinus, a Jew, of what befell him as he tra-|velled over the Mountaines Cordillære, with | divers other particulars about the restoration of | the Jewes, and the time when. |

Printed at London by R. I. for Hannah Allen, | at the Crown in Popes-head | Alley, 1650. |

(sm. 8º. 7 ll. + 90 pp.) [I. S.]

sig. A3. “To the Parliament, the Supream Court of England, and to the right Honourable the Councell of State, Menasseh Ben Israell, prayes God to give health, and all Happinesse.” But the original edition in Spanish is dedicated “A los Muy Nobles, Prudentes, y Magnificos Señores, Deputados y Parnassim deste K.K. de Talmud Tora.” ... Amsterdā. a 13 de Sebat. An. 5410.

In this first English version the name of the translator does not appear on the title page, nor does “The Translator to the Reader” bear any signature; but “Moses Wall” does appear on the title pages of two issues of a second edition which appeared in 1651 and 1652. (4to. 5 ll. + 62 pp.) [B. M.]

It was published again under the following title:⁠—

“Accounts Of The Ten Tribes of Israel Being In America; Originally Published By R. Manasseh Ben Israel.

With Observations Thereon, And Extracts From Sacred And Profane, Ancient And Modern History, Confirming The Same; And Their Return From Thence About The Time Of The Return Of The Jews.”

By Robert Ingram, A.M. Vicar of Wormingford and Boxted, Essex.

Colchester: Printed And Sold By W. Keymer; Sold Also By G. G. J. And J. Robinson, Pater-Noster-Row, London, 1792. [Price One Shilling.]

(8º. 56 pp.) [I. S.]

There are several Hebrew versions, the first translation appearing in 1698.

מקוה ישראל חברו ... החכם השלם׃ ... מנשה בן ישראל זצ״ל בלשון גוי הולנדי״אה׃ ¹ועתה נעתק ללשון הקודש ע״י ... ר״ אליקים בהר״ר יעקב ש״ץ זצ״ל חזן בק״ק אמשטרדם׃ ... נדפס באמשטרדם ... בשנת [תנח] לפ״ק ... בדפוס קאשמן עמריך.

(16mo. סו (66) ll.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

De | Hoop | Van Israël. |

Een Werck met groote naukeurigheyt | beschreven: |

Door | Menasseh Ben Israël | Hebreeuws Godtgeleerde en | Wijsbegeer. |

Waer in hy handelt van de wonderlijcke | verstroyinge der 10 Stammen, en hare ge-|wisse herstellinge met de twee Stammen Juda | en Benjamin in’t Vaderlandt. Met veele aen-|wijsingen, naukeurige vertellingen, en verkla-|ringen van verscheyde Prophetien. |

Met meer als 90 Beschrijvers bevestight: |

Met een verantwoordingh voor de | Eedele Volcken der Jooden. | Den 2. Druck⁠¹ van veel Letter-mis stellingen gesuyvert. | t’Amsterdam, | Voor Jozua Rex, Boeck-binder, | op de Cingel, recht over de Appelen-marrickt, | in’t Jaer 1666. |

(12mo. 6 ll. + 124 pp. [De Hoop Van Israel.])⁠² [I. S.]

### VII.

The Humble Addresses of Manasseh Ben-Israel

To | His Highnesse | The | Lord Protector | Of The | Common-Wealth Of | England, Scotland, and Ireland.

The Humble Addresses | Of | Menasseh Ben Israel, a Divine, and | Doctor of Physick, in behalfe | of the Jewish Nation. |

(4to. 4 ll. + 26 pp.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

### VIII.

“Vindiciæ Judæorum,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

Vindiciæ | Judæorum, | Or A | Letter | In Answer to certain Questions propounded by | a Noble and Learned Gentleman, touching | the reproaches cast on the Nation of the | Jevves; wherein all objections are | candidly, and yet fully cleared. |

By Rabbi Menasseh Ben Israel a Divine | and a Physician. |

Printed by R. D. in the year 1656. |

(4to. 1 l. + 41 pp.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

### IX.

Enseña A Pecadores

Libro | Yntitulado | Enseña | A | Pecadores |

Que contiene diferentes | obras, mediante las qua-|lespide el hombre | piedad à su | Criador. |

En casa y acosta | de David de castro Tartaz. |

En Amsterdam | Anno 5426. |

(12mo. 88 + ח (= 8) (8) pp.) [B. M.]

Page 2. “Prologo.... Aviendo pues el Señor hecho merced al mundo en traer a luz las obras divinas del H. Ribi Esayah, su memoria sea para benedicion, las quales son llenas de doctrinas y modos de encaminar al hombre a la salvacion....”

pp. 61‒79. “Conficion Muy Copiosa Maravillosa y llena de divinos conceptos y misterios, hecha por el divino Theologo y excellentissimo Sabio, Ribi Yshac Askenazi de Loria, Traduzida de Hebrico, en lengua castellana, por el doctissimo Haham Menasseh ben Ysrael; el Anno 5383. la qual se puede dezir estando el hombre enfermo o de ajuno o en qual quiera tiempo.”

pp. 80‒88. Vidvy Penitencial ... Auctor Selomoh De Oliuera.

וידוי כפרה ... שלמה די אוליוירה יצ״ו התחלתו ערב ר״ח אדר ראשון. בשנת מגיני אל אלהים מושיע ישרי לב׃ א‒ה .pp

תושלבע׃

### X.

“De Termino Vitæ—of the Term of Life,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

צרור החיים | Menasseh | Ben Israel, | De | Termino | Vitæ: | Libri Tres. |

Quibus veterum Rabbi-|norum, ac recentium do-|ctorum, de hac con-|troversia sententia | explicatur. |

Amstelodami. Typis & sumpti-|bus authoris An. 1639. |

(12mo. 8 ll. + 237 pp. + 25 ll.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

### XI.

“נשמת חיים—De Immortalitate Animæ,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

ספר נשמת חיים על ענין הנשמה ... מנשה בן ישראל ... פה ק״ק אמשטרדם נדפס בדפוס בן המחבר שמואל אברבנאל סואירו בשנת [תיב] לפ״ק׃

(4to. 8 + קעד (174) + 2 ll.) [I. S.]

Some editions, which are excessively rare, have this Latin addition:⁠—

נשמת חיים | Menasseh Ben Israel | Libri Quatuor | De | Immortalitate Animæ. |

In quibus multæ insignes & ju-|cundæ quæstiones ventilantur, | uti videre est, ex argu-|mento operis. |

Amstelodami, | Apud Autoris filium | Samuel Ben Israel Abrabanel Sueiro. |

Anno ϲlͻ. ͻlϲ. LI. |

(8 ll.) [I. S.]

sig. A2. (Epistola Dedicatoria) Ferdinando III. Augustissº. Romanorum Imperatori....

Sig. A4². Augustissimi Imperatoris Servus humillimus Menasseh Ben Israel.

Amstelodami Calendis Decembris Anno ϲlͻ. lͻϲ. LI.

### XII.

“Rights of the Kingdom,” by John Sadler

Rights of the Kingdom; | Or, | Customs of our Ancestours:... With an Ocasionall Discourse of Great Changes yet | expected in the World. |

London, | Printed by Richard Bishop. 1649.|⁠¹

(4to. 4 ll. + Aa‒Mm + f‒z + a‒c in fours.) [I. S.]

sig. G4. “How they are Now, I need not say, although I might also beare them witnesse, that They are yet Zealous in Their Way. nor doe they wholly want, ingenuous able men. of whom I cannot but with Honour, mention Him, that hath so much obliged the world, by his learned Writings; Rab Menasseh Ben Israel: a very learned, Civill Man, and a Lover of our Nation.

“The more I think upon the Great Change, now comming on Them, and All the World; the more I would be Just and Mercifull to Them, to All.”

### XIII.

“Nova Solyma,” edited by Rev. Walter Begley

Nova Solyma The Ideal City; Or Jerusalem Regained

An Anonymous Romance Written In The Time Of Charles I.

Now first Drawn From Obscurity, And Attributed To The Illustrious John Milton.⁠¹

With Introduction, Translation, Literary Essays And A Bibliography

By The Rev. Walter Begley

vol. i., ii.

London John Murray, Albemarle Street. 1902.

(p. 4). “The book was first presented to the public in small octavo form with this title page:

Novæ | Solymæ | Libri Sex. | Londini Typis Joannis Legati.| MDCXLVIII. |

“The book contained three hundred and ninety-two pages, of which the last contained the errata and the printer’s short notice to the reader. There was no preface or introduction of any kind, and no notes. The only printed extra was this Latin motto in the middle of the blank page facing the title:

‘Cujus opus, studio cur tantum quaeris inani?’

‘Qui legis, et frueris, feceris esse tuum.’

which I turn thus:

(p. 5). “‘Whose is the book?’ do you ask. ‘Why start such a bootless enquiry?

If you but read and enjoy, you will have made it your own.’” (pp. 5‒6). “... The next year the same book was published again—an evident attempt to utilise the unsold remainder, as there was no difference whatever, except a new title page with the old fly-leaf motto included in it and a page at the end containing the autocriticon. In the only copy I have seen, [St. John’s College, Cambridge], the title page runs as follows:

Novæ Solymæ Libri Sex; sive Institutio Christiani.

1. De Pueritia.

2. De Creatione Mundi.

3. De Juventute.

4. De Peccato.

5. De Virili Aetate.

6. De Redemptione Hominis.

Cujus opus, studio cur tantum quaeris inani?

Qui legis, et frueris, feceris esse tuum.

Londini: Typis Johannis Legati, et venundantur per Thomam Underhill sub signo Biblii in vico Anglice dicto Woodstreet. MDCXLIX.”

Here we have the very useful addition that it was published by Thomas Underhill, of Wood Street.

(preface pp. vii‒viii). “... That such a wide-reaching, learned, and varied work should have been allowed to remain unappreciated and utterly ignored for more than two hundred and fifty years is certainly a very surprising literary fact....

“The critics seem to have been both blind and deaf. They gave no encouraging praise, and no disheartening condemnation. They simply took no notice. And so this great work of seventeenth-century art vanished from the sight of men. A few copies were put away in college libraries, where they rested for years undisturbed and dust-covered in their original positions, and have so continued to rest for two centuries and a half, lost to the world.”

(p. 18). “There is a spirit of pure, lofty, and unselfish morality evident throughout all the various scenes of this interesting and unaffected book. It shows us the brightest, strongest elements of God-fearing Puritanism;...” “Here are the lyric songs from ‘the law and prophets,’ Abraham’s meditation on the Mount Moriah, Cain’s lamentations for Abel, David’s lament for Saul and Jonathan, and many a noble ode from the Psalms and short epics from Job....” “Here Truth and Justice and the Fear of God are all placed on the high pedestals they so well deserve; and there is withal a kindly insistence everywhere on those great teachings which tend to make life more abounding in hope, more perfect in self-restraint and more lifted-up in spirit.”

All these ideas are Hebrew, and characteristically Biblical. But the most curious fact, from our point of view, is that this work contains a description of the Ideal State on Mount Zion. Of course, the tendency is thoroughly Christian, but it is that kind of Christianity which is inspired by the Old Testament and by a sentiment of love for the old Jewish nation and the Holy Land. This book is the poetical expression of the Restoration ideas of the seventeenth century. It begins with a description of the springtime in New Jerusalem, “the city with twelve gates” (Ezekiel xlviii. 31), and “a virgin who held in her right hand a golden rod, and in her left the two tables of the Law.” The tourist-visitors, “two Englishmen and the third a Sicilian,” are told that “it is the anniversary of the founding of the city and the virgin you saw represented Zion, or, as they say, the Daughter of Zion.” “They” evidently refers to the Jews.

Strangers are received with remarkable hospitality (as in Herzl’s Altneuland).

(p. 86). “But Jacob, for that was the old man’s name, urged him all the more, ‘Come, come,’ said he, ‘it is a national duty with us to treat strangers with kindness, not unmindful that we too, long ago, were strangers in Egypt, and since then for a long time strangers and wanderers among all the nations of the earth. But now we call none aliens from Israel....’”

(p. 88). “We are now very close on the fiftieth year since our long and widely-scattered nation was restored to its present wonderful prosperity.” The old Jew then explains the system of education adopted in the new country, a system of physical development and moral integrity.

Joseph, who is one of the tourists and the hero of the romance, indulges in songs of Zion.

(pp. 175‒6) “O sacred top of Solyma,

How lovely is thy place

Where stands the city of our King

Where faithful saints rejoice and sing

O mercy, love and grace!

“For there our greater Temple stands

With greater glory blest

And there redeemed from alien lands,

Brought back at last by God’s own hands,

His Israel finds her rest.”

Here the translator remarks:

(p. 177) note i.: “How many sighs and prayers have gone up from the dispersed children of Zion in Russian Poland, in Galicia, in Roumania and by the old broken wall of Jerusalem in these latter days! What longing for this ‘antepast of Heaven’ that Joseph here speaks of! What passionate desire for that time, when the children of Zion should no longer have to sing ‘the Lord’s song in a strange land’! Is this century to see the Zionists in possession again of their Holy City—their longed-for Salem, the ‘Vision,’ the ‘Foundation,’ the ‘Inheritance’ of Peace, as expositors have variously entitled it? Who can say? From a practical point of view the prospect somehow fails to charm; but when I view it in theory, it seems as if the justice of the world as well as the justice of the Eternal One would be nobly consummated by such a termination to an earthly pilgrimage of nigh two thousand years.”

The anonymous author proceeds to describe the old-new home, and the people, new-born in benevolence, piety and purity, with their national distinctiveness, and the two tables of the Law. Thus, with all his honest and deep Christian convictions and belief in the final triumph of his religious ideas, he recognizes the right of the Jewish nation to have their country and to remain faithful to their traditions. This strange romance, after all sorts of philosophical reflections and sketches of various adventures in Sicily and elsewhere, comes back to Zion to sing the songs of the Old Testament in Latin verse in a way which shows that the author had the rhythm and atmosphere of Biblical poetry to perfection, and also that his views were much more in harmony with the notions of that time than with modern conceptions. The whole work is inspired by great enthusiasm for Israel’s glory, and abounds with sympathy and admiration for the Jewish nation.

Begley, who was a man of profound knowledge and an authority on matters of composition and style, ascribes this work to Milton. If this view be accepted, then to this poet’s glory must be added a further claim to immortality, because he was the first poet who expounded—from a Christian point of view—the idea of Israel’s Restoration in the form of a poetical romance. But from our point of view it does not matter whether Milton was the author, or another poet; the fact remains that this remarkable work is English and appeared in England in 1648.

### XIV.

“Prædamitæ—Men Before Adam,” by Isaac de La Peyrère⁠¹

Another of his famous works, also published anonymously, was:⁠—

Præadamitæ. | Sive | Exercitatio | super Versibus duodecimo, decimotertio, & | decimoquarto, capitis quinti Epistolæ | D. Pauli ad Romanos. | Qvibvs Indvcvntvr | Primi Homines ante Adamum | conditi. |

Anno Salvtis, | M.DC.LV. |

(4to. 22 ll. + 297 + 8 pp. [Synagogis Ivdæorvm Vniversis.]) [I. S.]

In the following year it was translated into English:⁠—

Men before Adam. | Or | A Discourse upon the twelfth, | thirteenth, and fourteenth Verses | of the Fifth Chapter of the Epistle | of the Apostle Paul to the | Romans. |

By which are prov’d, | That the first Men were crea-|ted before Adam. |

London, | Printed in the Year, 1656. |

(8º. 8 ll. + 61 pp. + 9 pp. + 35 ll.) [I. S.]

The End of the first Part (No more published)

sig. A.4. “To all the Synagogues to the Jews, dispersed over the face of the Earth.”

sig. M.8. “Terræ Sanctæ Delineatio” (A map of the Holy Land).⁠¹

### XV.

Isaac Vossius

Isaac Vossius was born at Leyden in Holland, one of the sons of the renowned scholar Gerard John Vossius by his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of Francis du Jon (Junius) (1545‒1602), French theologian and philologist. All the sons were precocious scholars, but Isaac was undoubtedly the most eminent.... He was invited by Queen Christina of Sweden, one of the most erudite women of her time, to come and shed the lustre of his learning upon Stockholm. He arrived towards the end of 1649, was appointed a Court Chamberlain, and taught the Queen Greek. In 1650 he sold her his father’s library for twenty thousand florins, with the stipulation that he received five thousand florins yearly with board and residence for its superintendence. In 1652 owing to certain differences he left Sweden. In 1655 Manasseh Ben Israel dedicated to him:⁠—

אבן יקרה | Piedra Gloriosa | O | De La | Estatua | De | Nebuchadnesar. |

Con muchas y diversas authoridades | de la S.S. y antiguos sabios. | Compuesto por el Hacham | Menasseh Ben Israel. | Amsterdam An. 5415. |

(12mo. 6 ll. + 259 pp. + 3 ll. + 4 etchings at pp. 5, 87, 160, 180.) [I. S.]

“All muy noble y doctissimo Señor Isaco Vossio, Gentil hombre de la camara de su Magestad, La Reyna de Svedia.

Muy noble y doctissimo Señor, ... Intimo amigo y afficionado servidor de V. M.,

Menasseh ben Ysrael.

Amsterdam 25. de Abril, An. 5415.”

In a list of Manasseh’s works at the end of the volume, it is catalogued “Piedra preciosa; o de la Estatua de Nebuchadnesar, donde se sexpone lo mas essencial del libro de Daniel.” It was for this small volume that Rembrandt designed and etched four illustrations.⁠¹

Vossius was created D.C.L. at Oxford in 1670, and installed to a prebend in the royal chapel at Windsor in 1673, which was presented to him by Charles II. (1630‒1685), and died at Windsor 21 Feb., 1688. He had accumulated the finest private library in the world, including 762 manuscripts. It was sold at Leyden in 1710 for thirty-six thousand florins. A large number of original letters of Vossius are preserved at the Bodleian Library, Oxford.

### XVI.

“Doomes-Day”

Doomes-Day: | Or, | The great Day of the Lord’s Iudgement, | proved by Scripture; and two other Prophecies, | the one pointing at the yeare 1640. the other at this | present yeare 1647. to be even now neer at hand.

With | The gathering together of the Jews in great Bodies | under Josias Catzius (in Illyria, Bithinia, and Cappadocia) | for the conquering of the Holy Land. | ...

London, | Printed for W. Ley. 1647

(4to. 1 l. + 6 pp.) [I. S.]

(p. 2) “... even those people the Jewes, according to certaine and credible information, are at this time [* Under Josias Catzius, and according to Letters from beyond the Seas, they are numerous, and shew themselves in great bodies in Illyria, Bethinia and Cappadocia.] assembling themselves together into one body from out of all countreys, whereinto they have been driven with a resolution to regaine the holy land once more out of the hand of the Ottaman:”⁠¹

### XVII.

“Restauration of all Israel and Judah”

A Paper, shewing that the great Conversion and Restauration of all Israel and Judah will be fulfilled at Christs second comming; and that the New Jerusalem, called Jehovah Shamma, described by Ezekiel, chap. 40. to the end of the Book, is most probably then to be set up, and is referred to the same time, &c., May 1. 1674.

(4to. 8 ll.) [I. S.]

### XVIII.

“Apology for the Honorable Nation of the Jews—Apologia por la noble nacion de los Ivdios—Verantwoordinge voor de edele Volcken der Jooden,” by Edward Nicholas

An | Apology | For The | Honorable Nation | Of The | Jews, | And all the Sons of | Israel.

Written by Edward Nicholas, Gent. | ...

London, Printed by John Field, 1648. |

(4to. 15 pp.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

A Spanish translation was also published here:⁠—

Apologia | Por | La noble nacion de los | Ivdios | y hijos de | Israel. |

Escrita en Ingles | Por | Eduardo Nicholas. |

E impresa en casa de Juan Field, en | Londres, |

Año ϲlͻ ϲlϲ XLIX. |

(sm. 8º. 8 ll.) [I. S.]

Some years later a Dutch version was issued (Published together with “De Hoop Van Israël” of Manasseh Ben Israel).

Verantwoordinge, | Voor | De Edele Volcken der | Jooden, |

En Kinderen van | Israel. |

In het Engels beschreven | Door | Eduardo Nicolas. |

In’t Nederduyts overgeschreven | en gedruckt. |

t’Amsterdam, | Voor Jozua Rex, Bœck-binder, | op de Cingel, recht over de Appelen-marreckt | in’t Jaer 1666. |

(12mo. 1 l. + 26 pp. + 1 l.) [I. S.]

### XIX.

“A Word for the Armie,” by Hugh Peters

“A word for the | Armie. | And two words to the | Kingdome. | To | Cleare the One, | And cure the Other. |

Forced in much plainesse and bre-|vity from their faithfull Servant, | Hugh Peters. | ....

London, | Printed by M. Simmons for Giles Calvert at the black | Spread-Eagle at the West end of Pauls, 1647. |

(4to. 14 pp.) [I. S.]

sig. B2. “IOLY. That Merchants may have all the manner of encouragement, the law of Merchants set up, and strangers, even Jewes admitted to trade, and live with us, that it may not be said we pray for their conversion, with whom we will not converse, wee being all but strangers on the Earth.”

### XX.

Isaac da Fonseca Aboab

He was the son of David Aboab and Isabel da Fonseca. To distinguish him from his contemporary Isaac de Matatiah Aboab, he is generally alluded to as “Fonseca Aboab.” He was born at Castrodagre, Portugal, and brought to Amsterdam as a child, where he became a pupil of Haham Isaac (ob. 1622) de Abraham Uziel. In 1623 he was the Haham of the Nevé Shalom, the second synagogue established in Amsterdam. In 1642 he emigrated to Pernambuco (Recife) in Brazil, where he was Haham until he returned to Amsterdam in 1654. (In 1640 Manasseh himself had intended going out to Brazil to join his brother Ephraim Soeiro⁠¹ in business.) During Aboab’s Rabbinate there was war between the Dutch and Portuguese for possession of the colony, which he describes in Hebrew verse, still in manuscript. He was the first Rabbi and the first Hebrew Author in the New World. It has been alleged, that in his declining years he was a secret votary of Sabbatai Zebi. He was a great-grandson of the last Gaon of Castile, the Isaac Aboab (1433‒1493) who wrote a super-commentary to Nachmanides’ commentary on the Pentateuch, printed in Constantinople in 1525. Rabbi Abraham de Samuel Zacuto, the author of the Juchasin, was one of his pupils, and on his death delivered the funeral oration.

### XXI.

Dr. Abraham Zacutus Lusitanus

He was one of the most eminent physicians of his time and the author of many valuable works in connection with his profession. He was a native of Lisbon and of marrano origin. In the year 1625, when Philip (1605‒1665) IV. of Spain (1621‒1665) and Portugal (1621‒1640) banished the Jews from the latter kingdom, Zacutus escaped to Amsterdam from the clutches of the Holy Office. Here he was initiated into the Abrahamic covenant and lived as an exemplary Jew. He was one of the “Aprovaciones” of the first volume of the Conciliador “Sapientissimo Viro, Domino Menasseh Ben Israel, sacrorum librorum eruditissimo interpreti, Salvtem.... Amstelodami dié ultim. Mensis August. Anno. 1632.

Te summé colit, & observat,

Doctor Zacutus Lusitanus.”

Among his clientele he numbered the Elector Palatine Frederick V. (1596‒1632), King of Bohemia (1619‒1620), and his consort Elizabeth Stuart (1596‒1662), eldest daughter of James (1566‒1625) I., King of England (1603‒1625). They were the parents of Sophia (1630‒1714), Electress of Hanover, the mother of George (1660‒1727) I. (1714‒1727).

His great-grandfather was Abraham [Diogo Rodriguez] (1450?‒post 1510) de Samuel de Abraham Zacut, the astronomer, mathematician and historian.

In 1473, while a professor in the University of his native town, Salamanca, he wrote his world-famous: ביאור לוחות׃ [B. M.] (Astronomical Tables), and here he became acquainted with Christopher Columbus (1446?‒1506).

His pupil Joseph Vecinho (Vizino) [Diego Mendes], physician to João II., the Great (1455‒1495), King of Portugal (1481‒1495), translated the work into Latin. It was printed by a Jew, Samuel D’Ortas, at Leiria in 1496, and entitled “Almanach Perpetuum.” Dr. Vecinho presented a copy to Columbus, which he always carried with him and consulted on his voyages, deriving invaluable help from it.

It was this very book that he used to predict the eclipse of the moon, which so terrified the Indians in Jamaica that they became obedient to him, and furnished his party food. After his death it was found in his library. On the margins are calculations in his penmanship, which were doubtless made to verify those of Zacuth.⁠¹

On the exile from Spain, 2 August, 1492, the author went to Lisbon, where he was appointed astronomer and historiographer to João II. He was of material assistance to the great navigator Vasco da Gama (1460?‒1524), in preparation of his voyage to India. The ships were provided with Zacuto’s newly perfected iron astrolabes, which hitherto had been of wood. He was highly esteemed by da Gama, who took leave of him on the 8 July, 1497, in the presence of his entire crew.

Portugal also expelled the Jews, so he fled with his son Samuel to Tunis, and here in 1504 he wrote his famous ספר יוחסין which is a chronological history of the Jews from the Creation up to 1500.

It was first printed in Constantinople in 1566 [B. M.], and an issue edited by Herschell Filipowski (1817‒1872) was published in London in 1857, some copies of which were printed on vellum [B. M.]. Tunis being invaded by Spain he emigrated to Turkey, where he died some time after 1510.

### XXII.

Jacob Judah Aryeh d̅e Leon

Haham Jacob Judah Aryeh de Leon [Templo] of marrano origin, was born in Hamburgh in 1603. Here for some years he was teacher in Hebrew and Rabbinics to the Kahal Kadosh de Talmud Torah. Subsequently he was appointed Haham of Middelburgh in Holland, where in 1642 he published tracts in Spanish⁠¹ and Dutch,⁠² describing a model he had constructed of Solomon’s Temple. Shortly after he settled in Amsterdam and resumed his tutorial profession, and it was here that a French version⁠³ of the tract was published, and seven years later a Hebrew edition appeared,⁠⁴ translated by the Author from his original Spanish. Versions in German,⁠⁵ Latin,⁠⁶ and Ladino⁠⁷ have also been issued at various times. In anticipation of his visit to London to exhibit his model before Charles II. (1630‒1685) and his Court, he prepared an essay in English, which was printed and published in Amsterdam,⁠⁸ describing the model of Solomon’s Temple, and also that of the Tabernacle of Moses, of which he had also constructed a model. It was again on view here in the years 1759 and 1760.⁠⁹ In 1778 it was in the possession of a Mr. M. P. Decastro, who claimed to be a near relation of Haham de Leon. He exhibited the model here, and translated and published the essay describing it,⁠¹⁰ which he tells us was “First printed in Hebrew and Spanish.”⁠¹¹

Leon Templo,⁠¹ as our Haham is at times referred to, is supposed to have invented “The Arms of yᵉ most Ancient & Honorable Fraternity, of Free and Accepted Masons.” The original drawing was seen by Laurence Dermott (1720‒1791) when he saw the model of the Temple in 1759‒1760.⁠² He also wrote on the “Cherubim” and on the “Ark of the Testimony.” In 1671 he issued the Psalms in Hebrew, with a Spanish paraphrase and notes. This was his last published work, in the preface of which he tells us that although he was then sixty-seven years of age, he completed the work in seven months, at times that he could spare from his tutorial duties. Four works in manuscript are still unpublished. After his death, among his sketches were found over two hundred designs to illustrate and elucidate Biblical and Rabbinical passages. These his son Haham Solomon Raphael (ob. 1733 circa) de Leon Templo presented to Willem Surenhuis, who had them engraved for his edition of the Mishna.⁠³

Biographers do not seem to know when and where he died. David Franco Mendes (1713‒1792) tells us that after his London visit he returned to Amsterdam, and although he gives a transcription of his epitaph, consisting of eight lines of Hebrew laudatory verse, no date is mentioned.⁠¹ Dr. M. Kayserling suggests that he died after 1675, that is after his London visit.⁠² There is, however, good authority to surmise that he died in London during his visit.

### XXIII.

Thesouro Dos Dinim

Thesovro Dos Dinim.... Composto por. Menasseh Ben Israel. Estampado em casa de Eliahu Aboab. An. 5405.

(8º. 16 ll. (one blank) + 625 pp. [in four sections])

*2 Muy Nobres, Magnificos, e Prudentes Senhores, Parnassim deste Kaal Kados de Talmud Torah.... o Sʳ David Abarbanel Dormido, Parnas da Sedaká, e Talmud Tora.... Menasseh ben Israel.

Amsterdam 15 de Hiyar, An. 5405. [B. M.]

Thesovro Dos Dinim ultima parte ... Economica ... Por Menasseh Ben Israel.

Amsterdā, na officina de Ioseph ben Israel seu filho.⁠¹ 5407.

8º 8 ll. (one blank) + 210 pp. + 4 ll.

A2.... Dedicatoria. Aos muy nobres, Magnificos e Prudētes Senhores, os Senhores Abrahā e Ishak Israel Pereyra....

A3. Este sen intimo, e affeiçoado amigo,

o Hahā, Menasseh ben Israel

Amsterdam 12 de Tamuz, An. 5407. [B. M.]

The two parts of Thesouro dos Dinim were subsequently reissued in one volume:⁠—

Amsterdam Anno 5470 (8º. 4 + 201 + 2 ll.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

### XXIV.

“Rettung der Juden,” by Manasseh Ben-Israel

Manasseh Ben Israel Rettung der Juden Aus dem Englischen übersetzt.

Nebst einer Vorrede von Moses Mendelssohn.

Als ein Anhang zu des Hrn. Kriegsraths Dohm Abhandlung: Ueber die bürgerliche Verbesserung der Juden....

Berlin und Stettin bey Friedrich Nicolai. 1782.

(8º. lii. + 64 pp.) [I. S.]

### XXV.

Newes from Rome.

Newes from Rome.

Printed by I. R. for Henry Gosson, and are to be sold in Pater

From a rare tract lent by Mr. Israel Solomons.

Of two mightie Armies, aswell footemen as horsmen: The first of the great Sophy, the other of an Hebrew people, till this time not discouered, comming from the Mountaines of Caspij, who pretend their warre is to recouer the Land of Promise, & expell the Turks out of Christendome. With their multitude of Souldiers, & new invention of weapons.

Also certaine prophecies of a Iew seruing to that Armie, Caleb Shilocke, prognosticating many strange accidents, which shall happen the following yeere, 1607.

Translated out of Italian into English, by W. W.

❧ TO THE RENOWNED

Lord, Don Mathias de Rensie,
of Venice.

AFTER the particuler thinges alleaged in my former writings vnto your Lordshippe, I thought it good and conuenient by this my Letter, to aduertise your Lordship, of certaine great, horrible, and fearefull things that hapned in this quarter.

Purposing to certifie your Lordship of the pompe and great triumph at the presenting of the Captaines of the Sea, vnto the great Turke: the miserie and vnhappines of the poore prisoners: the discorde & contention that came by the sonne of the Vice Roy of Naples, being prisoner: the threatnings made to the Christians: the receiuing of the Ambassadors of the Soffy: the pompes, tryumphes, and entertainments made vnto them, and yet dissembled enough, with mocking one the other at their departing: the presents giuen: the going of the great Turke a hunting and all other thinges written at large, as your Lordship shall vnderstand.

But now your Lordship shall vnderstand at thys time, the greatest, the most wonderfull, and most strange thing that euer was heard of. The which partly hath so troubled the great Turke, and all the rest, that they haue left of all other affayres, to prouide for the perrill and danger that at this time hangeth ouer theyr heads.

Your Lordships to vse,

Signior Valesco.

Newes from Rome
⁂

The newes are come that the king of Hungarie maketh a great Army, which shall haue for his ayde the gallies of Buda, and of many other Princes of Christendome. And they say moreouer, that the king of Bohemia will helpe therein, and that the most part of Christian Princes will come and ayde him in this enterprise against the Turke, except the Signorie of Venice, which medleth nothing at all in it. These reporters of newes affirme, that there shal come aboue a hundred gallies, besides other Barks, ships, & Hulkes without number, which is occasion that they hasten the warre the more. Notwithstanding, men esteeme not so much hereof, as of the war that is made beyond the Mountaines, as you shall understand not without wondering at it. The Tartars make friendes upon the greater Sea, & haue made a league & friendship with the great Turke, requiring ayde, for they are molested with war by the great Emperour of Muscouia, & prince of Sagodie, of Pogore, of Smelengie, of Drossy, of Gazam, of Virgolosam, of Tartarie, of Cham, and of diuers other people and regions lying toward the South: they say that this Emperor or Duke hath two Armies, and is called Iohn Dwatillo, a young man, of the age of xxiiii. yeeres, noble and valiant, and a Christian, after the institution of the Greekes, and presumeth that by reason of his blood, the Empire of Constantinople doth belong to him, And these two Armies are about two hundred thousand horse.

They were not wont in time past to be so strong, nor so feared of the Turks, for they had not the use of artillarie in the warre: but nowe they haue meruailous great preparation in theyr warre. Hee hath in wages certaine Dutch Captaines, and about tenne thousand Maister gunners, and is meruailously well furnished with harquebushes, and artillery, and because men understand that hee hath so vanquisht the Tartarians, and brought thē to such a state, that they cannot much more resist him, and that if the saide Muscouite should be maisters ouer the Tartars, they should consequently be Rulers of the great sea, & the way should bee open and easie for them to come, not onely to Constantinople, but also to driue the Turke out of Europe: and because that the saide great Turke is assured of this enterprise and commotion of the Greekes: he hath cōcluded and determined, to send to the said Tartars a good assistance of fifteene thousand fighting men, and also for this purpose, hee hath sent to the sea ten Gallies to passe them ouer.

Men make mention and doubt of Mondaccio which is a great Prince and Ruler, and able to make foure score, or a hundred thousand horse: and yet men are uncertaine whose part he will take, because hee is tributarie unto the great Turke.

There is newes also from Affrica, that the king of Bugien, the king Tramece, the king of Tunis, the children of Serif. The Lord of Murocho, and of Gran, with the Arabians and other, haue taken in hand to driue and expulse the turke wholy out of Affrica, & to endomage him as much as they may. Men know not yet in what place they will war, but we shall know it shortly. The newes also is, that the Soffie is in Campe with a great Armie, and hath the Medes to helpe him, which border upon the Caspian Sea, and of one side neighbour to the Hircans, called at this day Correxans and Zecatans, with whom he hath made a league and peace. There are on his side also the Ibeians and Albians, and also the people of Melibar, which harbor upō the Indians, and likewise with the king of Bosphorus, all beeing people meruailous swift and nimble. In this so mightie an host and armie, is also Bascet the sonne of the great Turke, by meanes whereof, all in those parts is in great trouble, as well as heere. It seemeth that the Ienissaries bring him the lot of Turkie, as Baduget, Zermonia, Alepo, and all the Regions lying neere to the Soffi is reuolted, all the which particularities shall be understoode more at large.

This newes is great, and hath made the great turke to muse enough upon it, but aboue all these meruelous and dreadfull newes which are hapned, there is yet chaunced another, which hath greatly feared & abashed all men, which although it seemeth to be incredible, yet upon my credit it is most true, and that is, that a people heretofore unknowne, mighty, swift, and meruelous nimble, hath taken weapon in hand, to the disaduantage and losse of the house of Ottoman. They say that Alexander the great did in time past driue beyond the mountaine Caspe nine tribes and a halfe of the Hebrewes which worshipped the Calfe & Serpent of gold, and draue them away, that neuer since there was no newes of them, neither knewe any man if they were in the worlde or not: because the Sea of sand, or the sandie sea, by a certaine inconuenience of sand Grauel or Beche, swelled & rose so high, that it utterly tooke from them the way into this our Region. But now by the meane of the newe Nauigation that yᵉ Hollanders haue made, they are arriued in their country, and haue espied out all their dooings: and after yᵗ the said Hollanders had instructed and taught them in the science and knowledge of artillery, and gun=pouder for Harquebushes and dags, whereunto they are meruelous apt and ready, they are become in all thinges perfit. After this they egged them forward to take weapon in hand, and passe the saide mountaine by Land. And because the sandy sea did hinder their passage, it appeareth yᵗ some Duchman or Italian, which yet men knowe not, but notwithstanding some great Astrologian or Cosmographer taught them the way, making some hill plaine with fire, whereby they might easilie passe, which is a thing of great wonder.

These people haue two mighty great armies, and infinite store of victualls, by reason of the fruitfulnesse of theyr country, they are also well prouided of all manner of preparation for war, & cunning in the practise of theyr weapons. They say they will come & recouer the land of Promise, towards the which the first army is already very neere, to the great terror and dread of euery man which hath either seene or heard of them. The spyes which haue been sent out by the great turke to discry them, doe affirme, that beside a hundred and two armies, there followe an infinite number of people, as well footmen as horsemen, and theyr first armie is already arriued upon the limmits of Turkie, putting all to fire and sword. Theyr language is bastard Hebrew: & because men speake much of it heere, I will not forget to speake also something thereof woorthy to be noted, and well understoode: The Hebrewes of Constantinople say, that they haue certaine prophesies, among the which one maketh mention, that from the foure parts of the world, shall rise a people, and come into Gog and Magog, and then shall appeare (as they perswade themselues) their Messias in might and power, and then they shall haue dominion and rule in the world, whereof they secretly reioyce, & are wonderous glad. They say moreouer, that there is a prophecie grauen in a piller set at Podromo which saith thus: A mightie Prince shall rise, whose beginning shall be of small reputation, who by his Issue shal war of such force and strength (with the helpe of God) that he shall bring to nothing, the empire and rule of Ottoman, and shal be the right possessour and inheritor of the Empire of Constantinople, & they beleeue all that it shall be this Emperor and duke of Muscouia, which is alreadie in great estimation among the Greeks.

The Turks haue a prophecie, which they sing often, and weepe bitterlie the while, for it betokeneth and denounceth unto them, their utter ruine and destruction. And although it seeme strange, to say that the Turkes haue prophecies, it is no meruaile: for Balam was a false Prophet: the Sybilles also prophecied and were Pagans. For all these causes the great Turke hath forbidden wine & will that all men goe fiue times in a day to the Moschea, and pray to God for theyr health and saftie. And so hee prepareth three great armies, one against the Muscouites another against the Soffie, and the third for to goe against the Hebrewes of the Mountaines of Caspij. Within these fewe dayes you shall haue other newes, wherefore thus making an end, I commend me unto your good Lordship: from Rome, the first day of June, 1606. Your faithfull and trustie seruant, Signior Valesco.

The description of the first Armie, conducted

by Zoroam a Iew, Captaine generall
of the Armies.

First of all a Jew, of verie great stature, of a fleshlie colour, more red then otherwise, with broad eyes, called Zoroam, is Captaine generall of all the Armies, hee leadeth under his Ensigne twelue thousand horse, and twenty thousand footmen. The horsemen are armed after a light sort, but very good Harnes, almost after our fashion: they carrie Launces of long Reedes, very hard and light, yet so sharpe pointed, that they passe thorowe a thing with incredible lightnesse: they carrie also shields or targets of bone, and in steede of swords, they use certaine Courtilaxes.

They are apparrelled with the colour of their Ensigne, and all clothed with silke: the foote-men carrie Pikes of the same sort, with Helmet and Habergin: their Ensigne is of blacke silke and blew, with a dog following a Hart, or Bucke, and a saying written in it, which is in our language thus: Either quick or dead.

2. Of the Armie of Don Phares.

There is one called Phares, which is an Earle, yong and valiant, not regarding this present life: this man hath under his commaund fifteene hundred horsemen armed lightly, onely on the fore-part and head-peece: yet this Armour is so well tempered and wrought, that it keepeth out a Launce and Harquebush shot.

This manner of arming themselues, is to the intent they may neuer turne their backe to runne awaie: they have also fierce and light horses: there are eighteene thousand footemen, apparrelled with a kinde of sodden leather, made of the skinne of a certaine beast, so that no pike nor harquebush can pearse it. These men are beastlie people, & will neuer flie for any thing, they are very obedient and subiect unto their Prince, and their ordinarie apparell is silke. The Ensigne that they beare, is a falcon pecking or billing with another bird, with a sentence that saith, Either thine or mine shall breake.

3. Of the Marquesse of Galair.

There is a Marquesse of Galair called Goes, this man leadeth fifteen hūdred men of armes, which be all exceeding well armed & stout, strong, and rebust men: their horses are moriskes, the greatest, the strongest, the fairest, and the best that bee in the world: there are also seuenteene thousand souldiers, very wel appointed with Launce and harquebush: theyr Ensigne or armes is a redde field, with a maid clothed in greene, holding a Lion in her hand, with these words I hope to subdue a greater thing.

4. Of the Duke of Falach.

There is a Duke of Falach, called Obeth, who hath under his conduct xx. thousand footemen, armed with a certaine mettall like yron, but it is light and hard, they have many good swords, launces, and other force, harquebushes, and wiflers: their Ensigne or armes, is a mermaid in a blacke field, and the deuise thus, My singing shall not cease untill the end.

The description of the Armie conducted by
Captaine Nauison.

There is a captaine called Nauison, which hath under him xx. thousand men, appointed and armed with the skin of a serpent, most hard & stiffe, they haue Axes, pollaxes, pikes, harquebushes, and other kind of weapons: their Ensigne or armes, is a white snaile in a blacke fielde, with a deuise about it, By little and little, men goe very farre.

Of the tribe of Simeon there is a Prince of Arsay, whose name is not yet knowne, but they say he is a deuill, great, grosse, & thicke beyond measure, with a flat nose, and both he and his men are of the stature of Giants: he leadeth with him xx. thousand footemen, almost all Alfiers, which are also so swift & nimble that they will take horses running: they make a meruailous noise, such as no people use: their Ensigne is an Lute in a blacke field, and haue for their posy, Such is my government.

6. Of the Duke of Barsalda.

There is a duke of Barsalda, and he is the conducter of xiii. thousand footmen, which are all Harquebushers, & carry no fire matches, but strike it with a stone: they are apparrelled & armed with such a hard kind of leather, and so enchaunted, that no yron weapon in the world is able to perse it thorow. They bee also very swift and light: their Ensigne or armes, is a dry tree in a blew field, and their deuise thus, I hope to spread, and be greene againe.

7. Of the Armie of the Duke Passill.

There is a duke of Passill called Abia, he hath under his conduct a thousand footmen, very cruell, hauing all kind of weapons to push or pricke far off, and to strike nigh, but farre different from ours, they are very expert in artificiall fire, and make the greatest and most dreadfull thinges withall yᵗ a man can imagin: they do it either by arte or enchauntment, so that it seemeth that it raigneth fire upon their enemies, and yet notwithstanding hurteth not themselves at all, by reason they are apparalled with a certaine Serpents skin which preserueth them. Their Ensigne is a Cat holding a Rat in her paw in a blacke fielde, and theyr posie thus, Euen so hapneth it to him that is not gouerned.

8. Of the Army conducted by the Earle of Albary.

There is an Erle of Albary called Orut, which hath under his gouernaunce a thousand horse-men with Crosse-bowes, some of them weare certaine light armour of a kind of hard mettall, with Rapyers and daggers after theyr manner, they fight alwayes running and their horses are so swift that it is wonderfull. This man also hath xx. thousand horses barbed with very fine leather. Some carry pikes & Partisans, & such like weapons. Their Ensigne or armes is a man in chaines, in a field parted halfe with greene and purple, and this deuise withall, My chaines shall bind another man.

9. Of the Marquesse of Vorio.

There is a Marques of Vorio called Manasses, who hath under his conduct xvii. thousand footemen, armed with a very hard & strong leather, which men beleeue to be enchaunted, because that no weapon nor harquebush is able to perse it thorowe, yet it is as light as Linnen cloth, and a thing very fayre to see to. These now haue all sorts of weapons that an Armie may haue: and they are deuided and set in a very faire, comely, and decent order: their Ensigne is an old man in a chariot, in a blacke field, saying thus, After a long iourney, I shall be happy.

Caleb Shilock his prophesie, for the yeere, 1607.

Be it knowne unto all men, that in the yeere 1607, when as the Moone is in the watrie signe, the world is like to bee in great danger: for a learned Jew, named Caleb Shilock, doth write, that in the foresaid yeere, the Sun shall be couered with the Dragon in the morning, from fiue of the clocke untill nine, and will appeare like fire: therefore it is not good that any man doe behold the same, for by beholding thereof he may lose his sight.

Secondly, there shall come in the same yeere a meruailous great flood of water, to the great terror and amasement of many people.

Thirdly, there shall arise a meruailous great wind, and for feare thereof many people shall be consumed, or distraughted of their wits.

Fourthlie the same yeere, about the month of May, will arise another wonderfull great flood, and so great as no man hath seene since Noyes flood, which wil continue three daies and three nights, whereby many Citties and Townes which standeth uppon sandie ground will be in great danger.

Fiftly, Infidels and Hereticks, through great feare and dread, will flie, and gather together, and asmuch as in them lies, make war against Christian princes.

Sixtlie, in the same yeere after the great waters be past, about the end of the yeere will be very great and fearefull Sicknesses: so that many people are like to die by the infection of strange diseases.

Seauenthly, there will be throughout the Worlde great trouble and contention about matters of Religion, and wonderfull strange newes unto all people, as concerning the same.

Eightly, the Turke with his God Mahomet shall be in danger to lose his Septer, through the great change and alteration in his Regiment, by reason of famine and warres, so that the most part of his people will rather seeke reliefe from the Christian, then from him.

Ninthlie, there will also arise great Earth=quakes, whereby diuers goodly buildings & high houses, are like to be ouerthrowne and ruinated.

Lastlie, there will be great remoouings of the earth in diuers places, so that for feare thereof, many people will be in a strange amazement and terror.

These punishments are prognosticated by this learned Jew, to fall uppon the whole world by reason of sinne, wherefore it behooueth all Christian to amend their euill liues, and to pray earnestly unto God to with=hold these calamities from us, and to conuart our harts wholy to him, whereby we may find fauour in our time of neede, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

FINIS.

COLLATION

A‒B in fours; Black letter, with the exception of title-page and introductory leaf: Lowndes, p. 2749 notes “Valesco, S. Jewes Prophecy, &c. Halliwell, May, 1856, imprint cut into £10‒5‒0: No other copy known.” This is now in the British Museum, the fore edge of which is badly cropped, the name “Shilocke” on the title-page being cut down to “Shilo.” As in this copy, the imprint is cut off after “Pater,” but there is just visible the top edge of the next line, which may be “noster rowe at the signe of the Sunne,” but no indication of a date. These are the only two copies known of this remarkable tract. To students of Shakespeare, it is of considerable interest. James Orchard Halliwell-Phillips, formerly Halliwell (1820‒1889), the great Shakespearean scholar, in his introduction to the Merchant of Venice (Halliwell’s Shakespeare, vol. v., p. 277: London, 1853) maintains that the name of the predominant character of the play suggested itself to the author, from this tract. [Notes and Queries, 10s. ix. 269. April 4, 1908.]

### XXVI.

“The World’s Great Restauration,” by Sir Henry Finch

The | Worlds | Great Restavration. | Or | The Calling Of | The Ievves, and (with them) | of all the Nations and King-|domes of the earth, to the faith | of Christ. |

Published by William Gouge, B. of D. and | Preacher of Gods Word in Black-fryers. London. |

London | Printed by Edvvard Griffin for | William Bladen, and are to be sold at his Shop | neare the great North dore of Pauls, at the signe | of the Bible. 1621. |

(4to. 7 ll. + 234 pp. + 1 l.) [I. S.]

This work has a second title page:⁠—

“The Calling of the Ievves. | A | Present | To Ivdah And | The Children Of | Israel that ioyned with him, | and to Ioseph (the valiant tribe | of Ephraim) and all the | house of Israel that | ioyned with him. |

The Lord giue them grace, that they | may returne and seeke Iehovah | their God, and David their | King, in these latter dayes. | There is prefixed an Epistle vnto them, | written for their sake in the Hebrue tongue,⁠¹ | and translated into English. |

Published by William Gouge, B. of D. and | Preacher of Gods word in Blackefryers. London. |

London | Printed by Edward Griffin for | William Bladen, and are to be sold at his Shop | neare the great North dore of Pauls, at the signe | of the Bible. 1621.” |

### XXVII.

“The World’s Great Restauration”
(continued).

Contemporary reference to the book is to be found in letters from the Rev. Joseph Mead (Mede) (1586‒1638), the eminent biblical scholar, to Sir Martin Stuteville.

(B. M. Add. 4176: 121, 123‒6.)

Christ’s College Cambr. March 31. 1621.

Sr.

“... Sʳ Henry Finch was last week examined before the High Commission about the book I wrote of, but wonderful privately. He gave up his answer in writing, ch⁄w was sent to the King, & expected from him what should be his censure....”

Christ’s College, Apr. 7 [1621]

Sr

... I have seen Sʳ Henry Finch’s The World’s Great restauration, or Calling of the Jews, & with them of all the Nations of the Earth, to the Faith of Xᵗ. I cannot see but for the main of the discourse I might assent unto him. God forgive me, if it be a sin; but I have thought so many a day. But the thing, which troubles His Majesty, is this point, which I will write out for you verbatim; “The Jews & all Israel shall return to their land & antient Seats, conquer their foes, have their Soil more fruitfull than ever. They shall erect a glorious Church in the Land of Judah it self & bear rule far and near.” ... We need not be afraid to aver and maintain, that one day they shall come to Jerusalem again; be Kings & chief Monarchs of the Earth; sway & govern all, for the glory of Xᵗ; that shall shine amongst them. And that is it Lactantius saith Lib. 7. Cap. 15. “The Romans name I will speak it, because it must one day be shall be taken from the Earth, & the Empire shall return to Asia. And again shall the East bear dominion & the West be in subjection.” In another place Ashur & Egypt, all these large & vast Countries, the whole tract of the East & South, shall be converted to Christ; the chief Sway & sovreignty remaining with the Jews. All nations shall honour them.

Some say, the King says, he shall be a pure King, & he is so auld that he cannot tell how to do his homage at Jerusalem.

This with my best respect,

Yours ever,

Joseph Mead.⁠¹

Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, James I. 1619‒1623.... Edited by Mary Anne Everett Green.... London ... 1851.

p. 247 April 18? (1621).

96. Petition of Sir Hen. Finch to the King. Disclaims the opinion which His Majesty thinks is asserted in his book; is sorry for having written so unadvisedly; begs liberty and restoration to favour.

p. 248 April 18, 1621 London:

Chamberlain [to Carleton.]

97. ... Serjeant Finch is committed for his book on the conversion of the Jews.

### XXVIII.

Philip Ferdinandus

The Jew referred to was Philip Ferdinandus (1555?‒1598), a native of Poland. He was converted to Roman Catholicism, but afterwards became a Protestant. He taught Hebrew at Oxford, and subsequently at Cambridge (D.N.B.).

His only publication is entitled:⁠—

Hæc sunt verba Dei, etc. |

Praecepta In Monte Sinai | data Iudæis sunt 613, quorum 365 negativa, & 248 af-|firmativa, collecta per Pharisæum Magistrum Abraha-|mum filium Kattani, & impressa in Bibliis Bomber-|giensibus, anno à mundo creato 5288 Vene-|tiis, ab Authore VOX DEI appellata: |

translata in linguam Latinam per Phi-|lippum Ferdinandum Polonum. |

His accesserunt nonnulla quæ sequens pa-|gina indicabit. |

Lex Dei integra est, Psal. 19. |

Aperi oculos meos, vt videam mirabilia legis tuæ. |

Vocem audivistis, et similtudinem non vidistis, | præter vocem. Deut. 4. 12. |

Vox Dei semel data est per Mosem in monte Sinai. |

Sed similitudinem videre. i. arcana, singulis diebus da-|tur. Ex Hazoar. |

Cum licentia omnium primariorum virorum in in-|clyta & celeberrima Cantabrigiensi Academia.

Cantabrigiae, | Ex officina Iohannis Legat. 1597. |

(4to. 3 ll. + A‒H. in fours.) [B. M.]

### XXIX.

Petition of the Jewes
Johanna & Ebenezer Cart[en][w]right

The | Petition | Of The | Jewes | For the Repealing of the Act of | Parliament for their banishment | out of England. |

Presented to his Excellency and the | generall Councell of Officers on | Fryday Jan. 5. 1648. | With their favourable acceptance thereof. |

Also a Petition of divers Comman-|manders, (sic) prisoners in the Kings | Bench, for the releasing of all pri-|soners for Debt, according to | the Custome of other | Countries. |

London, Printed for George Roberts, 1649. |

(4to. 1 l. + 6 pp.) [I. S.]

sig. A.2. “To the Right Honourable, Thomas Lord Fairfax, (His Excellency) Englanes (sic) Generall, And The Honourable Councel of Warre, Conveaned for Gods Glory, Izraells Freedom, Peace, and Safety, The humble Petition of Johanna Cartenright, Widdow, and Ebenezer Cartwright her Son, freeborn of England, and now Inhabitants of the City of Amsterdam.”

sig. A.3. “This Petition was presented to the generall Councell of the Officers of the Army, under the Command of his Excellency, Thomas Lord Fairfax, at Whitehall on Ian. 5. And favourably received with a promise to take it into speedy consideration, when the present more publike affaires are dispatched.”⁠¹

### XXX.

“The Messiah Already Come,” by John Harrison

The | Messiah | Already Come. | ...

Written in Barbarie, in the yeare 1610, and for that cause directed | to the dispersed Iewes of that Countrie, and in them to all others now groaning under the heauy | yoake of this their long and intollerable captivitie, which yet one day shall have an end:...

Amsterdam, | Imprinted by Giles Thorp. Anno M.dc.xix. |

(4to. 5 ll. + 68 pp.) [B. M.]

sig. A3.—To The High And Mighty Prince Frederick King of Bohemia, &c.... This Treatise was published seven yeares agoe and Printed in the Low Countries.... Your Maᵗᶦᵉˢ most humble devoted seruant Iohn Harrison.⁠¹

### XXXI.

“Discourse of Mr. John Dury to Mr. Thorowgood—Jewes in America,” by Tho. Thorowgood—“Americans no Jews,” by Hamon l’Estrange

An Epistolicall Discourse Of Mr. Iohn Dury, To Mr. Thorowgood. Concerning his conjecture that the Americans are descended from the Israelites. With the History of a Portugall Iew, Antonie Monterinos, (sic) attested by Manasseh Ben Israel, to the same effect.... Your faithfull friend and fellow-labourer in the Gospel of Christ. J. Dury, St. Iames, this 27 Ian. 1649/50.

(sig. D‒E, in fours.)

This will be found in the preliminary leaves of:⁠—

Ievves in America, | Or, | Probabilities | That the Americans are of | that Race. |⁠¹

“The Epistle to the Reader” is dated Mar. 30. 1651.

With the removall of some | contrary reasonings, and earnest de-|sires for effectuall endeavours to | make them Christian. | Proposed by Tho: Thorovvgood, B.D. one of the | Assembly of Divines. | ...

London, Printed by W. H. for Tho. Slater, and are to be sold | at his shop at the signe of the Angel in Duck lane, 1650. |

(4to. 22 ll. + 139 pp.) [I. S.]

The Imprimatur signed Iohn Downame is dated Septem. 4. 1649.

pp. 129‒(139) contain “The Relation of Master Antonie Monterinos, (sic) translated out of the French Copie sent by Manasseh Ben Israel.... J. Dvry Received this at London, 27 of Novem. 1649.”

This was the affidavit of Montezinos, superscribed by Manasseh Ben Israel, sent to John Dury at his particular request.

### XXXII.

“Whether it be Lawful to Admit Jews into a Christian Commonwealth,” by John Dury

A | Case | Of | Conscience, | Whether it be lawful to admit Jews | into a Christian Common-wealth? |

Resolved By | Mʳ John Dury: | Written To | Samuel Hartlib, Esquire. |

London, | Printed for Richard Wodenothe, in Leaden-Hall street, | next to the Golden Heart, 1656. |

(4to. 1 l. + 9 pp.) [I. S.]

p. 9: “... Sir! Your most affectionate and faithful servant ... John Dury. Cassell, in haste, Januarie 8 1656.”⁠¹

### XXXIII.

“Life and Death of Henry Jessey”

The | Life and Death | of | Mr. Henry Jessey, | Late Preacher of the Gospel of | Christ in London; | Who, having finished his Testimony, was | Translated the 4th day of September, 1663. | Written for the benefit of all, especially such as | were acquainted with his godly conversation, | and Pertakers of his unwearied Labours in | the Lord. |

With an Elegy upon the Death of Mr. | William Bridg. | ... Anno Domini 1671. |

(8º. 4 ll. + 108 pp.) [B. M.]

The author is unknown, but page 97 bears the initials “E. W.”

p. 67: “Towards the Jews his Charity was famous beyond President and many ways exprest,...”

p. 69: “3. His Charity was most eminently shewn to them in the great Collections, which through his importunity was made for the poor Jews at Jerusalem, who were reduced to extream poverty and misery; having lost, by reason of the Swedish Navies Wars, 15000000 of Rix Dollers; which their brethren of Hungary, Poland, Lithuania, and Prussia, were wont to send them yearly, for the maintenance of learned Rabbies and Students, and for the relief of antient Widows and decripid men, and other necessitous people, with which the Holy-Land doth abound; who (as we said) by cutting off their subsistance were brought (in 1657) into great extremity, not only of Famine and nakednesse (that of 700 Widows, 400 were famished out-right) but also by the imprisonment and scourgings of their Elders and Rabbyes, by their cruell Creditors, being the principal men of the Land to whom the Jews were indebted 20000 Rialls of Eight, which if the Ryall be 4s. 8d. a piece, it is 4666l. 13s. 4d. for the liberty of dwelling there, etc. which they extorted with great rigor and exaction, resolving to sell them all for slaves, in case payment was not speedily made.”

p. 70: “This befel the onely then Germane Jews at Jerusalem, for the Congregation of Portugal Jews were relieved by the Alms of their Rich Brethren in Portugal.”

p. 70: “4. The only Anchor the miserable Wretched and distressed Persons had, was to Implore succour from their Brethren in other parts, to which end they sent Letters to Venice, Amsterdam, and by Rabbie Nathan Levita, an Elder, and Cabalist: But all they got from them served only for payment of Interest of Debts: so that they had still perished, if the bowels of Christians in Holland, had not compassionated their State, who sent them 500. Rix Dollars, and by Letters did earnestly press Mr. H. J. to further a Collection in England.

“To which he made some demurs till he obtained full satisfaction of the truth of the Relation, and certainty of safe conveyance of the money that Charity might not be abused; for the first, the Messengers from Jerusalem brought Commissions signed by their Elders, which Commissions were sent to the Synagogues in Germany, and in the Netherlands to be examined; who assured that they knew the hands, and that those men would not subscribe to an untruth, and that they themselves had contributed upon the same Information.

“And as for Conveyance, two Noted Merchants of Francford, would return the mony, and give Bond for so much; till they procure a Receipt from the Elders of Jerusalem, as they had done for the above named summe of 500. Rix Dollars; and had a Letter returned from Jerusalem to the Charitable Christians of Amsterdam, both in way of Receipt and Gratitude with Original Hebrew Letter with the Messengers, Commissioners, and other necessary Instructions being sent to Mr. Jessey, removed all scruples, so that immediatly informed divers London Ministers, by whose assistance, together with his own private Friends and Interest, the some of 300l. Sterling was in short time gathered and sent, and a Bill of Receipt, with thankfulness returned: some of it being also sent to distressed Iews at Vilna and other places in Poland.”

p. 67: “When their liberty of returning and trading in England (as they did in Germany, Poland, Russia, Portugal, Netherlands etc.) was moved, disputed and debated for and against; He laboured that it might be granted, with such limitations, (as our Merchants yielded unto, viz) that they should be seated in some decayed Port Towns, and pay Custome for Goods, thence transported into other parts of the Nation, besides what they should pay there for exporting English, and importing forreign Commodities: such a tollerating of their trade might not onely be beneficial several ways to our selves, but be some satisfaction for the unhandsome dealings of our Nation against that people in the days of King Rich. I. King John and Edward the first, for the space of 100 years till their final Banishment, An. Dom. 1290. with those circumstances of cruelty, that our own Histories do not seem to approve of;...”

### XXXIV.

“The Glory of Jehudah and Israel—De Heerlichkeydt ... van Jehuda en Israel,” by Henry Jesse.

The Glory of Jehudah and Israel is referred to in the concluding paragraph of “The Humble Addresses.”

Manasseh Ben Israel writes:⁠—

“... Now, having prooved the two former Points, I could adde a third, viz. of the Nobility of the Iewes: but because that Point is enough known amongst all Christians, as lately yet it hath bene most worthily and excellently shewed and described in a certain Booke, called, The Glory of Iehudah and Israel, dedicated to our Nation by that worthy Christian Minister Mr. Henry Iessey, (1653. in Dutch) where this matter is set out at large:...”

“The Life and Death Of Mʳ Henry Jessey,” page 79: “... Mr. H. J. seconded his Almes with divers Consolatory Letters to the dispersed seed of Jacob, having before in 1650. wrote a compleat Treatise yet extant, and called (the glory & Salvation of Jehudah, and Israel) tending towards the reconciliation of Jews and Christians,...”

J. C. Wolf, in his Bibliothecæ Hebræae, 1733, vol. iv., p. 901, in his biography of Manasseh Ben Israel, incidentally refers to “De Heerlickheid en heyl van Jehuda en Israel” written in Flemish (Belgice) by Henr. Jesse.

It is apparently very rare, the only copy that has been traced is mentioned in “Catalogue De La Bibliothèque de literature hebraique et orientale et d’Auteurs hebreux De Feu Mʳ Leon V. Saraval Trieste ... 1853.”⁠¹ [I. S.]

Nᵒ. 619 “Jesse Henry de Heerlichkeydt en Heyl van Jehuda en Israel (en langue flamande, traduit de l’anglais.) Amst. 1653 in 8º ... tres-rare....”

### XXXV.

Of the Late Proceeds at White-Hall, concerning the Jews [Henry Jesse]

A | Narrative | Of the late Proceeds at | White-Hall, | Concerning The | Jews: | Who had desired by R. Manasses | an agent for them, that they might return to | England, and Worship the God of their Fa-|thers here in their Synagogues, etc. |

Published for satisfaction to many in several parts of Eng-|land, that are desirous, and inquisitive to hear the | Truth thereof. | London: | Printed for L: Chapman, at the Crown in Popes-|head-Alley. 1656. |

(4to. 1 l. + 14 pp.)⁠¹ [I. S.]

p. 11: “Here followeth part of a Letter written at Ligorn, 1652. and sent by the Preacher in the Phœnix Frigot, to a friend in London.

Ligorn, aboard the Phœnix, 19 of the 1, 1652.

Dear Brethren:...”

p. 12: A Postscript, To fill up the following Pages, that else had been vacant: Containing,

1 The Proposals of R. Manasses ben Israel, more fully.

2 Part of his Letter written Anno 1647.

3 The late progress of the Gospel amongst the Indians in New-England.

A translation appeared in:⁠—

Neue Schwarmgeister=Brut Oder Historische Erzehlung....

IV. Die Wieder=Einnehmung der Juden in Engeland

V. Die Bekehrung der Indianer in New-Engeland ...

Gedrukkt im Jahr 1661. pp. 189‒223.

(8º. 24 ll. + 223 pp. + 1 l.) [I. S.]

### XXXVI.

Bishop Thomas Newton and the Restoration of Israel

“The preservation of the Jews is really one of the most signal and illustrious acts of divine Providence. They are dispersed among all nations, and yet they are not confounded with any. The drops of rain which fall, nay the great rivers which flow into the ocean, are soon mingled and lost in that immense body of waters: and the same in all human probability would have been the fate of the Jews, they would have been mingled and lost in the common mass of mankind; but, on the contrary they flow into all parts of the world, mix with all nations, and yet keep separate from all. They still live as a distinct people, and yet they no where live according to their own laws, no where elect their own magistrates, no where enjoy the full exercise of their religion.... No people have continued unmixed so long as they have done, not only of those who have sent forth colonies into foreign countries, but even of those who have abided in their own country. The northern nations have come in swarms into the more southern parts of Europe; but where are they now to be discerned and distinguished? The Gauls went forth in great bodies to seek their fortune in foreign parts; but what traces or footsteps of them are now remaining any where? In France who can separate the race of the ancient Gauls from the various other people, who from time to time have settled there? In Spain who can distinguish exactly between the first possessors the Spaniards, and the Goths, and the Moors, who conquered and kept possession of the country for some ages? In England who can pretend to say with certainty which families are derived from the ancient Britons, and which from the Romans, or Saxons, or Danes, or Normans? The most ancient and honorable pedigrees can be traced up only to a certain period, and beyond that there is nothing but conjecture and uncertainty, obscurity and ignorance: but the Jews can go up higher than any other nation, they can even deduce their pedigree from the beginning of the world. They may not know from what particular tribe or family they are descended, but they know certainly that they all sprung from the stock of Abraham. And yet the contempt with which they have been treated, and the hardships which they have undergone in almost all countries, should one would think, have made them desirous to forget or renounce their original; but they profess it, they glory in it: and after so many wars, massacres, and persecutions, they still subsist, they still are very numerous: and what but a supernatural power could have preserved them in such a manner as none other nation upon earth hath been preserved?

“Nor is the providence of God less remarkable in the destruction of their enemies, than in their preservation. For from the beginning who have been the great enemies and oppressors of the Jewish Nation, removed them from their own land, and compelled them into captivity and slavery? The Egyptians afflicted them much, and detained them in bondage several years. The Assyrians carried away captive the ten tribes of Israel, and the Babylonians afterwards the two remaining tribes of Judah and Benjamin. The Syro-Macedonians, especially Antiochus Epiphanes, cruelly persecuted them: and the Romans utterly dissolved the Jewish state, and dispersed the people so as they have never been able to recover their city and country again. And where are now these great and famous monarchies, which in their turns subdued and oppressed the people of God? Are they not vanished as a dream, and not only their power, but their very names, lost in the earth? The Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians, were overthrown, and entirely subjugated by the Persians; and the Persians (it is remarkable) were the restorers of the Jews, as well as the destroyers of their enemies. The Syro-Macedonians were swallowed up by the Romans: and the Roman empire, great and powerful as it was, was broken in pieces by the incursions of the northern nations; while the Jews are subsisting as a distinct people to this day.”⁠¹

### XXXVII.

“A Call to the Christians and the Hebrews”

“You are at length to be restored to the land of your forefathers, where, after ages of dispersion and suffering, you will find rest and enjoyment; and will restore, surpass and enjoy, for ever, all that you have ever known, or conceived of happiness and glory.... Ye have sown in tears, ye shall reap in joy.” (Psalm cxxvi, 5.)

“They who deny that you will be restored and re-established in your ancient inheritance, may better deny that you are dispersed; for as certainly as the prophecies of your dispersion and preservation have been verified, so shall the numerous prophecies of your restoration be realized and fulfilled.”

“Will the British who preside over the Atlantic, Mediterranean and Indian Seas assume the glorious enterprise, and conduct the Hebrews from Tarshish and the various coasts of their dispersion?

“This island has given birth to the Bible Society, through whose labours the glorious work has been undertaken and sustained of circulating the sacred scriptures, among the various nations of the earth in the respective languages.

“From this isle of ancient fame, the Hindoos and the lone isles of the Pacific and Atlantic Seas, again receive their Vedas and sacred scrolls.

“The uplifted shell sounded from this Arctic isle, will gain the ear of the wakeful Spirits of peace within it, and upon either Continent; of those watchers of the world, who listen to gather and transmit to all kindred and nations, the grateful sounds fraught with good tidings, which ascend ever and anon, as the all-presiding God calls them forth from some one of his train on Earth.”⁠¹

### XXXVIII.

The Centenary of the British and Foreign Bible Society

Those who wish to read the full record of the Society’s work can do so in the two delightful volumes of Mr. William Canton. In his History of the British and Foreign Bible Society (London, Murray, 1904) he tells, in fine style, the story of the first half-century of the Society’s career. When the Society began its work, that is to say at the beginning of the nineteenth century, “all the Bibles in the world in all languages and in every land, printed or in MSS., did not greatly exceed 4,000,000 copies, and of the forty or fifty languages into which the Scriptures have been translated, several, like the Anglo-Saxon of Bede and the Mæso-Gothic of Ulfilas, were extinct tongues.” But now how stands the matter? “Under its auspices and mainly at its charges, scholars have been employed in translating the Scriptures into over 300 languages, including all the great vernaculars of the world. Neither expense nor labour has been spared in making these versions as perfect as possible; and when completed they have been printed, and thus placed within the reach of the poorest of those for whom they were intended. In 100 years over 180,000,000 copies of the scriptures, complete or in part, have been issued by the Society; and at the present time more than 6,000,000 copies per annum are being put into circulation.”

The well-known scholar, Dr. Israel Abrahams, after quoting this passage in the Jewish Chronicle, March 4th, 1904, rightly remarks: “... the Society is doing a noble work, with much of which Jews must completely sympathise. With some of its work we do not sympathise; but this reservation does not prevent us from offering cordial congratulations to the Society on its centenary,...” This is our point of view with regard to non-Jewish activities on behalf of Zionism, as well as on behalf of the Bible.

### XXXIX.

Lord Kitchener and the Palestine Exploration Fund

Dr. Samuel Daiches read a paper on the 7th February, 1915, to the Jews’ College Union Society about Lord Kitchener’s work in Palestine. Sir Edward Pears, who is a member of the Council of the Palestine Exploration Fund, presided. Dr. Daiches pointed out that there was an early period in Lord Kitchener’s life which provided him with work in which he developed his great capacities—the period of his work in Palestine—nearly forty years ago, when he was engaged for four years (from 1874 to 1878) in exploration work in the Holy Land. He first took up the work (at the age of twenty-four) as second-in-command under Lieutenant Conder, and later, owing to the ill-health of Conder, took command of the survey party of the Palestine Exploration Fund. The lecturer made it clear that the real underlying motive which induced Lord Kitchener to take up this work was a love for the Bible and the land of the Bible. Kitchener left for Palestine in command of the Survey in January, 1877. By the beginning of July the survey of Galilee was completed, 1000 square miles having been added to the map. Four weeks later he went with a reduced party to the south country and surveyed 340 square miles in the desert around Beer Sheba. The survey of the whole of Western Palestine was thus completed. Then the revision work was done. In January, 1878, Kitchener was back in England, and after a short leave he joined Conder at the South Kensington Museum, and arranged and wrote the Memoirs for the sheets of the map executed by himself. In September he formally handed over to the Committee the whole of the Maps and Memoirs complete. As a result of the work of Conder and Kitchener we now have the large map of Western Palestine in twenty-six sheets, three volumes of Memoirs on the topography, orthography, hydrography and archæology, and the volume of Arabic and English name lists. A volume of Special Papers (vol. v. of the series) contains contributions from Conder and Kitchener. Kitchener’s contributions concerning the ancient Synagogues in Galilee are very valuable, and his reports show a sympathetic understanding of Jewish traditions in Palestine.⁠¹

### XL.

Bonaparte’s Call to the Jews (1799)

Gazette Nationale ou Le Moniteur Universel.

No. 243. Tridi, 3 prairial an 7 de la république française une et indivisible.

[Page] 987. Politique. Turquie. Constantinople, le 28 germinal.

“Bonaparte a fait publier une proclamation, dans laquelle il invite tous les juifs de l’Asie et de l’Afrique à venir se ranger sous ses drapeaux pour rétablir l’ancienne Jérusalem. Il en a déjà armé un grand nombre, et leurs bataillons menacent Alep.”

No. 279. Nonidi, 9 messidor etc.

[Pages] 1136‒1137. De la conquête probable de-l’empire ottoman par Bonaparte.

“... Attendons la confirmation de ces heureuses nouvelles. Si elles sont prématurées, nous aimons à croire qu’elles se réaliseront un jour. Ce n’est pas seulement pour rendre aux juifs leur Jérusalem que Bonaparte a conquis la Syrie;...” (David.)

### XLI.

[A Zionist] Letter, addressed by a [French] Jew to his Co-religionists in 1798

“Brothers,

“You who have groaned for so many ages under the weight of the cruelest persecutions, do you not wish to burst from the state of degrading humiliation in which intolerant and barbarous religions have placed you? Contempt accompanies us everywhere. Our sufferings are unpitied and despised. The unshaken constancy with which we have preserved the faith of our ancestors, far from procuring for us the admiration due to such a conduct, has only increased the unjust hatred which all nations bear towards us. It is only by affecting the exterior of baseness and misery, that we are enabled to secure our property and preserve our unhappy existence. It is at least time to shake off this insupportable yoke—it is time to resume our rank among the other nations of the universe. Vile robbers possess that sacred land which our ancestors were compelled to yield to the Romans. They profane the holy City which we defended with so much courage. Posterity has preserved a dreadful remembrance of the struggle—we, surely, have not forgotten it. That courage has only slumbered: the hour to awaken it is arrived. O my brethren! let us rebuild the temple of Jerusalem!

“An invincible nation, which now fills the world with her glory, has shewn us what the love of country can perform. Let us implore her generosity—request her assistance; and we may be assured that the philosophy which guides the chiefs of that nation, will induce them to give our demand a favourable reception.

“We are more than six millions of people scattered over the face of the earth; we possess immense riches: let us employ the means that are in our power to restore us to our country. The moment is propitious, and to profit by it, is our duty. The following are the means best suited for carrying this holy enterprize into execution:—There shall be established a Council, the members of which shall be elected by the Jews, who are spread over Europe, Asia, and Africa.”

[Here the writer divides the Jews into the 15 following tribes, viz. The Italian, Helvetic, Hungarian, Polish, Russian, Northern, British, Spanish, Gallic, Dutch, Prussian, German, Turkish, Asiatic, and African. These the author proposes shall each form a body of electors in the capitals of the respective districts; and then he proceeds.]

“The fifteen deputies of these tribes shall form the Council, which shall hold its sittings at Paris. When they shall have assembled to the number of nine, they may begin to deliberate on the object of their mission. Their decisions will have with all the Jews the force of laws; they shall be obliged to submit to them. The Council shall appoint an agent, to communicate to the Executive Directory of France the propositions which it may think proper to make to the French government.”

“The country we propose to occupy shall include (liable to such arrangements as shall be agreeable to France) Lower Egypt, with the addition of a district of country, which shall have for its limits a line running from Ptomelais or Saint John D’Acre, to the Asphaltic Lake, or Dead Sea, and from the South point of that Lake to the Red Sea. This position, which is the most advantageous in the world, will render us, by the navigation of the Red Sea, masters of the commerce of India, Arabia and the South and East of Africa; Abyssinia, and Ethiopia, those rich countries which furnished Solomon with so much gold and ivory and so many precious stones, will trade the more willingly with us, that the greater part of their inhabitants still practise the law of Moses. The neighbourhood of Aleppo and Damascus will facilitate our commerce with Persia; and by the Mediterranean we may communicate with Spain, France, Italy, and the rest of Europe. Placed in the centre of the world, our country will become the entrepôt of all the rich and precious productions of the earth.

“The Council shall offer to the French government, if it will give us the assistance necessary to enable us to return to our country, and to maintain ourselves in the possession of it,

“1. Every pecuniary indemnification.

2. To share the commerce of India, &c. with the merchants of France only.

“The other arrangements, and the propositions to be made to the Ottoman Porte, cannot yet be rendered public: we must, in these matters, repose on the wisdom of the Council, and the good faith of the French nation. Let us choose upright and enlightened deputies, and we may have confidence in the success of this undertaking.

“O! my brethren! what sacrifices ought we not to make to obtain this object? We shall return to our country—we shall live under our own laws—we shall behold those sacred places which our ancestors illustrated with their courage and their virtues. I already see you all animated with a holy zeal. Israelites! the term of your misfortunes is at hand. The opportunity is favourable—take care you do not allow it to escape.”⁠¹

This appeal—a prototype of Pinsker’s Autoemancipation and of Herzl’s Judenstaat—produced a deep impression, but since the whole expedition proved a failure, Jewish opinion—not on the principle, but on the opportunity and the means—was divided.

### XLII.

“Transactions of the Parisian Sanhedrim,” by Diogene Tama

Transactions Of The Parisian Sanhedrim,

Or Acts Of The Assembly Of Israelitish Deputies of France and Italy, Convoked At Paris By An Imperial And Royal Decree, Dated May 30, 1806.

Translated From The Original Published By M. Diogene Tama,

With A Preface And Illustrative Notes By F. D. Kirwan, Esq.

London;... Published by Charles Taylor, Hatton Street. 1807.

(8º. xvi. + 334 pp.) [I. S.]

### XLIII.

“Signs of the Times”—“A Word in Season”—“Commotions Since French Revolution”—“History of Christianity”—“The German Empire”—“Fulfilment of Prophecy,” by Rev. James Bicheno

The Signs of the Times:... By J. Bicheno ...

London: Printed For The Author; And Sold by Parsons, Paternoster-Row; Wayland, Holborn, London; and James and Cottle, Bristol.

Price 1S. 6D. [1793]

Of whom may be had the Author’s Friendly Address to the Jews, and a Letter to Mr. D. Levi. Price 1s. 6d.

(8º. 4 ll. + 67 pp.) [B. M.]

A Word in Season:... To Stand Prepared For The Consequences Of The Present War ...

By J. Bicheno,... London ... 1795.

(8º. 2 ll. + 53 pp.) [B. M.]

The Probable Progress And Issue Of The Commotions Which Have Agitated Europe Since The French Revolution,...

By J. Bicheno ... London ... MDCCXCVII.

(8º. 2 ll. + 94 pp.) [B. M.]

A Glance At The History of Christianity,...

By James Bicheno, M.A., Newbury ... MDCCXCVIII....

(8º. 28 pp.) [B. M.]

The Destiny Of The German Empire;...

By J. Bicheno, M.A.... London:... 1801....

(8º. 2 ll. + 96 pp.) [B. M.]

The Fulfilment of Prophecy Farther Illustrated By The Signs Of The Times;...

By J. Bicheno, M.A. London ... 1817.

(8º. xvii. + 254 pp.) [B. M.]

### XLIV.

“Restoration of the Jews”—“Friendly Address to the Jews,” by Rev. James Bicheno—“Letter to Mr. Bicheno,” by David Levi

The Restoration of the Jews, The Crisis Of All Nations;

Or, An Arrangement Of The Scripture Prophecies, Which Relate To The Restoration Of The Jews, And To Some Of The Most Interesting Circumstances Which Are To Accompany And Distinguish That Important Event;

With Illustrations And Remarks Drawn From The Present Situation And Apparent Tendencies Of Things, Both In Christian And Mahomedan Countries.

By J. Bicheno, M.A.... London ... 1800. [Price Two Shillings And Sixpence.]

(8º. 2 ll. + 115 pp.) [B. M.]

The Restoration Of The Jews The Crisis Of All Nations;

To Which Is Now Prefixed, A Brief History Of The Jews, From Their First Dispersion, To The Calling Of Their Grand Sanhedrim At Paris, October 6th, 1806.

And An Address On The Present State Of Affairs, In Europe In General, And In This Country In Particular.

Second Edition.

By J. Bicheno, M.A.

London:... 1807. (Price 5s.—Entered at Stationer’s-Hall.)

(8º. 2 ll. + 235 pp.) [I. S.]

He also wrote:⁠—

A Friendly Address To The Jews....

To Which Is Added, A Letter To Mr. D. Levi; Containing Remarks On His Answer To Dr. Priestley’s Letter To The Jews; Shewing, That however his Arguments may affect the Opinions of Dr. Priestley, they form no Objection against the Christian Religion.

By J. Bicheno, Newbury. London:...

(8º. vi. pp. + 1 l. + 88 pp.) [I. S.]

Which occasioned the following reply:⁠—

A Letter To Mr. Bicheno, Occasioned By His Friendly Address to the Jews, And A Letter To Mr. David Levi, Containing Remarks On Mr. Levi’s Answer To Dr. Priestley’s First Letters To The Jews.

By David Levi, Author Of Lingua Sacra, The Ceremonies Of The Jews, etc....

See pp. 127‒134 in “Letters To Dr. Priestley, In Answer To His Letters To The Jews, Part II.” Occasioned By Mr. David Levi’s Reply to the Former Part. Also Letters 1. To Dr. Cooper, ... 2. To Mr. Bicheno, 3. To Dr. Krauter, 4. To Mr. Swain, And 5. To Anti-Socinus, alias Anselm Bayly. Occasioned By Their Remarks On Mr. David Levi’s Answer To Dr. Priestley’s First Letters To The Jews. By David Levi, ... London: ... M,DCC,LXXXIX.

(8º. 2 ll. + 159 pp.) [I. S.]

### XLV.

“Attempt to Remove Prejudices Concerning the Jewish Nation,” by Thomas Witherby

An Attempt To Remove Prejudices Concerning The Jewish Nation. By Way Of Dialogue.

By Thomas Witherby.

Part I.⁠¹

London: Printed For The Author, ... 1804. (Entered at Stationers-Hall.)

(8º. xx. + 511 pp.) [I. S.]

### XLVI.

“Observations on Mr. Bicheno’s Book,” by Thomas Witherby

Dedicated to the Jews.

Observations on Mr. Bicheno’s Book, Entitled The Restoration Of The Jews The Crisis Of All Nations:

Wherein the revolutionary Tendency of that Publication is shewn to be most inimical to the real Interest of the Jews, who are not to expect the Restoration to their own Land until they are, by the free Grace of the God of their Fathers, enabled to acknowledge his Justice, Righteousness, and Mercy, in their long-continued Dispersion, and in the Preservation of their Nation amidst those awful Sufferings which they have endured under his righteous Judgments.

Together With An Inquiry Concerning Things To Come;...

London: Printed For The Author ...

(8º. xx. + 323 pp.) [I. S.]

Page iii.: (Dedicated) “To The Jews. Distinguished Nation.... Thomas Witherby. Enfield, Middlesex, Aug. 22, 1800.”⁠¹

### XLVII.

“Letters to the Jews,” by Joseph Priestley

Letters To The Jews; Inviting Them To An Amicable Discussion Of The Evidences Of Christianity.

By Joseph Priestley, LL.D., F.R.S....

Birmingham, ... MDCCLXXXVII. [Price One Shilling.]

(8º. 2 ll. + 54 pp. + 1 l. (Catalogue.) [I. S.]

Letters To The Jews. Part II. Occasioned By Mr. David Levi’s Reply To The Former Letters.

By Joseph Priestley, LL.D. F.R.S.... Birmingham, ... MDCCLXXXVII. [Price One Shilling.]

(8º. iv. + 56 pp.) [I. S.]

Page 56: “Your brother in the sole worship Of the one only true God, Joseph Priestley. Birmingham, July 1, 1787.”

### XLVIII.

“An Address to the Jews on the Present State of the World,” by Joseph Priestley

A Comparison Of The Institutions of Moses With Those Of The Hindoos And Other Ancient Nations;

With Remarks on Mr. Dupuis’s Origin of all Religions,

The Laws and Institutions of Moses Methodized,

And An Address to the Jews on the present state of the World and the Prophecies relating to it.

By Joseph Priestley, LL.D. F.R.S. &c....

Northumberland:⁠¹ ... MDCCXCIX.

(8º. xxvii. + 428 pp. + 2 ll. (catalogue).) [B. M.]

pp. 393‒428: “An Address To The Jews.”

### XLIX.

“Letters to Dr. Priestley,” by David Levi

Letters To Dr. Priestly, In Answer To Those He Addressed To The Jews; Inviting Them To An Amicable Discussion Of The Evidences Of Christianity.

By David Levi, ... London, ... MDCCLXXXVII.

(8º. 2 ll. + 99 pp.) [I. S.]

Second Edition MDCCLXXXVII. (103 pp.) [I. S.]

Third Edition, M,DCC,XCIII. (2 ll. + 99 pp.) [I. S.]

### L.

“A Famous Passover Melody,” by the Rev. F. L. Cohen

“... Isaac Nathan, a fashionable singing master of London ... conceived the idea of imitating the ‘Irish Melodies’ of Thomas Moore (batches of which had been published since 1807, with the greatest success).... Less fortunate than Moore, Byron’s verses were not wedded to melodies of the national type they professed, because even before Nathan had thus exhausted his choice, he had made a most superficial search through the repertory of the Anglo-Jewish synagogues of his day, which, by the way, had not yet experienced the inspiringly melodious influence of ‘Polish’ Chazanuth.... The opening poem, ‘She walks in beauty,’ for example, he set to a tawdry Lecha Dodi.... But among the six actually ‘Hebrew’ melodies, there were one or two exceptions to the general inferiority of the music; and prominent among these was the tender and expressive air to which, by a happy inspiration, Nathan set the verses:⁠—

‘O weep for those that wept by Babel’s stream.’

Here, at least,

‘Music and sweet poetry agreed,

As well they should, the sister and the brother’;

and the result became world famous as a type of what Hebrew melody might be. It has often been republished; and has also appeared in other settings, as by the Rev. M. Hast to Ibn Gabirol’s hymn:⁠—

‘At morn I beseech Thee,’

or by Ernst Pauer in his Traditional Hebrew Melodies. But what is more especially known to and prized by musicians, it forms the only pianoforte composition of Robert Franz, the great songwriter, under the title

‘Beweinet, die geweint an Babel’s Strand,’

and as such, it has become famous.... The origin of the melody is ... simply the old chant of the Cohanim on the Festivals, as it used to be sung in London synagogues on the Passover a hundred years ago, with a joyous touch of Pesach tune....”⁠¹

### LI.

“Reminiscences of Lord Byron ... Poetry, etc., of Lady Caroline Lamb,” by Isaac Nathan

Fugitive Pieces And Reminiscences Of Lord Byron:

Containing An Entire New Edition Of The Hebrew Melodies, With The Addition Of Several Never Before Published;

The Whole Illustrated With Critical, Historical, Theatrical, Political, And Theological Remarks, Notes, Anecdotes, Interesting Conversations, And Observations, Made By That Illustrious Poet: Together With His Lordship’s Autograph.

Also Some Original Poetry, Letters And Recollections Of Lady Caroline Lamb.

By I. Nathan, Author Of An Essay On The History And Theory Of Music, The Hebrew Melodies, &c. &c....

London: ... 1829.

(8º. xxxvi. + 196 + 11 pp.) [I. S.]

### LII.

“Selection of Hebrew Melodies,” by John Braham and Isaac Nathan

A Selection of Hebrew Melodies Ancient and Modern with appropriate Symphonies & accompaniments.

By I. Braham & I. Nathan.

The Poetry written expressly for the work By the Right Hon. Lord Byron....

Published & Sold by I: Nathan Nᵒ 7 Poland Street Oxford Strᵗ. and to be had at the principal Music and Booksellers. [Price One Guinea. (1815.)

(4to. 4 ll. + 133 pp.) [I. S.]

A second edition was published in 1861.

(4to. 2 ll. + 218 pp.) [B. M.]

### LIII.

Earl of Shaftesbury’s Zionist Memorandum Scheme for the Colonisation of Palestine

Lord Ashley⁠¹ to Viscount Palmerston.

“St. Giles House,

“September 25th, 1840.

“My Lord,

“The Powers of Europe having determined that they will take into their own hands the adjustment of the Syrian Question, I venture to suggest a measure, which being adopted will promote the development of the immense fertility of all those countries that lie between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean Sea.

“The consideration of the person or the authority to whom these territories may be assigned by the award of the contracting Powers is of no importance. The plan presupposes simply the existence of a recognised and competent Dominion; the establishment and execution of Laws; and a Government both willing and able to maintain internal peace.

“These vast regions are now nearly desolate; every year the produce of them becomes less, because the hands that should till them become fewer. As a source of revenue they are almost worthless, compared, at least, with the riches that industry might force from them. They require both labour and capital.

“Capital, however, is of too sensitive a nature to flow with readiness into any country where neither property nor life can be regarded as secure; but if this indispensable assurance be first given, the avarice of man will be a sufficient motive, and it will betake itself with alacrity to any spot where a speedy or an ample return may be promised to the speculator.

“An inducement such as this is sufficient to stimulate the mercantile zeal of every money-maker under Heaven, and it would be advisable that the Power, whoever he may be, to whom these provinces may fall, should issue and perform a solemn engagement to establish, in his laws affecting property, the principles and practices of European civilisation: but, in respect of these regions now under dispute, there are, so far as a numerous, though scattered, people is concerned, other inducements and other hopes, over and above those which influence the general mass of mankind.

“Without entering into the grounds of the desire and expectations entertained by the Hebrew Race of their return ultimately to the land of their fathers, it may be safely asserted that they contemplate a restoration to the soil of Palestine. They believe, moreover, that the time is near at hand. Every recollection of the past, and every prospect of the future, animates their hope; and fear alone for their persons and their estates represses their exertions. If the Governing Power of the Syrian provinces would promulgate equal laws and equal protection to Jew and Gentile, and confirm his decrees by accepting the four Powers as guarantees of his engagement, to be set forth and ratified in an article of the Treaty, the way would at once be opened, confidence would be revived, and, prevailing throughout these regions, would bring with it some of the wealth and enterprise of the world at large, and, by allaying their suspicions, call forth to the full the hidden wealth and industry of the Jewish people.

“There are many reasons why more is to be anticipated from them than from any others who might settle there. They have ancient reminiscences and deep affection for the land;—it is connected in their hearts with all that is bright in times past, and with all that is bright in those which are to come; their industry and perseverance are prodigious; they subsist, and cheerfully, on the smallest pittance; they are, almost everywhere, accustomed to arbitrary rule, and being totally indifferent to political objects, confine their hopes to the enjoyment of what they can accumulate. Long ages of suffering have trained their people to habits of endurance and self-denial; they would joyfully exhibit them in the settlement and service of their ancient country.

“If we consider their return in the light of a new establishment or colonisation of Palestine, we shall find it to be the cheapest and safest mode of supplying the wants of those depopulated regions. They will return at their own expense, and with no hazard but to themselves; they will submit to the existing form of Government, having no preconceived theories to gratify, and having been almost everywhere trained in implicit obedience to autocratic rule; they will acknowledge the present appropriation of the soil in the hands of its actual possessors, being content to obtain an interest in its produce by the legitimate methods of rent or purchase. Disconnected, as they are, from all the peoples of the earth, they would appeal to no national or political sympathies for assistance in the path of wrong; and the guarantee which I propose, for insertion in the Treaty to be carried out by the personal protection of the respective Consuls and Vice-Consuls of the several nations, would be sufficient to protect them in the exercise of their right.

“The plan here proposed may be recommended by the consideration that large results are promised to the application of very small means; that no pecuniary outlay is demanded of the engaging parties; that while disappointment would bring no ill-effects except to those who declined the offer, the benefit to be derived from it would belong impartially to the whole civilised world....

“I have the honour to be, my Lord,

“Your Lordship’s most obedient, humble servant,

“Ashley.

“The Viscount Palmerston, M.P.

Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.”⁠¹

### LIV.

Restoration of the Jews

[The annexed documents have just appeared in a periodical entitled Memorials concerning God’s Ancient People of Israel, and are probably as yet but little known to the world at large:⁠—]

Memorandum.

To the Protestant Powers of the North of Europe and America—Victoria, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain and Ireland; Frederick (William) III. King of Prussia; William (Frederick), King of Netherlands; Charles (John) XIV., King of Sweden and Norway; Frederick VI., King of Denmark; Ernest Augustus, King of Hanover; William, King of Wurtemberg; The Sovereign Princes and Electors of Germany; The Cantons of the Swiss Confederation professing the Reformed Religion; and the States of North America, zealous for the Glory of God; grace, mercy and peace from God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ!

“High and Mighty Ones,

“The Most High God, who ruleth in the kingdoms of men (Dan. iv. 32), by whom kings reign and princes decree justice (Prov. viii. 15), having in these days granted a season of repose to his witnessing church (Acts ix. 31; Rev. xii. 16), planted in the lands whereof ye are kings and governors (Isaiah xlix. 23); the vine of His planting among the Gentiles (Acts xxviii. 28) hath extended her boughs unto the seas and her branches unto the rivers (Isa. xlix. 6), that now in nearly all the world the gospel of the kingdom is being lifted as a witness unto all nations (Matt. xxiv. 14), and in the isles afar off. The days are drawing near (Rev. xxii. 20) when the dominion, and the glory, and the kingdom, with all people, nations and languages, shall serve Him, who cometh in the clouds of heaven (Dan. vii. 14, Rev. i. 7), whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom that shall not be destroyed (Psalm xlv. 6). Blessed be He! He hath given his waiting people to hear the sound of His approaching footsteps, and to mark the signs of His drawing near (1 Thess. v. 4). The fig-tree putteth forth her leaves again (Matt. xxiv. 32). Israel’s sons are asking the way to Zion, by which we know that summer is at hand. Blessed are all they that wait (2 Thess. iii. 5), and hold fast (Rev. iii. 11), for quickly He cometh. Amen.

“In the prospect of the Christian Church, of the speedy appearing of her glorified head, the zeal of the Lord’s servants hath been stirred up (Rev. iii. 2) to a multiplied diligence in those labours of faith and love which were devolved upon her (Matt. xxviii. 19), when the Son of God, as a man taking a journey into a far country, bade his servants occupy, until he returned again (Luke xix. 13). With other responsibilities, the circumstances of one peculiar people, whom the Most High hath separated (Gen. xii. 1) and taken into covenant with him (Gen. xvii. 7; Exod. xxxiv. 7), and which covenant no act of theirs, however iniquitous or rebellious, can repeal or destroy (Mal. iii. 6), whom he hath scattered in all lands as witnesses of his unity and power (Isa. xliii. 9), connected with whom the welfare of mankind is bound up, and in the lifting up of whose head the most stupendous consequences are made to depend (Rom. xi. 15), are presented at this eleventh hour for the repentance and faith of Christendom, that the blood of our brethren of circumcision which has been unjustly shed may be atoned for in the blood of the Lamb (Isa. i. 18), and the fruits of forgiveness be manifested (Matt. iii. 8) in presenting the children of this people continually at the throne of grace (1 Pet. ii. 5; Ps. cxxii. 6) for the atoning sacrifice of Christ to cover them (Joel ii. 17); and as the Almighty, in his providential appointments, shall make the way plain to present the children of Israel who may be willing to go up (Ps. cx. 3) as an offering to the Lord of Hosts in Mount Zion (Isa. xxviii. 7).

“For 300 years the testimony of the churches, planted in the lands over which Almighty God hath made you rulers, hath been lifted up against that apostacy which hath usurped the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ in the earth (Rev. xxii. 5, and xxiii. 5) daring presumptuously to assert power over nations (Rev. xviii. 7), and over kingdoms, to root up and to pull down, to build, to plant, and to destroy (Dan. vii. 20, Rev. xiii. 2, 7). The millstone which shall sink the Great Babylon in the abyss of an unfathomable perdition (Rev. xviii. 21) when her hour arrives (and it is very near!) with the judgment under which she hath long lain, for being drunken with the blood of the saints and of the martyrs of Jesus (Rev. xvii. 6), shall include the avenging of the wrongs of God’s ancient people (Isa. li. 22, 23), and a terrible account it is; and the issue shall be joy and gladness to the whole earth, for it is written, ‘Rejoice, O ye nations, with His people; for He avengeth the blood of His servants, and shall render vengeance unto his adversaries, and will be merciful to His land and to His people’ (Deut. xxxii. 43). ‘Happy art thou, O Israel; who is like unto thee, O people saved by the Lord, the shield of thy help and the sword of thy excellency? and thine enemies shall be found liars unto thee, and thou shalt tread on their high places’ (Deut. xxxiii. 29).

“In the events, on which the eyes of nations are fixed, taking place around, whilst the continuance and stability of your thrones and sway, O kings, is the earnest prayer of the Christian church (1 Tim. ii. 2), she cannot but uphold the witness that the days draw nigh, when, under the hallowed sway of Messiah the Prince, the now despised nation of the Jews shall possess the kingdom (Dan. vii. 27), and she directs, with reverential awe, your eye to that mighty empire in the east which is crumbling to dust, and drying in all her streams (Rev. xvi. 12) to make way for the event. Palestine hath been a burdensome stone (Zech. xii. 2) unto the followers of the false Prophet (Rev. xvi. 13), as it was to the ancestors of many of you, O Princes, when, under the banner of the Popish Antichrist, their mistaken zeal sought to recover the Holy City from the Saracen’s grasp. But the fulness of the Gentiles is at hand (Romans xi. 21) and unto Israel the dominion shall return (Micah iv. 8).

“The apostate Julian sought to plant the children of this people in the seats of their fathers, in despite of the holy faith, one of the external evidences of whose trust was, that their house was left unto them desolate, until they should say ‘Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord’ (Matt. xxiii. 38, 9). But is it anywhere declared in the word of our God, that the children of Israel, scattered and peeled, humbled and dispirited, impoverished and broken down, should not be presented as an offering in faith to Jehovah of Hosts in Mount Zion? that there they may be pleaded with face to face by the God of their fathers (Ezekiel xx. 13), that there the veil may be rent (Isaiah xxv. 7) which is over their hearts (2 Cor. iii. 15), that there they may look on him whom they have pierced (Zech. xii. 10). Your attention, high and mighty ones, is directed to the recorded fact that such an offering is expected. And before that full and final gathering which follows the judgments poured out on all the earth (Isaiah lxiii. 15, 16, 20), a power, and that power a northern one (Jer. iii. 12, xxxi. 6, 9, xxxiii. 7, 8—Isaiah xliii. 6, xlix. 12), shall be employed to lead a people wonderful from their beginning hitherto—a nation expecting and trampled underfoot—whose land rivers have spoiled, unto the name of the Lord of Hosts in Mount Zion (Isaiah xviii.). These designs and purposes of the Lord God of Israel, King of Kings and Lord of Lords, are declared unto you, high and mighty ones, his servants (Dan. v. 23), that you may ponder them, and know His will, from the voice, with which He is about to speak unto nations and unto men (Haggai ii. 6—Isaiah i. 10), for the time is at hand (Rev. i. 3).

“Your wisdom hath been exercised to mark the boundaries of kingdoms, and to define the limits of empires; and has not the aggressor overleaped all barriers, and the strength of treaties snapped asunder as tow? And why? Because when the Almighty awarded to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel (Deuteron. xxxii. 7, 8). By an unrepealed covenant, the Lord God declared unto Abram, concerning the land of Palestine, ‘Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates’ (Genesis xv. 18). This gift was ratified unto him for an everlasting possession, and to his seed after him, when the Almighty gave him the covenant, and changed his name to Abraham (Genesis xvii. 4, 8). For the purposes of infinite wisdom fast hastening to maturity, the Lord God hath scattered his inheritance to the four winds of heaven. But hear the word of the Lord, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles afar off. He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him as a shepherd doth his flock.

“As the spirit of Cyrus, King of Persia was stirred up to build the Lord’s Temple, which was in Jerusalem (ii Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23), who is there among you, high and mighty ones of all the nations, to fulfil the good pleasure of the holy will of the Lord of Heaven, saying to Jerusalem, ‘Thou shalt be built’ and to the Temple, ‘Thy foundation shall be laid’? (Isaiah xliv. 28). The Lord God of Israel will be with such. Great grace, mercy, and peace shall descend upon the people who offer themselves willingly; and the fire offerings of their hearts and hands shall be those of a sweet-smelling savour unto Him who hath said, ‘I will bless them that bless thee (Genesis xii. 3), and contend with him who contendeth with thee’ (Isaiah xlix. 25).

“The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. Signed and sealed in London, 8th of January, in the year of our Lord, 1839, in the name of the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, on behalf of many who wait for the redemption of Israel.”

(Copy 1.)

“London, January 22nd, 1839.

“May it please your Majesty,—I have the high honour of laying at your Majesty’s feet the accompanying memorandum relating to the present condition and future prospects of God’s ancient people, the Jews. Your Majesty’s pious feelings, I doubt not, will be excited to give the Scriptural hopes and expectations therein set forth your earnest attention, considering the high station it hath pleased Almighty God to call this Protestant land to, as the great seat of the church.

“According to the petitions of this peculiar people at a throne of grace, that in your Majesty’s reign ‘Judah may be saved and Israel dwell safely,’ is the prayer of your Majesty’s dutiful subject and servant.

“Her most Gracious Majesty Victoria, Queen of
Great Britain and Ireland.”

(Copy 2.)

“January 19th, 1839.

“My Lord,—I have the honour of transmitting through your Lordship a document which it is the desire of some of her Majesty’s subjects should be laid at her Majesty’s feet, relating to the Scriptural expectations of the church, connected with the restoration of the Jews to Palestine, the land of their fathers.

“I am induced to solicit your Lordship’s good offices in being the medium of communicating this document to her Majesty, as the substance of it relates to the present rights of an ally of this country—namely, the Sublime Porte.

“But I would respectfully press upon your Lordship’s attention, that, in holding forth the Scriptural hopes of God’s ancient people, those who emanate the accompanying document never for one moment dream of political force to accomplish the end desired. When the hour comes of Israel’s planting in, doubtless Almighty God will not fail to raise up chosen instruments, who, with willing hands and hearts, shall accomplish the good pleasure of His will.

“If we are wrong in the course we have taken to bring the memorandum before Her Majesty, we will be happy to be set right. Should your Lordship undertake the duty, desiring the glory of God in this matter to be furthered, the Lord God of Israel will not be slack to reward the labour of faith and love proceeding from a desire to honour His name.

“I have the honour to be, &c.,

“The Right Hon. Lord Viscount Palmerston.”

Lord Palmerston’s Answer.

(Copy 3.)

“Foreign Office, March 14, 1839.

“I have to acknowledge your letter of the 19th January, enclosing a letter and a memorandum from some of Her Majesty’s subjects, who feel deeply interested in the welfare and future prospects of the Jews; and I have to acquaint you that I have laid those documents before the Queen, and that Her Majesty has been pleased graciously to receive the same.

“I am, &c.,

“Palmerston.”⁠¹

### LV.

Another Zionist Memorandum—Restoration of the Jews

“To the Editor of The Times.

“Sir,—The extraordinary crisis of Oriental politics has stimulated an almost universal interest and investigation, and the fate of the Jews seems to be deeply involved with the settlement of the Syrian dilemma now agitating several Courts of Christendom.

“... The peace of Europe and the just balance of its powers being therefore assumed as the grand desideratum, as the consummation devoutly to be wished, I peruse with particular interest a brief article in your journal of this day relative to the restoration of the Jews to Jerusalem, because I imagine that this event has become practicable through an unprecedented concatenation of circumstances, and that moreover it has become especially desirable, as the exact expedient to which it is to the interest of all belligerent parties to consent.

“The actual feasibility of the return of the Jews is no longer a paradox; the time gives it proof. That theory of the restoration of a Jewish Kingdom, which a few years ago was laughed at as the fantasy of insane enthusiasm, is now calculated on as a most practical achievement of diplomacy.

“It is granted that the Jews were the ancient proprietors of Syria; that Syria was the proper heart and centre of their kingdom. It is granted that they have a strong conviction that Providence will restore them to this Syrian supremacy. It is granted that they have entertained for ages a hearty desire to return thither, and are willing to make great sacrifices of a pecuniary kind to the different parties interested, provided they can be put in peaceful and secure possession.

“It is likewise notorious, that since the Jews have been thrust out of Syria that land has been a mere arena of strife to neighbouring Powers, all conscious that they had no legitimate right there, and all jealous of each other’s intrusion.

“Such having been the case, why, it may be asked, have not the Jews long ago endeavoured to regain possession of Syria by commercial arrangements? In reply it may be said, that though they have evidently wished to do so, and have made overtures of the kind, hitherto circumstances have opposed their desires....

“Now, however, these obstacles and hindrances are in a great measure removed; all the strongest Powers in Europe have come forward as arbitrators and umpires to arrange the settlement of Syria.

“Under such potent arbitrators, pledged to the performance of any conditions finally agreed on, I have reason to believe that the Jews would readily enter into such financial arrangements as would secure them the absolute possession of Jerusalem and Syria.

“I know no reason, under such powerful empires, why the Hebrews should not restore an independent monarchy in Syria, as well as the Egyptians in Egypt, or the Grecians in Greece.

“As a practical expedient of politics, I believe that it will be easier to secure the peace of Europe and Asia by this effort to restore the Jews, than by any allotment of Syrian territories to the Turks or Egyptians, which will be sure to occasion fresh jealousies and discords....

“I believe that the cause of the restoration of the Jews is one essentially generous and noble, and that all individuals and nations that assist this world-renounced people to recover the empire of their ancestors will be rewarded by Heaven’s blessing. Everything that is patriotic and philanthropic should urge Great Britain forward as the agent of prophetic revelations so full of auspicious consequence....

“Your very obedient servant,

“F. B.⁠¹

“Aug. 17.”

### LVI.

Extracts from Autograph and other Letters between Sir Moses Montefiore and Dr. N. M. Adler

My hearty thanks are due to my friend Mr. Elkan N. Adler for giving me access to his father’s letters. It may be mentioned that, although Dr. N. M. Adler was never able to visit Palestine, all his three sons went there. Palestinian activity has practically been a tradition of the Adler family. Mr. Elkan Adler originally visited Palestine in 1888, 1895, 1898 and 1901, in connection with the Montefiore work. His first visit was a professional one, undertaken on the instructions of the Council of the Holy Land Relief Fund. Its object was to clear up certain legal difficulties which had arisen on the land at Jerusalem and Jaffa purchased in 1855 by his father and Sir Moses Montefiore out of the funds of the Holy Land Appeal Fund and the Judah Touro Bequest. At that time their only buildings in Jerusalem were the Judah Touro Alms-houses and the Windmill. The vacant land adjoining had been jumped after the death of Sir Moses Montefiore by about three hundred poor and desperate Jews, who claimed that it had been originally intended for the poor, and they were poor.

The journey was successful. The squatters were removed, and their place was taken by industrious settlers, who, through the agency of the building societies, financed by the Sir Moses Montefiore Testimonial Committee, erected hundreds of pleasant little dwellings in the place of the rude, uninhabited shanties which stood there in 1888.

In 1894 Mr. Elkan Adler became a member of the “Water for Jerusalem Committee,” of which Sir Charles W. Wilson, K.C.M.G., was Chairman and Sir Edmund A. H. L. Lechmere, Bart., M.P., and Sir (then Mr.) Isidore Spielmann, C.M.G., Honorary Secretaries. The Turkish Government and the Jerusalem Municipality had sanctioned the scheme, but bureaucratic dilatoriness prevented its ever maturing. Its object was to secure, under a concession, for purely philanthropic purposes, a modern water supply for Jerusalem from King Solomon’s Pools.

Mr. Adler was also one of the founders of the London Chovevé Zion, and as Honorary Solicitor drafted its Constitution, which was settled by the Right Hon. Arthur Cohen, K.C.

“Grosvenor Gate, Park Lane,
“London, 28th Hesvan, 5602.

“12 November.

“My dear and much esteemed Sir,

“... I am most highly gratified, my dear Sir, by the very kind manner in which you have been pleased to notice my feeble exertions in favour of our unfortunate and persecuted Brethren in the East....

“Believe me to be,

“With sincere Respect and Esteem,

“My dear Sir,

“Your obedient Servant,

“Moses Montefiore.

“The Reverend

Doctor N. Adler, Chief Rabbi, &c. &c. &c.”

“Alliance Office,

“Bartholomew Lane,

“31 May, 5614.

“My dear and respected Sir,

“... I hope to find the amount of Contributions much increased from your admirable Letter having at last found its way in the hands of the several Seat-holders of each Synagogue, and I am sure if they respond to it with the same liberality as our Christian fellow-subjects have evinced for our suffering Brethren in the Holy Land I am confident you will rejoice at the success which has attended your benevolent exertions....

“I am with great respect and esteem,

“Your faithful Servant,

“Moses Montefiore.

“The Revd. Dr. Adler,

Chief Rabbi, &c. &c.”

“East Cliff Lodge,

“Ramsgate,

“17th August, 5614/1854.

“My dear and respected Sir,

“... I am obliged to you for the information which Mr. Albert Cohn’s letter has afforded me and believe me I am most truly thankful to the God of Israel that my days should have been prolonged to see the welfare of our unfortunate Brethren in Jerusalem cared for by so wealthy and powerful a family as the Barons de Rothschild. May the institutions which they propose diffuse all the advantages we hope for. I will endeavour to write this evening to Lord Clarendon and will take the earliest opportunity to communicate the result after I shall have had an interview with his Lordship. I have requested Mr. Green to forward all the letters to you that have arrived from the Holy Land. I shall take no step regarding the Hospital but with your concurrence. You may rely that there will be no opposition in any way on my part, and I am only too happy to see that Jerusalem is not forsaken....

“Believe me,
“With the greatest esteem and respect,

“Your faithful Servant,

“Moses Montefiore.

“To the Reverend

Doctor Adler,

Chief Rabbi.”

“Alliance Office,
“Bartholomew Lane,

“Wednesday Morn,

“23 Augt., ’614.

“My dear and respected Sir,

“... I now beg to trouble you with the enclosed letters which Dr. Lowe has written to the Holy Land with a remittance of £1200 divided in the following manner.... I have not thought it proper to send anything to the Portuguese at Jerusalem as they have not yet complied with your request in the mode of distribution or forwarded any particulars whatever. I therefore hope you will be satisfied with the arrangement that this will bring the Portuguese to a sense of the necessity they are under to conform to your instructions, or they will receive no more money from England....

“To the Revd.

Dr. Adler,

Chief Rabbi.”

“Buxton, 15th Septr., 5614/1854.

“My dear and respected Sir,

“... I have felt much vexed at M. Albert Cohn’s having taken the liberty of using your name as well as mine as having deputed him to carry out his schemes in the East....

“Believe me to be,
“With great regard and respect,

“Your faithful Servant,

“Moses Montefiore.

“The Revd. Dr. Adler,

Chief Rabbi, &c. &c.”

“Alliance Assurance Office,
“Bartholomew Lane,

“Monday Evening,

“26 Jany., 5617.

“My dear and respected Sir,

“Having this moment heard from Lady Montefiore that you expressed a desire to Visit the Holy Land, and well knowing the lively interest you have ever evinced in promoting the prosperity of Jerusalem, I beg to assure you that nothing could be more gratifying to my feelings, than to be honored with your Company during our intended Tour. We had fixed in our minds the 10th day of February for our departure, but to enjoy the honor of your Society, we would postpone it to meet your Convenience to any day that would enable us to reach Jerusalem for Passover.

“Hoping to have the gratification of a favorable reply from you.

“Believe me to be,

“Your faithful Servant,

“Moses Montefiore.

“To the Reverend

Dr. Adler,

Chief Rabbi.”

“East Cliff Lodge,

“Ramsgate,

“14th September, 5619.

“My dear and respected Sir,

“... With respect to the Jaffa farm I hope in a few days to have an opportunity of speaking with you. I think it was your wish that our co-religionists should be employed on it....”

“Believe me with great esteem,

“Your faithful Servant,

“Moses Montefiore.

“To the Reverend Dr. Adler,

Chief Rabbi.”

“To the Rev. Dr. Adler, Chief Rabbi, etc. etc.

“East Cliff Lodge, Ramsgate, May 15th, 5614‒1854.

“Reverend and Respected Sir,

“For the sake of Zion I cannot remain silent, and for the sake of Jerusalem I cannot rest, until the whole house of Israel have been made acquainted with the lamentable condition of those of our brethren who devotedly cling to the soil, sacred to the memory of our patriarchs, prophets and kings.

“Thrice having visited the Holy Land, it was my earnest desire to fully inform myself as to the condition of our brethren there....

“Aware, however, reverend Sir, of your great anxiety for the physical amelioration of our suffering brethren, and how watchfully you note their spiritual welfare, I am induced to put you in possession of the documents and appeals which I have received from the Holy Land, with the assurance that your powerful co-operation, in the shape of a pastoral letter addressed to the Jews of Great Britain and America—or the exercise of the same in any other mode your wisdom may dictate—will, with God’s blessing, not only tend to remove the present appalling misery of our starving brethren in Zion, but spare us the humiliation of its recurrence.

“I have the honour to be, reverend and respected Sir,
“Your faithful servant,

“Moses Montefiore.”

“To Sir Moses Montefiore, Bart., etc. etc.

“Office of the Chief Rabbi, London, 18th May, 5614.

“My dear and esteemed Sir,

“.... Although I should have much preferred that the duty of addressing our co-religionists on behalf of the afflicted had been assumed by yourself, as you would have made a far deeper impression than I can hope to do, from the well-known fact that you have devoted a great portion of your life to the amelioration of the condition of our brethren in Palestine, and this, too, at the risk of much personal suffering and danger, yet, to avoid all delay in the present emergency, I have to-day written a letter to the congregations under my charge, a copy of which I beg to enclose; and I fervently pray that the Lord may strengthen my feeble words, and incline the hearts of our brethren to this good work of charity.

“I am, my dear Sir Moses,

“Yours very faithfully,

“N. Adler, Dr.”

“PASTORAL LETTER

“To the Wardens, Members, and Seat-holders of the United Congregations of Great Britain.

“Office of the Chief Rabbi, London, May 18th, 5614.

“Beloved Brethren,

“... the present condition of our poor brethren scattered through the four cities of Jerusalem, Zaphed, Hebron and Tiberias, is absolutely heart-rending. This is no exaggeration but a stern and dreadful reality. The almost total failure of the last harvest, which raised the price of all the necessaries of life to an unparalleled height; the present war and general political disturbances; the diminution of the usual resources for the poor, especially those derived from Russia, which has hitherto contributed the most, have brought about an awful famine.... While all surrounding nations make that spot the object of their deepest concern, expending vast sums thereon, should we be unmindful of that land with which our past glory and future hope are inseparably connected? ... It may be thought by some that the unfortunate state of the Jewish residents of Palestine might have been brought about ... by their reliance on fixed pensions and casual alms without the exercise of industry, either in agriculture, commerce or other employments;... Why, therefore, continue a life of pauperism, which will endure until the springs of poverty are stopped—and what will be the use of a collection, which can but mitigate the evil for a moment?

“My dear brethren,—Before you accuse the sufferers of indolence, and their leaders of neglect, let us assure you that the people are most anxious to free themselves from the thraldom of dependence; that the Rabbis and the heads of the Congregations have proved to Sir Moses Montefiore, who has been at all times the strenuous advocate of industrial pursuits, the willingness of the people to till the soil, if only it could be done with security. But hitherto the great impediment to agriculture has been not alone the want of pecuniary means, but the want of protection on the part of the Government, it being absolutely impracticable to labour outside the walls of the cities, owing to the depredations of the roving and lawless Bedouins, for whatever the inhabitants sow is speedily seized by others.

“Without, however, alluding to the happy restitution that we anxiously look for, which lies in the hand of the Lord who commandeth us ‘not to stir, neither to awake His love, until He please’—the present war may, by the Divine blessing, bring about a great and beneficial change in the Holy Land. It is more than probable that the Government of the Porte will concede to our brethren in Palestine the right of holding land; and that this right will be placed under secure protection. It will then become the duty of our leading men to organise a proper plan of operations, put themselves into communication with the different Committees abroad, to raise the necessary means, to send men of ability, properly authorised, to Jerusalem, to bring about a unity of action among the different congregations there, to purchase land, to establish farms and factories, and to devote a portion of the money annually collected, as wages to those who will labour therein under the charge of the persons superintending those undertakings. The time for the realisation of such a scheme may not be remote, as the munificent legacy of the philanthropist Judah Touro, New Orleans, was bequeathed for this very purpose, which bequest will have an important bearing on the improvement of the Holy Land.

“... I remain, yours very faithfully,

“N. Adler, Dr., Chief Rabbi.”⁠¹

In February, 1855, Dr. Adler and Sir Moses published their first Report enumerating the appropriations of money they had made and the sums set apart for the establishment of institutions designed to relieve distress, and to encourage and promote industry.

In May, 1856, Sir Moses and Lady Montefiore set out on a mission to the Holy Land to organize means for the appropriation of the funds “with a view to the utmost benefit of the supplicants.”

The Trustees resolved to attempt the organization of some industrial scheme, and, says their Second Report, dated 1856: “In a land naturally so fertile as Palestine, offering so prolific a return for industry, but altogether wanting in commercial resources, agriculture must of necessity be the first object of attention, as likely to prove the most powerful auxiliary in bringing about a healthful reaction, by alleviating distress, by promoting industry, and by exciting a feeling of self-reliance.” The Trustees were confirmed in their views by the opinion of experienced agriculturists in the Holy Land, and by the valuable suggestions of munificent donors.

“On the 17th June Sir Moses had an audience with the Sultan, and on the 27th July the first meeting was held with the representatives of Zapphed.

“The desirability of cultivating land was discussed at this sitting, and the great probabilities of success in the undertaking were shown by the mention of numerous well-authenticated facts. The views entertained by the Trustees having been confirmed by the best evidence, a Committee of practical agriculturists—men distinguished by their probity, and of acknowledged skill—was, without further delay, appointed to aid in the selection of land, and to advise as to the fitness of the parties to be employed in its cultivation. Assisted by this Committee, Sir Moses selected thirty-five families from the Holy City of Zapphed, provided them with means to commence agricultural pursuits, and also secured for them local governors. Some orphan lads were also provided for, by being placed under the care of the Committee, to be trained as agriculturists. A district in the vicinity of Zapphed, called the Bokea, having been pointed out as a most desirable spot for agricultural purposes, sufficient means were granted to give employment to fifteen families, to be engaged in the cultivation of that fruitful district; the whole being placed under the supervision of the Agricultural Committee at Zapphed. The claims of Tabaria were next considered ... and means afforded to thirty families to enable them to engage in agricultural pursuits. At Jaffa some land, with a house, and well affording an abundant supply of excellent water, was purchased, and a number of our poor co-religionists are already engaged upon such land.” An establishment for weaving was instituted.

“Sir Moses eventually succeeded in purchasing a tract of land to the west of the Holy City, in a most beautiful and salubrious locality, within a few minutes’ walk from the Jaffa and Zion Gates. Here a considerable number of our co-religionists and others at once found employment on the land and in the building of the boundary wall.” A windmill was erected on this site to supersede the expensive method used at Jerusalem for grinding corn.

### LVII.

The Final Exodus

“And what now is the aspect of Palestine? Still, truly, it is a land rich in the grandeur and beauties of nature’s handiwork—still, in some parts, ‘... hills, plains, and valleys, fields of wheat and barley, vineyards and olive-yards, are spread out before you as on a map’—still does the benign influence of the sun’s warmth engender in the bosom of the earth the germs of fruits and flowers, that languish for want of culture, and never arrive at perfection—still do the hills uplift their heads amid the clouds, which drop down, as though with tears of sorrow, upon their barren and exposed sides, once covered with artificial soil and by the hands of a favoured race rendered fruitful as the vale beneath. The mountains remain unshaken, but where are the countless flocks? the stones of the water-course are there, but where is the limpid stream? Alas! the promised blessing has been withdrawn from the land; the flocks no longer multiply as heretofore, neither as in former days do springs and fountains burst forth everywhere out of the valleys and the hills; and her cities are desolate and forsaken, and of many even the site is not accurately known; literal, indeed, has been the fulfilment of the prophetic declaration ‘the land shall be desolate.’ Solitude now reigns where once the busy hum of voices enlivened many a glad city, ay, even in the wilderness—ruins now mark the spot where once rose the sound of harp and tabret, and where heart joined with hand in mocking with merriment the threatened desolation....”

“... But more than this—Britain! rejoice! it is for you to lead back to their beautiful land the long-dispersed members of Judah’s neglected race, and by planting in their native country a colony of whose attachment to its protectors there could be no doubt,...”

“... Jerusalem shall, indeed, become again the glorious city among the nations: no longer shall her name be Jerusalem, but ‘the City of the Lord, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel,’ for there shall be holiness,’ and in the midst of her ‘the King of Israel, even the Lord;’ ... Her walls shall be called ‘Salvation,’ and her gates ‘Praise’; and her children shall enjoy the former and the latter rain; ‘the floors shall be full of wheat, and the vats shall overflow with wine and oil; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them....’

“Among these there are many whose wealth—... has caused the name of the Jew too often to be coupled with the idea of sordid gain...: but it will be well for the few, who by ... prosperity, ... occupy now an elevated ♦position, ... prepare to head with energy every warrantable occasion for furthering the restoration of their unhappy people to Palestine. Providential is it for them, that among them are men possessing influence and wealth sufficient to become their leaders....”

“Once again—Britain, beware! and hasten to exert the means which, lying at your disposal, may be made use of as a defence for your valuable possessions in the East, and for the advancement of God’s glory, by the return of His people to the land whither He has said He would bring them again ‘that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that He might be glorified.’”⁠¹

### LVIII.

Disraeli and the Purchase of the Suez Canal Shares

The story of the purchase of the Suez Canal shares by Lord Beaconsfield has been told many times, but Mr. [afterwards Sir] Henry Lucy, in “Sixty Years in the Wilderness,” throws fresh light on the subject.

“On a certain Sunday night in the spring of 1875 he⁠¹ chanced to be dining in Bruton Street with Henry Oppenheim, one of the original proprietors of the Daily News. During a residence in Paris and Egypt that gentleman, just settling down in London, was brought into close connection with Egyptian financial affairs. On the previous day he heard of the intention of the impecunious Khedive to sell en bloc his holding in the capital of the Suez Canal. Greenwood instantly saw the opportunity for a great stroke of State. On leaving Bruton Street he went direct to the private residence of the Foreign Secretary (Lord Derby) and told him of the rare chance. Lord Derby informed the Prime Minister, whose Oriental mind glowed at the prospect of so stupendous a deal. Inquiry secretly made at Cairo disclosed the fact that the Khedive would ‘part’ for a sum of four millions sterling. But it must be money down.

“It was, Greenwood told me, on Lord Beaconsfield’s personal suggestion that the difficulty, at the moment apparently insuperable, was overcome. The consent of Parliament was necessary to confirmation of the deal. That involved both delay and publicity, either fatal to success. Late on the Thursday night following the Bruton Street dinner, the Premier sent his private secretary, Monty Corry,⁠¹ to call upon Baron Rothschild, the Sidonia of ‘Coningsby,’ at the time head of the great financial house. Even a Rothschild did not happen to have about him at the moment a trifle of four million sterling. Nor was it possible, in accordance with the traditions of the house, that such a transaction should be entered upon without having been considered in family council. Corry accordingly returned to the Premier without definite reply. It came promptly on the following morning, the terms being that the money would be advanced on a commission of 2½ per cent.

“These terms were pretty stiff, involving a payment of £100,000. The City heard of them with envy, and they were discussed with much severity when the matter came before the House of Commons. The Rothschilds and their friends defended them on the ground that the colossal transaction involved a certain measure of risk. There was absolutely no security beyond the influence of the Premier, still master of a majority in the House of Commons, and pledged to invoke its aid in order to obtain Parliamentary sanction. The whole thing happened between two Sundays. On the first Greenwood dined at Bruton Street; on the second, calling on Lord Derby, he learned that the transaction had been successfully carried through, and was invited to say what form his personal recompense should take. He declined to specify a request, protesting he had done nothing but his duty, and was content that its accomplishment should be his reward....”⁠¹

### LIX.

Cyprus and Palestine

The Anglo-Turkish Convention had given a new and unexpected addition to the already extensive list of British territorial responsibilities. It is true that a “conditional” element ... enters into the connexion formed with the Turkish Government; and the claims to interpose between the Sultan and his subjects, as well as the circumstances which would render interference necessary, are not very clearly defined. But the British Government, not only by entering into the Convention, but by the prominence with which important events invested that treaty, as also by its positive acquisition of the island of Cyprus, stand pledged before Europe and the world to secure to the populations of Asiatic Turkey a deliverance from the corrupt rule which has hitherto burdened them....

“In the minds of all thoughtful men there is a strong belief that this country is the instrument by which freedom, peace and true religion will be carried to the uttermost ends of the world. If that be so, there is assuredly no portion of the earth’s surface which more needs the possession of these blessings, or from which can come in keener despair the cry ‘Come and help us.’ The countries of Asia still remaining ... include those whereon the earliest progenitors of the human race appeared, and those which are familiar to us in Biblical records, or interesting as the platform upon which mighty nations strove, and empires fell in the strife which was raging then as now between the powers of Good and Evil.”⁠¹

### LX.

Disraeli and Heine

“Deux noms, dont le rapprochement peut sembler d’abord inattendu, me viennent sans cesse à l’esprit lorsque j’embrasse d’un coup d’œil cette physionomie singulière d’homme d’état et d’écrivain, et ils aident, si je ne me trompe, à en démêler la signification. M. Disraeli me fait souvent penser à Henri Heine. Chez tous les deux, en effet, même vivacité d’intelligence, même pénétration, même promptitude à saisir toutes les idées et à s’approprier pour un instant toutes les doctrines, même vagabondage d’imagination, même indiscipline de génie, même mélange bizarre de fantaisie et de pensée, de frivolité et de profondeur.... M. Disraeli a eu la chance, qui n’échut pas à H. Heine, de vivre dans un milieu oû certains excès n’eussent jamais été tolérés.... Il n’a pas connu non plus les souffrances morales, les âpres soucis, les angoisses, les sérieuses épreuves, qui répandent l’amertume dans l’ironie du poête allemand, et lui arrachent, parmi ses éclats de rire, des cris si poignans: mais comme il tranche néanmoins sur la société anglaise,... Quelle perturbation il jette dans son parti, quelle inquietude il y sème par les saillies de sa verve goguenarde,... De quel doigt irrespectueux il lève tous les voiles et touche aux institutions qu’il prétend défendre! Ici, comme chez H. Heine, on ne saurait méconnaître l’influence persistante de la race. L’un a fini par embrasser le catholicisme, l’autre est né dans l’eglise anglicane; mais ils restent Juifs, et pour sa part M. Disraeli, courageux avocat des Juifs à la chambre des communes et dans ces livres, n’a jamais désavoué sa parenté avec eux. L’eût-il essayé d’ailleurs, que le sceau de la race, vivement empreinte dans son génie et dans son caractère, l’aurait trahi. Malgré son torysme d’emprunt, on sent, il faut le dire à son honneur, dans le langage de M. Disraeli une sympathie de cœur pour les déshérités qui n’est guère une disposition anglaise et aristocratique: c’est bien plutôt un souvenir de l’égalité juive et un sentiment puisé dans la législation républicaine de Moïse; mais ce qui est plus juif encore, c’est ce fonde de cynisme, dernière défense d’une race trempée de longue date par la persécution et le mépris, bronzée par l’habitude de l’outrage. M. Disraeli n’est pas plus exempt que H. Heine de cette audace qui défie le ridicule et qui même sait en tire parti....”⁠¹

### LXI.

Disraeli’s Defence of the Jews

Disraeli supported the emancipation of the Jews in England on religious grounds:⁠—

“... The very reason for admitting the Jews is because they show so near an affinity to you. Where is your Christianity if you do not believe in their Judaism?... The Jew was necessarily a religious being, but not a proselytising one, and so would support and not undermine the Christian Church.... What possible object can the Jew have to oppose the Christian Church? Is it not the first business of the Christian Church to make the population whose minds she attempts to form, and whose morals she seeks to guide, acquainted with the history of the Jews? Has not the Church of Christ—the Christian Church, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant—made the history of the Jews the most celebrated history of the world? On every sacred day you read to the people the exploits of Jewish heroes, the proofs of Jewish devotion, the brilliant annals of past Jewish magnificence.... Every Sunday—every Lord’s day—if you wish to express feelings of praise and thanksgiving to the most High, or if you wish to find expressions of solace in grief, you find both in the works of Jewish poets.... In exact proportion to your faith ought to be your wish to do this great act of national justice. If you have not forgotten what you owe to this people, if you were grateful for that literature which, for thousands of years, has brought so much instruction and so much consolation to the sons of men, you as Christians, would be only too ready to seize the first opportunity of meeting the claims of those who profess this religion.”⁠¹

### LXII.

A Hebrew Address to Queen Victoria (1849)

Translated Extract from an Address of Russian Jews in Safed on their coming under England’s protection, 1849.

(After compliments to the Consul in Jerusalem.)

“We acknowledge to the Lord and praise Him that He has put it into the heart of the Glory the Pity of the mighty Crowned Queen, the pious, the precious, the upright who reigns over the provinces of England and its dependencies, to do good to the people of Israel and to succour them with every kind of aid, for great and small, and to defend them from those that rise up against them.

“With a perfect heart

Of mercy and loving kindness;

And with the tips of the wings of Mercy

And the grace of her Righteousness

She has extended and caused to shine upon us,

Who dwell in our own land,

The holy (be it established in our days,)

Us, who are burdened with troubles—

Sinking into distress,

Poverty and calamity,

But loving the land of our Fathers,

The place of our honour.

We here are those

Who are the sons of the provinces of Russia,

And this is the day we have looked for:

We have found it, we have seen it—

For she has bent down her pity to receive us

Under the shade of her wings of compassion,

And to comfort us with shade of her mighty rule,

For a name, for a praise, and for glory!

Yea, our souls within us are bound

To implore Him, who is fearful in mighty acts,

With praises and prayers,

That He may prolong her days

In rest and satisfaction;

That the Lord may hedge her in,

And all that are hers:

The princes around her,

With her nobles,

And all those comforted in her shadow

May they rise on wings of elevation, of prosperity,

In fulness of joy;

And may her kingdom be established

Like the Moon, for ever and ever,

Until the coming of Messiah!

May the Lord bless their lives and their substance,

And increase their honour,

And crown their praise!

Amen, so be Thy will!”⁠¹

### LXIII.

An Appeal by Ernest Laharanne (1860)

“Oh! que de proscriptions, que de larmes, que de sang dans cette période de 18 siècles, et vous êtes encore, fils de Juda!

“Contre la haîne, le mépris, le dédain, le dégoût vous avez franchi ces obstacles, sans nombre, que les bourreaux des siècles d’aveugle foi tendaient à votre passage, et l’éternelle main vous conduisait sans cesse!

“Mais la France vous a faits libres!...

“Vous avez été citoyens et vous êtes nos frères!

“L’an 1789 a été pour vous la première étape de la réhabilitation, si la réhabilitation est là où il n’y a pas la honte et infamie, mais là où il y a eu un malheur!

“Marchez alors sous l’égide sacrée de cette France émancipatrice! Dans sa mission libérale, son étoile de salut distingua échelonnés, sur la route des peuples, toutes les races proscrites et tous les parias du monde. Et vous étiez sur ce grand chemin, et l’opprobre et les malheurs ombrageaient seuls l’épineuse et brûlante voie!”

“Elle vous appella dans ses assemblées, dans ses triomphes, dans ses joies, dans ses malheurs; et au jour des délibérations, vous avez parlé, et au jour des marches triomphales vous avez applaudi, et au jour de nos malheurs, vous avez pleuré!...”

“Nous nous inclinons devant vous, hommes forts! Car vous fûtes forts durant votre histoire antique; vous fûtes forts, depuis le drame de Jérusalem; vous fûtes forts au temps du moyenâge, alors qu’il n’y avait que deux noires puissances: l’inquisition avec la croix, les pirates avec le croissant!

“Mais vous ne nous êtes pas arrivés tous jusqu’à nous. Combien n’en a-t-il pas fallu pour payer l’immense tribu de 18 siècles!

“Mais, ceux qui restent, vous pouvez grandir encore et rebâtir la porte de Jérusalem.

“C’est votre tâche. Dieu ne vous aurait pas conduits jusqu’à nos temps s’il n’avait pas voulu vous réserver la plus sainte des missions....”

“Une haute mission vous est réservée. Placés comme un vivant trait d’union entre trois mondes, vous devez amener la civilisation chez les peuples inexpérimentés encore, vous devez leur porter les lumières d’Europe que vous avez recueillies à flots.”

“Vous servirez d’intermédiaires entre l’Europe et l’extrême Asie, et vous ouvrirez les grandes voies qui mènent aux Indes et à la Chine et aux archipels encore inconnus, mais qu’il faudra explorer.

“Vous arriverez aux champs de Juda, avec la couronne du martyre et les cicatrices des longues douleurs, et le monde s’inclinera et les fronts se découvriront, comme devant un aîné des peuples!...”

“Vous avez assez aidé à civiliser les peuples, en Europe, à faire avancer le progrès, à faire et à favoriser les révolutions; vous devez maintenant songer au vallées du Liban et aux grandes plaines de Génézareth.

“Marchez! Dans votre œuvre rénovatrice, nos cœurs vous suivront et nos bras vous serviront d’aide!

“Nous le ferons! Vous avez en vous-mêmes de ces hommes si rares en nos temps, qui out fait appel à vos sympathies, et à vos secours, pour venir soulager nos frères dans le malheur!⁠¹

“Cette voix que nous entendons encore a retenti d’un bout à l’autre du monde. Et qui ne serait pas reconnaissant aujourd’hui du généreux élan qu’a provoqué le grand homme?

“Marchez, Juifs de tous les pays!... L’antique patrie vous appelle, et nous serons fiers de venir rouvrir vos foyers!”

“Marchez, fils de martyrs!...”⁠¹

### LXIV.

Statistics of the Holy Land

A folded page with which the Addenda (Extracts from some of the reports, letters, and addresses on agriculture in the Holy Land received by Sir Moses Montefiore, F.R.S., etc. etc., during his sojourn there. Translated from the originals, by Dr. L. Loewe) to Lady Montefiore’s Notes from a Private Journal, 1844, concludes, is entitled:⁠—

“A form of the lists giving a statistical account of the Children of Israel dwelling in the Holy Land. In the Year 5599/1839.” These are the names of the worthy persons fearing God, who resided in the Holy City, in the year 5599‒1839.

The form is divided into seventeen columnar sections, headed with the following queries:⁠—

Number in Family—Names—Where born—Age—Date of arrival in the Holy Land—How Situated—Occupation—Married—Single—Names and number of children—Age above 13—Age under 13—Names of Widows—Age—Names of Orphans—Age—Remarks.

Sir Moses, accompanied by his wife, first visited the Holy Land in 1827, and the urgent necessity and vast importance of statistics must have deeply impressed him, for we find that on his second pilgrimage, eleven years later, he caused forms similar to the above, which were also in Hebrew, to be distributed in the Holy Cities of Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias, Hebron, and in other towns and villages. The information furnished was signed, countersigned and sealed by the Heads of each Kahal.

Forms applicable to synagogues, colleges, schools, and various other institutions were also circulated, requesting particulars as to situation, the names of the ecclesiastical and lay heads, and other officials. The purpose of each organization, its income and expenditure, and a number of other minor details.

This information—collected for thirty-six years 5599‒5635 = 1839‒1875—was compiled and arranged by Dr. Louis Loewe (the life-long friend of Sir Moses, whom he accompanied on thirteen of his missions abroad) and transcribed in fifteen imperial folio volumes, a model of Hebrew calligraphy.

In addition to these particulars of a personal nature, this invaluable thesaurus contains information dealing with land, agriculture, buildings, industries, cotton, oil, fruit-trees, and the condition of the country in general. The volumes are now deposited at the Jews’ College, Queen Square House, London, but form part of the Library of the Judith, Lady Montefiore Theological College of Ramsgate.

A wealth of material lies at the disposal of future historians and statisticians, and it is devoutly to be hoped, that this great work will find its proper resting-place in the Archives of Jerusalem.

### LXV.

An Open Letter of Rabbi Chayyim Zebi Sneersohn of Jerusalem (1863)

“There were hundreds of Jews, preferring labour to starvation, to be seen working for their daily bread at one shilling per day in the fields of the so-called ‘Industrial Plantations for Jews,’ then under the auspices of Mr. Finn, late English Consul for Palestine, and up to the present time there are many Jews engaged in performing even the most menial offices and doing their best to provide food for their families. The other day a meeting was held by the Chief Rabbi, Haim David Hassan, and many other notabilities of the different congregations, at which I also attended. The subject proposed was an enquiry to ascertain the number of those who are likely to devote themselves to agricultural pursuits and to draw up a plan in which way they could be helped in order to attain the object desired. The result was that up to the present about one hundred heads of families declared their readiness to go and till the ground of their fathers. The result of the preliminary discussion on the plan to be adopted was to get a hodjet, or secure possession from the Government or possession of cultivated ground, consisting of gardens, olive trees, vineyards and fields.”

Palestinian Rabbis were quick to recognize the activity of the British Consul. James Finn was indeed an English pioneer of the idea of colonization of Palestine and of Britain’s protection of Palestinian Jews. He was appointed Consul before the death of Bishop Alexander (who was a converted Jew and the first Bishop appointed by the British Government in Jerusalem), in 1848, and the chief reason for his appointment was his known love of the Jewish cause. He was at the time a member of the London Society’s Committee, had published an interesting and learned work on the History of the Spanish Jews, as well as a tract upon the Chinese Jews, had devoted himself with great zeal and rare success to the study of Hebrew, which he spoke and wrote with fluency, and was considered on this account to be particularly well qualified for the post of Consul at Jerusalem (another proof of the great appreciation of the national Jewish character of Palestine on the part of the British Government at that time). Finn went out as a devoted friend to the Jewish cause, and such he proved himself throughout. Though an ardent Christian, he won the sympathy of the most orthodox Jerusalem Rabbis, and their moral support for the colonization of Palestine.

Palestinian Jews themselves advocated the establishment of Jewish agricultural colonies in 1863:⁠—

“Behold, we are now awaking to a sense of the profound degradation which systematic dependence on charity must produce and to the awful demoralization which must be the necessary consequence of its precariousness. The increasing prosperity of those around us makes us the more deeply feel our own unutterable misery: while European ideas, gradually penetrating to us, are rousing us from our apathy and inspiring us more and more with the wish to wipe away from us the disgrace of sloth, with which we are but too often stigmatized. We want to work, and to work hard, in order to support ourselves by the sweat of our brows. But there is in Palestine no other source of employment capable of giving bread to a community consisting of thousands of individuals, save agriculture. You dole out to us annually thousands of pounds, just enough to keep us, year after year, on the brink of starvation. This has now been going on for centuries, with the result which we have seen. Now try whether a change for the better could not be brought about. Lay out, by way of experiment, and on a small scale, just to begin with, a portion of the funds destined for the Holy Land in productive labour. Some of us, at least, will, instead of being maintained in involuntary idleness, see what our handiwork can produce, whereby you give the mere consumer of to-day a chance of becoming the producer of to-morrow, and in time you may have the satisfaction of seeing the country dotted with self-supporting agricultural colonies of happy Jews—the very same who are now a burden to you, and whose cry of distress every now and then resounds through the countries of the West.”

Rabbi Sneersohn was on a visit to Melbourne in 1861, and addressed (in Hebrew) a “Meeting of the members of the Jewish Faith (to which persons of other denominations were also invited) for the purpose of adopting measures to assist in building houses of refuge on Mount Zion” (The Salvation of Israel, an address, etc., by Rabbi Hayim Zwi Sneersohn, Melbourne, 1862).

### LXVI.

The Tragedy of a Minority, as seen by an English Jewish Publicist (1863)

“The whole Tragedy of our People is to be found in the fact that we must everywhere be in the minority: and no matter how just our cause may be, we shall always have to complain of slights and insults, of being overlooked by accident or design, of being scorned by many, and denounced by zealots or infidels, all for the sake of being a minority.... But once again blessed with a Government of our own, though only a small portion of Israelites should be found in their own land, while the many would prefer to remain in the countries where they now sojourn, and the advantages of which they might not wish to give up, the feelings of the world would necessarily undergo a great change, and the treatment meted out to us would not be what it is now. If we have our agriculturists, our statesmen, our mechanics, our public teachers, equal to the best found anywhere, who would dare to insult us by stating that he knows us only as pedlars, bankers and merchants: and class us as a whole among petty traders and men of low pursuits? No effort which we can make, situated as we are all over the world, will readily change the long habit which was forced on us to depend on commerce, large and small, in all its branches, in which the meaner necessarily predominated, owing to the exclusive laws to which we were subjected: and therefore it will be centuries before the unjust prejudices against us die out, if ever they can, in case we ever succeed in divesting ourselves of that habit. If our land be restored to us, and we to it, how nobly will our character, which is now concealed and obscure, burst forth in all ancient vigour and beauty, and we shall naturally present to the world again examples worthy of imitation, and the harp of Judah, which has so long hung mute on the willows of many a Babylon, will again resound to the master-touch of the inspired poet. He will again sing aloud the praises of the Most High. Our judges will sit on the judgment-seat of our ancient counsellors, and decide for the lofty and the lowly according to the demands of the Mosaic legislation: and the wisdom which had its chief residence on the hills of Jerusalem will evermore be diffused to enlighten a suffering world, and will prove its strength in contrast with the failures of antagonistic systems.... Will this dream be speedily realized? We cannot tell indeed: events occasionally creep slowly over the face of the world, but at other times they rush rapidly forward, and one great development follows closely on the heels of the other. The same may be the case with the now apparently distant restoration of Israelites to Palestine. The world is becoming rapidly peopled: the boundaries of nations in the meanwhile are frequently changed: jealousies of one people against another are constantly developed: the balance of power, a vain desire to preserve peace among men, is constantly vibrating to and fro. Is it then so unlikely that an effort will be made to place in Palestine and the neighbourhood an enterprising race which shall restore it?”

### LXVII.

הברת ישוב ארץ ישראל ודרישת ציון בלאנדאן הבירה׃
London Hebrew Society for the Colonization of the Holy Land

Plans

“The London Society for the Colonization of the Holy Land intends:⁠—

“1. To collect funds for the purchase of deserted and desolate towns, and fields and vineyards in the Holy Land, and to prepare Hebrew Persons able and willing to work, so as to fit them for agricultural labour in the Holy Land.

“2. All Israelites, expert in sacred scripture and the Hebrew language, who are members of this society for six years, and prove their ability in agriculture, honest, and of respectable behaviour, able and willing to work, will be sent out to the Holy Land by this Society.

“3. On those sent out by the Society the sacred duty devolves to fulfil faithfully the commandments of the תורה not to work—or cause to work—on Sabbath, Festivals, Schemita, and Jobal, as well as to observe לקט שכחה ופאה and all other commandments relating to the cultivation of the soil in the Holy Land.

“4. All Israelites having lived uninterruptedly for three years in the Holy Land will be considered as free members, and, after passing proper examination, can enjoy the same rights as those who have contributed.

“5. A house, with adjoining land, and cattle, implements and all other requirements for agriculture, and all necessaries for himself and his family shall be provided by the Society until the soil is fertilised and productive.

“6. In each colony the Society shall establish a Synagogue with all its requirements as ס׳ת, etc., schools for children and adults, appoint and pay Rabbis, readers and the other officials, provide books, &c.

“7. The Rabbi must not only have thorough knowledge of the Hebrew language and Theology, but must also be expert in other sciences and languages, especially the language of the country.

“8. Every colonist has the preference, after the stipulated time, to farm the land fertilised by his labour, which land remains the property of the society.

“9. The colonists will be placed under the protection of the great European powers.

“10. Co-religionists trained to the use of arms will be appointed by the society, to protect the colony from the attacks of the Bedouins; also police to enforce the laws and to maintain order.

“11. Israelitish co-religionists of all countries and of either sex will be accepted as members of the society.

“12. Those of other religions can only be accepted as honorary members.

“13. Boys and girls from 13 to 20 years of age, and persons more than 50 years of age can be members of the second class only.

“14. Children under 13 years of age are members of the third class.

“15. Communities forming societies among themselves will be accepted as branches of this society.

“16. Members, who bequeath money or property, according to their means, for the benefit of the society will be constituted perpetual members.

“17. Any member desiring to perpetuate the memory of deceased relations or friends, can do so by paying a certain sum, according to his means, to have them inscribed as perpetual members.

“18. Each member to pay an entrance fee of not less than 1s. 6d., one-third of which fee must be paid at the time of entrance.

“19. This third part will be used to meet the expenses of stationery, printing, advertising, rent of lecture hall, management, &c., and for the assistance of those persons preparing themselves for agriculture.

“20. Each member agrees to pay a certain voluntary contribution towards the funds of the society, which sum has to be paid to the committee every ראש חדש for which he will receive a receipt.

“21. A public meeting will be held every ר׳ח when the names of the members and the amount of their contributions will be published.

“22. General meetings will be held three times during the year, at such time and place as the monthly meetings shall appoint.

“23. Admission of non-members to the monthly meetings by ticket, to be had gratis.

“24. None but members will be allowed to address the meeting. Non-members can submit any question in writing, which will be communicated, and if necessary discussed at the meeting.

“25. To explain and to illustrate the principles of the society, lectures will be delivered every Sabbath in the hall of the society, to which members have free admission, non-members by ticket, sold for the benefit of the society.

“The land will be divided by ballot, for which members of the first class only are qualified. For assistance and for instruction every member of six months standing, in the first and second class, has a claim.

“Members who shall have obtained a plot of land and should not desire to emigrate, can convey the same to another person, provided he be qualified as described in Rule 2.”⁠¹

### LXVIII.

An Open Letter of Henri Dunant (1866)

“The disquieting circumstances in which Europe finds itself should not let us forget that the Eastern question, which has already troubled the Governments and peoples, may speedily reappear and complicate a position grave enough in itself. Instinctively every one feels that the day when this question will call for a definite solution, all Europe will perhaps be in inextricable difficulties.

“Diplomatic difficulties can only end in barren expedients, but the present, which is averse to a system of forcible conquest by fire and sword, has a much more powerful weapon at its disposal—that of pacific conquest by civilization.

“What is therefore to be done in order to prevent grave complications, and regenerate the East by rousing its vital forces and infusing into it the spirit of Western civilization?

“One of the most powerful means would be the formation of a large society, having an eminently international character, and which would have thereby the merit of reconciling the particular interests of the several European Powers with those of civilization. This Society would open for the West new and abundant sources of wealth: it would become for the East an efficient means of moral regeneration: and lastly would be for all nations co-operating in the matter a great honour and a great profit.

“The following is the manner in which such an association may be presented to the European public:⁠—

“Objects of the Eastern International Society:⁠—

“To promote the development of agriculture, industry, commerce, and public works in the East, and especially in Palestine. To obtain from the Turkish Government privileges and monopolies, whether in Constantinople or the rest of the Empire: notably the concession and the gradual abandonment of the soil of Palestine. To distribute for pecuniary considerations such portions of the land, the concession whereof might have been acquired or received by the Company, and to colonize the more fertile valleys of the Holy Land.

“The Turkish Empire contains virtues of all kinds, which, if they were utilized by a powerful company, would yield considerable results; but the Porte neither possesses the resources nor the necessary forces in order to create and lead to a favourable issue the works of public utility, which the internal development of the Ottoman Empire so urgently demands: left to her own resources she can neither augment her revenues nor form new ones, she is unable to give energetic support to either agriculture or industry, which are the only means of increasing public wealth and prosperity.

“It is therefore for the West, which possesses the capital and where the creative forces are superabundant, to turn to an account the real advantages presented by Turkey, and to take in hand a work capable of yielding excellent results. Skilfully conducted, operations in this new country bring in a very high interest: but new combinations must be devised, which should enjoy both the approval of the European Powers, and the support of the Sultan’s Porte. Therefore, in order not to weaken its forces, the Society must utilize certain special circumstances in which Turkey is now placed, and Palestine offers itself at first sight to the mind as the earliest field of activity.

“Palestine, as known, only wants human labour in order to produce abundantly: it is one of the most remarkable and fruitful countries on the globe: products of all latitudes are to be met with there, and emigrants from Europe find there the climate of their country. Commerce and private industry completing the work of agriculture, will draw hither in numbers merchants, colonists and capitalists. This resurrection of the East, uniting with the new rise of religious sentiment, will be aided by the co-operation of Israelites, whose valuable qualities and remarkable aptitudes cannot but prove very advantageous to Palestine.

“Having established commercial undertakings at Constantinople and other cities of the Turkish Empire, the Society will construct at Jaffa a port and a good road, a railway from this city to Jerusalem. The territory through which the railway runs should be granted by Turkey to the Society, which might sell it to Israelitish families. These in their turn would create colonies and make them prosperous, with the help and the labour of those of their Eastern brethren whose love for their ancient country has maintained itself as ardently as formerly. Special committees might at their cost send Israelitish emigrants from Morocco, Poland, Moldavia, Wallachia, the East, Africa, etc.

“The result pursued and obtained by the Society by means of a sincere international understanding, the co-operation of those interested in Turkey, and the establishment of Western populations in Palestine, will infallibly be in a less distant future than might be imagined.

“The reconstruction of Holy Places at Jerusalem, which might be carried out internationally, and in a manner worthy of Christendom: the end of conflicts which are being incessantly renewed between the Great Powers on account of the Holy Places: the transformation of ancient Jerusalem into a new city which shall rival in importance the finest cities in the West: the creation of European colonies which in time will become centres when Western civilization will spread into Turkey and penetrate the extreme East.

“Under the nominal suzerainty of the Sultan the Society will administer with intelligence and equity the territories that might develop upon it. Thus India has long been administered and governed by an English company. The Sultan, grateful for the financial support which will be given to him, might, perhaps, grant to the Holy Land a special administration, which, under the high direction of the Porte, would offer real security to the populations that might repair thither, and guarantees for the funds that might be employed there. Thanks to this combination, which would procure for her valuable resources, Turkey would not be obliged to contract new loans in order to pay the interest on previous ones.

“The rising colonies might diplomatically be neutralized, like Switzerland, and by a treaty which would have some analogy to the Convention signed at Geneva in favour of the amboulance, sanitary bodies, and wounded soldiers. It would not, moreover, be so difficult to neutralize Palestine by an agreement among the Powers, since there exists a remarkable precedent, which is the neutralization of the Lower Danube officially obtained from the Seven Powers, who signed the treaty at Paris. Now the Commission of the Lower Danube has created its flag and a small fleet, it possesses a numerous staff and revenues: it actually seeks to contract a loan, the same as an independent state.

“In order to prepare the organization of an International Eastern Society, it is necessary that the minds should be induced to occupy themselves with these great and interesting questions. It is indispensable for this purpose to form a committee composed of influential and honourable men of different nations and different opinions, having at heart the success of these views in the general interest. For the rest the elements of such a committee are quite clear.

“Its programme, at the same time economic, humanitarian, scientific, etc., is also international: it cannot hurt the susceptibilities of any nation. Influential men in France, England, and elsewhere are favourably disposed to the scheme.”⁠¹

### LXIX.

An Appeal of Rabbi Elias Gutmacher and Rabbi Hirsch Kalischer to the Jews of England (1867)

Appeal to Our Brethren

Thou shalt yet plant vines upon the mountains of Samaria; the planters shall plant and shall eat them as common things. Jeremiah, chap. xxxi.

And I will raise up for them a plant of renown and they shall be no more consumed with hunger in the land. Ezekiel xxxiv.

Hear ye generous people, learn ye who take an interest in holy matters, show your tender feelings towards our brethren in the holy land! Think of the abandoned, devastated, sacred soil. Thus voices and signs urgently warn you, pointing out to you that the time long ago vouchsafed has arrived to render them effectual help.

Destructive epidemic diseases and famine ravage in that land in the same awful way this year as they did in the past one and your ever so abundantly flowing gifts and donations are not efficient to alleviate the misery, to satiate the hunger; upon us the needy cast their looks and crave for relief. But there is only one way, one remedy to prevent a recurrence of such distress, and that is: colonization, cultivation and improvements of the Palestine soil.

This proposal, suggested already many years ago, urges now more than ever upon final realization, the soil must be redeemed. The society, “Alliance Israélite,” in Paris, so great in its activity, at the head of which M. Adolphe Crémieux stands as president, has declared itself in favor of this idea and promised its own assistance and interference (sic) elsewhere, to accomplish the object, as we have seen from that society’s recently published half-yearly report.

A letter Sir Moses Montefiore addressed to us after his safe return from Palestine states that the idea has been approved of there also. Sir Moses in the same letter says that from Zephat alone sixty Jewish families addressed to him personally the fervent prayer for a grant of land for agricultural purposes. That the hard tried Israelitish inhabitants of Schabatz in Servia have declared themselves ready to emigrate for the purpose of cultivating the Palestine soil, is known to us already, through the medium of Hebrew periodicals.—To realize the idea in question, money must be raised before anything can be done: the funds in hand are not sufficient, the number of Subscribers must increase, and the subscriptions be permanent. The leaders of congregations should take the matter in hand and every member of a congregation in good circumstances ought to join the society, with a yearly contribution of two Thalers (six shillings), by which they would be instrumental in the performance of the religious commands attached to the sacred soil just as if they themselves had been performing it. To enable members in more humble circumstances to contribute, quarterly payments might be received. But he whom the Almighty has blessed with earthly fortunes and who has the heart for the sufferings of his co-religionists anywhere in the Universe—he should not fail to join the “Alliance Israélite” of Paris, as a member with a yearly contribution of 1 Thaler 10 Sgr. (4 Shillings), and thus further the great aim. Two treasurers have been appointed by us to receive contributions. The well-known Banker, Mr. Seegall, in Posen, is Chief Treasurer, and Mr. S. Fuerst, in Schmiegel, Special Treasurer for amounts up to 100 Thalers (£15). The latter Gentleman has offered to pay all postages out of his own private pocket, and is resolved to go at his own expense to Palestine and to make a beginning with the colonization; perhaps the undersigned Mr. Hirsch Kalischer may take upon himself the expense and hardships of such a voyage, to see there after the strict observance of the religious commands connected with agriculture in Palestine. Were there one at least in every congregation that would zealously take the matter in hand; we would willingly confer upon him the diploma of a Governor of the society and give him the necessary instructions. We are also ready to purchase a priceworthy piece of land in Palestine on account and in the name of any of our wealthier brethren in faith that would remit to us a sum for the purpose, and to have it administered according to their instructions. We hope that with the proper assistance from the congregations of Israel and by the aid of the Omnipotent we shall in a very short time be able to give effect to the idea of Colonization.

Thorn in the month of Marcheshvan 5627. “Be of good courage, and let us play the men for our people and for the cities of our God” (2 Samuel x. 12).

Elias Gutmacher, Rabbi in Graetz.

Hirsch Kalischer, Rabbi in Thorn.⁠¹

### LXX.

Alexandre Dumas (fils) and Zionism

In La Femme de Claude, pp. 50‒51, Daniel says:

“Nous sommes dans une époque où chaque race a résolu de revendiquer et d’avoir bien à elle son sol, son foyer, sa langue et son temple. Il y a assez longtemps que nous autres Israélites, nous sommes dépossédés de tout cela. Nous avons été forcés de nous glisser dans les interstices des nations, d’où nous avons pénétré dans les intérêts des gouvernements, des sociétés, des individus. C’est beaucoup, ce n’est pas assez. On croit encore que la persécution nous a dispersés, elle nous a répandus; et nous tenant par la main, nous formons aujourd’hui un filet dans lequel le monde pourrait bien se trouver pris le jour où il lui viendrait à l’idée de nous redevenir hostile ou de se déclarer ingrat. En attendant nous ne voulons plus être un groupe, nous voulons être un peuple, plus qu’un peuple, une nation. La patrie idéale ne nous suffit plus, la patrie fixe et territoriale nous est redevenue nécessaire, et je pars pour chercher et lever notre acte de naissance légalisé.”

Isidore Cahen writes, Le Daniel de la Femme du Claude “... prévoit et prédit une restauration matérielle de la grandeur de Juda, la reconstitution d’un Etat politique juif! M. Dumas va jusqu’à citer le vœu célébre de la Hagadah: ‘L’année prochaine à Jérusalem....’

“Dans ces vœux qui contiennent nos livres traditionelles il n’y a qu’une espérance allégorique un vœu mystique: c’est une Jérusalem idéale, ... et non pas une Jérusalem politique....”⁠¹

... Il faut que je sois bien maladroit et que je dise bien mal ce que je veux dire pour qu’il y ait erreur sur mon appréciation des Israélites. Le jour où j’ai écrit la Femme de Claude, j’ai cru les glorifier. Je ne vois pas que Daniel et Rebecca ne représentent pas un idéal supérieur et si Daniel menace un moment ceux qui pourraient se montrer hostiles ou ingrats de la puissance que ses coreligionnaires out acquise, il a parfaitement raison. Ce n’est pas quand depuis près de deux mille ans une race subit l’injustice et la persécution comme l’a fait votre race, qu’elle va, après de grands services rendus, supporter l’ingratitude et l’hostilité de ceux qu’elle a tirés d’affaire. Il n’en est pas moins vrai que lors de l’apparition de la Femme de Claude, beaucoup de vos co-religionnaires se sont trompés sur mes intentions et que quelquesuns ont organisé une cabale contre la pièce. Je ne leur en veux pas. Je ne ferai jamais entrer une question personnelle dans ce jugement que je puis avoir à porter historiquement et philosophiquement sur toute une Nation.

... Comme j’assiste pendant le temps que je passe sur la terre aux évolutions de l’humanité à laquelle j’appartiens, je m’amuse quelquefois à essayer de prévoir et même de prédire la direction qu’elles peuvent prendre. Comme j’ai bien étudié celles de votre race, que je l’ai vue asservie et persécutée de tous temps et en ces mêmes temps toujours patiente et laborieuse, je me suis, dans mon intérieur, pris de sympathie pour elle, et si j’avais été capable de pratiquer une religion c’est à celle de ces persécutés et de ces laborieux que je serais allé. Quand un peuple a établi toute la morale humaine sur dix petits versets, il peut vraiment se dire le peuple de Dieu, étant donné la conception que les hommes les plus éclairés peuvent se faire, derrière Moise d’un Dieu personnel. Seulement j’ai le tort d’appliquer à ceux que j’étudie et qui m’intéressent les idées que j’aurais si j’étais à leur place..., quand j’ai vu les évènements politiques nous apporter en 1870, en établissant la République et en nous retirant de Rome, vous apporter la revanche de tant d’injustices et d’humiliations patiemment supportées, je me suis demandé quelle mission je me donnerais, si dans les idées où je suis, j’étais membre de ce peuple particulier. Je me suis dit alors que je n’aurais qu’une idée, ce serait de reprendre possession de mon sol d’origine et de tradition et de rebâtir le temple de Jérusalem, sinon sur la place du tombeau du Christ, du moins en face. C’est cette idée que j’ai incarnée dans Daniel. On m’a dit souvent depuis, que je me trompais sur les ambitions des Israélites, qu’ils ne pensaient plus à ces représailles-là, que leur idéal était de vivre en paix avec les différentes nations qui leur out donné droit de cité et qu’ils out renoncé à finir leurs jours dans un foyer à eux. Tant pis pour eux, si c’est vrai. Il est bon d’avoir un idéal, même quand il est irréalisable. Voilà mon cher ami, aussi brièvement que possible, mes idées sur vos coreligionnaires. Ils m’ont toujours inspiré les sentiments que leur courage, leur persévérance, leurs malheurs, leurs efforts de toutes sortes doivent inspirer à des esprits de bonne foi et à des consciences désintéressées....⁠¹

### LXXI.

Appeal of Dunant’s Association for the Colonisation of Palestine (1867)

Palestine Colonisation

To the Editor of the Jewish Chronicle.

“... International undertaking for the Rejuvenescence of Palestine.—Palestine is a rich and fertile country, although now little populated, and therefore uncultivated. A soil greatly subject to a variety of circumstances is the cause of a great variety of meteorological conditions. Hence a great variety of productions peculiar nearly to every latitude; hence also a great facility for every colonist to find in his new country a climate approaching that of his native land.

“It is not to be feared that the colonisation of the Holy Land, judiciously carried on, can lack warm sympathies or labour under a want of colonists. Numerous adhesions from emigrants by the thousand, easy in circumstances and willing to work, have already addressed themselves to the founders of the undertaking for the rejuvenescence of Palestine.”

“The new reforms introduced by the Ottoman Government, the law which authorised strangers to purchase and hold real estate in the Turkish empire, the road now being constructed from Jaffa to Jerusalem, the works projected in the port of Jaffa, the improvements effected in the great lines of communication—all these undertakings and circumstances united seem to indicate that the moment could not be better chosen for commencing the colonisation of Palestine....”

“The capital required for such an undertaking would not long remain unproductive; indeed, the financial operation of the company that should be formed for this purpose would be one of the simplest.

“The uncultivated land in Palestine purchased of the Ottoman Government at a comparatively small price, and with facilities for payment, resold at a higher figure, would bring in an important profit. The increase in the value of this land—a direct result of the colonisation—would be an additional guarantee for the realisation of this expectation.

“The supply to the colony of agricultural and industrial tools, a trade of importation organized on a scale strictly proportionate to the acknowledged wants of the new settlement, would offer to the company a field for a second operation, which, presenting neither risk nor peril, would nevertheless insure from the very beginning undoubted profits.

“The life which begins to stir in the port of Jaffa will take a fresh rise with the development of agriculture and manufacture in colonised Palestine. The rejuvenescence of Central Asia, which England on the one hand and Russia on the other pursue with so much vigour—the former in the way of peace and the latter in that of war—will not fail favourably to react on the trade of the coast of Syria, once so flourishing, and the decline of which only dates from the fall of the great empire of Persia.

“Ancient Phœnicia, the cities of Tyre and Sidon, the richest of antiquity, owed their prosperity only to the intermediate trade carried on between the east and the west. The fall of the empire founded by Cyrus produced in Central Asia so great a moral and material decay that the trade and industrial pursuits of these immense regions perished from inanity. Tyre and Sidon had no longer any basis for existence; their grandeur accordingly gradually declined. Alexander, after these splendid and proud cities, succeeded in forming direct relations with India, which the founder of this empire had brought nigh to Europe. But Alexandria in its turn had to experience fortune’s inconstancy. Since the discovery of the route to India to the day when steamers and the railway to Suez restored to it some life, desertion and oblivion were its lot. The piercing of the isthmus of Suez will end by restoring to Alexandria its pristine importance. The trade of India will once more completely come back to it, but the cities on the coast of Syria and Jaffa in particular will not the less remain mistresses of every commercial market of Central Asia, upon which a new destiny is dawning.

“A great economical revulsion in the old world is preparing, and the coast of Palestine will again become as in days of old, in common with that of Lower Egypt, the centre of all exchange between the old continents.

“The Palestine Company has therefore an immense future, which it is easy to foresee even now, but we must allow events to proceed in the development of its activity beyond the modest limits which we at present mark out for it.

“Paris and Jerusalem, March, 1866 and September, 1867.”

The address of the secretary-general of this undertaking is Paris, 24, Rue de la Paix.⁠¹

### LXXII.

Edward Cazalet’s Zionist Views

“It was through the armed intervention of England, that, in the year 1841, Syria was transferred from Egyptian to Turkish rule. At that time Lord Palmerston was in office; and his policy, as he explained to the French Ambassador, M. de Bourgoing, was to turn Syria into a desert under Turkish rule, and interpose this desert between the Sultan and his Egyptian vassal. In confirmation of this, which may seem to some an astounding statement, I can only refer you to ‘Guizot’s Memoirs,’ vol. 2, p. 525 ... to Syria assuredly reparation is due on the part of England.... To attempt to improve the Turkish Government of Syria is, for obvious reasons, a hopeless task.... No other country has anything like the same interest in Syria, that we have; besides which, it is to the English nation alone that the population of Syria look for protection and support....

“It was England who handed this country over to the Turks in 1841. Turkey has ever since abused her charge, and it is only just that she should be now called upon to transfer it into more capable hands.”

“The Arabs, who form two-thirds of the whole of the population of Syria, and are for most part lords of the soil, are with very few exceptions completely illiterate, regardless of truth, dishonest in their dealings, and immoral in their conduct. In large towns the greater proportion of the upper classes are both physically and mentally feeble, owing to the effects of polygamy, early marriages, and degrading vices. Out of such elements there is no possibility of creating a ruling class. The other sects are too few in number, and too bigoted and superstitious, to be of any assistance in the government of the country. If, then, the regeneration of Syria is to be attempted, it must of necessity come from without, and can only be brought about by an influx of an industrious and more enlightened people. Fortunately this last resource is not denied to us. The restoration of the Jews to their own land, seems to me the only practicable means by which the regeneration of Syria can be effected. You must not imagine that this event, important though it unquestionably must be, need cause any great perturbation in Europe, or prove in any way a strain upon the resources of England. All that is required is that England should create the conditions under which a large number of Jews would gradually migrate on their own account to Syria and Palestine. The first condition of such a movement is that law and order should be introduced under our Protectorate....

“But there is another influence which would greatly assist the colonization of the country. It has long been a cherished project with the Jews to establish a college in the Holy Land, which would serve as a centre of Jewish philosophy and science. Such an institution would readily meet with support, and incalculably quicken the pulses of their national life. With an extensive literature in their own language, in which every branch of philosophy and science is represented, the Jews would be able to make such an institution a genuine centre of intellectual activity. The leading learned men of the Jewish race would be naturally attracted to such a national centre, and would form a nucleus round which all the intellect of the nation would gather, by means of which the necessary elements of the future government of the country might be formed. I understand that the most suitable site for this college has already been generally agreed upon.

“I have still to show you that these attractions would be sufficient to induce numbers of Jewish families to migrate to Syria. The total number of the Jews throughout the world is variously estimated from eight to ten millions. Of those the greater number—probably six millions—inhabit Russia and the old Polish provinces which now belong to Austria, Germany and Roumania. The condition of the Jews in Russia is deplorable in the extreme. They are denied civil rights. They are forbidden to hold landed property. They are treated as aliens, and are restricted to limited areas in which they suffer from the evils of over-population. These conditions have induced no fewer than 250,000 Jews to emigrate to America within the last thirty or forty years, and it may be confidently predicted that Syria under our protectorate would offer still greater attractions. The land of Palestine alone, is capable of supporting ten times its present population. It may seem strange to say of the Jews who are scattered throughout the world, that they still consider this to be their fatherland. But, if they are denied the actual possession of it, they still bear it in their hearts. Three times a day every Jew offers up a prayer for the restoration of his race to the land and the temple, from which he has been exiled for eighteen centuries. It is a remarkable fact that this scattered and downtrodden people possess within themselves all the elements which go to form a united nation. They have a code of laws for their own government; they have a literature, a history, a language and a religion, which are peculiar to them. Their education is, with some exceptions, on a par with that of the most civilized nations. Numbers of them excel in all the different branches of mechanics and art; and in trade and finance they are, as we all know, unrivalled. Though last, not least they are a people who would fight bravely in the defence of their country.

“During the last twenty years of the reign of the Emperor Nicholas, the military conscription fell heavily upon the Jews. In proportion to their numbers, for every Russian that was enlisted, five Jews were compelled to enter the service; and during the late Turkish war they bore themselves bravely in the face of the enemy. No one who has any knowledge of the Jewish character can for a moment doubt that if the Jews were restored to their country under an English protectorate they would prove true to our nation, and that Syria would become as firmly united to England as if it were peopled by our own countrymen.”⁠¹

### LXXIII.

A Collection of Opinions of English Christian Authorities on the Colonization of Palestine

1. General Sir Charles Warren’s Views

“My proposal is simply an arrangement by which, ... Palestine, this unfortunate land may yet be placed in ... a position which may enable her again to take a place socially among the kingdoms of the earth....”

“It will probably at once occur, ‘And what of the Arabs of Palestine?’ I ask in reply, ‘Who are the Arabs?’ They are certainly not Turks in any degree; they are for the most part not Arabs of Arabia, of the Desert. Then who are they? It has long been known, and no person has thrown more light upon the subject than M. Ganneau, that the people of Palestine are of a very mixed race: some of Canaanitish descent, some Jewish, some of Arabia. It is evident that many of them being Moslems are so for convenience,... We cannot, therefore, look upon the natives of Palestine as rigid Moslems of one race; but we must recognize them as descendants of Canaanites, Israelites, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, and Crusaders, now professing the Moslem or the Christian faith, according to circumstances, but retaining above everything the ancient traditions—yes, and in some instances, I have little doubt, their veritable old religion.”

“Palestine is about the size and shape of Wales, and has now a population of about one and a half millions. Give her good government, and quicken the commercial life of the people, and they may increase tenfold, and yet there be room. The soil is so rich, the climate so varied, that within ordinary limits it may be said that the more people it contains, the more it may. Its productiveness will increase in proportion to the labour bestowed on the soil, until a population of fifteen millions might be accommodated there.

“Let us observe how the country may be improved. It consists of the hill country, or mountain districts; the Shephalah or swelling hills, or wolds; the maritime and Jordan plains, and the tablelands of Arabia.

“All these are most productive naturally; but are, for the most part, at present enjoying a long Sabbath.

“In the hill country, even now the white skeletons of the old system of terracing are visible in parts; but the rich loamy soil is washed down into the wadies, leaving the hillsides bare and desolate, and glaring in their nakedness. A cultivated strip may be seen at the bottom of the wady, subject to being swept away by any storm of rain forming a torrent down the bare hillsides, or withered before its time by the reflection of the sun from the bare rocks.

“Place the valley in proper hands, and note the results. The earth from the bottom will be carefully carried up the hillsides, and laid out in terraces, on which are planted young trees—those of a more delicate nature being placed on the northern declivity, in order that they may suffer less from the sun’s rays. The trees thrive rapidly, as they will do in Palestine; the rain falls, but not as heretofore, rushing fiercely down the bare rocks, and forming a torrent in the valley. No; now it falls on the trees and terraces, percolates quietly into the soil and into the rocky hillside, and is thus absorbed, scarcely injuring the crops at the bottom of the valley. The rain that sinks into the rocks will shortly reissue in perennial springs, so refreshing in a thirsty land. The trees, having moisture in the soil at their roots, spread out their leaves in rich groves over the land. The sun’s rays now do not fall on the ground, but on the green leaves and fruit, by which they are intercepted and absorbed, giving no glare or reflection. The heat of the sun causes a moisture to rise from the trees and soil beneath them, which, on reaching the higher and cooler winds, is condensed into visible vapour, constantly forming as the breeze passes over the grove, so that each grove, so to speak, supplies its own umbrella. The climate is thus changed. Where were hot, glaring sun, dry wind, dry earth, stony land, absence of vegetable products, are now to be found fleecy clouds floating through the balmy air, the heat of the sun tempered by visible and invisible vapours, groves with moist soil, trickling streamlets issuing from the rocks, villages springing up apace, Palestine regenerated.

“This is no dream. I have seen this change take place in Palestine in three years, on a small scale. Why is the Lebanon so different to the hill country of Palestine? In a great measure, because, by reason of its position and conformation, its woods have not been cut down....

“Again, on the east of Jordan, in Gilead, I have seen the same. After riding for miles through the ruins in the glaring summer atmosphere, through a country denuded of trees, nearly choking with the scorching wind, I came upon a district where the ancient woods had not been cut down. Immediately a change was felt: clouds were seen hanging over the woods, the air became soft and pleasant, the sun’s rays beat less fiercely, flowers were seen under the trees, blackberries on the brambles, water gushing out from the hillsides, birds chirping in the shade. This was not due to any change in the atmosphere generally, but was entirely local, and due to the presence of trees. In fact, there are spots where you can, on the same level, change the climate in an hour by passing from the bare land to that which is well wooded.

“This matter I have frequently examined into in Palestine. I mention one particular instance. During the prevalence of hot winds at Jerusalem, I noticed two clouds constantly stationary a few miles off, in an otherwise cloudless sky. On riding over towards them, I found them to be hanging over two large olive groves about seven miles off, recently planted by the Greek convents. Although the wind was blowing briskly, the moisture ascending was condensed as quickly as it rose, and formed an umbrella over these groves.

“In the wolds of Palestine the same process may be continued. Not so much terracing is wanted, but much planting of wood, particularly on the south side—trees of a hardy growth; so that, with a green southern slope opposite, the delicate fruit trees planted on the northern slopes may bring their fruit to perfection.

“The water, which will now be found gushing from the rock, from springs which have long been silent, will be carried in ducts along the hillsides, and used for irrigation purposes, passing thence into the plain, where it can still be used for irrigation, or else assist in filling up the wells near to the surface of the ground—wells which have hitherto been between thirty to ninety feet deep.

“Now again we shall find a difference in the crops in the plain. Hitherto there has been but one season, and then a long interval of desolation, from July to November, when the heaven is of brass and the earth iron. During this long period, scarcely a green blade can be seen over the vast plains—nothing but sticks, and stones, and dust; the monotony relieved only by the noise of the gulgul careering on the wings of the whirlwind....

“The presence of water brought down on the surface from the hills, together with the vast groves of trees to be planted, causes a change. The latter rains of June will be found to fall, giving a second season—a never-ending succession of crops. The fulfilment of the Prophecies will commence taking place—when the ploughman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed....

“The advance of the rolling sand-hills, which is now overwhelming the fairest of the maritime plains, may now be arrested. The rich ground between Gaza and Ascalon, which the sand has swallowed up, must again be recovered. This can easily be effected, by the planting of coniferæ along the sea coast, as has been done already at Beyrout.... If we examine the Jordan valley, we find even greater changes can be effected: it can be made far more fertile than it ever was....

“The whole valley, however, may be made one vast garden, not merely by rebuilding the great aqueducts, remains of which still exist, and by means of which the great cities were watered, but by means of the Jordan river itself. The Jordan, out of Tiberias, falls ten feet to the mile, or 600 feet in sixty miles.... The waters of the Jordan might be brought out of Tiberias in aqueducts falling one foot to the mile, and thus be brought over the great plain of Basan and of Jericho, and be made to irrigate all the lands which the streams have not touched. At the same time, the streams themselves will have increased exceedingly from the development of the country in the high lands.

“The country can thus be transformed.”⁠¹

2. The Rev. James Neil on the Colonization Movement

“At a moment when all eyes are turned to the East, it cannot be unimportant to learn that, after the slumber of ages, Palestine is awakening to new life, and Israel are actually returning to its shores in such numbers, and at the same time in such a way as they have never been known to do, or could have done, since their formal banishment by the Emperor Hadrian, in the year A.D. 135. Many Jews, it is true, driven ruthlessly out of Spain in 1492, found a home in the Holy Land. To go still further back, the celebrated Hebrew traveller, Benjamin of Tudela, tells us in the twelfth century that he found considerable numbers residing in the various towns of Palestine which he visited—descendants, perhaps, amongst others, of some of the 30,000 who joined the arms of Chosroes the Persian in his capture of Jerusalem, A.D. 616, or even of the Jews whom Julian the Apostate restored, A.D. 363, when he vainly endeavoured to discredit Christianity by rebuilding the Temple. But there is this all-important difference between what happened in the case of those who then returned, and those who are now flocking back to the land of their forefathers. While in the former instances, whether under Pagan, Christian, or Moslem masters, they were, as all history shows, equally the subjects of extortion, oppression and contumely: now they are beginning to hold a position of comfort, independence, and power. This remarkable change is in itself significant, and the whole movement should surely be watched by the student of prophecy with eager and expectant attitude....

“... The feeling everywhere seems abroad that the time has at last arrived to restore the desolations of Zion, and to rebuild the waste places of the land of Israel. The very existence of ‘The Syrian and Palestine Colonisation Society,’ which is about a year old, constitutes a striking expression of such a sentiment. This society, according to its prospectus, has ‘been formed to promote the Colonisation of Syria and Palestine and the neighbouring countries by persons of good character, whether Christians or Jews.’ This it proposes to effect by obtaining information for intending settlers, and making arrangements for their transport and reception; by assisting approved applicants with advances; and by making arrangements for the purchase of land by the emigrants, or securing suitable tracts of Government waste lands, under certain guarantees; and by exerting themselves to improve the communications. Having mentioned this association, let me plainly say, from an intimate experience of this matter, that there are at present a variety of reasons why emigration to Palestine by English people cannot possibly be undertaken with any hope of success, in the same way as emigrants to the United States or to a British Colony. In the first place, the heat of the plains is too great to admit of their labouring during summer with their own hands. The German colonists in attempting this have suffered a fearful mortality. Again, to employ Arab labour to advantage, and to hold any dealings with the people, the peculiar manners and customs of the East must be known, and colloquial Arabic to some extent be mastered. But, above all, the want of thorough protection to life and property so long as Palestine remains in Ottoman hands is greatly against any emigration scheme that does not include European government for the whole colony. Hence the evident wisdom in such a case of the plan put forth by Captain Charles Warren, R.E., in a pamphlet, published last year, entitled ‘The Land of Promise, or Turkey’s Guarantee.’ This officer, who has an intimate acquaintance with Syria, derived from his able work there on behalf of the Palestine Exploration Fund, proposes that, if only as a solution of the pecuniary embarrassments of the Porte, Palestine should be handed over to a company similar to the old East India Company, to be farmed and governed by such an association for a period of twenty years. He suggests that such a Company should pay to Turkey its present revenues, and to the creditors of Turkey a proportion of the interest due to them, taking for itself six per cent. on its capital and expending the remaining revenue in improving the country. What he considers the ultimate future of the land we learn from his own words. ‘Let this’ (the above arrangement), he says, ‘be done with the avowed intention of gradually introducing the Jew, pure and simple, who is eventually to occupy and govern this country.... Concerning what that settlement is in part to be, I can profess no doubt, because I feel none. It is written over and over again in the Word of God.... Israel are to return to their own land. This event, in its incipient stage, I have shown to be now actually taking place. That which is yet to be looked for is the public recognition of the fact, together with the restoration, in whole or part, of Jewish national life, under the protection of some one or more of the Great Powers....’”⁠¹

3. Colonel C. R. Conder on Palestinian Colonization

The greatest authority on Palestine in our generation, Claude Reignier Conder, wrote:⁠—

“It has always seemed to me that the future element of prosperous colonisation is to be found among the Jews of Eastern Europe. The thrift and energy of the race are not their only qualifications. Those who mean to thrive in Palestine must not only be prepared to work on the land, but they must be accustomed to the harder conditions of existence which are common in uncivilised countries, and almost unknown in the west. It is true that they will have to encounter the evils due to bad government and corruption, which are mitigated by civilisation; but if the accounts received from America are credible it is doubtful if these evils are less apparent in South America than they are in Turkish dominions. A people which has not only been able to live, but which has prospered more than the native born population, under Russian tyranny, will not find it difficult to prosper as subjects of the Sultan. A people which has lived under one form of Oriental despotism will be less discouraged by another similar condition than Europeans would be. It is from the Oriental, Jewish, agricultural class, expelled from Russia for their religion, that the colonists most naturally fitted for agriculture in Syria may evidently be drawn.

“I have often thought that the words of that famous passage in the Law, which predicts the future of Israel, must have come home with a sad and overwhelming force to the Jews in Russia during the last few years:

“‘And among these Goim shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest, and thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night; and shalt have none assurance of thy life. In the morning thou shalt say, Would God it were even; and at even thou shalt say, Would God it were morning; for the fear of thy heart wherewith thou shalt fear; and for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see.’

“But what is the other picture which the Law presents of Israel in its own land? ‘Blessed shalt thou be in basket and in store.’

“The proposal so to settle agriculturists, as freeholders tilling their own lands, is in accord with the general tendency of all enlightened statesmanship of the present age. We have too many artisans starved by competition, and too few tillers of the earth. Whether is it better for a man to sell penny toys in the streets of a foggy metropolis, or to till the red corn lands, and make food for himself, for his wife and for his children, for the citizens beyond the seas? Even if the whole of Palestine east of Jordan were covered with cornfields and vineyards, with mulberry and fig gardens, with cotton and maize, and pot herbs, and fruit orchards, there would not be too much produce useful to man. There would be markets in which the growers could compete with ease; and towns would grow up, where manufactories of silk and cotton might arise. There would be rice and indigo grown in the Jordan Valley, where now there are only flowers, and there would be petroleum and bitumen, and other minerals, to be worked near the Dead Sea shores. There would in short be a return of the old prosperity, which once covered this country with great Roman cities, and a prosperity yet greater because of the facilities offered by modern science.

“If then I were asked for advice on this subject I would say: Buy all the land you can get at moderate prices in Bashan and in Northern Gilead, and buy it soon, for the price will go up. Promote as far as possible the making of a railway, which is practicable, and which will bring this region within the pale of civilization. Send out as many fit men as you can, to till the land; and send their wives and children after them. They will be happy, and, if they work, they will be rich. The difficulties are less than those to be expected elsewhere, and the advantages are greater. The movement is not artificial, not merely due to religious sentiment, or to visionary philanthropy. It is a natural and healthy one, which ought to be encouraged, by giving power and money to the organization which seeks to aid it, and to control its direction in a wise course. The case has been laid before you fairly, and the details and precedents have been sufficiently studied. The experience of ten years will be of high value; and the consent of the Sultan, whose country it is, has been gained, both to the construction of a very important line of railway, and to the settlement of Jews, willing to abide by the law of that land as they have obeyed the much more tyrannical laws of the Czar.

“I confidently expect therefore, within a few more years, to see prosperity increasing in Palestine, and the empty lands filling up with an industrious population. And if this be so the Jewish people will have reason to remember with gratitude the name of Baron Rothschild as a generous benefactor, and the Society of the Chovevi Zion, as an organisation which undertook a very important work at a time when help was sorely needed.”⁠¹

4. Sir John William Dawson on the Future of Palestine

Sir John William Dawson, Professor of Natural History at Montreal University, the worthy disciple of Lyell and Darwin, in a description of the Holy Land, writes:⁠—

“From the higher parts of Jaffa one may obtain a good idea of the physical characters of the maritime plain of Southern Palestine. Along the shore stretch banks and dunes of yellow sand, contrasting strongly with the deep blue of the sea, and shading off on the east into the verdure of the plain. Near Jaffa this is covered with orange orchards, laden in February with golden fruit of immense size, and which forms one of the most important exports of the place. To the south the plain spreads into the fertile flats of ancient Philistia, interspersed in the distance with patches of sand, the advanced guards of the great Arabian desert. To the north it constitutes the plain of Sharon, celebrated in Hebrew song, and extends for fifty miles to where Mount Carmel projects its high rocky front into the sea. On the inland side, the plain is bounded first by the rolling foot-hills of the Judean range, the Shephelah or low country ... and then by the hill country proper, which, clothed in blue and purple, forms a continuous range, limiting the view eastward from Jaffa....

“The maritime plain was also a granary ... and it still produces much wheat and barley, though large portions of it are neglected and untilled, and the culture carried on is by means of implements as simple and primitive as they could have been in the days of Abraham. In February one found it gay with the beautiful crimson anemone (A. coronaria), which may have been the poetical ‘Rose of Sharon,’ while a little yellowish-white iris represented the ‘lily of the valley’ of Solomon’s Song....

“... Along the shores of the Dead Sea there are springs which produce petroleum; and this when hardened becomes Asphalt.

“Now the valley of the Dead Sea is an ‘oil district,’ and from the incidental mention of its slimepits, or literally asphalt pits, in Genesis xiv., was apparently more productive in mineral pitch in ancient times. It is interesting in connection with this to notice that Conder found layers of asphalt in the mound which marks the site of ancient Jericho, showing that the substance was used in primitive times for roofs and floors, or as a cement to protect brick structures from damp; and it is well known that petroleum exudes from the rocks both on the sides and in the bottom of the Dead Sea, and, being hardened by evaporation and oxidation, forms the asphaltum referred to by so many travellers.

“... Palestine, to the ordinary traveller, appears, especially in the drought of summer, a bare and barren country. Yet the climate and rainfall of Palestine, with the chemical quality of its rocks and soils, rich in lime, alkalies, and phosphates, render it productive to a degree which cannot be measured by our more northern lands. Its plains, though limited in extent and often stony, have very fertile soil. The olive, the vine, and the fig-tree will grow and yield their valuable fruit in abundance on rocky hills which at first sight appear barren and worthless. Whenever culture has been undertaken with skill and vigour, it has been well rewarded. In the olden times the Tirosh (often incorrectly translated ‘wine’), as the Hebrews called the fruit of their hill orchards and vineyards, was one of the main sources of wealth; and the vineyards, with their vines trailing over the warm rocks and clothing the ground with their leaves and fruit, realize the prophetic description of hills running with the grape juice, and of a land flowing with milk and honey, if by the latter we understand the ‘dibs’ or syrup of the grape. In Palestine a few olive-trees on a rocky hill, that in colder climates would be worthless, may maintain a family. There is also an abundance of nutritious pasturage, more especially for sheep and goats, all the year round, on the limestone hills....

“Palestine must originally have been a well-wooded country, and its forests are mentioned in the historical books of the Bible; but they have for the most part perished, and this had tended to make the climate more arid. The wild hill-sides are, however, often covered with an exuberant growth of bushes and young trees, which, if permitted to grow, or if replaced by cultivated trees, would soon clothe the land with verdure, and tend to produce a more abundant summer rainfall. With just laws, well administered, there is nothing to prevent Palestine from becoming as wealthy and populous as we learn from the Bible it was in the days of the Jewish kings, and it seems to have been at a later time under the Roman government....

“In Palestine, ... the country is gay with flowers, especially in early spring, and the conspicuous objects of culture are the vine and the olive. Even in the plains, cultivated fields are few, and much is merely wild pasture. The palm-tree is rare, though it still grows in the plain of Jericho and the sheltered valleys throughout the country, yielding dates smaller than those of Egypt, but of very pleasant flavour....

“That the future of these old lands may be more important than their present, it requires little penetration to see; and the old Book, whose history of these lands in the past we have been considering, has something to say of their future as well. Whatever belief men may repose in prophecy, they cannot doubt that the word of God has committed itself to certain foreshadowings of the future; and though some of these are shrouded in a symbolism to which varied interpretations have been given, others are sufficiently plain....

“We know, however, that physically these lands are still young, and capable of greater things than those of the past, and we may content ourselves with repeating the inspired words of an older Jewish prophet:⁠—

‘For the Lord will comfort Zion:

He will comfort all her waste places,

And will make her wilderness like Eden,

And her desert like the garden of the Lord:

Joy and gladness shall be found therein,

Thanksgiving and the voice of melody.’

Isaiah li. 3.

“The Holy Land is a fine tract of country well defined by natural boundaries, extending from the shore of the Mediterranean to the Syrian desert. It is a compact district, distinct and complete in itself, enclosed by mountain and sea, and consequently offering great facilities of defence against invasion. It has its highlands and its lowlands, its hills and its valleys, its streams and its lakes, its hot springs and its cold springs, a fine sea coast broken by bold promontories, cliffs towering above, beaches spreading out below, and is replete with all the capabilities essential for civilized life. The Holy Land is rich in vegetation, from the time-honoured ‘cedar of Lebanon to the hyssop on the wall.’ Groves of olive and mulberry trees, vineyards of grapes of extraordinary size and richness, interspersed with fields of golden grain, with magnificent hedges of the cactus almost reaching the height of trees; the sycamore with its thickness of foliage—these, and more can be enumerated in a brief outline, are there for the endowment and adornment of the Holy Land. Nevertheless, the wealth of nature is in a great measure of a passing character. The sloping terraces of the hills, made fertile by means of artificial irrigation, and now deprived of the help of the tending hand of man, no longer display that fruitful aspect which was formerly their glory. The land mourns under its present masters. The tillers of the soil do not even sow in tears to reap in joy. With listless fatalism they cast into the ground the seeds of a harvest which they know, as they watch it come into being, shall minister mostly, not to their wants or wealth, but to the greed of unrighteous local administration. And, wherever these people are crowded together in their miserable villages, all is mud, slum, penury, depression, chaos and picturesque misery. A goodly land, the almond tree white in bloom, orange and olive, everywhere lilies, the scarlet anemone; but no system, no industry, no skill, no capital. No nation has been able to establish itself as a nation, in Palestine, up to this day, no national union, and no national spirit have prevailed there. The motley, impoverished tribes which have occupied it, have held it as mere tenants at will, temporary landowners, evidently waiting for those entitled to the permanent possession of the soil.”⁠¹

### LXXIV.

Petition to the Sultan

The following is the text of a petition to His Majesty the Sultan of Turkey, which was presented by Mr. Samuel Montagu, M.P. (afterwards Lord Swaythling), to Lord Rosebery, with the request to transfer the same to Constantinople. The petition was signed by the officers of the Executive Committee and by the Commander and Secretary of each Tent:⁠—

“To His Imperial Majesty Abdul Hamid Khan, Sultan of
The Ottoman Empire.

“May it please your Majesty,

“The undersigned Association of Chovevi Zion (Lovers of Zion) beg humbly to submit to your Imperial Majesty that this Association has been founded to assist a limited number of worthy and industrious Jews to purchase and cultivate land, and to earn their living by agriculture. The Association has purchased some portions of land in your Imperial Majesty’s Dominions on the eastern side of the Jordan, and desires to acquire such other portions of land in the same region as may be for sale, and suitable for the cultivation of corn, vines, fruits, and silk, or to the raising of cattle and horses.

“And the Association desires to send to this land fitting colonists, industrious and peaceable men, provided by the Association with sufficient means to till the land and to erect for themselves houses, and to sink wells and construct roads so that they may be able to reach markets.

“The Association wishes thus to send to your Imperial Majesty’s dominions only such men, with their families, as will with God’s help and under your Imperial Majesty’s protection, increase the prosperity of your Imperial Majesty’s dominion, and become faithful subjects to your Imperial Majesty.

“The Association therefore humbly begs your Imperial Majesty to grant the Association of Chovevi Zion a Firman with the following privileges.

“First: that such persons as may be selected by the experienced men who conduct the affairs of the Association may, when provided with proper certificates that they have been so selected, and that land has been purchased for them, be allowed to settle in your Imperial Majesty’s dominions, and to cultivate land there, and that the privilege be granted to them of becoming naturalised as your Majesty’s subjects.

“Second: That in view of the great expenses attending the beginnings of cultivation, the building of houses, the sinking of wells, and the making of roads, the agriculturists be relieved from the tax of the ‘Tenth’ for a period of seven years.

“Third: that it be graciously permitted to them, under the direction and on the lands of the Association, to build houses and stables, schools for their children, and temples in which to worship the Most High, to construct roads, drainage and irrigation works, and to sink wells, without having to crave special permission in each case.

“Fourth: that on condition that the Association send only men free from disease or illness and approved by experienced Doctors, such persons may freely travel in your Imperial Majesty’s dominions.

“And the Association, reckoning on your Imperial Majesty’s benevolence and wisdom, believes that your Imperial Majesty will confer these benefits on deserving and industrious people, and your Imperial Majesty’s most humble petitioners invoke on your Imperial Majesty, the blessing of the Most High.

President.

Honorary Secretary.”

The following reply was received:⁠—

“Foreign Office,

“11th March, 1893.

“Sir,—I am directed by the Earl of Rosebery to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3rd inst., forwarding a number of petitions, addressed to the Sultan, by the ‘Lovers of Zion’ in favour of the colonization of certain lands on the East of the Jordan by Jewish emigrants.

“His Lordship will enquire of Her Majesty’s Ambassador at Constantinople whether the fact of these petitions being sent in through the British Embassy would be likely to lead to a relaxation of the regulations affecting immigration to Syria.

“I am, Sir,

“Your most obedient, humble servant,

“(Signed) T. V. Lister.⁠¹

“Samuel Montagu, Esq.”

### LXXV.

(1) Chovevé Zion and Zionist Workers

A great deal of idealism, energy and capacity has gone to the making of the Zionist movement in its earlier and its more recent form. It would be outside the scope of a history of Zionism dealing mainly with England and France to attempt to do justice to the work of all those individuals—mostly Russian Jews—who have devoted themselves to the national revival, in Palestine or in the Diaspora. The purpose of this Appendix is to place on record the services of some of the most prominent workers (not mentioned in the text of this book) in the field of organization, of propaganda or of Palestinian colonization.

Young men of ability and studious habits founded the Bnei Zion Association at Moscow. This Society had indeed concentrated upon and developed most strongly the national and Zionist ideal. The position of the Moscow Bnei Zion was so conspicuous, because that organization was the headquarters of prominent Zionist workers who played a distinguished part in the national revival in Russia and in other countries. Among these the most active and important leaders were: E. W. Tschlenow, M. Ussischkin, J. Maze, A. Idelsohn, T. Brutzkus, B. Mintz, S. Mintz and M. Rabinovitz.

E. W. Tschlenow’s life of strenuous work was characterized by calmness and steadfastness on the one hand, and gentleness and high virtue on the other. Since his earliest youth he combined within him the noble spirit of idealism and great capacity for precise work. As a young student, he soon won his way to the foremost rank among the Chovevé Zion workers. The soundness and farsightedness of his views were remarkable. Simple but impressive as a writer, as well as platform orator, his generosity and devotion soon made him a favourite of the Bnei Zion, and brought him prominence as organizer, leader and orator. He graduated at the Moscow University in medicine, and distinguished himself, after further study at other universities abroad, in a special branch of his science. He then settled in Moscow. His successful medical career, however, never prevented him from devoting a considerable part of his time, and when necessary all of it, to useful Jewish public work in general, and to Zionism in particular. After his important and fruitful work in the Chovevé Zion movement he entered the Zionist Organization. He was in Palestine twice, not as a mere tourist but as an investigator. He wrote a great number of pamphlets, reports and articles, and a very good book against Territorialism (Zion and Africa, in Russian, 1903). His second journey to Palestine enabled him to increase his already extensive knowledge of colonization, and he laid down his observations and conclusions in another excellent work, which he wrote in Russian, and which has been translated into other European languages. The conspicuous service which he rendered amid formidable difficulties to the Jewish National Fund, of which he was the manager in Russia, his tact, his calm energy and his counsel were of inestimable value to the Zionist cause. After having been for many years a member of the Greater Actions Committee, he was elected at the Vienna Zionist Congress of 1913 a member of the Inner Actions Committee. He then gave up his brilliant medical career in Moscow to undertake a work of singular complexity and extreme heaviness. In this he won the same measure of confidence as that he enjoyed in Russia, and provided the most important personal link between the East and the West. In 1914 he was delegated, together with the author, for Zionist political work in this country; and he came here again in 1918 notwithstanding his failing health. During his brief but momentous excursus into the regions of politics and diplomacy he revealed the same high qualities which had elsewhere marked his mind and character. In consequence of his efforts, his health, which had some years ago been weakened, broke down, and his tragic death took place on the 31st of January, 1918, in London—the greatest loss Zionism has sustained since the death of Wolffsohn.

M. Ussischkin’s career as Chovevé Zionist and modern Zionist is unique as well as remarkable. In some respects, and in some quarters, his influence was far greater than that of anyone else. A strong, perhaps the strongest organizer, possessed of deep nationalistic convictions and of intense Jewish feeling, and endowed with the wonderful gift of being able to impress the masses, he succeeded in establishing a very high reputation when a mere student, and later on as one of the founders and leaders of the Bnei Zion, and subsequently among the Chovevé Zion leaders. He was also a founder of the Bilu. On his long visits to Palestine, in propaganda work for the purpose of raising funds for colonization, and throughout his whole long and fruitful career of nationalist work, he exhibited the most indefatigable activity and greatest courage. Having graduated at Moscow in Technology and Engineering, he settled in Ekaterinoslaw, where his strong, unbending personality, his power of leadership, and the general respect he commanded, soon brought him into prominence, and gained for him a high reputation in Russia, in Palestine, and elsewhere. The very strength of mind, energy, outspokenness and self-reliance, combined with inflexible determination and ardent zeal, distinguish his untiring efforts on behalf of the Zionist Organization. While others faltered and failed, he remained firm; while others despaired, he remained confident, and his zeal and perseverance gained for him the respect even of those who opposed some of his methods, while it increased the admiration in which he was held by many of his adherents. He greatly distinguished himself in his strenuous work for the Zionist financial institutions, and was also the most influential champion of the idea of immediate practical work in Palestine. His pamphlets on Palestine and the Zionist programme are written with admirable cleverness. He has lived now for some years in Odessa, where he is the Chairman of the Society for the promotion of Jewish colonization work in Palestine. Being Jewish Nationalist to the backbone, he naturally takes a great interest in the revival of the Hebrew language.

A. Idelsohn is the most modern and the most ingenious Zionist publicist in the Russian language. His influence has been underestimated rather than justly appreciated. While, on the one hand, the pathetic devotion and enthusiasm of others are undoubtedly most useful and indispensable conditions for the success of the movement, an analytical mind, as a temporizing element and corrective, is of no less importance. This mind was devoted to the cause by Idelsohn since his youth, and found expression in his writings in the Zionist organ, written in the Russian language, its name being Razswiet and Ievreiskaiu Shisn. A critic, and a somewhat ironical thinker, he never permits an emotional effort to mar his clear intellectual discrimination. In later years he formed, with M. A. Soloveitschik, A. Goldstein, J. Klebanow, A. Seidemann, M. Aleinikow, D. Pasmanik, S. J. Janowski, J. Brutzkus, Ch. Grinberg, J. Eljaschew, I. Gruenbaum, and others who comprised the editorial staff of his paper, a brilliant ensemble of Zionist intellectuals which has recently been augmented by L. Jaffe, who sometimes acted as editor. Idelsohn is an eminent Zionist and a member of the Actions Committee.

Julius Brutzkus was an active and highly appreciated member of the Bnei Zion. Most gifted and learned, with a clear mind, and generally well informed, he adhered to the national idea from early youth. He graduated in medicine at the Moscow University, and settled for some years in Petrograd, where he became active in matters communal, literary and journalistic. He wrote several excellent articles and pamphlets.

The two Mintzs were also appreciated for their faithfulness, sincere devotion, and excellent and tactful propaganda. B. Mintz has since settled at Rostow, where he takes a leading part in Zionist work. S. Mintz graduated at Moscow in medicine and settled in Warsaw, where he attained a high reputation in his profession as well as in communal activity. A sincere Nationalist, of a serious and studious turn of mind, deeply attached to Zionism, an excellent Hebraist, most active in all movements making for the revival of the national language, he has remained true to Bnei Zion traditions. There are, further, the zealous Alperin, and Michael Rabinovitch, resident at Rostow, a distinguished Zionist worker who was member of the Actions Committee.

The great earnestness and untiring assiduity of the Bnei Zion did not fail to attract attention and to produce a deep impression. The immense zeal for this cause dispelled the apathy of those around them. Thus the Moscow Chovevé Zion and Zionist Group became indeed one of the best, the most esteemed and the most active in the world. Of those in touch with the first pioneers was Kalonimos Wolf Wissotski (1824‒1904), the well-known Chovev Zion and Zionist, a zealous supporter of the colonization of Palestine, a generous friend of Hebrew literature, a patron of learning and learned men. The representatives of his great firm have to the present day remained faithful to the traditions of the founder in a most liberal-minded and far-reaching manner.

The following names are arranged in alphabetical order.

Elieser Ben-Jehuda, born in Russia, is a prominent representative of the revival of the Hebrew language and of the national renaissance. As early as 1880 he expounded his political views on Zionism in Smolenskin’s monthly Ha’shachar. In 1881 he went to Palestine, where he became a sturdy and independent fighter for Hebrew as a living tongue and for Jewish nationalism. In 1885 he founded the Hebrew weekly paper Ha’zevi, which he edited for several years, assisted by his wife (Hemda) and his son. Together they formed the first Hebrew-speaking family in the country. He has revolutionized Hebrew style and introduced many new colloquial and journalistic expressions. As a pioneer of modern methods, radically opposed to the old ways of thought and action, he defended his heterodox ideas with energy, became involved in controversies, and was arrested by the Ottoman authorities for his nationalistic propaganda. Many years ago he started the publication of his great Hebrew dictionary (Millon). He was one of the first Palestine Zionists who approached Herzl and devoted themselves to Zionist propaganda in Palestine.

Vassyli Bermann (1862‒96) was a young man of high intellectual attainments and endowed with exceptional literary gifts, and would undoubtedly have risen to great eminence had he continued to devote himself to literature. But he gave almost all his time to the Chovevé Zion movement. His name is closely connected with the history of the national Jewish movement in Russia. Born at Mitau, he received his elementary education at the school founded by his father, a capable pedagogue, in Petersburg, and completed his college studies in the same town. Already, as student of the faculty of Law in Petersburg, Bermann placed himself at the service of Judaism, and strove, through the foundation of a suitable association, to spread the idea of the liberation of the Jewish people into wide circles of the community. In the year 1884 he published the compilation Palestine. Even this first work drew general attention upon the highly gifted young writer. At the meeting of the Russian Chovevé Zion at Drusgenik, in 1887, Bermann was considered, by the side of the spiritual father of the national Jewish movement in Russia, Leo Pinsker, as the leader of the “Zionophiles,” as Bermann called the adherents of the national Jewish idea. When it was found desirable to obtain the authorization of the Russian Government for the “Odessa Association for Supporting Jewish Artisans and Agriculturists in Syria and Palestine,” the shrewd lawyer, Vassyli Bermann, employed his utmost energy in order to help in overcoming all difficulties which stood in the way of the foundation of this association. He was one of the members of the first official congress of the Russian Chovevé Zion which was held at Odessa in the year 1890. Once again in Petersburg, Bermann devoted all his zeal to the editing of his continued compilation, which he intended to transform into a year-book. In this way Zion, published in the year 1891, was brought out. It is considerably superior to its predecessor in contents and get-up. Zion, which is dedicated to Pinsker, affords an interesting insight into the phase of development of the national Jewish thought of that time. From Bermann, who was well aware of the influence of historical knowledge upon the strengthening of the national consciousness, came also the initiative towards the foundation of the “Historio-Ethnographic Commission” within the “Society for the Propagation of Culture among the Jews in Russia.” When, in the year 1892, the Petersburg central committee of the Jewish Colonization Association was formed, and the necessity for a scientific basis of the colonization question became evident, Bermann undertook, at the request of the J. C. A., a mission of study, the result of which he recorded in a comprehensive memoir, and thus afforded the central committee valuable material towards the work of colonization. The exertions of travelling had much affected Bermann’s health. But he would not allow that to prevent him from further work in favour of his brethren with the greatest devotion. At last he found himself compelled to seek the mild climate of Egypt. There, on March 18th, 1896, Vassyli Bermann breathed his last. His tombstone bears the inscription: “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget (her cunning).” The dying man had wished it so.

Gregor Belkovsky, a distinguished lawyer, born in Odessa, was one of the first pioneers of the Chovevé Zion movement. He was a member of the Societies Nes Ziona and Ezra. In 1895‒7 he was Professor of Law at the University of Sofia, Bulgaria. On his return to Russia, he entered the Zionist Organization and came into prominence from the First Congress onwards. He was one of the most notable workers for the establishment of the Zionist financial institutions. He also did important work in connection with the movement in Russia.

Jehiel Brill (1836‒86), born in Russia, and taken to Constantinople when he was quite young, was later brought to Jerusalem, where he received a talmudic education. In 1863, with the assistance of his father-in-law, Jacob Saphir, he established the Hebrew monthly, Ha’lebanon, which, after the appearance of the twelfth number, was suppressed by the Turkish Government. He then went to Paris, where he resumed publication of Ha’lebanon. After the Franco-Prussian War he removed to Mayence, where he renewed the publication of his paper. When the Chovevé Zion movement was inaugurated, Brill, who was well acquainted with Palestine, was chosen by Baron Edmond de Rothschild, on the recommendation of Rabbi Samuel Mohilewer, to conduct a group of experienced farmers from Russia to Palestine. He gave a vivid description of his mission in his Hebrew pamphlet Yesod Ha’maalah (Mayence, 1883).

H. Brody was, when in Berlin, a studious, scholarly worker, and at the same time active in Zionism. Later he was appointed Rabbi in Nachod, Bohemia, and, being a scholar and a prolific writer, he became very active in scientific and literary matters. He has contributed to Ha’magid, Ha’eshkol and Ha’shiloach; has edited (with A. Freimann) a Bibliographical Review, and has written valuable books on Jehuda Ha’levi and Moses Ibn Ezra. In defence of Zionism he has written, under the nom de plume Dr. H. Salomonsohn, an excellent pamphlet, in which he proves that Zionism is an essential principle of Jewish tradition.

Martin Buber, born in Galicia, was a member of the Vienna Kadima who afterwards studied in Berlin. He was closely akin to Berthold Feiwel in aspirations and activity. Buber was one of the founders of the Verlag and one of its principal contributors. He was really one of the authors of the Jewish Renaissance, not a product of it. He has no equal as an inspirer of the Jewish intellectuals in Western Europe. He has been a Zionist since the inception of the Organization, but he has devoted himself mostly to literary work in connection with the Jewish Renaissance. Sweet and pathetic legends, delicate Chassidic sketches, tales of wonder, mystic and philosophical treatises and allegories, profoundly Jewish and reflected in deep Murillo-like shades, such are the subjects of his Story of Rabbi Nachman (1906), Legends of the Baal Shem (1907), Daniel (1914) and other writings.

Rabbi I. H. Daiches, a great Talmudist, formerly Rabbi of Neustatt Shirvint, and now in Leeds, supported the Chovevé Zion movement, and was afterwards a delegate to the Zionist Congress.

Joshua Eisenstadt (Barzilai), the oldest, and, as far as enthusiasm is concerned, still the youngest among the propagandists in Palestine, a man of high aspirations, who looks at things from the standpoint of a devotee rather than of a critic, exercises considerable influence through his speeches and popular articles. He died in Switzerland in 1918.

Rabbi Mordecai Eliasberg (1817‒89), Rabbi of Bausk in Russia, an eminent Talmudist, a profound theologian and a diligent student of history, who wrote valuable books and articles on talmudic subjects, was one of the most ardent advocates of the ideas of the Chovevé Zion. By his numerous contributions to Ha’melitz he helped very much in the spread of Zionistic ideas, and his memory will be cherished as one of the representatives of orthodox Judaism who raised the banner of Palestine.

Berthold Feiwel, born in Brunn, Moravia, was a member of the Vienna Kadima, but did most of his work in Berlin. A young man of exceptional attainments, he early attracted the notice of Herzl, and was for some time editor of the Welt, for which work he was particularly well qualified. But the work of leader-writing did not satisfy the poetic and æsthetic side of his nature, and he turned to literature. The promise of his early writings, with their beauty and originality, is amply fulfilled in the literary activity which he subsequently developed in the Almanach and in other publications of the Jüdischer Verlag, which was founded by him and his friends. His poems, as well as his excellent translations of Rosenfeld and other works, have won him a lasting reputation. He has also taken an active part in the work of the Zionist Organization, and was a member of the Actions Committee. He was editor of the Welt for the second time in the years 1906‒9, and has written many pamphlets.

The brothers Isaac and Boris Goldberg hold a specially distinguished place both in Russian Zionism and in the movement at large. Isaac Goldberg has made himself indispensable to all Zionist institutions, and has attained the highest repute in the Zionist Organization, and in Palestine. Boris Goldberg is a very influential member of the Actions Committee, with a thorough knowledge of all matters concerning Zionism and Palestine, and an important contributor to the Zionist press. He was a member of the Zionist Commission of Inquiry which visited Palestine five years ago.

J. Grazowski has written popular and useful books on general Jewish history, and has collaborated in a Hebrew dictionary. He is now in the service of the Anglo-Palestine Company at Jaffa.

Mordecai (Marcus) ben Hillel Ha’cohen was even in his early youth an excellent, versatile contributor to the Hebrew and Russian Press. Possessed of great vivacity and a humorous and enthusiastic disposition, an enlivening speaker, with the national idea deeply at heart, he has worked for Zionism, Hebrew and the national idea with considerable success. His writings in Ha’melitz, Ha’zefirah, Razswiet, and other papers and reviews, as well as his own pamphlets, the description of his journey to Palestine, and his reminiscences, written in a brilliant style, have won him a well-merited popularity. After working several years in the Chovevé Zion movement, and in the Zionist Organization, he settled in Palestine, where he is active as one of the most popular leaders of the Tel-Aviv community, and is particularly engaged in educational, communal and literary work.

Dr. William Herzberg (1827‒97), a highly educated writer and communal worker, who, though not writing in Hebrew, greatly influenced the movement, and his work was translated into Hebrew. He wrote the famous book, Judische Familienpapiere (1875‒6). This book made a stir in the Jewish scholastic world. Zacharias Frankel welcomed the book as a modern Kusari. It was only after some time that the identity of the author was discovered, for it was published under the nom de plume of Gustav Meinhardt. Perez Smolenskin was much inspired by the nationalist spirit of this phenomenal literary production, and translated the most important parts of it in the Haschachar (he had made it a rule not to publish any translation, but in this case departed from the rule). Herzberg intended to obtain a professorship in a German University, but, finding that this was impossible for a Jew, he contented himself with a professorship in the Gymnasium. He passed his probationary year in the Gymnasium of his native town, Stettin, but, when his final appointment was recommended by the Head Master, who was much impressed by the fine scholarship of the young teacher, the Minister of Education confirmed it cordially, on the supposition, however, that the candidate had embraced Christianity, as a Jew could not be appointed Professor in a Gymnasium. In 1877 he was induced by his friend, Professor Grätz, to accept the post of Director of the Agricultural School, Mikveh Israel, near Jaffa. Dr. Herzberg remained one year in this position and then accepted the Headmastership at the Von Laemel School at Jerusalem.

Isaac M. Hirschensohn, born in Russia, has rendered great services to the progress of the Jews in Palestine as a publisher, bibliophile and Talmudist. He advocates rabbinical ideas, in harmony with the national principle.

Dr. N. Katzenelsohn, of Libau, Russia, holds an important place in the history of Zionist organization. After having joined the Organization at one of the first Congresses, he soon became a prominent member, particularly in the domain of financial affairs and institutions. One of the devoted friends of Herzl, he accompanied him on his visit to Russia in 1903, and took part in some of his political efforts there. In 1905 he was appointed President of the Board of Directors of the Jewish Colonial Trust, and regularly gave his reports of the activities of this Institution, as well as of those of the A.P.C. at the Zionist Congresses. He visited Palestine in 1907, and particularly investigated the financial and economic situation of the country. He also accompanied Wolffsohn in the same year to Constantinople on a political mission. Dr. Katzenelsohn was a member of the First Russian Duma, and was for many years very active in the work of the I.C.A. for the emigration of the Russian Jews, a question on which he also submitted reports to the Zionist Congresses.

5644 * THE KATTOWITZ CONFERENCE * 1884

Dr. Jacob Kohan-Bernstein, of Kishinew, was one of the earliest of the Chovevé Zion. His speeches and appeals when he was in charge of the so-called “Post-Centre” were most effective in kindling Zionist enthusiasm. As a member of the Actions Committee he has occupied a high position in the movement.

The late Abraham Moses Luncz (1854‒1918), born in Russia, lived since his early youth in Palestine. He rendered great services to the exploration of the Holy Land from the historical, geographical and physiographical standpoint, by means of his guide-books for Palestine, his Palestine annuals, and his Jerusalem almanac.

Joseph Lurie was born in Russia, and became a prominent nationalist at the Berlin University. He settled later in Warsaw, where he was engaged in educational work, and afterwards edited a Zionist Yiddish weekly paper, published by the Achiasaf. After the suspension of this paper he lived for about two years in St. Petersburg, where he was assistant editor of the Fraind. Thence he went to Palestine, and became a teacher at the Jaffa Gymnasium. Some time afterwards he was elected President of the Union of Teachers (Agudath Ha’morim) of Palestine. He has not, however, given up his journalistic work. His articles on Palestine are unequalled for clearness of exposition and logical argument.

Rabbi Samuel Mohilever (1827‒1903), of Bialystok, wrote many appeals in favour of the Chovevé Zion movement. He was a lifelong adherent of the national cause, helped to promote colonization, and gave his unqualified adherence to the new Zionism. Even in very advanced age he was still a fighter in the forefront, travelling, preaching, collecting funds and generously spending his own means. At the outbreak of the pogroms in 1881, he took the Jewish refugees to Lemberg. Here he became acquainted with Sir Samuel Montagu (afterwards Lord Swaythling) and Laurence Oliphant, and he sought to win the former for the Palestinian colonization movement. On his return to Russia he called a conference at Warsaw and formed a Chovevé Zion Society. In the same year he undertook a journey to Paris to obtain, through the Grand Rabbin Zadoc Kahn and M. Erlanger, Baron Edmond de Rothschild’s support for the colonization movement. Returning again to Russia, he went on a propaganda tour, agitating in several towns in favour of Palestinian colonization. In 1885 he presided at the Kattowitz Conference. In 1890 he journeyed to the Palestinian colonies and witnessed the founding of the colony of Rechoboth.

Leo Motzkin was born in Russia and educated in Berlin. His intellectual versatility made him a leading personality in student circles and Jewish societies, particularly in the Zionist Organization. He soon attracted attention at the Congresses, and was delegated to proceed to Palestine and inquire into the condition of the colonies, on which he prepared a report. As a member of the Actions Committee, he took part in 1914 in a Commission consisting of Zionists appointed to inquire into the state of affairs in Palestine. He has also written valuable books and pamphlets on the Russo-Jewish problem.

Isaac Nissenbaum, born in Russia, lives in Warsaw, where he was one of the sub-editors of Ha’zefirah and a lecturer at the Zionist Synagogue. Though not a Rabbi, he belongs by virtue of his education, associations and the nature of his occupation to the Rabbinical world. A learned Talmudist, a powerful preacher and a prolific Hebrew writer, he has a worthy record in all these spheres.

Alfred Nossig, scientist, artist and journalist, was one of the first, perhaps the first in Galicia, to publish pamphlets in Polish in defence of Jewish nationalism. He has pursued a line of his own in Zionism, and from the point of view of the Zionist Organization his activities have often been open to criticism. But he deserves recognition, both as a man of letters and as a strenuous advocate of Palestinian colonization.

Daniel Pasmanik is a Russian Zionist who has done much propaganda work and proved himself a writer and journalist of extraordinary capability. His book Die Seele Israels (written in Russian and translated into German) is a noteworthy contribution to Zionist thought.

Jehiel Michael Pines (1842‒1912), born and educated in Russia, a Hebrew writer and Talmudist, was elected delegate to a conference held in London by the Association Mazkereth Mosheh for the establishment of charitable institutions in Palestine in commemoration of the name of Sir Moses Montefiore; in 1878 he was sent to Jerusalem to establish and organize such institutions. Thenceforward he lived in Palestine, working for the welfare of the Jewish community and interesting himself in the organization of Jewish colonies. In his Hebrew book, Yalde Ruchi, and particularly in Part I., Rib Ami (Mainz, 1872), he expounded the Jewish national idea. He was a contributor to all Hebrew periodical publications, especially to those in Palestine.

Samuel Poznanski pursued his studies at Berlin, and was already, as a young man, a rising representative of the Hebrew Revival. Having graduated, he returned to Poland, where he is now the Rabbi and Preacher of the Great Synagogue at Warsaw. His achievements in the field of Jewish scholarship are great and universally recognized. He has written many valuable books and treatises, all of which are the result of careful observation and patient study, and are distinguished by depth of thought. A devoted Hebraist, he contributes to Hebrew literature and the Press, and as a communal worker he has succeeded in counteracting destructive assimilationist tendencies by the advocacy of a sound traditional nationalism.

Rabbi Samuel Jacob Rabbinowitch, of Sopotkin (now in Liverpool), was first a Chovev Zion and early joined the Zionist Organization. His calm piety and gentle nature won him the hearts of all Zionists. He was for several years a member of the Zionist Actions Committee. He contributed a number of articles to Ha’melitz, which later were published under the title Ha’dat Weha’leumit (Warsaw, 1900). He has also written talmudic works.

Rabbi Isaac Jacob Reines (1839‒1915) was a great talmudic authority, author of halachic works, in which he taught the rigid application of logic to the solution of talmudic problems, and founder and principal of a modern Yeshivah (Rabbinical College) in Lida. He was an ardent Chovev Zion, and joined the Zionist movement, in which he became one of the most prominent workers, orators and propagandists. He occupied a high and influential position in orthodox Zionism, and was the founder of the orthodox Zionist section, Misrachi.

Rabbi Pinchas Rosowski, a great talmudic scholar and prominent Hebraist, was an enthusiastic Chovev Zion, and later a member of the Zionist Organization. He wrote articles inspired by the nationalist idea.

Jacob Saphir (1822‒86), a Russian Jew, who settled in Palestine, was not directly connected with the new colonization. He was commissioned by the Jewish community of Jerusalem to undertake a journey through the southern countries, in order to collect alms for the poor Palestinian Jews. In 1854 he made a second tour, visiting Yemen, British India, Egypt and Australia. The result of this journey was his Hebrew book Eben Saphir (vol. i., Lyck, 1866; Mayence, 1874), in which work he gave the history and a vivid description of the Jews in the above-mentioned countries. There is in his book a touch of Haskalah (Enlightenment) and even of national sentiment.

His grandson, Elie Saphir, who died a few years ago, was a conspicuous figure among the pioneers of the new colonization by virtue of his great knowledge, especially of the Arabic language and literature, and the laws and customs of the country. A man of keen judgment, he occupied the position of assistant-manager of the Anglo-Palestine Company at Jaffa. The leaders of financial and agricultural institutions were always eager to consult and confide in him. But he was essentially a scholar. His Hebrew writings, and particularly his last work Ha’arez—a physiographic and scientific examination of the conditions of Palestine—are of great value.

M. Smilanski, of Rechoboth, has one of the longest and best records of work in Hebrew literature. His writings on Palestinian colonization are as sound as his literary sketches are instructive.

A. Tannenbaum, of St. Petersburg, was an ardent Chovev Zion and an excellent Hebraist. Of his Hebrew writings, his study on “The Architecture of the Synagogues” (in the first volume of Knesseth Israel) is of enduring merit. This group strongly supported the local Chovevé Zion Society, which was of considerable importance. At that period Rosenfeld undertook with great courage and determination the propaganda in the first Razsweet, which, however, had to be suspended after a period of brilliant journalistic exploits in troublesome and stormy times (in the eighties), in which period the two years of that organization happened to fall. Later on, the late Salomon Grazenberg, a medical man of great knowledge and an ardent Zionist, whose articles were characterized by soundness of argument, took up the same work in a new Russian weekly paper, entitled Boudoushtshnost, which managed to exist a little longer.

Vladimir Temkin was one of the most important and, undoubtedly, the most popular champion of the Bilu. An idealist, an enthusiast, an attractive personality and a powerful speaker, he possessed a special gift for propaganda, and became one of the chief organizers of colonization in Palestine. He belonged to the Zionist Organization from its inception, was a prominent Congress representative and member of the Actions Committee, and is to-day one of the leading Zionists.

Davis Trietsch has not always found the appreciation he deserved. He has been frequently drawn into controversies and misunderstood owing to the support he has given to schemes which appeared to be impracticable and fantastic, but in ordinary circumstances would not have given rise to opposition. But he is a man of varied experience and untiring activity, and his advice has often been very useful. He lived for a couple of years in Palestine, where he grappled with many forms of industrial work; he has written books, pamphlets and articles, and is an indefatigable advocate of the idea of colonization. He has given a considerable impetus to the study of Palestine and to many practical ideas.

Semion Weissenberg worked hard with Berman and Temkin in the St. Petersburg Students’ Palestinophile Association, took part in the Odessa Chovevé Zion meetings, and later entered the Zionist Organization, of which he is a prominent member. His bent lies in the direction of work in connection with the Jewish problem in Russia.

David Yellin (1858), a son-in-law of J. M. Pines, is one of the most eminent Hebraists and educationists in Palestine. The Zionist idea captured him early in life and grew upon him during his many-sided literary and educational career. He has written the best text-books of the Hebrew language, based on the principle of the modern method Ibrith B’ibrith (Hebrew in Hebrew), and has thus helped to make Hebrew a living language. He has been teacher and principal of several Hebrew schools and of the seminary for the training of teachers. He has many connections in England, and is on the Montefiore foundations in Palestine.

In St. Petersburg Zionism has now gained a strong footing, owing to the steady efforts of the distinguished, devoted and indefatigable member of the Actions Committee, Israel Rosoff, Michael Aleinikow, the able and gifted Abraham Idelsohn, A. J. Rapaport, as well as of the very able and devoted workers S. S. Babkow, W. Grossmann, A. Goldstein, S. J. Janovski, A. Seidemann, M. Sachs, and others. As far as Nationalism is concerned the learned and talented historian, Shimon Dubnow, and the group of his followers, are undoubtedly most faithful adherents to this idea, and the same may unhesitatingly be also said of N. M. Friedmann, M. Ch. Bomesch and E. R. Gurevitch, the members of the Duma, and many other leading St. Petersburg Jews. The old Zionist leader, Gregor Belkovsky, a man of high standing in the Zionist Organization, who has already been mentioned, has for many years been very active, his influence being still as great as ever.

The number of the Chovevé Zion societies increased. They watched each other’s activities and emulated each other in brotherly devotion. The University groups were influenced by the literature and the press, as well as by the old leaders; and the old leaders were in their turn again stimulated by the ardour of the younger men. To return to the older Chovevé Zion societies and later Zionist societies, a few of the most important should be mentioned, as, for instance, the Odessa Group (or the Official Society), under the leadership of Pinsker, Achad Ha’am, M. L. Lilienblum, A. Grünberg (who was for some years President of the Society), Ch. Tschernowitz, L. Lewinski, Rawnitzki, S. N. Barbasch, A. E. Lubarski, Frankfeld, J. Klausner, M. Scheinkin, Ben Ami Rabinowitsch, and at a later period, Ussischkin, Bialik, S. A. Benzion-Guttmann, M. Kleinmann, Ch. Grinberg, and others. The Bialystok Group, with Rabbi Samuel Mohilewer, Dr. Chasanowitsch (who deserves an honoured place as a zealous pioneer of Nationalism and a great worker for the Hebrew revival in Palestine, and for his noble, almost life-long efforts for the purpose of establishing his Hebrew library, “Baith Neeman,” in Jerusalem) and Nissenbaum was of great importance during the lifetime of Rabbi Mohilewer and retained a great practical influence later, especially in consequence of the fact that the Bialystok Chovevé Zion themselves took a prominent part in various colonization schemes. The Warsaw Group had a principal leader in Isidore Jasinowski, a man of great sincerity, enthusiasm and love for the cause. An ardent Chovev Zion, he afterwards joined the Zionist movement, and, till the Territorialist split, remained devoted to the cause. The most energetic workers there were Schefer-Rubinoscitsch; J. M. Meyersohn; Eleasar Kaplan, who died recently and was an able and enterprising Nationalist, a most zealous worker, to whom great praise is due in connection with the Achiasaf and other Hebrew literary enterprises; W. Gluskin (one of the most notable workers and leaders), who joined with L. Kaplan in the foundation of the Achiasaf and Ha-Zofe, undertook afterwards the Directorship of the Palestine Wine Company, “Karmel,” and settled in Rishon L’Zion, in Palestine, where he is now one of the leaders of the new colonization); Stawski; Mates Cohn; Dr. Bychowski; Samuel Luria; Dr. T. Hindes (who lived some years in Palestine, and takes a useful part in the propaganda); M. M. Pros; M. Feldstein (the well-known Chovev Zion and supporter of the literary movement, a prominent member and representative of Zionist institutions); J. Lewite; Jacob Braude; Rafalkes; Ginzburg; Friedland; L. Davidsohn; and others.

All these important workers were afterwards active in the Zionist Organization. The development of Zionism gave a new impetus to the Palestine propaganda and to the national movement. The University movement, though most vigorous in other parts of the Russian Empire, had only few adherents in Poland. It is worthy of note that Dr. Zamenhof, the inventor of Esperanto, was, during a certain period of his university career, a Jewish Nationalist of great zest, and a contributor to Rosenfeld’s Razsweet. Meierowitz, the old Bilu pioneer, as well as the pioneer Freimann, came from Warsaw; Mekler, Elie Margulies, Manson (who died young) were the most prominent Chovevé Zion among the Warsaw students in the eighties. Only with the new Zionist Organization a strong movement of a local character came into being with adherents who were natives of the country, and this resulted in the production of literature and a Press in the native tongue. In this respect, the activity of the late Jan Kirszrot was very helpful. A great idealist, an honestly and deeply convinced Zionist, who had been brought to the cause out of assimilated surroundings, a worker of the most generous impulses, and a writer par excellence in the Polish language (like many other young Zionists of assimilated education he had acquired the knowledge of Hebrew), he worked side by side with the gifted and devoted Isaac Grunbaum, who became in later years a prominent leader, a publicist of excellent abilities and a worker of great intellectual integrity; also with the zealous Nahum Syrkin, whose significant activities extended over a large sphere, with the remarkable, energetic, indefatigable worker Leon Lewite, with the keen, persistent and conscientious Zelig Weizmann, the graceful and judicious S. Seidemann, the sound and forceful Isaac Gruenbaum, the talented and consistent Hartglass (for a certain period), the keen and learned Shimon Rundstein, the intellectual and devoted Julian Kaliski, and a number of other young writers and organizers—in connection with older Zionists and men of letters, and together with the general Zionist Organization, particularly with the younger and more progressive element. They had founded a Nationalist group “Safroth,” issued a Zionist weekly in Polish (Prgyszlose), and published a very interesting miscellany in that language. Kirszrot’s life of devotion to the highest ideals and his brilliantly youthful career were unhappily cut short by the hand of death.

But the University nationalist Jewish movement had begun. A change was in process, the extensive scope of which was scarcely noticed by the representatives of Assimilation, to whom it seemed that the small group of students and intellectuals consisted merely of visionaries and dreamers. Yet there obtained in this apparently insignificant group a vitality which was destined to become a powerful factor in the life of Polish Jewry. The evolution of this young movement was the result of the whole Zionist movement, the rapid growth of Jewish cultural life, of Jewish education, of the Jewish literature and press, of which all Warsaw had become a very important centre. At that period we see already the influential Zionist leaders busy with great Zionist work. Zionism, the Hebrew Revival, national education, the defence of Jewish interests and of the national principle in communal affairs, now engaged the attention and support of the generous, experienced, and beloved Abraham Podliszewski, of the acute and energetic H. Farbstein, of the thorough and dignified Dr. Poznanski, of the calm and pacific Dr. Mintz, of the strong, vigilant and inflexible Isaac Gruenbaum, the devoted and popular Nissenbaum, Dr. Klumel, Olschwanger, M. I. Freid, Dr. Hindes, Horodischtsch, Dunajewski, Dr. Gottlieb, Zabludowski, the educational worker and excellent Hebraist S. L. Gordon, and of many others. In this camp we meet again all the Chovevé Zion of bygone days.The same development took place at Lodz, where the able, eloquent Dr. Jelski, Dr. Silberstrom and others had long been at work, and where afterwards a strong Zionist group, with the esteemed and influential Dr. M. Braude as guide and leader, was doing most useful work. In Minsk we find working in the Chovevé Zion movement Joshua Syrkin, the man of faith and energy, whose mind is well stored with treasures of Hebrew literature, and here we also meet with the zealous Neifach, the late Rabbi Chaneles, and the eminently able Wilbuschewitsch family. We come again across them later in Zionism together with the active Zionist workers Kaplan, Churgin, Berger and others. In Pinsk at the Chovevé Zion period, Eisenberg, Rosenbaum, Hiller, Naiditsch, Pinchas Breymar, J. Breyman, L. Berger, Maslanski were the leaders. The aged Reb Dowidel (Friedmann), the great Talmudist, pious and saintly, supported the Movement and took part in the Kattowitz Conference. Among them we can trace Naiditsch, now of the Actions Committee; Eisenberg, the great authority on colonization—in Rechoboth, Palestine; Maslanski, the powerful preacher at New York; Weizmann, a member of the Inner Actions Committee, and S. Rosenbaum, the lawyer, the member of the First Duma, and Lithuanian statesman, who proved his worth during many years as member of the Actions Committee, as legal adviser, as representative of several Zionist institutions, as a great worker in the Organization, and as a defender of Zionism in Russia. In Wilna, the late S. J. Finn, and his son the late Dr. Finn, Joseph Gurland, Ch. L. Markon, Triwusch, Gordon (who settled later on in Palestine), Miriam Zalkind, who founded the Society of the “Daughters of Zion”; Lewanda, Fischel Pines, who attended the Kattowitz Conference; Ben-jakob, Isaac Goldberg, Boris Goldberg, Neuschul and others very early took an interest in the Chovevé Zion movement. In the Zionist Organization, Wilna at a certain period was the centre of activity, from the point of view of organization, propaganda and press. Ben-jakob did good work for the Jewish Colonial Trust, Neuschul is a thorough and devoted Nationalist. Among those in Wilna who succeeded in rising to the height of national importance, doing at the same time great national work of a general character, and useful, indispensable local work in Russia, belong the two excellent and distinguished Zionists: Isaac and Boris Goldberg.

The influence of these Russian and Polish enthusiasts soon spread further. Mention has already been made of the Kadimah of the Vienna University and of Nathan Birnbaum, one of its leaders. Others of its prominent members were: Dr. N. T. Schnierer, the physician, scholar and editor, who was a highly respected member of the First Zionist Actions Committee; the gifted brothers Marmorek, supporters of Herzl and his political Zionism; Schalit, who represented the sympathetic, real Viennese type; the very capable and devoted Werner, who became later one of the secretaries of Herzl and editor of the Welt; the well-known polemical journalist, S. R. Landau; the reserved and learned Berkovitsch; the energetic and faithful Alkalai of Serbia, who has been a member of the Actions Committee since the inception of the Zionist Organization;⁠¹ the devoted worker, M. Moscowitz of Roumania, who was a member of the Actions Committee (he recently died in Palestine, where he was physician of the colony Rechoboth); the enthusiast, Caleff of Bulgaria; Erwin Rosenberger, and many others from different countries.

The similarity of their views on Jews and Judaism brought them more and more closely together, and they soon agreed that the fundamental views of the higher-educated Jews of the time were in need of a change, and that a vigorous attack against the theory of assimilation prevailing among Western European Jews would have to take place. They clearly realized that the lever ought to be applied to the academical youth, not only because those circles were nearest to them, but because in their midst the assimilation theory had found most adherents. The assumption seemed justified that the academical youth once converted would propagate the national Jewish idea with all the fire of its enthusiasm and authority among the largest strata of the population. These few young men soon obtained a small addition of courageous fellow-combatants, and a phalanx was at once formed which undertook the foundation of an academic Jewish national union. Their aspirations met with powerful support and advancement from a man whose name shines in golden letters in the history of Jewish literature—Perez Smolenskin. A profound judge of the human soul, an even more thorough investigator of the Jewish national psyche, he at the same time wielded in a masterly way the language of the prophets. He had fought for years in numerous writings, and particularly in his monthly publication Hashahar, against the dissolving tendencies and for the nationalization of Judaism with all the brilliancy of his mind and all the sharpness of his caustic satire. How welcome to him must have been the small band of Jewish university students who undertook to carry his ideas into practical life and to make them the common property of the Jewish academical youth. Until his death Smolenskin was to them a kind and wise leader. Among many other obligations, the Union owes him its name.

At the beginning of the summer term of 1882 there appeared for the first time upon the notice-board of the Vienna University an appeal of a Jewish national society, addressed to the corporation of Jewish students. The sensation produced by this appeal was extraordinary. The Christian students shook their heads incredulously, while most Jewish students poured out upon the innovators a flood of scorn and ridicule. And not only the students but the middle-classes, the official representatives of Judaism, opposed the Kadimah most mercilessly. It was a contest of all against a few. But the few went on, calm and undismayed; engrossed by the magnitude of the idea for which they fought, they unswervingly pursued their aim. The Kadimaner propagated the Jewish national ideal by innumerable lectures, meetings and publications. Their number increased constantly, and by and by a specific Jewish national student life developed at Vienna University, which began to throb with increased intensity when the Kadimah, compelled by the conditions of the Vienna University, was transformed into a fighting, “duel-bound” association. People may hold different opinions about duelling at most Western European Universities, but one thing must be admitted, namely, that it has had a favourable influence upon the physical development of the Jewish young manhood, and that the duelling Jewish student corporation gained the esteem of its Christian colleagues. Partly through this transformation and partly through the growing propagation of the national ideal among the Jewish students, the number of Jewish national academical unions was gradually increased. One association after another came into existence: “Unitas,” “Ivria,” “Gamala,” “Libanonia,” “Hasmonäa,” and others; so that there exists at the present day, at nearly every university at which Jewish students study, a Jewish national student association.

Old Assimilants looked upon this movement at first as a farce. Certainly no one at that time anticipated that the mainsprings of new life perceptible in many different places would soon become a powerful source of cleansing and reviving Judaism. As the preparatory work for creating a clearer conception of things was at first confined to groups of such young men, most opponents looked upon it as a pastime only fit for young, inexperienced schoolboys. Meanwhile, the movement continued to make rapid progress. At the end of the eighties there existed an important association in Berlin, which was at first somewhat theoretical in character, but very soon afterwards became a sister society of the Vienna Association, taking also the name of Kadima. In this organization we come across a great number of workers whose names are inseparably bound up with the history of the Zionist Organization and with Jewish national literature in all languages.

The large number of young men who have been associated with the Jewish National Students’ Association at Berlin would make a list too long for detailed enumeration. But the following must specially be mentioned:⁠—

Shemaryah Levin was born in Russia. He is an enthusiastic nationalist, a good Hebrew scholar, and as an exceptionally effective speaker he attained considerable popularity already as a young student. He lectured on Hebrew literature and attracted much attention. Having graduated, he returned to Russia, and was Rabbi in Grodno. Later, he lived for some time in Warsaw, where he devoted himself to Hebrew literary work in connection with Achiasaf, and possessing great mastery over the Hebrew language, he wrote books and pamphlets of great value. Since then he has contributed to numerous Hebrew reviews. Some time afterwards he was Rabbi in Ekaterinoslaw and Wilna, and was elected a member of the first Russian Duma, where he distinguished himself as a most able speaker and worker. Then he left Russia and settled abroad. Already as a youth he was most active in the Chovevé Zion movement; later he took a prominent part in the Zionist Organization, and is now a member of its Small Actions Committee and one of the most influential leaders. An excellent orator, closely attached to Palestine, where he has lived for a considerable time, a plodding worker, he has for some years been busily engaged in propaganda work in Europe and America.

Victor Jacobsohn was born in Russia, and brought up from his infancy in an intensely assimilated (Russianized) environment. His father was a judge at Simferopol, but the son became irresistibly drawn towards Jewish nationalism. He was much influenced by the Berlin Students’ Group. An accomplished young man, of splendid literary taste, a lover of fine art, thoroughly impressed with the righteousness of the national cause, he soon became one of the leaders among the students. After having graduated, he returned to Russia, where he took a large and active share in the Chovevé Zion movement, and took up the Zionist Movement from the time of its inauguration. He was very soon elected member of the Actions Committee, but, apart from his work for the Organization as a whole, he was, when still in Russia, a steady and successful local worker. He then moved to the East, living in Palestine and in Constantinople, where he devoted himself entirely to Zionist work, both financial and political. Being a business man as well as a man of letters, a political thinker as well as an able financier, he has become one of the most influential Zionist leaders. He is a member of the Small Actions Committee.

Chaim Weizmann, who was born in Russia, was already in his boyhood very active in the young Chovevé Zion movement. During his studies at the Charlottenburg Polytechnic he took a leading part in the Berlin Jewish National Students’ Association. Of amiable and genial disposition, a pleasant and persuasive speaker, inseparably bound up with the deep national affection and humour of the Jewish home in Russia, young Weizmann soon gained great popularity among his fellow-students. Later he came into great and well-merited prominence at the Zionist Congresses and Conferences. With Feiwel, Buber and others he was most active in the Students’ propaganda, and during his visits to Russia took a prominent part in the propaganda there. Having graduated, he went to Switzerland, and was soon appointed Lecturer of Chemistry at the Geneva University, where he became the central figure of the West Zionist Group. About that time he, with Feiwel, Buber and others, conceived the idea of a Jewish University. At the Basle Congress in 1901 the Actions Committee had included the question of the establishment of a Palestine University in their programme, and Herzl took steps to obtain a concession for the University from the Turkish Government; but, in consequence of the pressure of other problems, this project was lost sight of for some years. The movement in favour of this idea, however, continued to develop, and its inception as well as its popularity is due to Weizmann more than to any other Zionist. The general Zionist activity of Weizmann grew from one Congress to another. He was elected member of the Actions Committee and of several important Zionist institutions. He has been living in England for some years now, occupying a chair in the faculty of chemistry at the Manchester University and taking a leading part in the English Zionist Federation. (The new University Scheme, and Weizmann’s activity in this direction, are described elsewhere.)

Leo Motzkin, Berthold Feiwel, Martin Buber and Joseph Lurie, also prominent in this circle, have already been mentioned.

In the Berlin group we also come across Isidor Eliaschew, a refined critic of great artistic culture, an important contributor to Jewish literature—mostly in Yiddish. His talents and information are of the most varied character, for he is the author of charmingly written essays, studies, monographs and sketches extending over a wide sphere of thought. He occupied a leading position in the radical wing of Zionism and among the literary workers of the Renaissance. We also come across Soskin, a clear-minded, enterprising and practical Zionist, a young man of wonderful foresight and an agricultural engineer of renown; further, Berman, whose studies were concentrated on colonizing work. Both of them went to Palestine later, and supervised colonization work there, acquiring in that way much valuable information and experience, which they recorded in various instructive books. We also find there Nachman Syrkin, the radical propagandist, the leader of the Zionist-Socialists; the able and cautious Estermann; Elie Davidsohn, who took a prominent part in discussing the open controversy between the various sections; Wilenski, an active and enthusiastic worker of considerable influence, first abroad and later in Russia; Mirkin, powerful, energetic and highly respected; Meschorer, determined and broad-minded, who, though not identifying himself with the Organization, worked hard in Warsaw when first the propaganda for securing capital for the Jewish Colonial Trust was set on foot, and died recently; Grigory Wilbuschewitsch, one of the family of energetic enthusiasts for and in Palestine; Salkind of Minsk; Kunin, a loyal and devoted worker; Pevsner, who worked zealously; and—last, but not least—Ch. D. Gurevitsch, the excellent Hebrew writer and essayist, novelist and publicist, a contributor to the Hebrew and Yiddish Press, a learned economist who was particularly interested in introducing his economic programme into Zionism, who expounded the idea in a lecture he delivered at a Conference of Russian Zionists held at Minsk in 1902. Then there were also Davis Trietsch and Ephraim Lilien, who have already been mentioned.

In course of time the movement spread steadily and systematically. Similar associations were soon founded in Heidelberg, Munich, Leipzig, Königsberg, Breslau, Berne, Zurich, Geneva, Lauzanno, Montpellier and Galicia.

The Jewish University students, particularly those hailing from Russia, pursued their studies at different universities, often passing from one to another. We, therefore, find some of them changing their places and activities in the Movement. For this reason it is impossible to follow a precisely geographical or chronological course.

At Heidelberg, Joseph Klausner and Saul Tschernichewski were already active before the First Zionist Congress took place. Loeb Jaffe of Grodno, who combined idealism with practical astuteness, wrote emotional Zionist poetry, and at the same time did organization work perhaps more than any other Jewish student who happened to be at Heidelberg. Later he became a great Zionist worker, organizer, editor and member of the Actions Committee in Russia. Gurland of Wilna, Eliasberg of Pinsk, Feitlowitsch, J. Melnik, Blumenfeld and others were the pioneers of the Zionist idea who had rallied around Professor Herman Schapiro, that venerable and cherished veteran, who, aided by his devoted wife, made his home a rendezvous of the local Zionist group. In Munich, the intellectual and kind-hearted brothers Strauss, members of an old noble Jewish family, worked together with G. Halpern, who during his University career had already distinguished himself by his great talents, and who was a good economist, a journalist of great skill, and a devoted Zionist worker. At a later period he was elected member of the Actions Committee. Lew, Izkovitsch, Abramowitsch and Nemzer may be mentioned among others. The last-named had greatly endeared himself to his fellow-students by his sincerity and warm-heartedness. He died very young, in Riga (1906), in a tragic way, a martyr’s death. At Leipzig there was also Loeb Jaffe, working with the devoted Kunin, who became in the last few years one of the pioneer workers in Palestine, as manager of Medjdel; and also Gurland, the engineering student at Mitwreida, as well as others.

It is interesting to glance back upon the various stages of propaganda in order to discover how the Russian Jews influenced their brethren abroad, how Zionism infused new life into the older Chovevé Zion movement, and how the present important representatives of new Zionism gradually appeared upon the scene and took up so strong a position.

A little society for the support of Palestine colonization was already in existence in Berlin as recently as 1871, but there seems to be little on record about it. At the beginning of the eighties there was a venerable, orthodox Rabbi, Dr. Israel Hildesheimer, assisted by his son Hirsch, together with some other members, notably the philanthropist S. Lachmann, Willy Bambus, a devoted Zionist, who travelled in Palestine, and has published many pamphlets and articles, and in connection with a Chovevé Zion of Russia, M. Turow, took an important part in the Chovevé Zion movement, and the late Moses of Kattowitz. We read already, in Dr. Rülf’s appeal of 1882: “Do not divide us; take us to places where we can live together, remain together, and work together as a united community, arranged like any other human society, where we may be Jews, without being interfered with” (this circular was issued in English by Haim Guedalla), and that is a trumpet-call of Zionism. Rülf, the Rabbi of Memel, was a man of genius and thoroughness, who was well known for his talent as an author of philosophical works, a theologian, preacher, and above all a noble character: he afterwards took part in the Zionist Movement and in the Congress. In 1884, a society for the support of a Jewish colonization in Palestine, called “Esra,” was founded in Berlin. In Cologne a Chovevé Zion group was established through the efforts of David Wolffsohn, Dr. M. Bodenheimer, Rubensohn and others. The Jewish National Students’ Association, consisting first almost exclusively of foreigners, gradually attracted the best elements of the local Jewish youth. One of the first and foremost was H. Löwe, a young man of great enthusiasm and energy, of vigorous eloquence, who travelled in Palestine and appeared at the First Congress as a delegate from Jaffa.

Arthur Friedemann, an able student, a member of an old and honoured family; Gronemann, the son of a respected Rabbi, a brilliant student and an excellent Jew; Klee, a keen propagandist and attractive speaker; Jungmann, a humorous, attractive and talented writer; Hantke, who distinguished himself by profound honesty of purpose and love of detail, and as a highly gifted, indefatigable and successful organizer; Jeremias, a faithful adherent to the movement (he died recently); Elias and Israel Auerbach, who possessed, besides their noble Jewish national aspirations, the most excellent literary gifts; Zlozisti, a fine writer and a poet full of wit and humour; Kalmus, a quiet, steady and enthusiastic Zionist worker; Sandler, an eminently able young scholar; Kollenscher, a strong political Zionist; Chamitzer, a faithful and zealous adherent of the Organization; the late Pell, an eminent propagandist and organizer; Leszynski, a quiet, persistent and conscientious member of the party; Witkowsky, an intelligent and active supporter; Oscar Levy; Emil Cohn, an eminently able theologian; Goldberg, a determined worker in the Organization; Edelstem; A. Wiener, a wholehearted, ardent worker; and at a later period, Gideon Heymann, a young man of burning zeal and considerable attainments; Blumenfeld, a propagandist of great eloquence and literary talents; Brunn, Hildesheimer and other medical men, steady workers, who devoted themselves to medical work in Palestine; Salomon, the brothers Treidel, Biram, a studious and very clever pedagogical worker, who recently was engaged together with Tachauer in Haifa, Löwenberg in Jerusalem, and others in national educational work; Richard Lichtheim, a gifted adherent to the cause; Rosenblüth, an able worker; Weinberg; Goitein (the latter died recently), who assisted in the work of the Palestinian Office, and many others—all of them took part in the University movement.

We find most of them joining in later years the Zionist Organization, which was in course of time supported by a representation of the older generation. Otto Warburg, botanist, author and professor, was an active member of the “Esra” for a long time. He then joined the Zionist Organization, and placed his great scientific knowledge at the service of the Movement, especially for the purpose of colonization work. Simple-minded, of high integrity and unassuming, he worked with a quiet determination and an intense love of Palestine. He edited Palästina, Altneuland, founded the Palestine Land Development Company, was elected member of the Small Actions Committee and succeeded David Wolffsohn in 1911. Hantke, so devout in national aspirations and with such great capacity for organization, and an exceptional record of local work for some years, entered the Small Actions Committee at the same time. Dr. Bodenheimer, one of the oldest and most prominent Zionists, was an excellent practical worker in the management of the Jewish National Fund. Dr. Oppenheimer, the famous economist, gave a great impetus to co-operative work in Palestine. Dr. Ruppin, a man of great learning, high intelligence, wonderful energy, and an exceptionally active administrator, had the largest share in the management of practical work in Palestine, and a considerable record of literary work in connection with the problems of colonization. And in the work of organization Julius Simon proved an eminent worker; likewise Dr. Moses, an experienced Zionist; H. Schachtel, indefatigable in important work; Hermann Struck; Wagner, a splendid worker, the well-known painter and Zionist worker of high religious sentiment, and Dr. Frank, the leader of the “Misrachi.”

A similar development took place in all other countries. The revival among the Jewish students at the Swiss universities commenced in the eighties, and there again we come across many who in later years have achieved leading positions in literature, in the Zionist Organization, or in educational and practical work in Palestine. Among the names of note at the Bern University we may mention: Mossensohn, Bogratschow, Jacob Rabinovitscz, Metman-Cohn, Jochelmann, Aron Michael, Boruchow, Isaac, Loeb Boruchowitsch, J. Becker, Chissin, Glikson, Rabin, Salkind, Melamed, Klazkin, Bernstein, Seleger, Robinsohn, Marschak, Meir Pines and many others; in Geneva: Weizmann, Harari, M. and Mme. Aberson, Grunblatt, Stupnitzki, and later Daniel Pasmanik, Ben Ami Rabinowitsch, and others; in Zurich: David Farbstein, Felix Pinkus, Mlle. Reines (later Mme. Davidsohn); in Basle: Ezekiel Wortsmann—and many others.

Switzerland, the favourite place of students and political international workers, became of course a great centre of intellectual Zionist activity. The circumstance that the First Zionist Congress, as well as most of the following ones, took place in Switzerland, contributed much to the importance of this centre. The number of Jewish students from Eastern Europe, particularly owing to the great facilities with regard to university studies in Switzerland at that time in comparison with other countries, has for some time been very considerable. The pressure occasioned by the exceptional restrictions, which interfered with Jewish education in Russia, caused a steady increase in this number, while, as a natural and psychological effect, the baseness and injustice of the restrictions awakened in the Jewish young men a consciousness of their real position and of the necessity for a radical solution. It was there that the battles were fought between the young, enthusiastic champions of the different movements: Socialists, Bundists and various schools of Zionism, conservative, radical, political, practical, etc.

All the aforementioned pioneers could be found at work at those different periods, and afterwards. To mention only a few of them, Weizmann’s activities had considerably developed when in Geneva; Mossensohn, a man of striking individuality and an orator of renown, was a most active propagandist, thoroughly nationalist; he became afterwards professor and subsequently director of the Hebrew Gymnasium at Jaffa; Metman-Cohn and Bogratschow, both widely read and fine scholars, also Marschak and Harari did much to cause a great revival of Hebrew in Palestine; Rabin is a pedagogical worker who did good work in Palestine and Russia; A. U. Boruchow, pre-eminent among Zionist intellectuals, took a conspicuous part in the Poale-Zion movement; Chissin distinguished himself in practical work in Palestine; Klazkin, Boruchowitsch, Melamed and Bernstein are well-known Hebrew writers, most gifted and very active, and regarded as important in the Zionist Movement; Aberson was well known as a smart disputant and propagandist; Stupnitzki is a thoughtful Yiddish publicist; J. Becker, who really belongs to the Berlin group, has for many years been most actively engaged in the Movement, he has been editor of the Welt and has published many reports of the Congresses; in the same direction, and of a similar character, was the activity of Pinkus; Jochelman joined, after years of useful and honest Zionist work, the Territorialist movement, of which he is one of the leaders; Wortsmann is an arduous Zionist writer of inexhaustible energy. David Farbstein of Warsaw was one of the most prominent pioneers. A very learned and discreet lawyer, with a mind stored with useful information, and a good Hebrew scholar, he was highly appreciated at the First Congress, and was able to give valuable legal advice in matters appertaining to financial questions. Daniel Pasmanik developed considerable activity at a later epoch and devoted himself with exceptional sincerity to propaganda work; as a writer and journalist of extraordinary capabilities and of great vivacity, he became an invaluable contributor to the Zionist press, particularly in Russia. Lastly, we must mention the Montpellier group, with its leaders: Mohilewer, Kalwaryjski, Buchmil, Mlle. Imas (later Mme. Buchmil), Einhorn, Katzmann, Miss Ginsberg (later Mme. Krause), and others.

Old Zionists will remember what a significant impression the appearance of the Montpellier delegates created at the First Congress. Later experiences confirmed this favourable impression. Kalwaryjski is now successfully engaged as manager of the Rothschild Colonies in Upper Galilee, in Palestine; Mohilewer, the grandson of Rabbi Samuel Mohilewer, worthily upholds the traditions of his family, and occupies the post of a capable communal Rabbi in Bialystok; Buchmil is engaged in propaganda; Katzmann did good work in America, where he lives; and Einhorn, an excellent agricultural engineer and a fine Hebraist, has written a very useful book on this subject.

In Galicia, the Movement can be traced back to the early eighties, and it was closely connected with the Vienna Kadima. Some of the Galicians belonged to different groups in Germany, Switzerland and other countries. In later years the Universities of Lemberg and Cracow became great centres of the Jewish national movement. Ruben Bierer belonged to the founders of the Kadima, also Birnbaum, who is a Galician. Practically most of the Vienna Kadima students were Galicians, and also a certain number of the Berlin Kadima. To the most distinguished Zionist leaders belongs Mordecai Braude of Lemberg, who graduated at Freiburg, was Rabbi at Stanislau, and only missed by a small minority being elected to the Austrian Diet. He is now Rabbi and Preacher at the Great Synagogue in Lodz, Poland. A man of learning and high character, he showed immense capacity for Zionist work, as also in his rabbinical career.

Stand, Korkis, Zipper, Rabbi Schmelkes, Malz, Schiller (living in Palestine), Thon, Wahrhaftig, Hausmann, Waschitz, Emil Reich, Silbermann, Kornhäuser, Reis, Waldmann, Schorr, Zimmermann, Samuel Rapaport, Balaban and many others—now important Zionist workers—were mostly influenced by the University movement. Stand has a fine record as a brilliant Zionist and politician. He, with Mahler, Straucher and the late Gabel, formed a Jewish National Club, composed of members of the Austrian Parliament. As a political speaker he always strove to spread the truth concerning the Jewish situation in all its purity and strength. Alfred Nossig, mentioned already in another connection, also came from Galicia.

Although Zionism played an important part in Western Europe, Russia has yet always been the most important centre of Zionist propaganda. The penetration of Zionism into University circles began, naturally enough, in that country, where Jewish life is so real, where the knowledge of the Hebrew language and of the national past is so widely diffused, and where the persecutions have always been so strongly felt. There were several centres of the movement; but, while one of those centres was considered the foremost as far as national aspirations were concerned, and others in other directions, there was one that seemed the most prominent from the beginning, and which seemed destined to rank far above the others, namely, Charkow.

A Chovevé Zion group was founded at Charkow in 1882, which was the Bilu—mostly composed of University students. Israel Belkind, the most zealous, true-hearted and indefatigable worker, was one of the first leaders; this group was in connection with another Chovevé Zion Society, which was at that time already in existence in Krementhsug, of which David Levontin (now Managing Director of the Anglo-Palestine Company), one of the first Chovevé Zion of Russia, and one of the first pioneers in Palestine, was the President. The latter Society was in touch with David Gordon in Lyck, and with some other societies which were already in existence in various parts of Russia. They were also in touch with Jehiel Brill, the editor of the Ha-Lebanon, and with M. Pines of Rishnoi. The banker Karassik in Charkow was the Treasurer of the Bilu Society. Joseph Feinberg, an intellectual communal worker and a good linguist, who had graduated in chemistry in Switzerland, was at the time in touch with Dr. Mandelstamm, in Kiew, who was greatly interested in the movement. The Bilu Society sent twenty propagandists all over Russia, with the result that 525 members joined. The central office was in Charkow. The Society eventually came into touch with Dr. N. Adler, Sir Moses Montefiore and Laurence Oliphant. An office was opened in Odessa and another in Constantinople, where an Appeal was issued (see Appendix LXXIX., “The Manifesto of the Bilu (1882)”). After a meeting in January, 1882, Levontin and Feinberg were sent to Palestine for the purpose of purchasing land. The negotiations with Oliphant, who was at that time in Constantinople, having fallen through, the representatives of the Bilu addressed themselves directly to the Ottoman Government, and were received by the Grand Vezir. And Levontin and Feinberg, having found some suitable plots of land in the South of Palestine, negotiated with the Bedouins for the purchase of them.

In June, 1882 (the 7th of Tammus), the first Bilu party, consisting of fourteen persons (among whom was one girl, Debora, the sister of Israel Belkind, now the wife of Dr. Chissin), and later joined by further six persons, arrived in Palestine. Grave difficulties arose, however, in connection with the formalities for the purchase of the land. Meanwhile, a number of new pioneers had arrived also from Roumania.

In Roumania, in 1882, the Zion Society at Galatz had voted ten thousand francs towards the project of the colonization of Palestine. At Jassy a committee, comprised of the most influential members of the Jewish community, was formed to collect subscriptions for the same object. The Palestine Colonization Society at Berlad sent a delegate to the Holy Land to confer with the Governor on the question as to the purchase of land. The office of the Central Committee of the Society for Promoting Jewish Emigration from Roumania (preferably to Palestine) was in Galatz, under the control of M. Samuel Pineles. The President was (in 1882) M. Isaac Löbel, and M. Abeles at Galatz, M. Neuschotz at Jassy, M. Marco Schein, L. Goldberg, Dr. L. Lippe, M. Mattes and M. Weinberg. Dr. Moses Gaster, at that time a young but influential man, strongly supported the movement. On the 4th May, 1882, a general meeting was held at Jassy concerning the Palestine Colonization Scheme. Laurence Oliphant was the central figure of this assembly, and power of attorney was given him by the Committee to negotiate on their behalf at Constantinople. It was also resolved to send a commission to Palestine to purchase land (E. Cohn, Helman, Denirerman). At that period there were forty-nine Palestinian societies in Roumania. A new Society was founded: “The Advanced Guard” (“Chaluzei Yessod Ha-Maala”) (see Appendix XCI.: “The Advanced Guard”), with David Levontin as President, F. M. Halsoferes, Treasurer, A. N. Hillel, A. Lande, S. Sogrisebas of Roumania, as members, and later on S. A. Schulman as Secretary.

At this period Mr. Moore was the British Consul at Jerusalem, and M. Hayman Amzulak, a respected Jaffa citizen, was British Consular Agent at Jaffa. The Chovevé Zion expected great help from England. M. Amzulak, who was himself a Jew, took a keen interest in the movement and, evidently encouraged by Mr. Moore, went to Constantinople for the purpose of helping to surmount the difficulties. Unfortunately, the war in Egypt had just broken out, and owing to the strained diplomatic relations between Britain and Turkey in consequence of the occupation of Egypt, the moment did not prove opportune for the intentions of M. Amzulak and Laurence Oliphant. It looked as if in that way nothing could be done. At last 3300 Dunan were bought at Rishon, but new funds were much needed. M. Amzulak was elected Honorary President of the “Advanced Guard,” and appeals were sent to England. Meanwhile new groups, which despatched their envoys to several countries, were formed. In April, 1882, M. Hirsch Braun and M. Isaac Temkin of Elizabethgrad, Russia, proceeded to Vienna, Paris and London on behalf of 150 families of Elizabethgrad, comprising nine hundred persons in all, who had raised a fund of thirty thousand roubles for the purpose of migrating to Palestine. But this plan and similar schemes were still in an undeveloped stage, while the Bilu business, which had already been started, was really pressing. The Company wanted a loan of thirty thousand francs. In 1883 M. Feinberg was delegated to go abroad to get this loan. He went first to Vienna, where the Chovevé Zion Society (called “Ahirath Zion”), with Perez Smolenskin, Dr. Schnirer and Kremenezky was already in existence. M. Feinberg was introduced to various committees which promised contributions, provided the Paris Chovevé Zion would head the list. M. Feinberg went to Paris holding letters of introduction from the former teacher, Professor Herman Schapiro, to M. Zadoc Cahn, the Grand Rabbin of France, and was well received by the French rabbi, who got him in touch with M. Michel Erlanger. In that way he was introduced to the Alliance Israélite, and to Baron Edmond de Rothschild, and succeeded in getting the required loan.

This was practically the first colonization experiment of Jewish immigrants. The die was cast. The nucleus of colonization by immigrants had been formed. This pioneer group naturally could not remain very long in that place, because it was badly suited for that purpose. There were no means, skill, method, or experience. Great privation was endured. The little group soon found itself in a deplorable condition; some of them, overwhelmed by hardships, anxiety, disappointment and despair, had to leave; but the “survival of the fittest” prevailed. Some went to Mikveh Israel, where they worked as farm labourers, others to Katra, twenty-five miles south-west of Jaffa, where M. Pines had bought some three hundred Dunam of land for them. But the fact remains that these students and idealists were the first in the field as Palestinian colonizers. The present writer had the moral satisfaction to meet survivors of these pioneers in Palestine six years ago: the old-experienced settlers, M. Tschernow in Rishon L’Zion and M. Leibowitz in Katra, and Israel Belkind, the most enthusiastic worker—all three veterans of the struggle for the survival on the land.

But all these difficulties only stimulated the efforts of other new pioneers. The Bilu stirred up the enthusiasm of all noble-minded Jewish students at the Russian Universities.

(2) Modern Hebrew Literature

The necessarily brief outline in the text may be supplemented by some account of the principal figures in Hebrew literature during the last generation. The names are in alphabetical order.

Ben-Avigdor (Schalkowitsch, 1866), born in Warsaw, was Secretary of the Bnei Mosheh, for some years assistant manager of the Publication Society, Achiasaf, and founded in 1897 the new Publication Company, Tushiah, which has published hundreds of new Hebrew books, particularly in the domain of education. His idea was to create a popular Hebrew literature, and he has greatly stimulated Hebrew writing and Hebrew education. He is himself a successful and prolific Hebrew novelist.

S. Benzion (Gutman), born in Russia, has done important literary and pedagogical work in Odessa, and during the last few years in Palestine. He is one of the best Hebrew writers of our time; his stories are remarkable for beauty, charm and vividness of language. He has contributed to many Hebrew reviews and newspapers, and has co-operated in the publication of Achiasaf, Tushiah, and Moriah, chiefly in the domain of pedagogical literature. He was also editor of the excellent review Moledeth at Jaffa. A selection of his sketches and tales was published not long ago.

M. J. Berditchevski is an original stylist and a prose-poet of great sensibility and mystic beauty, distinguished especially for his gift of allegory. His mode of thought is original, sometimes eccentric, but always spiritual.

Simon Bernfeld, born in Galicia, and graduated in Germany. He is one of the most prolific and distinguished of Hebrew writers. During the last years of David Gordon’s life he was a regular contributor to Ha’magid, and after Gordon’s death was for a time editor of that paper. At that time he ardently supported Jewish nationalism and the Chovevé Zion. After a couple of years as Chief Rabbi at Belgrade he returned to Germany and devoted himself entirely to literary and journalistic work, mostly in Hebrew. He has been a regular contributor to the Hebrew press all over the world. He has written also a large number of books on history and the philosophy of religion, and many biographies. His vast erudition and his popular style have won him a prominent place in Hebrew literature.

Reuben Brainin, born in Russia, has lived in Vienna and in Berlin, and is now in the United States. He is a critic, essayist and publicist. His contributions to the Hebrew press, as well as his biographies of Mapu, Smolenskin and others, have won him a high place in this domain of letters. His style is fresh and easy, and distinguished by correctness and taste. He edited Mimisrach Umimaarav, and has written novels and treatises of great literary value. He was one of the pioneers of the national movement in Vienna, and was in the closest connection with the Kadima and Herzl.

R. A. Broides, born in Russia, belonged to the old Wilna school. He had a pure and pleasant Hebrew style, and wrote some novels of value. He contributed to Ha’shachar, and was afterwards sub-editor of Gottlober’s Ha’boker Or in Lemberg. He worked for the Zionist movement in Galicia and Vienna, and wrote several articles for the propaganda of Zionism. He died in Vienna in 1902.

M. M. Dolitzky, born in Bialystok, Russia, lived for many years in America. He was a contributor to Ha’shachar and Ha’melitz, and wrote several novels and essays, as well as poems full of Zionist enthusiasm. Critics may differ as to the exact literary value of his poems, but there is no doubt as to their depth of feeling and beautiful Biblical style.

Drujanow, born in Russia, active in Odessa, in Palestine and in Wilna, belongs to the most prominent representatives of “cultural” Zionism. He was Secretary of the Chovevé Zion in Odessa, lived a few years in Palestine and acquired a high and well-deserved literary reputation as editor of Ha’olam. A conscientious publicist, of consistent and independent judgment, with an admirable mastery of the Hebrew language, he is an intellectual worker in the best sense of the term. Besides his work as a publicist, he has written some excellent essays.

Mordecai Ehrenpreis, born in Galicia, graduated in Germany, was Rabbi in Esseg, Austria, then Chief Rabbi in Sofia, Bulgaria, and is now Chief Rabbi in Stockholm. He is a Hebrew nationalist of genius and experience, many-sided, with international associations and wide knowledge. He belonged to the Nationalist Students’ Association in Berlin, and has been in the Zionist Organization since the first Congress, at which he played a prominent part. He represents the intellectual and spiritual side of the movement. A man of clear judgment and of strong character, he is very active in important work connected with the international Jewish problem. In Hebrew literature he is one of the best critics and essayists. He writes excellent Hebrew, and has sound literary judgment.

Eleasar Eisenstadt, born in Russia, was Rabbi at Rostow, and is now official and communal Rabbi at St. Petersburg. As a student at Berlin, where he graduated, he was one of the most enthusiastic of the young nationalists. Endowed with a keen perception, and intimately acquainted with the life of the Russian Ghetto, he is a master of anecdote, and has turned his gift to account in a series of Hebrew tales. A many-sided and energetic communal worker, particularly interested in Jewish education (in which he was formerly engaged at St. Petersburg), he enjoys a wide popularity.

Zalman Epstein, of Odessa, now in Warsaw, who belonged to the Achad Ha’am circle, and was Secretary of the Chovevé Zion in Odessa, is an ardent nationalist and a zealous worker for the Jewish revival. He contributed during several years to Ha’melitz and other Hebrew periodicals. His productions are distinguished by a vivid, nervous style, and by a deep earnestness of conviction. An acute controversialist, with a strong predilection for traditional ideas, he has written several articles against the extravagances of modernism.

A. S. Friedberg (Har Shalom), born in Grodno, lived in St. Petersburg and in Warsaw. He was one of the most popular Hebrew writers of his time. He wrote with ease and elegance and was at one time considered the successor of Mapu, particularly for his translation of Grace Aguilar’s Vale of Cedars—into Hebrew, Emek Ha’arazim. He possessed a wonderful Hebrew style, and had the closest acquaintance with current Jewish affairs. A convinced and enthusiastic nationalist, he was a member of the editorial staff of Ha’melitz, afterwards of Ha’zefirah, and of the first volume of the Hebrew Encyclopædia, and became ultimately one of the principal writers of the Achiasaf, for which he wrote a series of popular books.

S. I. Fuchs, born in Russia, graduated in Switzerland, and was a scholar of great versatility and deep learning. As a student he belonged to several nationalist students’ associations and was distinguished by his earnestness and high moral sense. His treatises dealing with Jewish historical and literary topics are of enduring value. He was one of the assistant editors of Ha’magid and had a considerable share in the propaganda of Zionism.

S. J. Hurwitz, born in Russia, a Hebrew writer of marked individuality. A learned Talmudist, with considerable erudition in ancient, mediæval and modern literature, a keen, inquiring and independent thinker, he pursued “Jewish science” and historical studies in a way which often brought him into collision with established and accepted traditions. He contributed to several reviews, and edited his own review, He’atid. He is a devoted champion of the Hebrew revival.

Wolf Javitz, born in Warsaw, scholar and writer, is a master of the Hebrew language, in the knowledge of which he has few equals. A student of extraordinary assiduity, he has amassed a vast fund of erudition, which is revealed in the writings of his later years. An enthusiastic nationalist and Chovev Zion, and at the same time an upholder of strict traditional principles, he is the most eloquent interpreter of the national idea in the spirit of traditional Judaism. He lived for several years in Palestine, and has written several books. Many years ago he began writing a complete History of the Jews, of which several volumes—works of great learning—have already appeared.

Isaac Kaminer, born in Russia, was a physician and a prolific contributor to the Hebrew press. His essays, causeries and parodies are distinguished by skill and “temperament.” His poems are full of fight and an honest zeal for the Jewish national cause. He had an original and entirely free metrical and rhythmical system. A selection of his works appeared posthumously in Odessa (1907), with an introduction by Achad Ha’am.

Aaron Kaminka, born in Russia, studied abroad, mostly in Paris. He contributed regularly to Ha’melitz, Ha’zefirah, and several reviews. He also translated classical poems and wrote original verses. He took a considerable share in the Chovevé Zion movement, preaching with great zeal the spiritual progress of the nation, and emphasizing the importance of a living Hebrew language. He was then appointed Rabbi in Slavonia, afterwards at Prague. He joined the Zionist movement, but left it through a difference of opinion. He has since become Secretary of the Israelitische Allianz at Vienna, for which he has travelled much. He has published records of his travels, as well as a selection of his Hebrew poems.

Dr. J. C. Katzenelsohn (1848‒1917) (Buki ben Yogli) wrote essays and short stories which are literary jewels. His scientific works in Hebrew are unequalled for learning and mastery of style.

A. S. Kerschberg, of Bialystok, Russia, is a Hebrew scholar and writer of great ability. He has contributed to Ha’zefirah and Ha’shiloach, and has written treatises dealing with talmudical matters. An ardent nationalist, he has been connected with the Chovevé Zion movement since it began. He has lived in Palestine and has published his observations and experiences in an interesting pamphlet.

Joseph Klausner, born in Odessa, a graduate of Heidelberg, is one of the most prominent disciples of Achad Ha’am, whom he succeeded in the editorship of Ha’shiloach. A devoted Chovev Zion and a keen Hebraist, he commenced Hebrew journalistic work in his earliest youth. At Heidelberg and elsewhere he assisted in the formation of the Nationalist Students’ Association, in which he took a leading part. He has done valuable work in the field of Biblical and historical studies. He was for many years lecturer at the Rabbinical College in Odessa. Palestinian nationalism and culture based upon Hebrew tradition are the guiding principles of his numerous publicistic writings. He is a pioneer of Palestinian Hebrew education. The impressions of his last visit to Palestine are given in his Olam Mithhaveh (A World in Evolution).

L. Levinski, born in Russia, lived during the most important period of his life in Odessa, where he was a prominent member of the Chovevé Zion, of the editorial staff of Ha’shiloach, of the Moriah, of the Zionist Synagogue Javneh, and other institutions. His quaint felicity of style, continual flow of wit, and easy, vivacious narrative won him a great reputation as a satirist. He contributed to the Hebrew press feuilletons and reviews of current events, and also wrote some pamphlets of value. A selection of his works has been published since his death by the Moriah.

Mordecai Zevi Mane was born in the village of Radoshkevitsch, in Russia. He studied at the Academy of Arts in St. Petersburg, and won distinction as a gifted painter, a Hebrew poet, and an excellent writer in prose. He contributed to He’assif and Knesseth Israel. Though he may not rank among the Olympians, he produced in his modest way many a Zionist poem of enduring worth. He died young, and a collection of his works appeared posthumously (Warsaw, 1907).

David Neumark, of Galicia, studied at Berlin, and was one of the most original and prominent figures in nationalistic students’ circles. After having graduated, he was appointed Rabbi at Rakowitz, Austria, where he officiated for a few years. He entered the Zionist Organization and became a loyal and zealous worker, with a strong inclination towards “cultural” Zionism. He soon devoted himself to philosophy, and, besides his History of Jewish Philosophy, first written in German, he contributed a series of philosophical articles, written in an elaborate and exact style, to Ha’shiloach. He also wrote other essays of value. Later he was appointed Professor at the Cincinnati Hebrew Union College, where he has pursued his educational and literary activity.

Saul Pinchas Rabinowitsch (Schefer) (1875‒1911) won a very prominent place among the distinguished pioneers of Zionism in Russia, as well as among the ablest and most popular Hebrew writers and publicists. He devoted many years of his life to the propaganda of the Chovevé Zion movement, and was for many years Secretary of the Warsaw Chovevé Zion. He was an ardent and active Zionist from the very beginning of the Zionist Organization. In close connection with Rabbi Mohilever, Leo Pinsker and Alexander Zederbaum, he often travelled on important missions, maintaining a world-wide correspondence with hundreds of Jewish leaders and writers, and occupied principally with Chovevé Zion affairs, but also with Russian-Jewish affairs generally, particularly during the period of the pogroms. He was a zealous and devoted Jewish national worker, was assistant editor of the Ha’zefirah, 1857‒80, contributor to several Hebrew and other newspapers, editor of the year-book Knesseth Israel, one of the editors of the first volume of the Hebrew Encyclopædia Ha-Eschkol, and author of many monographs and biographies. His greatest work was the Hebrew translation of Graetz’ History of the Jews (with many valuable original additions of Harkavy and of other scholars, as well as of his own).

J. Ch. Rawnitzki, born in Russia, author and educationist, whose activity has lain mostly in Odessa, has for many years been engaged in Hebrew literary work of a nationalist character in the Chovevé Zion movement. He edited Ha’pardes, contributed to several reviews, and is one of the principal editors and authors working for the Moriah in Odessa.

A. J. Slutzki, born and living in Russia, was an able and shrewd Zionist publicist. He contributed to Ha’melitz under J. L. Gordon, and actively assisted the Chovevé Zion propaganda.⁠¹

O. Taviev, born in Russia, lives in Moscow. He is one of the most prominent Hebrew journalists, authors and educationists. He is one of the originators of the modern Hebrew style. For several years he contributed regularly to Ha’melitz and other Hebrew papers and reviews. He has written causeries and critical essays in an easy and pleasant style, and has also translated some works of belles lettres. His principal services, however, lie in the domain of pedagogy.

Joshua Thon, born in Galicia, now Rabbi and preacher at the temple of the Jewish Congregation at Cracow, took an active part in the Students’ national movement as a student in Berlin, where he graduated, and distinguished himself by great learning and strength of character. A convinced Zionist and an enthusiastic champion of Hebrew, he entered the Zionist Organization, of which, owing to his oratorical powers and personal influence, he is one of the most active leaders. Besides his numerous writings in Polish and in German, he is a Hebrew writer of value, and his essays, mostly published in Ha’shiloach, exhibit a considerable critical faculty.

Chaim Tschernowitz, born in Russia, had a thorough talmudic education, was Rabbi in Odessa, then studied at a German University and graduated in Switzerland. His contributions to Ha’shiloach, under the nom de plume, Rav Zaair (A young Rabbi), attracted attention by the broadminded views and comprehensiveness of historical sense in dealing with religious and ritual matters which they disclosed. He has also written historical and talmudic sketches. He was for several years Principal of the Odessa Rabbinical College. He is in the closest touch with the Chovevé Zion movement, and is one of the leaders of those nationalistic Rabbis who unite faithfulness to the old traditions with a modern spirit of science and critical inquiry.

Hillel Zeitlin, born in Russia, active in Wilna, and more recently in Warsaw, was one of the editors of the Wilna Ha’zman, to which he contributed valuable essays and articles. A Talmudist of erudition, an authority on Chassidism, a semi-mystic enthusiast endowed with a poetical imagination, a master of the Hebrew language and of the forms and methods of modern literature, he achieves a degree of pathos and beauty unsurpassed in modern Hebrew literature. He joined the Zionist movement, but afterwards identified himself with Territorialism. In recent years he has gone over to the Yiddish press, of which he is one of the most gifted and influential writers.

Other Hebrew writers worthy of mention are Joshua Steinberg, from a scientific point of view one of the most important of the Hebraists of Russia; Bendetsohn, who exceeded Mapu in biblical purity of language in the form of an idealistic prose; Moses Reichersohn; Mordecai Wohlmann; T. E. Epstein; A. B. Gottlober, the popular poet, superficial yet clear and graceful; Eleazer Ha-Cohen Zweifel, the sweet Midrash-like moralist, homiletical critic and essayist; the wonderful modern novelists Feuerstein, Jehuda Steinberg, Berschadski and Grassin; Eleasar Atlas the sharp-witted critic, M. A. Schatzkes, who notwithstanding his loquacity had a rich style and some good ideas, and his other protagonist in the same field of Agada-explanation; Jehouda Schereschewski, distinguished by his concentrated calm—and their followers; Weissberg; Dubzevitch; Edelman (“Adulami”); Maskileison; the learned and thoughtful Joseph Rosenthal; the serious scholars Jacob Bachrach; A. I. Bruck; David Kahane; Salomon Mandelkern, the industrious scholar and skilled poet who translated Byron’s Hebrew Melodies with masterly skill; Slominsky; Lichtenfeld; Lipkin; Medalie; Barasch; Y. Margulies; Hirsch Rabinovitch; and Sosnitz, who introduced natural science into Hebrew literature; J. L. Kantor; Proser; Silberman; J. Kohn Zedek; Werber; Frumkin; Fischer; Ch. L. Markom; Joseph Brill, masters of journalistic style—all these writers and many, many others were the precursors of the revival of Hebrew. In this connection, special mention must be made of some of the living writers who, though not showing any special nationalistic or Zionist tendency, have greatly contributed to the enrichment and development of the Hebrew language and literature.

Great attention and acknowledgment are due to David Fischmann, the charming poet, the brilliant causeur and essayist, the wonderful critic who deals in a witty way with the most serious questions, the translator of many works of science and fiction; to the old Hebrew novelist and poet, Nathan Samuely, whose poetry is replete with sweetness and harmony; to the greatest of Jewish historians, bibliographers and critics of world-wide fame, Dr. Abraham Harkavy; the learned Israelsohn; the able Abraham Cahan; the Talmudist, N. A. Getzow; the learned and thoughtful Heller; the ingenious scholar and mathematician, Ch. J. Bornstein (who translated Hamlet into Hebrew); the bibliographer, Wiener; the orientalist, Isaac Marcon; the studious T. Ratner, magid; the old writer of lyric impulse, I. L. Levin (Jehabel), a poet and publicist of merit; the critic and essayist, A. J. Paperna, one of the last representatives of the old school; the able journalist and talmudical critic, Benzion Katz; the talented modern novelists: Brenner, Schofman, Berkowitsch, Kaabak; Sneur, the young poet of vigour and ardour, noble spirit and bold fancy, who refreshed Hebrew poetry by a new stream of modern fiction; and Isaac Katzenelsohn, Ben Schimon, Heftmen, Pinski and others, who gave us sunny thoughts and beautiful pictures, in which delicacy of taste is accompanied by versatile and roaming fancy. Shalom Asch, the greatest in the coterie of the artists of the Polish Ghetto, gave us some of his tales in Hebrew; the gifted Abraham Reisin, a master of Yiddish, and the talented Numberg, who masters the Hebrew language, and who besides writing essays and tales of value in Hebrew worked hard and successfully in Hebrew journalism, have contributed very much to the modernization of Hebrew literature. And, as regards the two greatest stars of the Yiddish literature, “J. L. Peretz” and S. Rabinowitsch (“Scholom Aleicham”), whose loss we so deeply lament, and whose undying names belong to the chief glories of our literature of the present age, it is well known that both of them were partly Hebrew poets and writers of considerable genius.

Finally, there are Ben Ami Rabinowitzch (Mark Jakovlevitch), born in Russia, lived in Odessa, and now in Geneva, Switzerland, who is one of the best writers of fiction on Jewish life in Russia. His writings breathe a noble passion of love for the Jewish people, his observations are those of a high-minded man and an artist, and are full of national, noble emotion. He joined the Zionist movement from its very beginning.

Vladimir Jabotinski, born in Odessa, studied in Russia, in Italy and in Austria, and graduated at Petrograd, is a brilliant journalist and an orator of great eloquence and power. He is a contributor to great Russian newspapers, and has established a reputation as correspondent and an essayist of admirable skill. He worked with great devotion and success in the Zionist propaganda. Having acquired a sound knowledge of Hebrew, he translated Bialik’s poems into Russian, and wrote also some articles in Hebrew.

It will also be interesting to mention that the famous Russian-Jewish writer of the last generation, Lewanda, who was one of the representative writers of the period of enlightenment, during his successful literary career adhered in the last years of his life to the national idea, and supported the Chovevé Zion movement.

It is impossible to enumerate all the literary and educational representatives of the National Revival in Palestine; but a few names of note, in addition to those which have already been mentioned, cannot be omitted.

Israel Belkind has given proof of considerable literary ability in a series of pamphlets dealing with Palestine. J. Menuchas, who was born and is still living in Jerusalem, is a prominent contributor to the Hebrew press, as well as an excellent teacher. Ahroni, the zoologian, a scholar of renown, is pursuing his idealistic, scientific work at Rechoboth. Isaac Epstein now lives in Switzerland, but he is in spirit and style decidedly a Palestinian. He lived for years in seclusion, in a rustic tent among the hills of Upper Galilee, and wrote his work by the light of heaven. He remained faithful, as few priests have ever remained to their calling, a priest of the Hebrew language, which was revealed to him in all its beauty. M. Scheinkin, the devoted and popular worker, is a prolific publicist. Freimann, the old settler of Rishon, writes excellent books. Aronovitz, with his contributors, made the Ha-Poel Ha-Zaiv one of the best Hebrew weeklies which have ever existed; the Ha-Omer and the Moledet, splendid magazines, had a real Palestinian charm. (Of the last-mentioned the excellent essayist, pedagogical writer and poet, Fischmann, was recently the editor.) The numerous and various writings of Ben-Zion Guttman have been added to in Palestine; the “Waad Ha-Lashon” (Committee for the Language) at Jerusalem, with Yellin, Ben Yehouda, Zouts, Dr. Mazie and others, has done good work. Nearly all the specialists in agriculture and in medicine write in Hebrew; and Brenner, the most modern belles-lettres writer in Jerusalem.

On the other hand, the new Hebrew schools brought into the country a host of intellectual workers: Metman-Cohn, Bogratschow, Turow, Mossinsohn, Alexander Rabinowitsch, Lurie, Zutta, Segal, Schiller, Ladyshewski, Marschak, Biram, Tachower, Rosenstein, Ziphroni, Feldmann, Mowschensohn, Ozerkowsky, Jehieli, Papper. Others added merely their young modern efforts to the brilliant abilities of a Yellin or of that admirable type of a national educator represented by Vilkomitsch at Yessod Ha-Maaleh. All these pioneers are inspired Zionists, and they are paving the way for a great Revival.

In addition to these writers, the following prominent Hebrew journalists may be mentioned:⁠—

Abraham Loudvipol, a writer of great ability and strength of conviction, who became editor of the Ha’zofeh; Moses Kleinmann, a shrewd journalist, and a publicist of sound judgment; Samuel Tschernowitz (the brother of Chaim Tschernowitz), a journalist of a high order, who worked with great success for Ha’zefirah and Ha’zman; Nahum Syrkin, a wholehearted Zionist, an orator and a publicist of keen observation, and an eloquent exponent of the national idea, author of hundreds of articles, sketches, causeries and speeches⁠¹; N. J. Frenk, a moderate and consistent publicist of wide experience, who takes a leading part in the work of Ha’zefirah; and S. Jatzkan, at present editor of the Haint, formerly a contributor to Ha’melitz and Ha’zefirah, a zealous journalist and fighter: and among those of the older generation, M. Braunstein of Roumania (“Mibaschan”), master of a flowery and elaborate biblical style, author of many pedagogical books, but best known by his innumerable contributions to the Hebrew press; Lazar, the able editor of Ha’mitzpeh in Cracow; M. M. Pross of Warsaw, a judicious writer of causeries and criticisms in the old style; Ch. Z. Zagorodzki of Warsaw, a polished Hebrew stylist, author of several fine sketches, for many years one of the principal collaborators of Ha’zefirah; Shimón Volkov, a talmudical parodist with a peculiar style of his own; Dr. Berkowitz, of Vienna, a Jewish scholar and an excellent Hebrew writer, who was at one time Hebrew Secretary of the Vienna Zionist Organization and a regular contributor to Ha’zefirah; M. Rabinsohn, author of several sketches and translator for Ha’zman and Ha’zefirah; Z. Prilutzki, an old Chovevé Zion writer and worker. These and many others have perhaps done more to make Zionism popular by their everyday work as journalists than many authors of books.

Other contributors to modern Hebrew journalism are: Leon Rabinowitsch, who was editor of Ha-Melitz in Petrograd after Zederbaum; S. Rosenfeld, who afterwards came into prominence as a Yiddish publicist; J. E. Triwusch of Wilna; Samuel Leib Zitron of Wilna; the late Hirsch Neimanowitsch and M. Weber of Warsaw; E. Goldin of Lodz; J. D. Berkowitsch, now in New York; P. Lachover of Warsaw; Hermoni of Palestine; and E. D. Finkel of Warsaw. To the new Hebrew pedagogical literature: Ch. D. Tawiow of Riga, Salomon Berman, P. Kantorowitz, A. Libuschitzki of Warsaw, P. Berkman of Lodz, and the two great Yiddish poets Simon Frug of Odessa and Jehoasch of New York have played important parts in the awakening of the national feeling.

### LXXVI.

Note upon the Alliance Israélite Universelle and the Anglo-Jewish Association

In considering the relationship of the Alliance Israélite Universelle and the Anglo-Jewish Association to the Jewish National Movement, regard should be had to the foundation period of these institutions, when not only were those associated with their establishment men of Jewish Nationalist sympathies, but their activities were met by similar criticism to that which has confronted the Zionist leaders of recent years. Time has brought about a change in the personnel of the leadership of the Alliance and the Anglo-Jewish Association, but it is useful to bear in mind that this change is simply personal and that there is nothing changed in principle in the organizations which should prevent them being expressive of that nationalist spirit, characteristic of their earlier days. M. Charles Netter, Dr. Abraham Benisch, Dr. Albert Löwy and Mr. Baron Louis Benas, J.P. (M. Netter, one of the founders of the Alliance, Dr. Benisch, Dr. Löwy and Mr. Benas, associated with the establishment of the Anglo-Jewish Association) were all men of Jewish Nationalist sympathies. M. Netter is permanently identified with the foundation of the Mikveh Israel Agricultural School near Jaffa, the foster-mother of the Jewish Colonies of Palestine. Dr. Benisch, to whom the suggestion of an Anglo-Jewish Association on the lines of the Alliance Israélite was made by Mr. Benas, who had established in Liverpool the first branch of the Alliance in England in 1867, enthusiastically took up the idea and became the organizer of the English institution founded three years later. The formation of the first English branch of the Alliance at Liverpool called forth in 1868 at the end of its first year’s work the highest appreciation of M. Crémieux. Dr. Benisch had in his student days inaugurated with Dr. Löwy and Professor Steinschneider a Zionistic movement, and in the foundation of the Anglo-Jewish Association the two former saw the possibilities of the realization of many of the hopes and aspirations of their youth. Mr. Benas, Dr. Benisch and Dr. Löwy were active propagandists on behalf of the Association. Mr. Benas and Dr. Löwy were members of the International Palestine Committee which was formed in 1878 on the recommendation of the Palestine Section of the International Jewish Conference held that year in Paris, and of which section Mr. Benas was one of the two English representatives, the other being the Rev. S. Jacobs. The Palestine Section undertook to institute an examination of the general condition of the Jews in the East and especially of the Jews in Palestine with a view of effecting such improvements as might be needful, that country being known to several members who had visited it at various times. This section had the advantage of being attended by delegates from both Europe and America. This section of the Conference resolved “That the Alliance be requested to bring about the formation of a special commission on Palestine. This Committee is to be composed of persons of every country who take an interest in the welfare of brother Israelites and in the prosperity of the Holy Land.” On its formation, the Committee was entrusted with the establishment of new schools and particularly the control of the Institution Mikveh Israel. The report significantly added, “in entrusting the control of this Agricultural School to the Committee, with the view of further aiding in the development of that Institution, the Alliance would obtain a solid basis for its civilizing action” (Anglo-Jewish Association, 8th Annual Report, pp. 30, 36). In 1885 Mr. Benas and the late Chief Rabbi, Dr. Hermann Adler, visited Palestine together. En route they had an interview with Baron Edmond de Rothschild in Paris, at whose request materials were collected for a report of the condition of Jewry in the Ancient Jewish Homeland. The late Chief Rabbi gave an oral account of the educational institutions in Palestine to the Executive Committee of the Association. Mr. Benas’ “Report of his Travels in the East” was published as an Appendix to the Fourteenth Annual Report of the Association. The Report, which drew from the historian Graetz a most appreciative letter to the author, disclosing Graetz’ strong Zionistic sympathies, is not only valuable as one of the few historical documents in English giving a contemporary account of the early renascence of Jewish life in Palestine by a Jewish writer, but because of its accurate forecasting of the conditions of future development, the revival of Hebrew as a living language being particularly noted. The following are extracts from the report:⁠—

“Jaffa. Jaffa was reached on April 26th, and I at once, in company with Dr. Adler, visited the Mikveh Israel or Agricultural School. The director, Monsieur Hirsch, happened to be absent at Aleppo, but we were received by the sub-director, M. Haim.

The whole neighbourhood of Jaffa is most charming, full of the choicest exotics, whilst palms, citrons, and oranges luxuriate everywhere. The vines are in splendid condition. Everything seems to flower there in profusion, even wild roses and poppies in the cornfields, whilst the fig takes the place of our bushes and thickets. There are some charming properties about Jaffa.

As far as a model farm and beautifully cultivated garden is concerned, the Mikveh Israel holds its own with any institution of its kind, I would almost say, in Europe, and is a perpetual monument of the efforts of the late Mons. Netter.

There are 240 hectares, mostly under cultivation. They produced excellent wine, which, I am informed, is sold at a good profit. They have oranges, lemons, and various other fruit trees, besides cereals. The technical instructor, M. Klotz, an Alsatian, told me that there is considerable promise for the estate. There are now thirty-five pupils in the school, one of whom is a Moslem. They have a carpenter’s shop, where three boys are at constant work. They have thirty cows—ten giving a full supply of milk; they have eight calves, two horses and ten mules to assist the agricultural operations, and a good supply of water and a complete system of irrigation.

Everything in the establishment is thoroughly well kept. We were shown through the dormitories, and found twelve slept in each room, but the chambers were tolerably large.

Jerusalem. I arrived at Jerusalem on the night of the 27th April. The first thing that strikes the visitor is the fact that Jerusalem is a Jewish city. The Jewish population has so steadily increased as to tower head and shoulders above all others; this can best be noticed on a Sabbath, when almost all the streets and bazaars are silent. The native born Jewish population are in physique superior to their European co-religionists; they are taller, more dignified, and are decidedly of a handsome type. I am indebted for my statistics to M. Nissim Behar and the banker, M. H. Valero, both of these estimable gentlemen being natives of Jerusalem. The total population of Jerusalem is about 35,000. There are conflicting accounts as to the Jewish population; some put it at 20,000, others at 18,000.

There are two Jerusalems, the one within the walls of the city, the other outside the Jaffa Gate, which has sprung into existence during the last five or six years, and inhabited almost exclusively by Jews. I am undervaluing rather than exaggerating when I state that the villas and residences outside the city are quite equal in neatness and in their inviting aspect to some of the best parts of the Cheshire side of the Mersey, which they much resemble.

The Asiatic Jews are wealthy, and have mostly emigrated from the neighbourhood of Batoum, Poti and Tiflis. Their residences might almost be described as attaining a degree of positive comfort. They are a large community, and are quite independent in their means; they have their own rabbi, and give considerable assistance, when required, to their more indigent co-religionists. These Jews are scrupulously clean in their habits, are above the average height, and their flowing robes of spotless white cashmere betoken at once their manners. Credit must also be given to the Montefiore Testimonial Fund Buildings, which, if small, are decidedly clean and well kept, especially those tenanted by the Sephardi Jews—a great number of tenements having been built through the aid afforded by this fund. There are also the buildings of the Meah Shearim, a kind of building society, who have erected a large square block of tenements, which compare favourably with artisans’ dwellings in Lancashire cities.

The Judah Touro houses outside the city walls are fairly well kept, but, of course, the more modern houses have the advantage of superior construction. The defects in earlier constructions have here been carefully avoided.

The Yemen Jews are very poor; they present a most peculiar ethnological type. They have a very dark complexion, almost of a deeper shade than that of the Arabs; they have beautifully chiselled features, lustrous eyes, are most simple in their piety and devotion to the Holy City. They still retain their manuscript prayer books, which Dr. Adler states are most interesting. I saw a Yemen woman with her child working in the heat of the sun at what, in Lancashire, would be termed navvy’s work, and at the close of the day saw the clerk of the works give her sixty centimes as her daily wages. They were in terrible distress at first and slept in caverns, but, thanks to the exertions of Mr. Marcus Adler, who raised a fund in England, they are building cottages on the hillside upon which they work themselves, and owing to their thrifty habits and aptitude for labour, it is to be hoped that their worst difficulties are passed, and that they will attain some degree of independence. There are two sets of tenements being built for them, the one by the London Committee and the other by the help of the Society called Ezrath Nedachim. I may add, the Yemen Jews, both male and female, dress exactly like the native Arabs, from whom they are hardly distinguishable.

When I write upon the Jewish tenements in the interior of the city my report, of course, must be less favourable. I took the means of going alone with M. Valero, when unexpected, into some of the back streets and slums of Jerusalem; I dropped into various houses here and there, and saw matters from a practical point of view. It is most unfair for any one coming from Princes Park, Liverpool, or Kensington, London, or the Champs Élysées, in Paris, instituting a comparison between those neighbourhoods and the lanes of Jerusalem. But I maintain that the old streets of Marseilles and Florence, the Ghetto in Rome, the labyrinths in Naples, and the slums of Venice, are infinitely worse than the worst slums of Jerusalem. Nay, more, I maintain that the old Judengasse in Frankfort, the Judengasse in Worms, and some of the by-lanes in Vienna are decidedly no better than those of Jerusalem. They are more ancient and grimy than dirty; the absence of timber, and the constant employment of stone for building purposes in Old Jerusalem, gives a rough and jagged appearance to the walls, but there is nothing except the absence of drainage (and that is the same in every continental city, whether it be in France, Italy, or Austria) that calls for especial condemnation, nay, the dingy tenements inside Jerusalem, inhabited by the Sephardi Jews, are made presentable by a considerable use of clean white calico hung over the walls and covered over their simple furniture and beddings.

The future prospects of Jerusalem rest entirely with the rising youth, and I shall speak later on of the enormous value and high hopes I entertain of the Lionel de Rothschild School, conducted by the admirable and excellent director, M. Nissim Behar, of whose devotion, ability, and conscientiousness nothing too much can be said.

The Lionel de Rothschild School, or “Institution Israélite pour Instruction et Travail,” contains 140 pupils, all boys. The institution is singularly fortunate in possessing M. Behar as its chief. To be able to effect good work in Jerusalem it is almost imperative to be a native of the city. A teacher from England, France, or Germany who has longings for Europe or his native land, however able he may be, or however zealous, is incapable of infusing enthusiasm in his pupils, and when one is found like M. Nissim Behar, who is a man of great culture, and combines Parisian refinement with an ardent love and patriotism for the city in which he was born, and feels that he has a mission to perform and is perfectly oblivious to pecuniary advantages, it is to have already gained half the victory. Everything is neat, clean, and methodical.

The hours of instruction are from 8 o’clock until 12, and from 1 to 5.

I shall devote my report principally to the course of technical education, with which I believe the future prosperity of the Jews of Jerusalem is bound up.

The Technical School contains a forge, a carpenter’s shop, a cabinet-maker’s bench, a tailor’s department, a shoemaker’s shop, a turner’s lathe, a school of art for modelling, drawing, and sculpture, and a gymnasium for physical development.

Of these schools, the forge, the carpenter’s shop, and the school of art have produced capital results; we saw Jewish lads, who have only been a few weeks at the classes, making some excellent sketches, and in order to test their genuineness gave them several impromptu subjects to execute in our presence, which they did admirably.

The Forge is another successful institution.

Although the French language is the medium of tuition and the general language adopted, Hebrew is used side by side, not only as a language of prayer, but also as a means of conversation. French, as a medium of intercommunication amongst Europeans and officials, is very much required in the East.

The Girls’ School—Evelina de Rothschild Institute—contains 184 girls.

Hebron. I regret to have to report very adversely upon the condition of our co-religionists in Hebron. The pleasure and hopefulness I experienced in Jerusalem present a marked contrast to the disappointment I felt at the abject position of the Jews in the City of Abraham.

I met several Jews on the road who were trading with the neighbouring villages in butter and cheese; of course their profits would be exceedingly small. The soil around Hebron is most fertile, and the natural resources of the immediate neighbourhood decidedly good.

I venture to think that it is not eleemosynary aid that will do any real good for them. Food of all kinds and wine of a good quality is abundant and very cheap. I believe the Jews would work hard if taught what to do. Technical and general education would very soon transform an abject congregation into a happy and prosperous community.”

Mr. Benas delivered a large number of lectures upon the subject of his visit to Palestine and granted many interviews, all of which helped to arouse interest on behalf of the budding Jewish life in the Ancient Homeland. In its earliest days the Anglo-Jewish Association received from members of the Board of Deputies criticism not unakin to that which in later days members of the Board levelled at the Anglo-Jewish Association. In those days the Board was oligarchic, assimilative, and insular in outlook, while the Anglo-Jewish was popular, national and world-Jewish—true to the motto כל ישראל חברים. If to-day, while the Association cannot be called insular there are those who would ascribe to it the characteristic of the Board of Deputies of earlier days, signs are not wanting of a change towards the original outlook, particularly among the branches. It is in fairness due to the Anglo-Jewish Association to bear in mind that the Public Demonstration, the Conference, the International gatherings for Jewish purposes now a phenomenon of everyday life in Jewry owe to the Association and the Alliance their origin. To both no inconsiderable share of the foundation and the interest in the Western world in the foundation of the Jewish colonies in Palestine may justly be credited. Thus the organizations and those who established them merit the recognition and the gratitude of all who hold to the Jewish national ideal and strive for its fulfilment.

[The Reports of the Alliance Israélite Universelle and the Anglo-Jewish Association contain much valuable material for the History of the Resettlement in Palestine.]

### LXXVII.

An Appeal of the Berlin Kadima

In 1891 the Russian Jewish Students’ Colony in Berlin submitted to the International Committee for the assistance of the Russian Jews a memorandum, in which they urged the Committee to use its endeavours to divert the stream of Jewish emigration, and, above all, of well-to-do emigrants, from America to the Holy Land. The document is of very great interest. What is called the wave of emigration, say the writers, is not so much emigration as flight. Only well-organized colonization can prove a remedy in the present calamity. A Jewish peasantry must be founded, consisting not only of the poor, but to a great extent also of the middle and intelligent classes. Palestine is the only country which affords the possibility of attaining that aim, because (1) Palestine itself, and especially Galilee and the land on the other side of the Jordan, and also Syria and Mesopotamia, contain an amount of land ready for sale and scarcely populated. The settlement of Jews there cannot meet with any objection. The Turkish Government will not only tolerate, but favour the immigration, if properly organized. An additional advantage is that in the near future no competition need be feared, because other emigrants, as a rule poor people, are not attracted by an uninhabited, uncultivated country. (2) The soil is fertile everywhere. Where no corn can be grown, wine can be produced. The Jewish wine-growers in Palestine will shortly be able to compete in the markets of Europe, and will greatly shake the monopoly of other wines. The climate of Palestine is as healthy as that of Italy, so that invalids will go there on the recommendation of their physician instead of to Italy. In the colony Rishon Le’Zion, which was founded about nine years ago, there has been up till now only one death, although there are between three hundred and four hundred people living there. (3) It is the only country able to create a peasantry, because there is no trade there. It is true that in other countries also the Jews will at first turn to agriculture; they will watch for anything offering them the means of subsistence. But a great portion will always be anxious to settle in the towns and again apply themselves to trade, whereas in Palestine the colonists will be compelled to persist in agricultural pursuits. Thus, in America, the colonists have gradually returned to the cities after millions have been wasted. But in Palestine the colonies founded by Baron Edmond de Rothschild and by the efforts of the colonists themselves are in a most thriving condition. Of course, the fact that the Jews are animated by love for Palestine and inspired by the many associations connected with the country must not be overlooked. Only in a country where every stone bears biblical reminiscences the labour is sweet to them. This idealistic motive will assist in turning traders into agriculturists. It is to this idea that some twenty larger and smaller colonies owe their existence. It is owing to this motive that the great Palestine Committee in Odessa, under the presidency of Dr. Pinsker, is able annually to give land and tools to Jewish peasants to the value of 200,000 frcs., that there is in Jaffa an Executive Committee, presided over by the engineer Vl. Temkin, that in London enormous meetings are being held in favour of the Palestine idea, that limited companies have arisen, like the Dorsche Zion in Minsk, in Kovno, in Bialystok, in Wilna, as well as in Warsaw, Riga, etc., which intend to buy land in Palestine for their members, to be repaid to them by instalments. (4) The more civilized and intelligent class of Russian Jews will also be induced to go to Palestine for the purpose of following agricultural pursuits.

The students concluded by saying that they were willing to seek for happiness and safety by readily submitting to the harvest labour in the fields of Palestine. “Then we shall be enabled to pass a happy life, for enthusiasm will make our paths straight, and provide us with a healthy courage.” The document bore sixty-four signatures.

### LXXVIII.

The Jewish Colonies in Palestine

(The figures are taken mostly from the Report of the Jewish Colonisation Association for 1910.)

Name. | Year. | Area. Hectares. | Population. | Gross Income. Francs
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
I. Judea. |  |  |  |
Mikveh-Israel⁠¹ | 1870 | 225 | 150 | —
Mozah | 1873 | 59 | 28 | —
Petach-Tikvah | 1878 | 2275 | 1500 | 466,971
Katra | 1882 | 500 | 150 | 76,415
Rishon-le-Zion | 1882 | 1180 | 1190 | 121,213
Wady-el-Chanin | 1882 | 285 | 200 | —
Jehudie | 1883 | 12 | 15 | —
Ekron (Mazkeret Mathya) | 1884 | 1275 | 300 | 144,918
Kastinieh | 1888 | 550 | 150 | —
Rehobot | 1890 | 1300 | 600 | 128,415
Artuf | 1896 | 460 | 50 | —
Ben Shemen | 1906 | 210 | 100 | —
Bir Jakob | 1907 | 200 | 70 | —
Ain Ganim | 1908 | 65 | 100 | —
Hulda | 1909 | 182 | 40 | —
II. Samaria. |  |  |  |
Zichron Jacob | 1882 | 1850 | 1000 | 183,210
Um-el-Dschemal | 1889 | 253 | 80 | —
Schweja | 1891 | 851 | 50 | —
Hedera | 1891 | 1750 | 200 | 121,915
Kefar Saba | 1894 | 635 | 30 | —
Atlit | 1897 | 460 | 50 | 18,950
Hefzi-bah | 1905 | 200 | 8 | —
Tanturah | — | 40 | 16 | —
III. Galilee. |  |  |  |
Rosh-Pinah | 1882 | 3800 | 800 | 48,096
Yessod Ha-Maaleh | 1883 | 910 | 300 | 29,913
Mishmar Ha-Yarden | 1890 | 230 | 100 | 27,453
Ain-Seitun | 1891 | 509 | 20 | —
Metula | 1896 | 1350 | 310 | 69,685
Sedjera | 1899 | 1850 | 200 | —
Mahanayim | 1899 | 100 | 100 | —
Milhamie | 1902 | 1350 | 100 | 74,100
Mescha | 1902 | 900 | 200 | 70,122
Yemma | 1902 | 2750 | 400 | 91,027
Kinnereth | 1908 | 550 | 80 | 13,300
Delaika | — | — | — | —
Mizpah | 1908 | 360 | 40 | —
Dagania | 1909 | 320 | 30 | —
Migdal | 1910 | 450 | 100 | —
Merchavyah | 1911 | 900 | 100 | —
Poriah | 1911 | 350 | 30 | —
IV. Trans-jordania. |  |  |  |
Bene Yehuda | 1888 | 315 | 83 | —

LIST OF COLONIES IN 1913.
Name of the colony. | Year of foun- dation. | Approxi- mate number of souls. | Area in Dounams. | Kind of work, institutions, etc.
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
Judea. |  |  |  |
Mikveh Israel | 1870 | 150 | 2,612 | Agricultural School of the “Alliance Israélite Universelle”; 100 pupils, 15 teachers and officials. Manager: M. Krause.
Rishon le-Zion | 1882 | — | — | Plantations. School for boys and girls. Kindergarten. Religious school “Netzah Israel.” People’s Hall (Bet Am) with library and orchestra. Great wine cellar and centre of the wine trade.
Nachlath Jehuda | 1913 | 850 | 11,402 | Plantations. Founded in commemoration of Dr. Leo (Jehuda) Pinsker. Dwellings for labourers. The colony is situated in the neighbourhood of Rishon.
Rehobot | 1890 | 800 | 14,193 | Plantations; vines, olives and almonds. School for boys and girls. Kindergarten. Religious school “Netzah Israel.” Zoological collections of Dr. Ah’roni. Place of the yearly celebration “Chagigah.”
Wadi el Chanin (Ness Ziona) | 1882 | 200 | 2,793 | Plantations. School for boys and girls. Vineyards and gardens planted by J.C.A. for the labourers of the neighbouring colonies. Kindergarten. Bee-keeping.
Ekron (Maskeret Batja) | 1884 | 350 | 12,723 | Agriculture, Plantations. School for boys and girls. Kindergarten. Religious school. Most of the colonists were engaged in agricultural work in Russia.
Katrah (Gederah) | 1884 | 200 | 5,632 | Plantations, Agriculture. School for boys and girls. Religious school “Netzah Israel.” This colony was founded by the Bilu pioneers.
Kastinie (Beer Tobia) | 1896 | 150 | 5,622 | Agriculture. Religious school “Netzah Israel.” This colony was founded by the Odessa Chovevé Zion.
Dschemama (Ruchama) | 1911 | 25 | 6,000 | In the early stages of colonization. The land was bought by two companies of Russian Jews, and is cultivated by a group of labourers.
Bir Jacob | 1907 | 25 | 2,048 | Colony of labourers. Plantations. Was founded by Dagestan Jews.
Hulda | 1909 | 50 | 1,890 | Jewish National Fund Domain. In this colony the so-called Herzl Forest (of olive trees) in commemoration of Herzl is planted.
Ben Shemen | 1906 | 120 | 2,329 | J.N.F. Domain and Farm. Second part of the Herzl Forest. Houses for Yemenite Jews. Agricultural institutions and experiments (Mr. I. Wilkanski).
Abu-Shushe | 1912 | — | 7,000 | In the early stages of colonization.
Kafruriah | 1912 | 20 | 5,000 | In the early stages of colonization. Cultivated by a group of labourers.
Artuf | 1896 | 70 | 4,670 | Agriculture. School for boys and girls. The first settlers were Bulgarian Jews, Sephardim. Now property of Mr. Isaac Goldberg of Wilna.
Mozah | 1890 | 40 | 1,100 | Agriculture, three-quarters of an hour from Jerusalem. Synagogue. Mill. Vines and vegetable-growing.
Dilb | 1913 | — | 1,800 | In the early stages of colonization.
Petah-Tikvah | 1878 | — | — | Plantations. The largest colony in the country. Schools for boys and girls. Centre of the religious schools (Dr. Auerbach). Home for orphans. Soup kitchen for labourers. Agricultural school.
Machne Yehouda | 1913 | 2,500 | 23,837 | Settlement for Yemenite Jews.
Yehoudieh | — | — | — | —
Ain Ganim (Fedje) | 1908 | — | 762 | Settlement for labourers. Founded by Chovevé Zion for the Petah-Tikvah labourers (a little house and orchard for every family).
Bir Ados | 1912 | 40 | 4,220 | In the early stages of colonization.
Kinnereth Colony | 1908 | 25 | 5,572 | In the early stages of cultivation.
Kinnereth Farm | 1909 | 60 | 3,703 | Farm of the Jewish National Fund. Farm for girls of the “Union of Women.”
Dagania (Um d’shuni) | 1910 | 45 | 3,072 | Farm of the Jewish National Fund. Farm for girls of the “Union of Women.”
Poriah | 1911 | 60 | 3,703 | Property of one of the American Achuzah Companies.
Mispah (En Katab) | 1908 | 50 | 3,420 | Agriculture.
Hattin | — | — | 2,000 | Agriculture.
Lubic | — | — | 7,082 | —
Near Tiberus | — | — | 830 | —
Migdal | 1910 | — | 5,000 | Farms and Plantations belonging to a Plantation Company.
Jessod Ha-Maaleh | 1883 | 225 | 12,228 | Agriculture. School for boys and girls.
Rosh Pinah | 1882 | 650 | 20,102 | Agriculture and Plantations. School for boys and girls. Centre of the Baron’s (I.C.A.’s) administration for the Colonies of Upper Galilee (M. Kalvaryjski).
Machanaim | — | — | 21,885 | —
Ain Zeitun | 1891 | — | 6,016 | —
Mishmar Ha-Yarden | 1884 | 125 | 7,596 | Agriculture. School for boys and girls.
Metulah | 1896 | 325 | 16,907 | School for boys and girls.
Bene Yehouda | — | 50 | — | —
Jaulan. |  |  |  |
Lands in the Jaulan | 1886 | — | 70,000 | Belong to the Jewish Colonization Association—not inhabited.
Samaria. |  |  |  |
Kafr Saba | 1892 | — | 7,321 | Plantations, mostly almonds. Occupied by a little group of labourers.
Chederah | — | — | — | Agriculture, Plantations. School for boys and girls. In the neighbourhood of the “Garden of Samaria” (Mohilewer) ethrogim (citrons) and oranges. Baron Rothschild’s eucalyptus wood, the greatest in the country.
Nachliel | — | 500 | 31,355 | Settlement for Yemenites.
Chederan Ann | — | — | 1,200 | In the early stages of colonization.
Chefzibah | — | — | 7,000 | Property of the Company “Agudath Netaim.” Olives and almonds.
Kerkur and Bedus | 1912 | — | 11,400 | In the early stages of colonization.
Zichron Jacob (Samarin) | 1882 | — | — | Plantations, Agriculture. School for boys and girls. Mostly Roumanian Jews. Centre of the Baron’s (the I.C.A.’s) administration with beautiful buildings. Library. Hospital with 20 beds.
Shveia | 1888 | — | — | School for boys and girls.
Bath Shlomo | 1888 | 1,150 | 30,668 | —
Marah | 1907 | — | — | —
Herbet Menshie | 1911 | — | — | —
Tantura | — | — | 300 | —
Atlit | 1897 | 50 | 6,800 | Experimental Station.
Lower and Upper Galilee. |  |  |  |
Merchavia (Fule) | 1911 | 100 | 9,415 | Co-operative Labourers.
Sedjera Farm | 1899 | 100 | — | Farm. Co-operative Labourers.
Sedjera Colony | 1900 | 200 | 17,717 | Agriculture.
Mesha | 1902 | — | — | Agriculture.
Melhamieh | 1902 | 200 | 16,023 | Agriculture.
Yemma | 1902 | 300 | 24,422 | Agriculture.
Bet Jen (Bet Gan) | 1904 | 100 | 4,549 | Agriculture.

### LXXIX.

The Manifesto of the Bilu (1882)

In 1882, in a little lodging-house in Galata, Constantinople, a meeting of young Jews was held. Most of those present were students, artisans or scholars. The assembly resulted in the formation of a Society called Bilu, from the initials of the words: Beth Iakob Lechu Venelcha (House of Jacob, come, let us go!). The Society had many branches, each bearing some name well known in Jewish history, as Kreti U’phleti. There was an artisans’ branch, called He’charash Ve’hamasger (carpenters and locksmiths). From headquarters was issued the following manifesto (in Hebrew):⁠—

“To our Brethren and Sisters in the Exile, Peace be with you!

“‘If I help not myself, who will help me?’ (Hillel).

“Nearly two thousand years have elapsed since, in an evil hour, after an heroic struggle, the glory of our Temple vanished in fire and our Kings and chieftains changed their crowns and diadems for the chains of exile. We lost our country, where dwelt our beloved sires. Into the Exile we took with us, of all our glories, only a spark of the fire, by which our Temple, the abode of our Great One, was engirdled, and this little spark kept us alive while the towers of our enemies crumbled to dust, and this spark leapt into celestial flame and shed light upon the faces of the heroes of our race and inspired them to endure the horrors of the Dance of Death and the tortures of the autos-da-fé. And this spark is now again kindling and will shine for us, a true pillar of fire going before us on the road to Zion, while behind us is a pillar of cloud, the pillar of oppression threatening to destroy us. Sleepest thou, O our nation? What hast thou been doing till 1882? Sleeping and dreaming the false dream of Assimilation. Now, thank God, thou art awakened from thy slothful slumber. The Pogroms have awakened thee from thy charmed sleep. Thine eyes are open to recognize the cloudy structure of delusive hopes. Canst thou listen silently to the flaunts and the mockery of thine enemies? Wilt thou yield before the might of...? Where is thine ancient pride, thine olden spirit? Remember that thou wast a nation possessing a wise religion, a law, a constitution, a celestial Temple, whose wall is still a silent witness to the glories of the Past, that thy sons dwelt in Palaces and towers, and thy cities flourished in the splendour of civilization, while these enemies of thine dwelt like beasts in the muddy marshes of their dark woods. While thy children were clad in purple and fine linen they wore the rough skins of the wolf and the bear. Art thou not ashamed to submit to them?

“Hopeless is your state in the West; the star of your future is gleaming in the East. Deeply conscious of all this, and inspired by the true teaching of our great master Hillel: ‘If I help not myself, who will help me?’ we propose to build the following society for national ends:⁠—

“1. The Society will be named Bilu, according to the motto: ‘House of Jacob, come, let us go!’ It will be divided into local branches according to the number of members.

“2. The seat of the Committee shall be Jerusalem.

“3. Donations and contributions shall be unfixed and unlimited.

“What we want:⁠—

“1. A Home in our country. It was given to us by the mercy of God, it is ours as registered in the archives of history.

“2. To beg it of the Sultan himself, and if it be impossible to obtain this, to beg that at least we may be allowed to possess it as a state within a larger state; the internal administration to be ours, to have our civil and political rights, and to act with the Turkish Empire only in foreign affairs, so as to help our brother Ishmael in his time of need.

“We hope that the interests of our glorious nation will rouse the national spirit in rich and powerful men, and that everyone, rich or poor, will give his best labours to the holy cause.

“Greeting, dear brethren and sisters.

“Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one, and our Land, Zion, is our own hope.

“God be with us!”

The Pioneers of Bilu.

The last survivors of the Bilu still in Palestine are: Israel Belkind, S. Belkind, Mrs. Feinberg (née Belkind), Dr. Chissin, Drubin, Swerdloff, Leibowitz, Hurwitz and Zaladichin.—Of the veterans of the Chovevé Zion Colonization we met in 1914—to mention only a few—Gissin in Petach Tikvah, the Stamper family (Stamper was one of the first, and the most energetic settlers, he came from Roumania); Shalit, Meerowitz, Lubman, Freimann in Rishon; Idelowitz, now in Alexandria, managing the “Carmel” Wine business; Eisenberg, Goldin, Hirschensohn, Mme. Basia Makow in Rechoboth, and of the old “Menucha Ve-Nachla” (the Warsaw Colony) settlers: Bucharski, Padua, Weinstein, Bresner, Rafalkes, Appel.

### LXXX.

Zionism and Jewish Art

It is somewhat difficult to distinguish between Jewish art, that is to say between art expressing the Jewish national spirit, and ordinary art cultivated by the Jews.

Is Jewish art possible to-day? National art requires a soil out of which to issue, and a sky towards which to unfold. We—present-day Jews—have neither. We are inhabitants of many countries, and our thoughts ascend to different skies. Within our innermost soul we know of no earth and no sky. We have no country to bear our hopes in its lap and lend firmness to the tread of our feet, and we have no national sun to bless our sowings and irradiate our day. National art requires a homogeneous community out of which it arises and for which it exists. We have merely fragments of a community, and as yet there is hardly any stirring of the part to assemble into a whole. But without these premisses national art cannot come into existence; it cannot be made. It is no hothouse growth, but healthy, sapful plant life in a free native atmosphere. No artificial conditions may be created for it, it must come and develop with the progressing renascence.⁠¹

Another question presents itself. Are, at present, Jewish artists possible, i.e. artists who respond inwardly and in their works to Jewish individuality? If we may answer this question in the affirmative, the inner possibility of Jewish art is affirmed too. Because, as a rule, two elements have to co-operate so that a national artist may be evolved: a strain of national heredity, and a national environment; the former consecutive, not acquired by experience, but brought in unconsciously, the latter rather atmospheric, and up to a certain point consciously experienced. Since, in the most favourable conditions, present-day Judaism contains only the material and the elements of transformation of national environment, a Jewish artist would have to derive his national individuality chiefly from qualities received through heredity. But this would tend to prove that the artistic aptitude of the Jewish race is still aglow like live coal under ashes, and that it only needs personalities gifted with creative energy, and in whom this aptitude concentrates, condenses and transmutes into works, to bring forth Jewish artists. Are Jewish artists possible nowadays? By way of reply it may suffice to show that there are Jewish artists, or rather that with many Jewish artists we have the impression that their art has a national character.

It is very doubtful indeed whether any clear definition can be given of Jewish national art equally acceptable from the standpoint of the nationalist and that of the artist. We shall, therefore, confine ourselves to a brief outline of the evolution of Jewish artistic activity in painting and sculpture in modern times, without entering into the old and much-discussed question of ancient Palestinian Jewish painting, sculpture, architecture, etc., medieval Jewish miniature-painting of a religious or semi-religious character and more or less Jewish origin, and the arts of poetry and music cultivated by Jews since remotest antiquity and bearing undoubtedly in some cases the national character.

The sphere of art, particularly painting and sculpture, became accessible to the Jews at the same time as the realm of modern science and European culture and education, at the beginning of the nineteenth century. The fugitives from the Ghetto began to devote themselves to the study of art with more or less zeal, according to the opportunities afforded and conditions prevailing in the countries in which they lived—in Western Europe at an earlier period and in Eastern Europe somewhat later. Having received their training in different countries, they were naturally influenced by various schools of art. Some attained great distinction and merit, deserving to be placed in the foremost rank of European art, but these repudiated their Judaism, e.g. Munkácsy; others gained locally a high reputation; the majority of them, however, did not rise above mere mediocrity.

Benjamin Ulmann, an Alsatian, born in Strasburg, 1829, was a historical and portrait painter of some merit; Jean Jules Worms, born in Paris, 1832, painted genre-pictures with a good deal of animation; Leopold Pollack, born in Lodenitz, Bohemia, 1809, was a genre-painter of much refinement. He was an artist possessed of various accomplishments, who gained distinction in artistic circles as a “Slav”; Felix Schlesinger, born in Frankfurt O/M., 1814, and educated at Paris, became a famous French painter and was much appreciated as a genre-painter; Emil Lévy, born in Paris, 1826, deserves mention as a painter of idyllic scenery that showed considerable skill combined with simplicity; Louis Neustaeter, born in Munich, 1829 (d. 1899), achieved a reputation as a portrait painter; Felix Possart, born in Munich, 1837, was a most versatile popular painter; Nathanael Sichel, born in Mainz, 1843, was a historical painter of great talent; Eugene Benjamin Fischel, born in Paris, 1821 (d. 1895), was a historical painter (“The Arrival at the Inn” at the Luxembourg Museum since 1863), and devoted himself later on to painting of miniatures; Eduard Bendemann, born in Berlin, 1811 (d. 1889) was a painter of good taste and highly artistic accomplishments: he painted for the most part historical pictures, some of which are hung in German museums; Carl Jacoby, born in Berlin, 1853, distinguished himself among German painters of his time for his remarkable correctness in drawing; Friedrich Friedlaender, born in Vienna, 1825 (d. 1895), displayed the peculiar style of “Viennois” painting of his time; Toby Rosenthal, born in New Haven, U.S.A., 1848, was a disciple of Pilloty, and endeavoured to emulate his master; Herman Junker, Frankfurt (b. 1838); Karl Blosz, Munich; Edmund Edel, Charlottenburg; Julius Ester, Munich; August Gross, Vienna; Tullo Massarini, Rome; Albert Raudnitz, Munich; Ernest Raudnitz, Paris; Emanuel Spitzer, Munich; Ernst Nelson, Berlin, and others are known more or less as painters of various subjects.

The most notable of Jewish sculptors of the earliest period were: Antoine Samuel Adam Salomon, born in La Grete, France, 1818; Max Klein, born in Hungary, 1847; Josef Rona of Budapest; Adolf Huszar of Budapest, among whose important works should be mentioned the famous monument of the Hungarian national poet, Petöfi; Johann Silbernagel of Vienna, famous for his charming little statuettes; Charles Samuel, born in Brussels, 1862, who executed the monument of the great Belgian statesman, Frère d’Orban; Moses Jacob Ezekiel, born in Richmond, Virginia, U.S.A., 1844, who established a great reputation in America and in Italy, and others.

It cannot definitely be said that this imposing host of artists belonging to the Jewish people who have enriched Art, during a comparatively short period—proving in that way the Jewish capacity for art—have in their works revealed a pronounced Jewish spirit. Jewish artists and their works are scattered all over the world, and there is no possibility even of bringing copies of their works together in one collection, so as to ascertain ad oculos whether there is, in spite of all the differences of schools and influences of environment, any trace of a special character to distinguish them from other collections of this kind, as the special character can only be distinguished when a number of pictures can be reviewed together. Seeing that the racial element is no doubt a potent factor in art, the work of the Huszars of Budapest, the Massarinis of Rome and the Possarts of Munich must have something in common because, after all, in the depths of their being, they are neither Magyars, nor Italians, nor Germans, but Jews. On the other hand, one may say that these Jews, having become an assimilated unit of the peoples among whom they had lived, been educated and worked, have no longer anything in common with and do not represent any specific school of Jewish art.

Another question is, whether the aforementioned Jewish artists have been engaged in presenting Jewish subjects (which is a question altogether removed from the previous, more fundamental question). This question can be easily answered: Jewish subjects were dealt with by Eduard Bendemann (“Boaz and Ruth,” “The Mourning Jews,” “Jeremias”); Emile Lévy “The Feast of Tabernacles” and other pictures); Moses Jacob Ezekiel (various statues of great artistic value).

Apart from these artists who proved that Jews were capable of becoming more or less important artists, there were even at an earlier period some who not only displayed generally great artistic skill, but also gave evidence of understanding something about Jewish art.

First and foremost among these pioneers was Henry Leopold Levy, born in Paris, 1840, who painted “Joash saved from the Massacre of the Grandsons of Athaliah” (1867), “Hebrew Captives weeping over the Ruins of Jerusalem” (1869), and other pictures. Being, so to speak, a divinely inspired artist, his works give proof of profound emotions and transcendental beauty and force. His mastery of dramatic effect, his extent and depth of passion remind one of an old Hebrew prophet.

Moritz Daniel Oppenheim, who was known as “Professor Oppenheim” of Frankfurt (1801‒82), is not of much importance from an artistic standpoint. In his time he was one of the most prominent illustrators of Jewish patriarchy. His “Pictures of Jewish Life” give the impression of great devotion and have gained considerable popularity through thousands of reproductions.⁠¹

A tragic figure in the annals of art was Simeon Solomon, born in Bristol, 1834 (d. in London, 1905). At an early age he showed signs of artistic ability and—as his biographers say—“came under the influence of D. G. Rossetti.” His drawings and paintings developed the mystical and sensuous tendencies of the pre-Raphaelite school to the extreme. He published a number of designs for the “Song of Songs” and reproductions of the drawings illustrating Jewish ceremonies. Keen critics of art ascribe to his genius a stimulating originality which influenced the whole pre-Raphaelite artistic school.

The pinnacle of Art, speaking generally, was reached by three prominent masters: Joseph Israels (1824‒1911), Max Liebermann, and Solomon J. Solomon, R.A.

It was Joseph Israels who succeeded in representing the twilights of the Dutch atmosphere in all their individuality and tender charm. To understand how to portray Nature and Humanity, and more especially suffering Humanity, with equal care and art, and to bring into relief their organic interaction; to represent rural scenes, not as a stage setting but as an atmosphere, not forcible but imbued with poetic feeling; to invest human nature with a breath of such delicate lyricism that the impression created is one of love rather than of mere beauty; that is the chief characteristic of Israels’ art, which to us seems so entirely Jewish. It is the enchanting melancholy, the gentle, delicate longing, the half-uttered tones, the soft harmonies which are divined rather than seen or heard that make Israels appear so extraordinarily modern. It is not merely because Israels was a Jew, not merely because his greatest works represent Jewish subjects, but because his art was characterized by a rich poetic fancy, by kindliness and melancholy, and at the same time by a priestly solemnity and a great simplicity which harmonize so wonderfully with the deepest emotions of the Jewish Psyche, that we are justified in regarding Israels as a national-Jewish painter. We are acquainted with the Jewish Rabbi, the calm, discerning, introspective thinker, seeking for the great ethos of existence in all the passing phenomena of life. Joseph Israels was a painter-rabbi. He painted with the same fervour as a midrash scholar would teach, with which a Jehuda-ha-Levi would sing. A “Gaon” in the domain of Art, a “Baal-Shem” who works spells, causing angels to appear not by means of prayers and texts; not by means of cabbalistic incantations, but by means of colours, light and shade effects. Where so visible as in Israels, creations are the groups of Divine sparkle flying about the world, the creative embodiment of the “naked souls” thirsting for existence, peace and incarnation of which the Cabbala speaks with so much enthusiasm and of which Chassidism dreams.

In all his paintings Israels succeeded in effecting a concentration in composition which focussed all interest upon the soul, upon sensation. Israels has not been content to fix by the masterly stroke of the brush a moment of dramatic intensity surprised in his model [as for instance, in the Writer of the Law (The Thora-Writer)], or the influences of the moment upon the emotions and expressions of the subject, but the soul itself and the whole soul-state. This directness was attained by Israels through the double study of man and his destiny in direct relation to nature.

Encyclopædias give the names of his masters and types in Amsterdam and Paris. But had Israels been a mere follower of his masters, then his name would not be found in encyclopædias. For decades, for many decades, he, the versatile painter, devoted himself to historical painting. No catalogue has rescued the titles from oblivion. When questioned concerning his early works, he answered the present writer with one of his characteristic subtle smiles: “How should I know where they are?” It was not until he had attained full maturity, or according to general ideas, after he had well passed maturity, that Israels became what he now is: he found himself after the sun of his life had passed the meridian.

Max Liebermann regards himself as a disciple of Israels, but is considered by others to be superior in the brilliancy and versatility of his genius. He was practically the father of the German “Secession,” and is the greatest living painter in Germany and one of the greatest in the world. Solomon J. Solomon is one of the most celebrated English painters. Dignified and serene, he has a wonderfully extensive and many-sided grasp of his art. As to Jewish art, it is a disputable point whether Liebermann’s pictures bear indications of a pronounced Jewish character—some writers having maintained that such is the case. Israels’ “Thora-Writer,” and particularly his “Son of an Old People”—which is justly supposed to have been inspired by the new national movement—appeal undoubtedly to the Jewish consciousness by their exceptional impressiveness. The picture which established Solomon J. Solomon’s reputation was his “Samson and Delilah,” while his “Allegory” of 1904 is said to depict the triumph of Judaism as the last and only religion of the world.

In closing the review of this epoch, mention must be made of Lesser Ury of Berlin, an artist of great severity and sadness, whose “Jeremias” and other pictures display some originality singularly independent of influences from without—in which fact some critics thought they could trace some visions of Jewish awakening.

A similar change was noticeable in Eastern Europe during the period of transition which began there some decades later than in the West. Here, too, some young Jews entered the academies of art just as others went to the universities for scientific study, but, of course, with that difference in the prospects of success which distinguish art from science, that art depends more on natural gifts than on capacity to study. Some Polish, Galician and Russian Jews pursued their studies in Cracow or Petrograd, some others studied at Munich and Paris. Some deliberately emphasizing their national origin and country, others showing, through their new environment, a leaning towards a diversity of practical and theoretical motives.

Joseph Redlich (1821‒81) was an engraver of world-wide fame during the first half of the century. Alexander Lesser of Warsaw (1819‒91), the son of a Jewish merchant, was described as “the father of Polish historical painting.” Of no importance as a painter, the curious fact remains that this typical Polish Jew was in his time appreciated as a painter of Polish national history (the first and most important publishers of illustrated books and periodicals in Warsaw were Merzbach, Gliksberg, Lewenthal, the son of a Hebrew teacher, and Wolf, who was of Jewish origin).

Leopold Horowitz, born in Hungary in 1831, who lived many years in Warsaw, and since the expulsion of foreign Jews from Russia in Vienna, has the twofold distinction of being an eminent portrait painter of European fame, and a well-known and noble-minded Jew. His Jewish picture “The Ninth of Ab” (the anniversary of the Destruction of the Temple) is a work of grand style, exquisitely finished; his portraits, too, gained highest praise. He is much interested in Jewish matters, and was prominently associated with the foundation of the “Jewish Museum” at Vienna.

One of the greatest painters of the last generation in Russia was Isaac Levitan, born in 1860 (d. 1900), the master of Russian landscape. This Jew of the Russian Ghetto taught Russian artists to abandon mere topography for a poetical treatment of landscape scenery. He did not only paint admirably the rich purple of the northern sunset, the thin clouds, dawn and darkness, but also the very soul of the landscape. A writer in the (anti-Jewish) Novoye Vremia had to admit that “this full-blooded Jew knew as no other man, how to make us realize and love our plain and homely country-scene.” Levitan’s pictures adorn the Tretjakov Museum at Moscow, and have the right of undisturbed shelter in that city that was not unconditionally granted to their originator. Leonid Pasternak, born in 1862, is an important Russian painter, particularly known for his connections with Tolstoi.

The most wonderful romance of Jewish vitality and force of self-regeneration is the story of Mark Antokolski (1842‒1900). Whatever modern critics may think of the special value of his master-works—classical or pseudo-classical—from an up-to-date point of view, the fact remains that this Lithuanian Jew, who was a son of poor parents at Vilna, brought up in the atmosphere of the Cheder (religious school) and the Vilna Schulhof, which is the most typical and best known centre of what is distinctly Jewish, is recognized, as far as sculpture is concerned, in Paris the metropolis of art. He introduced Russian sculpture into European art and his works have been highly appreciated, seeing with what intense delight and admiration they have been regarded by the highest in his native land, where he was entrusted with the task of executing the greatest national monuments, but his works have also received the highest praise throughout the world. Bernstamm Aronson and ♦Ginzburg, distinguished by exceptional maturity in study and powers of concentration, the former an eminent master where powers of imagination and fascination were concerned, the latter of an observant, subtle intelligence, which proved so useful to him in the careful reproduction of details dealing with nature. They are devoted to the art of sculpture in Paris and in Russia.

All these artists proved that Jews can be artists. Jewish art in Jewish subjects was here and there to be observed. Isidore Kaufmann, a Hungarian Jew, born in 1853, executed some appreciable work in genre-painting of Polish-Jewish life. He displayed in his “Visit of the Rabbi,” “Talmud Students” and other little pictures, a great simplicity and freshness, and a delightful sense of humour, but these pictures, humorous as they are, have merely anecdotes for the outlines of their scheme. A real awakening of Jewish art in a higher sense was left to the present period of the Jewish National Revival and Zionism.

This new period was inaugurated by two Polish-Galician Jewish artists, who, while their respective artistic achievements were of different value, were instrumental in opening new perspectives for Jewish art; these were Moritz Gottlieb and Ephraim Moses Ha’Cohen Lilien.

Moritz Gottlieb, born in a small village in Galicia, about 1860, was a disciple of the great Polish national painter Jan Matejko. Of great imaginative power and intense feeling, a real artist, he succeeded in mastering the intricacies of modern painting. He soon became a favourite of his tutor, and was much admired in artistic circles at Cracow, where his works were immensely appreciated on account of the suave and well-balanced style of his pictures. His prospects of a great future increased with his popularity. It is said—se non é vero é ben trovato—that when he expressed his intention of devoting himself to Polish historical painting, Matejko remarked: “My son, you are a Jew; you cannot weep on the graves of Polish kings; leave it to others.” So Gottlieb devoted himself to Jewish subjects, the most important of which was his admirable “Jew Praying in the Synagogue.” This masterpiece so full of inspiration was more than a picture; it was a message to Jewish artists, one of the most simple and impressive: “You shall go back to your own people; you shall find and see your own greatness and glory; you shall be your own selves again!”

The hand of death removed him in early manhood—at the end of the eighties of the last century—Moritz Gottlieb’s name was cherished by the new generation of Jewish artists as that of a noble pioneer who had ushered in the era of Jewish art.

About ten years later, Lilien, having terminated his studies at Munich, settled in Berlin, and got in touch with the young Zionist intellectual movement. By means of his illustrations in black and white, which combined modernism with archaic forms, permeated by the Hebrew spirit, he soon succeeded in introducing a new element in artistic skill, and played a prominent part in shaping the modern tendencies of a somewhat independent young Jewish art. As to the artistic value and originality of his remarkable and exceedingly fruitful art, opinions may differ considerably, yet there is no doubt, as a master of an unique style of drawing, touch, finish and execution, and as a pioneer and advocate of methods expressing Jewish aspirations, types and ideas, he is unrivalled, and his works have had a far-reaching effect in encouraging Jewish artists to devote themselves to the extension of Jewish art on a self-dependent and self-inspiring basis. The message of Gottlieb and the impulses of Lilien can be easily traced, even among the important Jewish artists who have been their contemporaries or have lived at a later period and have occupied honoured positions in general as well as in Jewish art.

Samuel Hirschenberg, Leopold Pilichowski and Henry Glitzenstein form, with all the distinction of their individualistic and high artistic qualifications, a sort of triumvirate in the realm of art. All these came from the same country—Poland—and from the same district of that country; they were contemporaries in age as well as in their outlook on life, seeing that all these represent the new, emancipated intellectual type of the Polish Jew with a touch of Jewish nationalism of the eighties, who differ so distinctly from the old type of the “assimilation” Jews of a previous period.

Samuel Hirschenberg excelled in the painting of a variety of subjects. His distinctness and fine blending of colours, his skill in creating broad and accurate outlines of figures are indeed remarkable. He was a modest, earnest and most industrious worker of really artistic aspirations. He had a strong predisposition for big canvases and was averse from anecdotal subjects. He was unable to paint anything of a small type. The Jewish people, its suffering, and his persecuted brethren formed the subjects of his brush. “Golus” (copies of which are well known) is a specimen of his art and outlook. Of keen perception, the life-blood of Jewry pulsing through his veins, he painted his “Wandering Jew,” presenting with tragic force the synthesis and the resentment caused by Jewish Martyrdom.

He was one of those who had penetrated most deeply and powerfully the tragedy of the Golus, with all its great and desperate dreadfulness and all its abysmal horror, who felt it within their innermost marrow and blood, who went through life with its sad brand on their brows. The brush with which he painted was the master’s heart, and the colour—his blood, the warm life-blood. The blood which has been flowing for thousands of years from the ever-open wound of the creative genius and of the nation. He dreamt to base the future upon sacred ruins. He deemed as nothing the laurels of the Golus as compared with the feeble light which began to glow more and more vividly far away in the old country and in his bosom, which overflowed with sadness and longing. He was a priest of art and a priest of the Jewish renaissance. During the last years of his life he went to Jerusalem to take part in the art work of Bezalel, and died there—as he had lived—upright and resigned to his fate, hiding from the world the sufferings of a noble soul.

Leopold Pilichowski is quite different in artistic temperament. Cheerful, thorough and pleasant, guided by a truly artistic instinct, he possesses the natural gifts of an eminent artist, being a keen observer of life, of charming personality, and an enthusiastic worker. He achieved a high reputation by reason of his admirable blending of colours, his excellent and attractive style, the life-like expression of his portraits and the careful attention bestowed upon details. In France he attained high distinction, and recently also in this country where his works have found considerable appreciation. But the favourite subject of his art is Polish Jews. His picture entitled “Wearied,” the two figures of old wearied Polish Jewish pilgrims—is in conception and execution a masterpiece; this picture has been so frequently reproduced that it is now one of the most popular and most impressive Jewish pictures of the time. He expresses more forcibly than any other contemporary painter the intense fervour of Jewish prayer. He endeavours to penetrate the secrets of Polish-Jewish pathos in his charming picture “The Feast of our Rejoicing” and in another, entitled “Sorrow” which, probably, no other painter would have been able to understand. He describes and creates an historical record for the type of the Polish Jew as he knew him—in the fervour of his prayers, in the glory of his devotion, in the attractiveness of his misery.

Henry Glitzenstein, who now lives in Rome, is the son of a Melamed (religious teacher) in the little village of Turek, Poland. In Italy and throughout Europe, where his works have at several exhibitions gained highest distinction, he is recognized as being one of the greatest sculptors of the age. In ability, taste, gracefulness, originality and invention, he is a sculptor-poet, who excels all Jewish sculptors that ever lived, and even many non-Jewish artists of standing. It is not presumptuous to assert that Glitzenstein is one of the most modern sculptors, whose modernism does not merely amount to the acceptance of a certain “fad” but means original and constructive ability. He, too, is a dreamer of the Ghetto, but at the same time a master of a living art. His “Messiah,” the incarnation of the mighty, asleep yet about to awaken to any movement towards the Jewish future, is a work of an enormous conception.

Hirschenberg’s “Wandering Jew,” Pilichowski’s “Wearied” and Glitzenstein’s “Messiah,” though undoubtedly independent individual works, have yet to a certain extent been influenced by the new national spirit set aglow by Gottlieb and Lilien, and by the literature of the Jewish Revival.

To this category of Jewish artists belongs Hermann Struck, who combines artistic refinement with orthodox Jewish devotion and Zionist aspirations, a master of the first water, who has executed etchings of Israels’ works and those of other great artists, and has a fine record for original portrait painting, Palestinian landscapes, and other drawings of exceptional skill; Moses Maimon, a distinguished Russian-Jewish painter, the author of the very popular “Marranos in Spain,” and of other pictures of value; Jehuda Epstein, who has given proof of possessing great power of imagination by his great sketch “Maccabean,” a picture made for Herzl, who had it in his studio; Minkowski (Warsaw), whose Pogrom pictures are of really artistic value; Pffeffermann (Pan), a man of considerable artistic achievement, who has been engaged on the teaching staff of the Bezalel; Weinles and Altmann (Poland), who are responsible for various pictures and studies of Jewish subjects; Wachtel (Galicia), who emulated Lilien; and Hochmann (Cracow), who was guided by Glitzenstein’s works. In Russia there are the painters: A. A. Maneritsch, M. L. Schafrom, A. B. Lachowski, and the sculptors: F. Bloch, M. L. Dillon, J. A. Troupianski, of the younger generation, and—of the older generation—Gabowitsch, J. J. Brodski, who represent modern Jewish art. In the important colony of artists and art students in Paris, including Leo Minsenberg, Leopold Gottlieb, Cylkow, Markus, Kramstück, Elie Nadelman and others of Warsaw, a real Jewish awakening has been observed, particularly among the younger members of the colony.

Special mention should be made of the well-known landscape painter Abraham Neumann of Sierpce, Poland, who has a fine long record of artistic work. He participated most actively in stimulating Jewish artistic activity in Poland and Galicia.

With regard to sculpture, Alfred Nossig has also to be mentioned. Nossig can boast, among his various accomplishments, also that of an able sculptor con amore. In some of his works he has dealt impressively with national Jewish subjects.

Another Jewish sculptor of note should be mentioned, viz. F. Beer of Paris (died in 1910). He was an ardent Zionist and a great personal friend of Herzl, and contributed his share to Zionist artistic work (the badges of the Congress).

In this country, Will Rothenstein has become very popular through several of his pictures devoted to scenes of Jewish life; Isaac Snowman and his brother Louis [Conrad] are artists of recognized accomplishments, and have painted valuable pictures of this kind. Wolmark is well known as an artist of exquisite taste and idealistic aspirations. His inclination has led him to the rendering of subjects dealing with Jewish life, so admirably dealt with in some of the pictures. He is a strong individualist and truth-seeker, and has in recent times manifested a decided inclination for futurism, of which he is one of the champions. Jacob Epstein is the most representative of sculptors and combines genius with technical skill.

The foregoing survey of Jewish activity forces us to the following conclusions:⁠—

I. The numerous Jewish works of art, especially in painting and sculpture of such marked ability, with no previous history, patronage or encouragement, and produced under most unfavourable circumstances in a comparatively short time, showed that Jewish genius was as much capable of development in the sphere of art as in music, poetry or the drama, and has made its influence felt at every opportunity.

II. The great artistic value—with few exceptions—of the works of these masters who either were acquainted with the older Jewish traditions, like Israels, H. P. Levy, Ezekiel, or who had come direct from the Ghetto, like Antokolski, compared with the Assimilationist Jews who were either satellites or plagiarists, proves that, even during the period previous to the present national Revival, Jewish consciousness (like any other deep racial consciousness) has stimulated the vigour and originality of artistic activity.

III. The beneficial effects of the National movement in Jewish artistic craftsmanship can be observed in two directions:⁠—

(a) in the artistic value of the productions, especially with regard to Jewish subjects, and

(b) in the degree of influence of the artistic activity on the Jewish people.

With regard to the first point, the progress made can be easily gauged by comparing, for instance, Bendemann and Emil Levy with Gottlieb, or Oppenheim with Lilien, and so on. Jewish life at the period of Assimilation, like the literature of that period was presented essentially in apologetic terms and addressed itself always, consciously or unconsciously, to Gentiles, as if to say: “Think of us, we are really not as detestable as you believe us to be, we are rather attractive”; but, on the other hand, national artists say: “We are what we are,” and more than that, seeing that to deal with Jewish subjects from a national standpoint is self-centred, and therefore more of a psychological question. We are what we are, neither better nor worse than others: we endeavour to know ourselves, and we want to see our images reflected in our own art. Oppenheim’s Jews are so idealistically exaggerated that one would not recognize them if one were to meet them in their shops on the “Zeil” in Frankfurt, while Gottlieb’s Jews are so orientally peculiar, that meeting them in the market-place dealing with tapestry one would have the impression that these dealers are descendants of oriental princes, although the artist had no intention of producing this impression.

The second point is still more important. The art of the period of Assimilation, like the active character of Assimilation, is essentially individualistic and aristocratic, while the art of the period is decidedly of a collective and democratic character. Logically and psychologically, there can be no movement of Assimilation in masses, because Assimilation must be opposed to cohesion or a movement for the cohesion of Jews, except for ritual purposes. A Jew becomes a doctor, a lawyer or a painter—the more he succeeds in his career among Gentiles, the less he is brought in contact with the Jewish masses: nobility of character or generosity may make him a philanthropist to the masses whom he may endeavour to patronize; on the other hand, the absence of these qualities will make him wholly indifferent, but anyhow the chain of natural and simple intercourse is broken. This was necessarily the course of Assimilation in every direction, and also showed us the relationship of Jewish artists to the Jewish masses. All those Huszars, Ronas, Schlesingers and Pollacks had no inclination and no possibility whatever of acquiring the artistic education of the people from whom they sprang. In this respect the situation has considerably improved owing to the national movement, Chovevé Zion and Zionism. Now, many Jewish artists live among the people, and are influenced by them. Not only in Russia, where there is now a strong movement for propaganda ♦and mutual help among Jewish artists (under the tutorship of Ilja Ginzburg)—a movement which was unthinkable in the time of the Assimilation tendencies—but even in Paris a tendency has made itself felt in this direction in the Jewish colony of artists in recent times. Among the masses in the East of London, too, there is an Organization called Ben Uri, for the propaganda of art. Lectures are arranged, instruction is given, and popular articles are published on various subjects of art. That popularity is due to the activity of the publishing firms Phœnix, Libanon, the monthly Ost und West, and other publications.

Summing up the effects of relationship between Jewish art and Zionism, we see that Zionism has played its part in the revival of Jewish art. On the other hand, Jewish art has contributed much to the propaganda of Zionism. It cannot be too often repeated that the creative and active forces of Zionism have always been literature, education and art: they have stimulated the people’s hearts and minds, they have opened the people’s eyes and enlisted their generosity. One of the greatest agencies of Zionist propaganda has been the Bezalel, the work of the enthusiastical Jewish artist Boris Schatz, who is in his own art a disciple of Antokolski, but who stands himself, unrivalled, as a pioneer in the propaganda of Jewish artistic activity in Palestine.

It is not hazarding too much to assert, that with an important development of colonization and education in Palestine we are going to see a really original Jewish art. But even in the Diaspora, the awakening of Jewish consciousness will ennoble, popularize and strengthen Jewish art. Jewish artists should not pursue any particular tendency in addition to their own art; they should be only artists, and true to themselves. Art must be free, and being free it will—as a necessary and natural consequence—eventually offer ample scope for the national genius.

### LXXXI.

Progress of Zionism in the West since 1897

1. England

In England Zionist propaganda was very much hampered for want of an influential and well-supported Hebrew press and literature—which, after all, form the most powerful factor in the national propaganda, and an intellectual weapon in the struggle, the more so because through them can be maintained a direct closer touch and personal relations with Palestine. These two factors have made Zionism in Eastern Europe something more than a formal organization governed by certain statutes; it has now become a living force. Zionist propaganda there has also suffered from want of extensive university groups that have brought a great educational force into the Movement in continental countries. In England, where class divisions are so pronounced, in ideas, language and customs, and where the pressure of the Jewish problem from outside is not felt, the difficulties in the way of Zionist propaganda were naturally much greater. Besides these difficulties, there was another fact that did not fail to influence the position. The centralization of the financial institutions and the greater facility for political organization were no doubt of considerable advantage, as they afforded English Zionism in this respect means of propaganda not accessible to the Movement in other countries. But there was also an important drawback, namely, the Movement has been concentrated on these two appeals. The consequences of such a development manifested themselves in two directions: in the influence upon the Organization, and in the effect on non-members of the Organization. As for the internal influences, although the general Zionist work might have appeared here as elsewhere to be of the greatest importance, nevertheless it must be admitted that the financial institutions necessarily absorbed more energy, and carried more weight, while observers from outside were faced more directly than in any other country with this particular aspect of the Zionist Organization. In Eastern Europe, the public outside of Zionism was also made aware of the existence of a political scheme and financial matters; but what they realized most immediately and forcibly was above all an intellectual activity, a new system of education, a new attitude towards all questions of the day and a new and close relationship with Palestine. In England, outsiders saw little or nothing of what others saw elsewhere. All they realized was a political scheme which they naturally endeavoured to magnify and to exaggerate for the sake of controversy, clinging obstinately to their own opposition to “Utopia,” and looking at the comparatively meagre financial means as something that was unable to impress them to any great extent.

Yet they were greatly mistaken. Zionism in England was in its essentials not in the least different from what it is in Russia or anywhere else. It must be admitted that it has not yet sufficiently developed all the various branches of its activity, but this is not due to a difference in its principle, but to the divergence in local conditions for which the idea is not responsible. If all its potentialities have not yet been developed, there is no reason why they should not be so very soon. Notwithstanding all kinds of difficulties and domestic controversies, Zionism in England was propagated and furthered by a great number of able workers. Among those who took a leading part in the work in England since the earliest period may be found: the Haham Dr. Moses Gaster, Joseph Cowen, Herbert Bentwich, the late S. B. Rubenstein, L. J. Greenberg, Jacob de Haas, Jacob Moser, Charles Dreyfus, the late Rabbi A. Werner, the late A. Vecht, the late A. Lozinsky, the late A. Ginzberg, L. Kessler, Percy Baker, the late J. Massel, E. Ish-Kishor, M. Shire, J. Cohen-Lask, Rev. J. K. Goldbloom, the late Rev. David Wasserzug, Dr. S. Fox, E. W. Rabbinowicz, Miss H. Weisberg, Dr. Moses Umanski, H. M. Raskin, H. Comor, the late H. M. Benoliel, Solomon Cohen, E. Guilaroff, and others.

Somewhat later—not exactly in the literal sense—the older leaders were joined by new workers of influence and eminent ability. The most notable are: Dr. Ch. Weizmann, Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rev. Isaiah Raffalovich, Leon Simon, Harry Sacher, Norman Bentwich, Albert M. Hyamson, Dr. S. Brodetsky, S. Landman, Leonard Stein, Rev. M. H. Segal, Bertram Benas, Joseph Jacobs, Paul Goodman, Israel Cohen, Dr. Joseph Hochman, Samuel Cohen, Israel Sieff, Simon Marks, Dr. Salis Daiches, F. S. Spiers, and others. In University and intellectual circles also important progress in Zionist thought could be perceived. One of the most prominent of the intellectual Zionists is the Haham Dr. Gaster. He was born at Bucharest in 1857. Having matriculated there, he proceeded to the Jewish Seminary, Breslau, where in due course he received his rabbinical diploma. He is also a Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Leipsic. He published numerous important works on the Roumanian language and literature, and on the subject of folklore, on which he is one of the first authorities. He has written text-books for general and Jewish schools in Roumania. His compendium of Scripture history has been adopted as a standard work throughout the country. He produced the first excellent translation of the Hebrew Prayer Book into Roumanian. In 1885 he left Roumania and came to England, where he was appointed Haham of the Spanish and Portuguese Congregations in succession to the late Haham Dr. Artom (1887). This office he resigned in 1918. He brought new life into those congregations and largely aided by his valuable literary work in the promotion of oriental studies in England. Gaster was an ardent Zionist long before the First Congress. Profoundly touched by the unfortunate position of the Jews in Roumania, he assisted in establishing the first Jewish colony in Palestine, Samarin (Zichron Jacob)—and organized meetings in Roumania which were addressed by Laurence Oliphant and others. Indeed it was the part he took in these matters that, in some measure, led to his expulsion from Roumania. In England he joined the Zionist Organization from its very beginning. His learned speeches and writings gave a great impetus to the propaganda.

Herbert Bentwich, a zealous and devoted supporter of the Jewish colonization in Palestine, was as well known in the Chovevé Zion movement as he is in the Zionist Organization. He was the organizer and leader of the Maccabean Pilgrimage to Palestine of 1897. In several articles in the English press he answered the attacks made upon Zionism. Being a lawyer by profession his services were invaluable in the foundation of the Zionist financial institutions. A well-known figure at the Zionist Congresses, he is a most active worker in local affairs, especially in the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, in connection with which organization he recently helped to found a land company for the purchase of land in Palestine. He is indefatigable in the propaganda of Zionism, and one of the few English Zionists who succeeded in making Zionism a tradition of his family by means of the closest personal contact with Palestine.

Israel Zangwill may be described as one of the most distinguished propagandists of the Zionist idea during the period 1899 until 1906, when he founded the Territorialist Organization. To this brilliant writer and orator belongs the credit of having contributed greatly towards making Zionism popular in England. An English writer of enchanting dexterity, possessed of a keen sense of humour and capacity to appeal to the crowd, he discredited the old idea of Assimilation. Though his views on the future of Palestine have undergone considerable modification, his pamphlets and early speeches are still useful and appreciated in Zionism.

Mr. Joseph Cowen, who takes a most active and responsible part in Zionist work, particularly with regard to the financial institutions, plays an important part in central as well as in local organization. He was for some years a member of the Actions Committee and one of the most prominent representatives at Zionist Congresses and Conferences. Mr. L. J. Greenberg’s name is found in the Zionist records of the first few years in connection with the movement in England, as well as internationally, and in his work he has always associated himself with Mr. Cowen. He was always deemed resourceful and an energetic propagandist in England, and was for a certain period a member of the central management of the Organization. He was Honorary Secretary of the English Zionist Federation, and a member of the Actions Committee, and in these capacities did admirable work. Both Mr. Cowen and Mr. Greenberg were deeply attached to Herzl, and assisted him in his work in England.

The late S. B. Rubenstein was one of the veterans of the old Chovevé Zion, and as a representative Zionist was very active in the movement since the First Congress. Mr. Jacob de Haas, a journalist of great versatility, combined with great devotion and inexhaustible enthusiasm for the cause, worked hard in England, and now continues his useful work zealously in the United States. Mr. Leopold Kessler, a faithful adherent to Zionism since its inception, has been active, partly in South Africa and partly in England, more especially in connection with the financial institutions and the Actions Committee. The Rev. Isaiah Raffalovich, Rabbi of the New Hebrew Congregation, Liverpool, a native of Jerusalem, an inspired Chovev Zion and Zionist, is doing excellent propaganda work. The late Joseph Massel, of Manchester, a man of great Jewish learning, a Hebrew writer and translator, was a well-known and popular figure at the Zionist Conferences in England, as well as at the Zionist Congresses. He was one of the few Hebraists who introduced an element of Hebrew literature into the Zionist propaganda in England. The late Aron Vecht (1856‒1908), a man of striking individuality, was an ardent Jewish nationalist. He founded the weekly paper, The Jewish Standard, and was one of the founders of the Chovevé Zion Association in London, and later, when Herzl launched the Zionist movement, became one of his most devoted followers.

Mr. Jacob Moser, J.P. (Lord-Mayor of Bradford, 1910‒11), deserves an honourable place among the Zionist leaders. A prominent philanthropist in his city, and a devoted Zionist, he has been for a number of years a leading representative of the Movement and was elected a member of the Actions Committee, and attended most Zionist Congresses, where he gained great popularity. He visited Palestine and became a generous and zealous patron of Hebrew education there. The Hebrew Gymnasium at Jaffa, which is the first and foremost Hebrew educational institution in the Holy Land, was practically founded by him, and owes its existence and maintenance to his exertions and generosity. Dr. Charles Dreyfus, J.P., of Manchester, has associated himself with the Zionist movement now for some years. He has been a member of the Actions Committee and President of the English Zionist Federation.

Some Zionists have worked, and are now working, with great enthusiasm in the sphere of Hebrew education. The method of Hebrew teaching known as “Ibrith B’Ibrith” (Hebrew in Hebrew), which was first introduced by Zionists into Palestine and Russia, was first recommended in England by Mr. David Yellin, of Jerusalem, at public meetings addressed by him on his visits to this country, and was strongly supported by Mr. Israel Abrahams. In the work of encouraging the diffusion of the Hebrew language in England those most active were: in London—Rev. J. K. Goldbloom—and before his removal to the United States Mr. E. Ish-Kishor, and—in Liverpool—Dr. Samuel Fox, an able Hebraist and educator, formerly editor of the Ha-Magid, assisted by a number of efficient Hebrew teachers, Mr. Maximovski (now in America), Mr. Rumianck, Mr. Wassilewsky, Mr. Port, Mr. A. Doniach, the young Hebrew poet Pinski, Mr. Beilin, Mr. Hodes, and others. There are in London, as well as in the provinces, some Hebrew-speaking societies and groups that work for the maintenance of Hebrew as a living tongue. The late J. Suwalski, an able Talmudist and Hebrew writer, edited and published in London for some years a Hebrew weekly, Ha-Yehoudi, under most difficult conditions. After his death the publication of this paper was suspended, but in Hebraist circles a propaganda is again on foot for the purpose of securing the reappearance of a Hebrew weekly.

In tracing the more recent development of Zionism in England, a number of representatives and workers of a prominently intellectual and literary character cannot escape our attention: Dr. Samuel Daiches, Lecturer in Biblical Exegesis and Talmudics at Jews’ College, and author of numerous works on Assyriologian, Biblical Babylonian and Talmudical Babylonian subjects, a scholar of recognized merits, has an excellent Zionist record as a delegate to the Congresses, a Zionist writer, and as a most faithful propagandist of the national idea and the Hebrew language. His brother, Dr. Salis Daiches, Minister of the Edinburgh Hebrew Congregation and author of studies on philosophy, is an active member of the Organization. Both are faithful to the traditions of their old rabbinical family and particularly to that of their father, the venerable Rabbi Israel Hayim Daiches of the Great Bet Ha-Midrash Congregation, Leeds, who many years ago, when Rabbi at Neustadt-Shirvint, Russia, was one of the first of the orthodox Rabbis to identify themselves with the Zionist idea.

The beginning of a University movement and the literary activity in connection with Zionism are, undoubtedly, remarkable features of Zionist development in England in recent years and deserve due consideration. Most prominent in this useful and promising movement are: Leon Simon, Norman Bentwich, Harry Sacher, Albert M. Hyamson, Dr. Selig Brodetsky, Samuel Landman, Dr. Joseph Hochman, Leonard Stein, the Rev. M. H. Segal and others, who, as Hebrew scholars and English writers of a highly cultivated literary taste, have founded University Zionist Societies, and are frequently lecturing on Zionist and general Jewish literary subjects. During the four years of the European War, despite the pressure on their time and energies which their non-Zionist duties, in most instances in the service of the State, involved, they produced a Zionist literature remarkable not only in all the circumstances for its quantity, but also for its quality. They established and produced two periodicals, The Zionist Review, the monthly organ of the English Zionist Federation (editors, Mr. A. M. Hyamson and Mr. Leon Simon), in a sense the successor to The Zionist, which ceased publication on the outbreak of war, and Palestine, the weekly organ of the British Palestine Committee (editor, Mr. Harry Sacher). Of books all of a high quality and a permanent character, Zionism and the Jewish Future (editor, Mr. H. Sacher), which immediately became the standard work in England on Zionism, and passed into a second edition which soon became exhausted, Zionism—Problems and Views (editors, Mr. Paul Goodman and Mr. Arthur D. Lewis), Palestine—The Rebirth of an Ancient People (Mr. Albert M. Hyamson), Palestine of the Jews (Mr. Norman Bentwich), and England and Palestine (Mr. H. Sidebotham), published by the British Palestine Committee, have all appeared since 1914. At the same time the same small band of writers have been active in the periodical press, and by means of a number of pamphlets, which deal with different aspects of Zionism and the Palestine question, have had considerable influence on public opinion, Jewish and non-Jewish, throughout the English-speaking world. Some members of this small band have also written on Zionism and Palestine in some of the leading American periodicals. Without being by any means exhaustive, one may mention among recent pamphlets: The Case of the Anti-Zionists (Leon Simon), Great Britain, Palestine and the Jews—(1) Jewry’s Celebration of its National Charter, (2) A Survey of Christian Opinion, What is Zionism? (Dr. Chaim Weizmann and Dr. Richard Gottheil), The Jewish Colonization in Palestine: Its History and its Prospects (S. Tolkowsky), A Jewish Palestine: The Jewish Case for a British Trusteeship (H. Sacher), Zionism and the Jewish Religion (F. S. Spiers), Zionism and the Jewish Problem (Leon Simon), A Hebrew University for Jerusalem (H. Sacher), Zionism and Socialism (Lewis Rifkind), Jewish Emancipation: The Contract Myth (H. Sacher), History and Development of Jewish Colonization in Palestine (L. Kessler), Zionism, its Organization and Institutions (S. Landman), Jewish Colonization and Enterprise in Palestine (I. M. Sieff), Zionism and Jewish Culture (Norman Bentwich), Zionism and the State (H. Sacher), Zionism and the Hebrew Revival (E. Miller), Hebrew Education in Palestine (S. Philipps), British Projects for the Restoration of the Jews (A. M. Hyamson), Cosmopolitanism and Zionism (Arthur D. Lewis), The Jewish National Fund (Joseph D. Jacobs), Zionism in the Bible (N. Sokolow), Achievements and Prospects in Palestine (S. Tolkowsky), Hebrew Education in Palestine (Leon Simon), and a number of the essays of “Achad Ha’am,” translated into English by Mr. Leon Simon.

Of important articles in the principal English weeklies and reviews may be mentioned “Palestine and Jewish Nationalism,” by Mr. Leon Simon, in The Round Table, “The Development of Political Zionism,” by Mr. Israel Cohen in The Fortnightly Review, by Mr. Albert M. Hyamson in the Quarterly Review, and also several other articles by the same writer in The New Statesman and The New Europe. The Times and The Manchester Guardian, not to mention other daily periodicals, have given valuable and frequent support, in their editorial columns and elsewhere, to the Zionist cause.

It is chiefly due to the exertions of Mr. Leon Simon, who stands at the head of the University Zionist Organization, that the revival of interest in living Hebrew has spread among the young intellectuals. It is worthy of notice that this young scholar, who was born and educated in this country, was so strongly inspired by the Zionist idea that he acquired so thorough a knowledge of the Hebrew language that he is now a good Hebrew speaker, as well as a highly appreciated contributor to the Hebrew monthly Ha-Shiloach. The Rev. M. H. Segal, formerly Minister of the Newcastle-on-Tyne Congregation, author of Mishnaic Hebrew and its Relation to Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic, who belongs to the same group, is an excellent Hebrew writer. This movement has been greatly influenced by Asher Ginzberg—Achad Ha’am—who lives in London, and whose writings are very highly appreciated in intellectual quarters. Mr. Simon has translated some of his books into English. A great supporter of this movement is Dr. Ch. Weizmann, who is an old worker in University circles.

Evidently Zionism is attracting more and more attention and consideration, and has the moral support and sympathy of distinguished scholars and spiritual leaders, among whom we may mention the Goldsmid Professor of Hebrew at the University of London and Rabbi of the Bayswater Synagogue, Hermann Gollancz, and Dr. S. A. Hirsch, a well-known Talmudist and Emeritus Lecturer at Jews’ College. Dr. Hirsch was one of the distinguished Chovevé Zion, and took great interest in the Zionist movement. He was for a time Chairman of the Joint Committee of the English Zionist Federation and the Maccabeans.

The foregoing sketch, incomplete as it is, gives some idea of the amount of energy and labour expended on the work of Zionist organization and propaganda in England. If it is not as large and vigorous as it might be, and as it is undoubtedly going to be owing to the new development, it cannot be denied that there is in England a strong Zionist movement supported by an ever-increasing number of able, determined and devoted workers.

2. South Africa

In South Africa Zionism is powerful and important. Among the first representatives of the movement there must be mentioned as the most notable: Dr. J. H. Hertz, Johannesburg (he was Delegate to the Fourth Zionist Congress, 1900), who is now Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Empire. Other staunch supporters were the Rev. Dr. J. L. Landau, Mr. S. Goldreich, the late Rev. D. Wasserzug, Mr. S. L. Heymann, Mr. S. Lennox-Loewe, Mr. R. Alexander, Mr. J. Heymann, Dr. Abelheim, Mr. J. L. Cohen, Mr. H. Lyons, Mr. R. Feigenbaum, Mr. H. B. Ellenbogen, Mr. S. S. Grossberg (Bulawayo), Mr. B. Aaron, Mr. J. Blum, Mr. A. Beyer, Mr. N. Richardson, Mr. J. Kark, Mr. B. J. Chaimowitz, Mr. A. Deremeik, Mr. A. M. Abrahams, Mr. J. Kaplan, Mr. J. Schwartz, Mr. Groimann, Mr. Hersh, Mr. S. Bebor and others. They have a well-organized Zionist Federation, of which the advocate, Mr. Maurice Alexander, is the Chairman. They also have their own Zionist Press, always send delegates to the Zionist Congresses and maintain a strong and successful propaganda in their country. The enthusiasm manifested by the masses is as great as the wonderful generosity with which they support all Zionist institutions in and outside of Palestine. One is simply struck with admiration at the wonderful results they have achieved in the way of contributions.

3. Canada

In Canada the Zionist movement began in 1898 and immediately met with great success. Zionists propagated their principles at mass meetings and soon attracted enthusiastic workers for their cause, and by their help they were enabled to form organizations in Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Hamilton, London, Kingston (Ontario), Ottawa, and on the Pacific Coast. (The first Zionist Society in Canada was the Agudath Zion in Montreal.) First and foremost among the leaders is Mr. Clarence I. de Sola, a brother of the late Rev. Meldola de Sola, the minister of the Sephardi Community of Montreal. Both were the sons of Dr. Abraham de Sola, LL.D., who was Professor of Semitic Literature at the McGill University of Montreal, and the leading Jewish Rabbi and writer in Canada. Mr. Clarence de Sola is President of the Federation of the Zionist Societies of Canada. The Rev. A. M. Ashinski (now at Pittsburg), Dr. David M. Hart, the Rev. B. M. Kaplin, Mr. J. S. Leo, Mr. A. Levin, the Rev. D. H. Wittenberg, Mr. H. G. Levetus, Mr. Leon Goldman, Mr. B. Levi, the late Mr. Falik and many others were the principal, untiring workers from the first; and the distinguished Hebraist Rabbi Menkin (Hamilton), the eminent preacher Rabbi Abramowitz (Montreal), Mr. L. Lewinsky (Toronto), Mr. J. Friedmann (Ottawa), Mr. S. Jacobs (Montreal), Mr. Leon Cohn, Dr. Shayne, Mr. David Levy, Mr. Louis Fitch, Mr. A. A. Harris, Mr. S. Frankel, Mr. E. Geffen, Mr. Joseph Finsberg, Mr. H. Nathansohn, Mr. Bernard Lasker and many other enthusiastic speakers, workers and writers contributed to the efforts that made the Federation of the Canadian Zionists a living force in the great movement, and the most active and most respected section of Jewry in that important part of the British Empire.

4. Other Parts of the British Empire

There are also some Zionist groups as well as individual supporters in New Zealand, in Australia and in all other parts of the British Empire. In Egypt Zionism has recently made considerable progress.

5. The United States

The United States of America, with its three million Jews, of whom by far the greater number have migrated there from Russia during the past two generations, has naturally become an important centre of Zionism. It is impossible to give, in a brief outline, a proper conception of the greatness and importance of Zionist activities in America.

America is a world in itself, and this can equally be said of American Zionism. The majority of Zionists may already perhaps, or will very soon, reside in the English-speaking countries. The extent of Zionism in the United States cannot be gauged by the payment of the “Shekel” (the annual obligatory Zionist contribution), which is not by any means a criterion as far as Zionist allegiance in America is concerned. It is sufficient to mention such well-known names as: Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Nathan Straus, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Dr. Harry Friedenwald, Professor Richard Gottheil, Miss Henrietta Szold, Dr. Solomon Solis Cohen, Professor Israel Friedlaender, Rev. Dr. Pereira Mendes, E. Lewin-Epstein, Zolotkow, Louis Lipsky, J. de Haas, Professor Felix Frankfurter, Leon Sanders, Dr. C. S. Rubensohn, Nathan D. Kaplan, Judge Aaron J. Levy, Judge Julian W. Mack, Dr. H. M. Kallen, Rabbi H. H. Rubenowitz, Louis Robison, Dr. Benjamin L. Gordon, Julius Meyer, S. Abel, A. E. Lubarski, Maurice L. Avner, Rabbi S. Margolis, Rev. Max Heller, Joseph Barondess, Rev. H. Masliansky, Abraham Goldberg, Bernard Richards, B. Rosenblatt and many others, representing all classes, sections and shades of American Jewry—these names enable one to form a slight idea of the greatness of the movement.

Mr. Louis D. Brandeis, Justice of the Supreme Court, stands at the head of the Organization, and his influence in America equals almost that of Herzl in this hemisphere. Dr. Shemaryah Levin, representing the Inner Actions Committee, has done much to stimulate propaganda in America, and is strongly supported by a number of distinguished Zionists who have recently arrived there.

The movement has, however, a long and honourable record in America (where, as in other countries, the Zionist movement was preceded by a Chovevé Zion movement). There have been not only the Shove Zion in New York and the Chovevé Zion in Philadelphia in 1891; the beginning was much earlier. Mention has already been made of the Rev. M. J. Raphall’s activities; but he did not stand alone in his efforts. An attempt to form a Chovevé Zion organization was made at Cincinnati in 1855. In the Occident of Philadelphia, of March 8th, 1860, Mr. Simon Berman, the author of the Hebrew book Massot Shimon (published in 1874), published the details of a Chovevé Zion plan he had then formulated. Still later, Adam Rosenberg worked most energetically in connection with Chovevé Zion in other countries, and with the first colonists in Palestine. Rosenberg attended also the First Zionist Congress.

The Federation of American Zionists was organized on July 4th, 1897, with Professor Richard Gottheil as President, Dr. B. Felsenthal of Chicago, Dr. M. Jastrow of Philadelphia, Dr. S. Schaffer of Baltimore, Dr. J. L. Bluestone, Rev. H. Masliansky, as members; Mr. C. D. Birkhahn acted as Hon. Treasurer, and Rabbi Stephen S. Wise as Honorary Secretary.

The old and highly esteemed Dr. Gustav Gottheil, father of Professor Richard Gottheil, who had formerly been Rabbi at Manchester (and a friend of Professor Theodores), and had just then become Rabbi at New York (where he died in 1903), identified himself with the Zionist movement. Professor Richard Gottheil joined the movement from the beginning. He was a friend of Herzl, a member of the Actions Committee and a prominent figure at the Zionist Congresses. In order to spread a knowledge of the Zionist movement, the first Committee of the Federation resolved to issue a series of publications, and Professor Gottheil wrote his first pamphlet, The Aims of Zionism, in 1897. Five years ago he published an important work on Zionism. For a long time Dr. J. L. Magnes was most actively engaged in Zionist work, and he is still most active in the work of organizing Hebrew education in the United States.

The late Dr. Marcus Jastrow, who served on the first Committee, was an orientalist and a rabbi, pre-eminently known as a man of genius and thoroughness, and as an author of a great dictionary of the Aramaic-Talmudic language, and of other works of great value. It is not generally known, and therefore worthy of notice here, that when he was preacher at the Great Synagogue in Warsaw at the beginning of the sixties at the time of the Polish Insurrection, he was an enthusiastic friend of the Poles in their struggle for national liberty. Poles and Polish-Jewish patriots still cherish his memory with deep reverence.

The present Zionist movement in America, as compared with the earlier one, is of course much stronger and healthier, but it is interesting to observe that the movement in America is not one that sprang up only recently.

During the present war American Zionism has come providentially to the succour of Palestine with an enthusiasm and a generosity unequalled in history, and it is undoubtedly qualified and destined to play a prominent part in the Zionist solution of the Palestinian problem.

6. Germany

The geographical position of Germany—its proximity to Russia and Austria—the numerical strength of its Jewish population, and their long tradition of Jewish learning and Jewish activity, have combined to make that country favourable soil for the growth of Zionism. Nor must the prevalent anti-Semitism be left out of account as a factor making in the same direction. Whereas, for instance, the Jewish University student in England is welcomed in the various students’ associations and clubs, the Jewish students at a German University are practically compelled to form an organization of their own. This is one of the causes of the remarkable growth of the Zionist Students’ movement in Germany—a movement which, while it is not free from the besetting sin of over-organization, has undoubtedly done a great deal to transform the spirit of German Jewry. But from the earliest years, even before the growth of the Students’ movement, Zionism has always been in Germany a serious intellectual movement, contending for supremacy with the “Reform” theory of Judaism, and never failing to hold its own. The first official paper of the movement was Die Welt, and the Jüdischer Verlag in Berlin was for long the most important Zionist publishing concern; while in the extent of its Zionist literary and artistic output Germany is probably second to no other country. Yet it is characteristic that a Zionist Congress has only once (Hamburg, 1911) been held in Germany, though the headquarters of the movement were for a time at Cologne and afterwards at Berlin, and though Germany has been the home of such distinguished Zionists as Dr. Max Bodenheimer, for many years at the head of the Jewish National Fund, Dr. Franz Oppenheimer, the expert in co-operative colonization, and Julius Simon, to say nothing of members of the Inner Actions Committee like Wolffsohn, Hantke and Warburg.

7. Smaller European Countries

Holland gave to the movement one of its earliest leaders, Heer Jacobus Kann, who was associated with Wolffsohn in the administration after Herzl’s death. It has now a well-organized and active Zionist Organization, to which a great impetus was given by the Eighth Congress at the Hague, 1909. Dutch Zionists take a very active part in the general organization work and in that of the Jewish National Fund, the headquarters of which are at present at the Hague. The Dutch Zionist Federation has an excellent weekly paper, De Joodsche Wachter, which has appeared regularly for several years. Zionism in Holland has had for several years a University Movement. In connection with Holland, a place of honour in Zionist history belongs to Belgium, and particularly to Antwerp, which has been for several years an important Zionist centre. M. Jean Fischer, most noteworthy of the Antwerp group from the point of view of the organization, is a member of the Actions Committee and of the great financial institutions of Zionism. He and his friends have taken an important part in colonization undertakings in Palestine. Switzerland, the land of Zionist Congresses, has a good organization with many zealous and able workers. In Denmark and Sweden the Zionist organization has lately developed great activity, owing to the Zionist Office which has been established at Copenhagen. Rumania (which was almost equal to Russia in the Chovevé Zion movement) and Bulgaria are still more important as centres of Zionist activity.

### LXXXII.

The Institutions of Zionism

The Zionist institutions—A. General: 1. The Congress—2. The Actions Committee—3. The Annual Conference—4. The Federations in various countries—5. The English Zionist Federation—6. The Order of Ancient Maccabeans—7. The Palestine Society.—8. The Poale Zion—9. The Mizrachi—10. Women Zionist Societies—B. Financial: 1. The Jewish Colonial Trust—2. The Anglo-Palestine Company—3. The Anglo-Levantine Company—4. The Jewish National Fund—5. The Palestine Land Development Company—6. The Kedem Company—7. The First London Achuzah Company—8. The Maccabean Land Company—C. Institutions in Palestine—D. Miscellaneous Institutions.

A. General:

1. The Congress

The Zionist Congress is the supreme authority in the Movement. Until the fifth Congress, Congresses were held annually, but since the sixth Congress they have been held biennially. The first Congress was held on the 29th of August, 1897, at Basle, Switzerland. Most of the subsequent Congresses were held at the same place: the second in August, 1898; the third in August, 1899; the fifth in December, 1901; the sixth in August, 1903; the seventh in August, 1905, and the tenth in September, 1911. The fourth Congress was held in London in August, 1900; the eighth took place at the Hague in August, 1907; the ninth at Hamburg in December, 1909, and the eleventh at Vienna in August, 1913.

The Congress consists of delegates representing the shekel payers throughout the world, who assemble for the purpose of international discussion of the Jewish question and decisions concerning the world-wide Zionist Organization. The Congress, as the controlling body of the movement, interprets the programme of Zionism, settles the details of organization, elects the executive and examines the financial affairs of the movement. The officials and committee of the movement are responsible to the Congress. The Zionist banking institution, the Jewish Colonial Trust in London, is also controlled by the Congress, as only members of the Actions Committee can become members of the Council of the Trust. A deciding voice in the control of the Jewish National Fund is secured to the Congress, as only members of the Council of the Jewish Colonial Trust can become members of the Jewish National Fund. (See below as to the Jewish Colonial Trust and Jewish National Fund.)

Only shekel payers (paying a sum of one shilling or a corresponding sum in foreign coinage) have the right to elect delegates to a Congress. The payment of that sum by a person who accepts the principles of Zionism as adopted by the first Congress entitles him or her to membership of the International Zionist Organization.

The last Zionist Congress, which was the eleventh, was attended by 538 delegates, who represented the Zionists in the following countries: Russia, France, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, United States of America, Canada, Turkey, Belgium, Holland, Roumania, China, Bulgaria, Italy, Hungary, Serbia, Australia, South Africa, Greece and England.

2. The Actions Committee

The Executive power of the movement is vested in the Greater Actions Committee, consisting of twenty-five members, and in a Smaller Actions Committee, consisting of six members. The members of the present Greater Actions Committee are:

Dr. Max Bodenheimer, Jean Fischer, Dr. Frank, Dr. Friedemann, B. A. Goldberg, Dr. H. G. Heymann,⁠¹ A. Idelsohn, Jakobus Kann, L. Kessler, Dr. Klee, J. Kremenezky, Dr. Alexander Marmorek, Leo Motzkin, J. A. Naiditsch, A. Podlischewski, Dr. Leon Reich, I. A. Rosoff, S. Rosenbaum, Heinrich Schein, Julius Simon, Adolf Stand, Robert Stricker, M. Ussischkin, Dr. Chaim Weizmann,⁠² and David Wolffsohn⁠³

The members of the present Smaller Actions Committee are:

Professor Dr. Otto Warburg, Dr. Arthur Hantke, Dr. Victor Jacobson, Dr. Shemaryah Levin, Nahum Sokolow, and the late Dr. E. W. Tschlenow.⁠¹

The Greater Actions Committee is the executive body of the Congress according to its constitution, but it is only convened to decide on important questions. It meets several times in the year, and must meet not less than once a year. Only the Greater Actions Committee is competent to consider and decide questions relating to the Zionist organizations in the various countries. The Committee has also the right to inquire into and examine the work of the Smaller Actions Committee.

The Smaller Actions Committee is the superior Executive of the whole Zionist Organization, and is entrusted with the management of all branches of the Zionist movement and activities all over the world.

3. The Annual Conference

The name of this institution is somewhat misleading, as the conference called Annual Conference is really a biennial conference held in those years in which a Zionist Congress does not take place. The holding of such conferences was decided upon by the fifth Congress. This conference is in reality an extended meeting of the Greater Actions Committee, and is attended not only by all members of that Committee, but also by the president and vice-presidents of the last Congress, the presidents of the permanent commissions, the presidents of the federations and amalgamated organizations of the various countries, the directors of the banking institutions, the members of the Congress tribunal, the legal adviser of the Congress and the auditors. The conference is somewhat limited in the scope of its activities, as it may only examine the accounts of the organization, accept resolutions, and draw up a programme of activity for the next period of administration. The conference has no right to carry out elections of committees or officials or to alter or modify the Zionist programme.

4. The Federations in Various Countries

The name “Federation,” as far as the Zionist movement is concerned, is frequently synonymous with the amalgamated organizations in any particular country. But, on the other hand, it sometimes designates an organization consisting of a number of societies and groups which have federated, for the purpose of propagating Zionism on certain defined lines. The Smaller Actions Committee is authorized to grant recognition to a federation in any country, providing such a body comprises not less than 3000 shekel payers and satisfies them as to such other requirements as the Smaller Actions Committee may impose upon it.

5. The English Zionist Federation

The English Zionist Federation was established in 1898, and according to its constitution, amended and revised in 1907, its object and constitution are:

“The English Zionist Federation as ‘Landes Comité’ of United Kingdom shall carry on its operations in accordance with the constitution adopted by and in sympathy with the decisions arrived at from time to time by the Zionist Congress.

“The Federation shall consist of such Jewish Associations and Bodies in the United Kingdom as desire, subject to the general sanction and direction of the Executive Committee, to promote the acquisition of a publicly recognized legally secured home in Palestine for the Jewish people, or in addition thereto, any of the following objects:

(a) The fostering of the National idea in Israel.

(b) The support of the regular International Congress of duly accredited representatives of the Jewish people, for the consideration of the position of Jews in the different countries of their dispersion, and for taking such measures as may be deemed conducive to their general welfare.

(c) The support of existing colonies, and the founding of new colonies by placing as many Jews as possible living in Palestine as settlers on the land, and encouragement, guidance and assistance of new settlers anxious to establish colonies, or any handicrafts, industries or arts in Palestine and neighbouring lands.

(d) The study of Hebrew literature and the use of Hebrew as a living language.”

The functions of the Federation are: to be the medium of communication between affiliated societies and the Executive Council (Actions Committee) and with Zionist Associations in other countries; to advise on the steps necessary for the furtherance of the general movement, and adopt such means as may be approved for carrying into effect the resolutions adopted by Congress held from time to time; and to initiate, in connection with the various objects of the Federation, propaganda, which shall partake of one common character throughout all the federated bodies.

The Constituent Societies affiliated to the Federation now number sixteen in London, twenty-seven in the Provinces, and four in the Dominions and Colonies. Of these forty-seven ten are Women’s and Girls’ Societies and six Junior Societies.

The general government of the Federation is vested in a Central Committee, consisting of delegates from all the federated societies. The Executive Power of the organization is vested in a Council consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents, Honorary Secretary and twenty other members of the Council.

For the purpose of carrying out the work of the Federation a number of sub-committees deal with various special matters (Propaganda, Literature, Palestine, Finance, etc.).

6. The Order of Ancient Maccabeans

This is a Friendly Society, established in 1894, and registered on the 8th of May, 1901, under the Friendly Societies’ Act, 1896. When Herzl came to England before the first Zionist Congress the members of the Society, who then belonged to the “Lovers of Zion” movement, pledged their adherence to the Zionist cause. The Society is an avowedly Zionist Order, and every member on admission has to declare his willingness to be a Zionist, to pay the shekel and to assist generally through the Order in the work of resettling the Jews in Palestine.

Since the Zionist Congress of 1909 the Society has been recognized as a separate Federation, having a membership of over three thousand, as required by the regulations of the Zionist Organization.

The Executive Power of the organization is vested in a Grand Council.

7. The Palestine Society

The Palestine Society is an association of Jews who desire the establishment in Palestine of a centre of Jewish life, which shall offer a full opportunity for the free development of the Jewish religion, Jewish ideals and Jewish culture. It is not formally associated with the Zionist Organization.

The activities of the Society include the following:

(a) Propaganda for the purpose of creating among Jews and Jewish Institutions in England a public opinion favourable to the furtherance of Jewish activities in Palestine.

(b) The collection and dissemination of information concerning the work that is being carried on by existing Palestinian institutions.

(c) The support of Palestinian Institutions and activities.

(d) The organization of visits to Palestine.

In the spring of 1912 a Palestine Exhibition and Bazaar was held in London, in aid of two Jerusalem institutions—the Bezalel and the Evelina de Rothschild School. The Exhibition had the effect of exciting interest in Palestine among all sections of English Jews. It was then felt that a systematic effort should be made to press the claims of Palestine upon the Anglo-Jewish middle-class. Accordingly a body known as the Palestine Committee was founded for this purpose. This Committee held a series of drawing-room meetings, which met with a fair measure of success.

In order to undertake activities of a more extensive and more varied kind, a properly constituted society—the Palestine Society—was formed in the autumn of 1913. During its brief existence it performed useful work, as, for instance, the arrangement of a series of drawing-room meetings, at which lectures were delivered by eminent speakers. The speakers and chairmen included: the Chief Rabbi, the Rev. M. Adler, the Rev. A. A. Green, the Rev. Dr. J. Hochman, the Rev. Morris Joseph, Dayan H. M. Lazarus, the Rev. W. Levin, the Rev. E. Levine, the Rev. D. Wasserzug, Lady Swaythling, Dr. A. Eichholz, Mr. H. R. Lewis, Mr. J. Prag, and Mr. Israel Zangwill.

Fifteen of the London Jewish ministers are members of the Society, and have preached a number of sermons with sympathetic references to the Society and its aims.

In the course of the year 1914 the Liverpool Bezalel Association became affiliated to the Palestine Society. A branch of the Society was also formed at Glasgow, and when the War broke out branches were in course of formation at Leeds, Brighton and in several of the suburbs of London.

At the outbreak of the War the membership of the Society numbered approximately 250, though no widespread propaganda was ever attempted either for the enrolment of members or for the collection of funds, as it was intended from the outset that the work of the Society should be limited to those circles which other agencies had not succeeded in reaching.

Among other activities of this Society were:

(1) An effort to induce literary and kindred societies to include a discussion of the Palestine question in their programmes for the 1914 to 1915 session, the Society providing the speakers, of whom it had compiled a list.

(2) An attempt was made to organize a tour to Palestine in the spring of 1914. Owing to difficulties that arose in respect of the choice of date and the time available, an organized tour on a large scale had to be abandoned; three members of the Committee, however, visited Palestine during that year. A tour was projected for the spring of 1915; that had, of course, to be abandoned owing to the War.

(3) The first two pamphlets of an intended series were prepared, dealing with the agricultural colonies in Palestine and the work of their educational institutions respectively. A summary account of general Jewish activities in Palestine in 1913‒14, and of the measure of support it had received from English Jews, was also in preparation when the War broke out. It had been intended to publish all this matter in a Palestine Annual, and to reprint most of it separately in due course.

There is reason to believe that in the brief period of its active life (it suspended activity on the outbreak of the War) the Society succeeded in arousing an interest in Palestine as a centre of Jewish aspiration among a large circle of Jews whom other agencies have left untouched, and in creating in certain quarters an atmosphere more favourable than had existed heretofore. It must be added that the Society has merely suspended its activities and not abandoned them. This was explained in a letter from its President, Dr. Eichholz, which appeared in the Jewish Chronicle of December 3rd, 1915.

The Officers and Committee for 1913‒14 were: President: Dr. A. Eichholz; Vice-Presidents: the Very Rev. the Chief Rabbi, the Very Rev. the Haham, the Rev. Morris Joseph, Sir Isidore Spielmann, C.M.G., F.S.A.; Treasurer: Albert M. Hyamson; Committee: Mrs. A. Eichholz, Miss H. M. Bentwich, the Rev. Dr. J. Hochman, Dr. M. Epstein, Harry R. Lewis, Leon Simon, Robert B. Solomon, F. S. Spiers; Hon. Secretaries: Miss A. Stein and Leonard Stein; Hon. Corresponding Secretary in Palestine: Michael E. Lange.

8. Poale Zion

The national idea forms the premiss of Zionism. To bring this idea to life, to provide a durable foundation for the national unification of the Jews upon their very own, old historical ground, that is the aim of Zionism. In its tendency, therefore, it comprises the whole Jewish people; its immediate object, however, apart from the self-evident conservation of the ideal of national unity, bears upon fragments, so to say, of the people; upon more or less considerable parts of population, individuals, groups, and classes. Their specific attitude towards Zionism hinges on two main points, of which one is more of spiritual, and the other more of material nature. Both must be equally considered, for both are effective, although in varying degree. However, when a particular class is considered in its relation towards Zionism, it behoves to examine first of all the point of view to which this class itself attaches most importance. It may of course be open to discussion whether when forming an estimate of national and social questions the economic aspect ought always to be considered foremost, but there is no doubt that it is so regarded by the working-class. Let us also admit it for the Jewish workmen. If we take class interest into account the workman may speak first, then the Jew within him. It will appear that it is precisely from a closer examination of the class interest of the Jewish workmen and the interrelations between them and the general working-class, that their position towards Zionism results most simply, as we already see this clearly indicated, and as it will be evolved in the near future, given certain conditions.

Jewish workmen may be divided into two categories, apart from several intermediate divisions. The one is nationally indifferent, class interest alone carries weight with it. By entering into the general working-class the workmen of this category are, so to say, engulfed by it; they retain no trace of national needs and wishes. The numerically by far larger category comprises the actual masses of Jewish workmen in Russia, Galicia, and America. These Jewish workmen also join the general working-class, but they occupy within it a very distinctly noticeable separate position. Where the amelioration of the economic condition of the working-class is concerned, the obtaining of higher salaries, the reduction of working time, in short, in all questions falling within the sphere of class interest they hold together with the other workmen. Just as they suffer from unemployment like these, so they make common cause with them on special occasions, for instance, strikes. But beyond the material questions of existence there is much which separates them. They are sociable enough to come together for a short time with the other workmen where need and interest demand it, but they are not sufficiently ♦homogeneous to unite socially with them. They cannot shake off a certain feeling of alienage in the camp of the general working-class. Critical points soon arise on the boundaries of economical questions, deep contrasts become manifest which are not brought about by ill-will, but are rather caused by historical forces which even to-day are still at work. What will it profit if, in order to proceed summarily, one ascribes this segregation of the Jewish workmen to a thousand years of atavism? The disclosure of the cause, whether acceptable or not, does not do away with the fact. And it is a fact that these Jewish workmen wield a strong national and religious influence, that religion is no “private concern” for them, as it is designated by the workmen’s programme, or only private concern inasmuch as religion is prudently left undiscussed by the labour party.

Probably from such differences and sentimental contrasts it is to be explained that voices became loud which demanded the independent organization of the Jewish workmen. Such a demand might be considered by the leading party as an anomaly, since the Jewish workmen are not at all taken into account nationally but pass as appendages of the various nations. And if it was not merely euphemism when the Jews were accorded the same right to exist, when the name or the nation in whose country they became settled was conferred upon them, wherefore an independent organization? Now, the course of evolution of the Jews up to the present, especially its last phase, has revealed that not only the masses of Judaism which are not yet on a high plane of cultural development feel nationally. It is just in the Zionism of the educated Jews that the full justification of the national movement shows itself. We may point out without fear the difference between the conscious Zionistic action and that part of Judaism which is unconsciously national through the power of historic conditions.

The Jewish workmen are the natural allies of Zionism, but they will become the actual and co-operating allies only through independent workmen organizations. The Jewish workmen, independently organized, would go hand in hand with the labour party in all single claims dictated by class interest, but otherwise they would be independent. National as the Jewish workmen are distinctly enough in life, national in consequence of their education, their peculiarities—why should they not be so as a working-class? Do then the workmen of other nations lay aside their nationality when they take their stand to the social question? And do they give up their nationality when they have done for the moment with debate and action? And the Jewish workmen alone should renounce their nationality, they who are not even yet capable of sharing properly in the culture of another nation? Although it is not out of love for Zionism that the Jewish workmen, for the greater part, feel nationally, they may yet in time become national even in a Zionist sense. And that through the natural community of interests, passing from the unconscious to the conscious, which will establish a more and more intimate relation between them and Zionism. The whole political development of recent times has made it clear to the Jewish workmen how powerful the national thought is among workmen. Even in the event of the victory of the collectivistic idea it could hardly become different in regard to race contrasts. And when Eduard Bernstein in the epilogue of the translation of Mr. Webb’s History of the Trade Unions observes: “Class struggles manifest themselves only seldom so acutely as national ones,” we may add that race contrasts may still exist long after class contrasts will have disappeared.

It is evident of what extraordinary importance for Zionism the Jewish working-class would become. The workmen if they became Zionist would, so to say, constitute the solid effective force which could be relied upon at any moment. On the other hand, it can well be assumed that the Jewish nation will meet as far as possible the claims of the working-class. It is only with the attainment of the Zionist aim that the condition for the prosperity and unfolding anew of national life will be realized for the first time. Judaism, united as a nation, will hereby be confronted by the question with the solution of which all civilized nations are so anxiously preoccupied. The difficulties may be ever so great, occasional crises and storms may break forth, but the nations will not be permanently depressed thereby, nor paralyzed. Like other nations the Jews hold the unshakable belief in a continually progressing economical amelioration, in a prosperous development of all. Even that party which has developed class contrasts into a theory of society, is seen to be receding ever more from the revolutionary principle and paying homage to the evolutionary. To the principle of evolution Zionist Judaism also holds fast, and will, surely, as soon as it is nationally consolidated, not be willing to lag behind other nations as regards social legislation. And if one may conclude from the historical past of a nation what its conformation will be in the future, so, doubtless, a breath of that gentle spirit will be felt in the modern Jewish community which pervades the Mosaic legislation. And this not only as regards the future but also the present. The Jewish National Fund is the model of a broad Mosaic-socialistic institution which has for its object the nationalization of the soil.

The Poale Zion was established in 1901. It originated in Russia, and has now adherents in America, Palestine, Austria, Russia and the United Kingdom. At the time of the Zionist Congress at the Hague in 1907 an International Conference of the Poale Zion was held, which led to the establishment of the General Union of the Poale Zion Societies in America, Russia, Austria, Palestine, England, etc., on federal lines. The programme of the organization represents a synthesis of Zionism and Socialism on the basis of the Basle programme.

The principles of the Poale Zion have been fully expounded in a book written by Dr. Pasmanik, entitled The Theory of the Poale Zion. Among its official publications may be mentioned The Jewish Worker, Cracow; The Jewish Fighter, New York; Forward, Vilna.

It is not easy for the Gentile workman to understand and appreciate to the full the position taken up by the Jewish workmen who support the principle of the Poale Zion. The Gentile workmen have no national problem to solve; they have only an economic question to deal with. The Jewish workmen are face to face with two problems, the economic and the national. The Poale Zionists are convinced that although a nation may love its traditions it must concern itself also with immediate economic needs. It is for this reason that they are primarily Zionists, although supporters of Socialism. Unlike other Socialists they deem it their duty to devote themselves mainly to their own national cause. Apart from this, they have a great love for Jewish tradition, and are in the fullest sense of the term nationalists.

9. The Mizrachi

The Mizrachi (a composite word derived from “Merchaz Ruch’ni,” which means Intellectual Centre) is an organization of religiously orthodox Zionists.

After the fifth Zionist Congress, where a lively debate took place on the question of national Judaism on a religious basis, the desire arose among those Zionists who maintained orthodox views on religious questions to organize themselves for common purposes. The object of the Mizrachi is therefore of a cultured and not a political character. It strives to champion, within Zionism, by means of a sound organization, the standpoint of orthodox religious belief, and further, to show clearly that a conservative tendency in religious matters can go side by side with national aspirations. Politically the Mizrachi has no special aim, but desires to work in unison with all other Zionists.

Soon after the fifth Congress Russian Zionists of Mizrachi conviction assembled at a conference in Vilna and officially founded the Mizrachi. Subsequently support was also forthcoming from Mizrachi Zionists in other countries, and at the sixth Congress the organization was represented by a group of over one hundred delegates. From the 19th to the 21st of August, 1904, a general Mizrachi Conference took place at Pressburg. This conference was called by Rabbi I. J. Reines of Lida, Russia, and was attended by a large number of Rabbis from Russia, Roumania, Galicia, Hungary, Germany, England and America. Rabbi Reines was elected president of the entire organization. The regulations of the organization maintain in general the Zionist principle, but lay particular stress upon the necessity of the Mizrachi cultural tendency. Already at this conference three centres of propaganda were created, an East European centre for Russia, Roumania and Galicia, of which Rabbi J. Reines became the president; a West European centre for the other European countries, with its seat in Frankfort, of which Rabbi Dr. Nobel became president; and an American centre at New York, of which Rabbi D. Klein became president.

In addition to the usual shekel and the local contributions, the Mizrachi members pay a further contribution to cover the expenses of an office and propaganda. The Mizrachi carries out its aim by organizing mass meetings, issuing from time to time periodicals, pamphlets and leaflets, and arranging lectures and debates for its members.

The fear expressed on the beginning of the Mizrachi movement, that the Mizrachi as a section might destroy the unity of Zionism, has proved unfounded. From the past activity of the Mizrachi it is now certain that their propaganda is not detrimental to the interests of Zionism—that on the contrary their principal aims, such as the fostering of belief in the laws of our forefathers, the maintenance of ancient rites and customs, and the revival of the Hebrew language, are such as to obtain for them continually new supporters among strictly orthodox Jews.

Among a number of books written to explain the standpoint of the Mizrachi, there should be mentioned Zionism from the Standpoint of Orthodoxy (1904), by Rabbi Dr. Roth of Papa (Hungary); The Voice of Zion (1905), by Rabbi Reines, and Mizrachi (1907), by Dr. Feuchtwanger.

10. Women Zionist Societies

In the measure in which the Jewish national movement had begun to expand the question was raised more and more frequently what the attitude of the Jewish woman would be towards this movement. In the Jewish nation woman occupies a pre-eminent position.

At the time of the existence of the Jewish state the whole inner life rested upon family organization. Woman is the entirely coequal ruler of the home, and truly regal is the description which the Bible traces of her. She is prophetess and bard, the inspirer of all that is good and strong, and the bestower of the prize of combat. She is the first to display that wonderful enduring heroism which is the heritage of the Jewish race. She initiates the great national works; it is significant that tradition traces back the liberation out of Egypt to the merit of noble women. At the time of the erection of a spiritual country after the loss of the homeland, at the time of formation of the Talmud, the high appreciation of woman rose still more. In the writings of that time she appears as the naive leader whose untrammelled and unsophisticated mind grasps the nature of things, and who, quick in discernment, settles matters resolutely. But the highest importance woman attains during the period of the “Ghetto.” Here all life concentrates in the family. Free civic life is replaced by the narrower but pleasurable family life. Here woman becomes the creator of a self-contained family culture. She relieves man of a great part of his business dealings and makes it possible for him to devote himself to his intellectual pursuits. In the midst of the heaviest persecution she inspires him with courage and confidence. She brings up her children to be valiant and steadfast Jews. She carries into the home a wonderful natural freshness which replaces as far as possible the tender verdure of the lost country. The Jewish woman it is who, in this time of suffering, encourages man to persistence in the faith. Spanish-Jewish women urged their husbands to seek death together with them. In all the massacres and persecutions of the Middle-Ages Jewish women gained the highest crown of martyrdom.

But the disposition of the Jewish woman has radically changed since complete or partial emancipation. The cause lies in the change of the whole situation. At the time of the Ghetto the sufferings of the Jew were as unspeakably heavy as his joys were profound and intimate. For good and for evil he was under the shadow of a great fate, and therein he developed. Suffering destroyed his strength, the passive heroism peculiar to him, home happiness, his kindness of heart and joy of sacrifice; both united made him true, true to the past and true to his nation. This grew gradually different. With the advance of so-called civilization persecution became more petty and perfidious; it no longer threatened existence itself at any moment, but it crept into every hour of life, into each everyday activity. The one stab of the dagger had become a thousand pinpricks, out of the great fate which drew heroism out of man, and an abundance of passions, virtues, resolutions, renunciations, struggles and victories of all kinds, a painfully dragging, tortured and harassed existence had come into being. And with lesser sufferings the joys got lesser too. The beautiful unity of home-life became loosened through the great gulf between old and young, such as is not met with in any other nation of the world. The increased struggle for daily life separated married couples and impeded the education of the children, the apparently greater absence of danger operated against the strong national resistance and the welding and segregating special customs.

This state of dissolution was reinforced to a great degree by the declaration of the legal equifranchise of the Jews. Their instinct of self-preservation adapted itself to the new conditions of existence in just as extreme a manner as their seclusion had formerly been extreme. In the now arising fanaticism for assimilation the women, who adapt themselves most easily to their surroundings and assume their nature, shared most intensely. While all strove after non-Jewishness the inner structure of Judaism was crippled, all innate power discarded, Jewish solidarity dispensed with and independent culture destroyed.

The rigid family organization upon which the vitality of the Jewish nation reposed, collapsed under the impact of the extraneous; with Jewish customs the Jewish home began to break up, with the evanescence of fidelity love too faded. An attempt was made to stupefy through an outward life of luxury, as bustling as possible, the feeling of forlornness brought about by the want of inner contentment. Thus it frequently happened that the assimilated Jewish woman became ever more estranged from her sphere of activity. She who had formerly been mistress in her own house was often the slave of her servants; she gave herself up to a dull, nervous idleness; with her the old charitableness of the Jews became snobbishness. The desire for beauty which formerly animated Jewish woman, was distorted by her into a tasteless and unhealthy love of finery, as if someone transformed a beautiful national costume into the gaudy robe of a carnival pierrot. Sincere, devoted faith has gone without making room for a new and strong conception of life; the more burdensome religious practices have been given up, a few easier ones have been outwardly retained, without apprehension of their meaning and without the feeling of their sanctity. The synagogue and the sermon, the only religiously stimulating momenta, which one attended ever more seldom, were not sufficient to counteract a thousand other influences of life and surroundings.

Therefore Jewish woman, more so than man, needed a great, inspiring Jewish ideal. And on the other hand, the realization of this ideal needed the collaboration of woman no less than the collaboration of man. For national rejuvenation in its innermost core can emanate from Jewish woman to a considerable extent. For a nation without a land and for a nation in dispersion, home is the pillar of life. In the Diaspora the Jewish home is the Jewish nation. In the first instance it was found desirable that Jewish woman should become active for Zionism, that is contribute in speech and writing to the diffusion of the national idea, and exhort to self-help. Through her warmth of feeling and freshness of will she is to help to reunite the divergent members of the nation, and from her love of the nation a community of souls is to resuscitate. She must recognize that she can only then become a whole personality if she values highly the peculiarity of her race, and if she tends and develops the Jewishness in her. She will then again make home and family life what they once were: the hub of life and the spring of ever new energy. One will see there Jewish works of art on the walls, Jewish books upon the table, and Jewish customs being practised with deep, gladsome understanding. Then the quiet force which overcomes laughingly everything inimical will again gather in the family. True, living love for the great destiny of the Jewish nation, strong, helpful love for its present, hopeful and cheery readiness to work for the future of this nation, and preparation of this future through energetic collaboration in the Zionistic organization, which acknowledges no difference of duties and rights between man and woman—with this message the modern Jewish national idea appealed to the Jewish woman.

To be sure, Jewish woman did not enter the national movement in numbers, nor at once: nevertheless she joined the first pioneers of the Chovevé Zion as well as the first Zionists. At all Zionist congresses Jewish women took part as delegates, and in Palestine they have unfolded a particularly beneficial activity in the domain of home industry for women.

B. Financial

1. The Jewish Colonial Trust

The Jewish Colonial Trust is the financial instrument of the Zionist movement, and its main object is the industrial and commercial development of Palestine and the neighbouring countries.

Among the prominent Jews who supported the formation of the Company from its inception were the following: S. Barbasch, Odessa; Herbert Bentwich, London; M. T. Eliasberg, Pinsk; T. H. Ellman, Braila; M. Farbstein, Warsaw; Leopold Kahn, Vienna; Samuel L. Heymann, London; Theodor Herzl, Vienna; Isidor Jasinowski, Warsaw; J. H. Kann, The Hague; Stanislaus Landau, Lodz; Gregorie Lurie, Pinsk; Max Mandelstamm, Kieff; Alex. Marmorek, Paris; Oscar Marmorek, Vienna; Moritz Moses, Kattowitz; Max Nordau, Paris; Samuel Pineles, Galatz; Heinrich Rosenbaum, Jassy; S. T. Sachs, Dwinsk; Leib Schalit, Riga; Moritz Schnirer, Vienna; Heinrich Steiner, Vienna; W. Temkin, Elizabethgrad; E. W. Tschlenow, Moscow; David Wolffsohn, Cologne; and Oser Kokesch, Vienna.

According to the Company’s Articles of Association it was permitted to commence business as soon as an eighth part of its capital, viz. £250,000, had actually been paid up. This stage was reached at the beginning of 1902.

The subscribers to the Memorandum and Articles of Association were: David Wolffsohn, Jacobus Henricus Kann, Samuel Leopold Heymann, Samuel Barbasch, Gregorie Lurie, Salomon F. Sachs, Heinrich Rosenbaum. For the last four the Haham, Dr. Moses Gaster, acted as Attorney. The first Council of the Company consisted of Dr. Theodor Herzl, Dr. Moritz Schnirer, Dr. Oser Kokesch, Dr. Leopold Kahn, Oscar Marmorek, Dr. Max Mandelstamm, Dr. Richard Gottheil, Dr. Israel Jelsky, Isidor Jasinowski, Dr. Max Bodenheimer, D. J. Bernstein-Kohan, Samuel Pineles, J. H. Ellman, Dr. Alexander Marmorek, Wladimir Temkin, Dr. Samuel Schur, Carl Herbst, Dr. E. W. Tschlenow, Dr. Salomon Rosenheck, and M. Ussischkin.

The first directors were the aforementioned subscribers to the Memorandum, and the first Governors were: Dr. Rudolf Schauer, Leib Schalit, Abraham Hornstein.

The first Secretary of the Company was Mr. James H. Loewe, who resigned his post in May, 1903, on his appointment as Manager of the East End Branch of the International Bank of London, Ltd.

For the first business year (1902) Mr. David Levontin was Manager.

The Company carries on ordinary banking business at its Head Office in the City of London (10‒12 Walbrook) and its East End Branch (41 Whitechapel Road, E.), and is registered at Somerset House as bankers, in accordance with the requirements of the law.

The nominal capital of £2,000,000 is divided into £1,999,900 ordinary shares of £1 each and 100 founders’ shares of £1 each. These latter shares are jointly held by those persons who for the time being are the members of the Council of the Company. The members of this Council are appointed by the Actions Committee of the Zionist Congress from the members, and are entitled at any General Meeting of the Company on all questions, with the exception of that relating to the declaration of a dividend, to as many votes as all the holders of ordinary shares present and voting at such General Meeting. The capital issued, including the aforementioned 100 founders’ shares, amounted, on the 15th May, 1916, to £261,658. The Company is controlled by a Council consisting at present of twenty members, who are at the same time the joint holders of the founders’ shares referred to above, and by a Board of Directors consisting at present of thirteen members, of whom four are Governors (Representatives of the Council). Until his death in September, 1914, David Wolffsohn was President of the Council and a Governor. He succeeded the late Dr. Herzl in these positions on his death in 1904. Previous to that Wolffsohn was Chairman of the Board of Directors, which position he had held since the formation of the Company in 1899.

The members of the present Council are Professor Dr. O. Warburg (Vice-President), Dr. M. J. Bodenheimer (Reporter), M. M. Ussischkin, I. A. Rosoff, A. Podlischewsky, Simon Rosenbaum, I. Naiditsch, J. H. Kann, L. Kessler, Jean Fischer, Dr. V. Jacobsohn, M. Hornstein, Dr. A. Marmorek, Julius Simon, L. Motzkin, Dr. A. Hantke, J. Kremenetzky, Dr. A. Friedemann, Dr. A. Klee. The members of the present Board of Directors are: Dr. V. Katzenelsohn (Chairman), J. H. Kann (Vice-Chairman), S. Barbasch, H. Urysohn, Joseph Cowen, I. A. Rosoff, M. M. Ussischkin, Jean Fischer, Julius Simon, L. Kessler, M. Feldstein, Dr. V. Jacobsohn, J. Kremenetzky. The last four members are the Governors.

2. The Anglo-Palestine Company, Ltd.

This Company was registered on the 27th January, 1902, and began its business operations in the spring of 1903. Its Head Office is at Jaffa, and it has Branches at Jerusalem (Manager: Dr. Isaac Levy; Sub-Manager: S. Gordon), Hebron (Manager: S. Slonim), Haifa (Manager: V. Kaisermann), Beirut (I. Lipawsky, who died in October, 1915, was Manager before the outbreak of war), Safed (Manager: J. Karniol), Tiberias (Manager: Mr. Bentovim).

The Managing Director of the Company is Mr. David Levontin, who is assisted at the Head Office by S. Hoofien, Assistant General Manager, and J. Grasowsky and M. Arwas, Sub-Managers.

The Company is the mainstay of Jewish colonization in Palestine. It advances money to Land Societies for buying land, which is then sold to new immigrants, also to building societies for establishing modern hygienic quarters in the vicinity of towns (Jaffa, Jerusalem, Haifa, etc.). It also makes advances for the installation of water supplies in the Jewish Colonies, and grants loans on long terms for the development of plantations. It has further organized with its own means Co-operative and Loan Societies for the purpose of buying agricultural implements and selling the products of the soil, especially oranges, lemons and wine. The Company has also elaborated various projects for public enterprises, such as tramways, irrigation works, electric lighting, etc. The Company also carries on every kind of banking business, dealing with all elements of the population regardless of race or creed. Thus the Company has become an important factor in the economic life of the country.

The nominal capital of the Company is £120,000, divided into 120,000 ordinary shares of £1 each. The paid-up capital on the 15th May, 1916, was £99,727.

The Board of Directors of the Company consists of the following members: J. H. Kann (Vice-Chairman), Dr. N. Katzenelsohn, S. Barbasch, H. Urysohn, Joseph Cowen, M. M. Ussischkin, L. Kessler, M. Feldstein, J. Kremenetzky, I. L. Goldberg, D. Levontin (Managing Director). The last Chairman of the Company before the war was the late David Wolffsohn.

3. The Anglo-Levantine Banking Company, Ltd.

This Company was registered on the 8th May, 1908, and has since then carried on banking business in Turkey.

The nominal capital of the Company is £100,000, and the paid-up capital on the 15th May, 1916, was £25,038.

The Board of Directors consists of the following members: Dr. N. Katzenelsohn (Chairman), J. H. Kann (Vice-Chairman), S. Barbasch, Joseph Cowen, M. Feldstein, Dr. V. Jacobsohn, L. Kessler, J. Kremenetzky, D. Levontin, S. Mitrani, H. Urysohn. The Constantinople Managers are: S. Mitrani (Director) and Dr. V. Jacobsohn (Director).

4. The Jewish National Fund

The Jewish National Fund was established in accordance with a decision of the second Congress, its object being to acquire land for the Jewish people in Palestine, such land to remain for ever the property of the whole Jewish nation. The management of the Fund has deemed it its duty to promote all undertakings of public utility in Palestine, assisting thereby to the utmost the general progress of the work of colonization. The Jewish National Fund is the most popular of Zionist institutions.

The Jewish National Fund was legalized in this country on the 8th of April, 1907, as an “Association Limited by Guarantee, and not having a Capital Divided into Shares.” By the constitution of the Association the permanent right of control is vested in the representatives elected by the Zionist Congress, who are identical with the holders of founders’ shares and members of the Council of the Jewish Colonial Trust, Ltd. (referred to above).

According to the Articles of Association, only 75 per cent of the assets of the Fund may be invested in Palestine; the remaining 25 per cent must always be left in the shape of money on deposit or investment of an easily realizable nature. The Bankers of the Association are the Jewish Colonial Trust, Ltd. The Fund amounted at the end of the year 1914 to £209,243 18s. 6d.

The means of collecting contributions to the Fund are numerous and varied. They include: General Donations, Collecting Sheets, Collecting Boxes, the Golden Book, National Fund Stamps and Telegrams, Olive Tree Donations, Contributions to the Workers’ Dwelling Fund, etc. The Golden Book has been instituted for the purpose of entering the names of Zionist workers and supporters, on payment of the sum of £10 or more. The first Golden Book, containing 5000 names, has already been filled. It is an elaborately executed work of art, and is generally exhibited at Zionist Congresses. The second Golden Book, now in use, was produced by the Palestinian Art School “Bezalel” at Jerusalem. On the entry of a name in this book, an artistically executed certificate is issued.

A few years ago another book, called “Memorial Book,” was instituted for the purpose of perpetuating the memory of Jews who have defended the honour or property of the Jewish people in Palestine, or have been permanently and successfully occupied in the interest of the Jewish National Fund, or have left by will, according to their means, a considerable legacy for the benefit of the Fund.

The Fund has also received from time to time considerable sums for the purpose of foundations, principally to build homesteads for the workers. The principal contributions under this heading have been: The David and Fanny Wolffsohn Foundation, about £3000, and the Halperin Foundation (Vienna), about £4000. Besides the foregoing sums other contributions towards the Workers’ Homestead Fund, amounting to about £17,000 in all, have been received.

The total income from every kind of contribution to the Fund was about £25,000 for the year 1915, contributions having come from about thirty different countries in all parts of the world.

By the end of the year 1914 the Jewish National Fund had invested in Palestine close upon £150,000—70 per cent of its entire assets.

The members of the Company are the holders of founders’ shares of the Jewish Colonial Trust, Ltd. (see above).

The administration of the Fund is in the hands of a Board of Directors, consisting of five Directors elected by the members, and two Governors appointed by the Controlling Committee. This Committee consists of the persons who for the time being form the Smaller Actions Committee of the Zionist Congress, and its functions are merely those of vetoing or prohibiting any act of the Directors that the Committee may deem to be detrimental to the interests of the Association.

The present Directors are: Dr. Max Bodenheimer, L. Kessler, J. Kremenetzky, and Dr. A. Hantke.

The only Governor is Professor Dr. O. Warburg (the second Governor, D. Wolffsohn, having died in September, 1914). The Secretary of the Association was H. Neumann, and its registered office is at 10‒12 Walbrook, London, E.C.

The Administrative Office of the Association is situate at the Hague, and the principal officials at that office are: Engineer J. Kaplansky, N. Gross and S. Hallenstein.

Central offices exist in many countries for the collecting of contributions and donations to the Fund. The addresses of these officers are:⁠—

Argentine: Federacion Sionista en Argentine, Buenos-Aires, Sarmiento 2086.

Australia: The Brisbane Zionist Society, c/o J. A. Blumberg, Hon. Sec., Brisbane-East, Wellington Road.

The Victoria Zionist Association, “Hatchiah,” Melbourne, 313 Drummont Street, Carlton.

The Sydney Zionist Society, c/o M. B. Michelson, Hon. Sec., Sydney, Pett Street 64.

Belgium: Oscar Fischer, now at Scheveningen, Cornelius Jolstr. 105 Sam. Schmeidler, Scheveningen, Stevinstr. 142.

Brazil: Associacio Zionistat Tiferes Zion, c/o Jaime Horowitz, Rio de Janeiro, Rua Visconte Itanna.

Bulgaria: Comité Central Sioniste, aux bons soins de Mr. le Dr. Benroya, Philippopoli.

Canada: Bureau Committee of the Federation of Zionist Societies of Canada, Montreal, P.O. Box 912.

China: E. B. Ezra, Esq., c/o the Bank of Territorial Development of China, Shanghai, Nanking Rd. 33.

Denmark: S. Skorochod, Kopenhagen, Bordergade 30.

Egypt: Jacob Caleff, Heliopolis-Le Cairo, Rue Zagazig.

Germany: Jüdischer Nationalfonds, Zentrale für Deutschland, Berlin, W., 15 Sachsische Str. 8.

England: Jewish National Fund Commission for England, 15 New Broad Street, London, E.C. 2.

France: J. Salzmann, Paris, 41 Rue de la Tour d’Auvergne.

Greece: Syllogue Sioniste “Poale-Sion,” Volo.

La Commission Mixte de Fonds National des Sociétés “Bené Sion” and “Nordau” aux bons soins de Mr. J. Usiel, Salonique.

Holland: Alfred Polak, Tilburg, Telegraafenstr. 1.

Italy: Mademoiselle Emma Coen, Verona, 14 Via Gran Czara.

Croatia, Bosnia, Slavonia: Frau Clara Barmaper-Jacobi, Agram, Boskovicg 23.

New Zealand: The Auckland Zionist Society, Auckland Park Rd. 42.

United States of America: Jewish National Fund Bureau for America, New York City, 44 E. 23rd Street.

Norway: Norske Zionist Forening, p. Adr. Aron Grusd, Christiania, Karl Johan Str. 7.

Austria: Jüdischer Nationalfonds, Sammelstelle für Österreich, Wein ii Zirkusgasse 33.

Eastern Asia: Josef Levy, Singapore, 10 Robinson Road.

Portugal: W. Terlo, Lissabon, Rua St. Nicolau 59.

Roumania: M. Heinrich Schein, Galatz.

Switzerland: W. Simon, Zürich, Neugasse 11.

Serbia: Dr. D. Alcalay, Belgrad.

Sweden: J. Abel, Stockholm, Storkyrkobrinken 8.

South Africa: South African Zionist Federation, Mr. B. J. Chaimowitz, Johannesburg, P.O. Box 18.

Tunis: Association Sioniste Tunisienne, Tunis, 52 Rue des Glacières.

Hungary: Zsido Nomzoti Alap magyarorszagi irodaja, Budapest Kiraly utca 36.

In England the collection of funds is entrusted to the National Fund Commission for England. This commission consists of two representatives of the English Zionist Federation and two representatives of the Order of Ancient Maccabeans. The office of the Commission is at 15 New Broad Street, London, E.C. 2, which has a number of sub-commissions in London and the principal provincial towns. It organizes frequently house-to-house collections, flower days, collections at public meetings, places of worship and entertainment, etc.

The English National Fund Commission has recently published a small pamphlet, giving full particulars of its activities. A larger pamphlet, entitled The Jewish National Fund, is now being issued in the English language by the Head Office of the Fund, and by the time that this book reaches the public will no doubt be obtainable at the Office of the National Fund Commission in London.

5. The Palestine Land Development Company, Ltd.

This Company was registered on the 20th of January, 1909. Its main object is to encourage the settlement of Jews in Palestine by the purchase and parcelling out of the land and by preparing the soil for the successful settlement of a larger number of small holders.

The nominal capital of the Company is £50,000, divided into 40,000 ordinary shares of £1 each and 200 founders’ shares of £50 each.

The Secretary of the Company is W. Wolf, and the Office at 10‒12 Walbrook, London, E.C.

6. Jüdischer Kulturfonds Kedem (Kedem Keren Hatarbuth Hoiwrith), Ltd.

This Company was established for the purpose of developing and promoting and assisting in the development and promotion of Jewish knowledge and learning, the cultivation of Hebrew literature and Jewish history, and the revival and use of the Hebrew language in the prescribed region (which expression means Palestine, Syria and the Peninsula of Sinai). In order to carry out these objects the Company aims at establishing an Academy (Sinhedrijah) as a central institution of Hebrew and Jewish learning. It further intends to publish all kinds of books, useful for its purpose, and distribute them among individuals, academies, colleges, universities, schools and other institutions. It also proposes to establish and maintain all kinds of schools and teaching establishments, to promote the main object of the Company. Among its many ancillary objects are the granting of scholarships, and the subsidizing of funds, pension schemes, etc., for maintaining Jewish authors, teachers and artists.

The foundation of the Company is due to the initiative of Mr. Moses Feldstein of Warsaw, who contributed the sum of about £1500. In commemoration of this fact a Fund was created under the name of “Feldstein Foundation,” which is to comprise the aforementioned sum and all other capital donations given to the Company from time to time towards this Fund. Since the establishment of the Company several other similar contributions have been made to the Fund, but the outbreak of the war has prevented the founder of the Company, Mr. Feldstein, and his co-directors from carrying out the vigorous propaganda which they intended to set on foot in all parts of the world. The members of the Company consist of the joint holders of the founders’ shares of the Jewish Colonial Trust, the Directors of the Jewish National Fund, and the President of the Odessa Committee (the Committee of the Company for assisting Jewish Agriculturists and Handicraftsmen in Syria and Palestine).

The Directors of the Company are M. Feldstein (Chairman), Dr. A. Hantke, Dr. S. Levin, A. Podlischewsky, N. Sokolow, M. Ussischkin, Dr. Ch. Weizmann.

The Secretary of the Company is W. Wolf, and the office is at 10‒12 Walbrook, London, E.C.

7. The First London Achuzah Company, Ltd.

The First London Achuzah Company, Ltd., was founded by Dr. J. M. Salkind, with the assistance of Mr. M. Rosenblum and Mr. T. Z. Teacher, in April, 1913, when fifteen members joined the Company. Towards the end of 1913 the number of members amounted to fifty. It has now increased to eighty, about fifty of whom live in London, fifteen in Edinburgh, one in Russia and the rest in provincial towns in England.

The Company was incorporated as a limited liability company in England at the beginning of 1914. The members decided to pay 25 per cent of the amount subscribed by them (a full member’s share amounting to £300). At the same time the Company sent two delegates to Palestine to make investigations with a view to the purchase of suitable land. This was in February, 1914, after fifty members had paid up an aggregate sum of £4000. The two delegates who proceeded to Palestine were Dr. J. M. Salkind and Mr. H. Sterling. The nominal capital of the Company amounted on registration to £15,000, but was increased in August, 1914, to £25,000, and it is now intended to increase it again to £50,000. Most of the members have already paid the Company more than one-third of the amount of their shares (£120 on each £300 share). Some of the members have taken more than one share—one and a half, two, two and a half, and in one case three shares. About half of the members belong to the artisan class, while the other half consist mostly of merchants. The Company intends to establish also an industrial Achuzah, for the purpose of encouraging and establishing industrial undertakings in Palestine.

When the delegates came back from Palestine, they proposed the purchase of the second half of Kerkur, the first half of which belongs to Mr. Schlesinger (a Zionist of Chita, Siberia), and covers an area of 5134 dunam (about 1280 acres). The proposal was accepted in May, 1914, and the Company paid half of the purchase price, which amounted to £8850. The purchase was made through the Palestine Land Development Co., Ltd., London.

From that time onwards the membership in London, Cairo, and the two small branch companies in Paris and Antwerp, increased considerably. The progress thus achieved induced the Company to increase the extent of its holding in Palestine, and it purchased in 1914 a large area of land called Rabia, in the neighbourhood of Kerkur, measuring about 4000 dunam (1000 acres), the purchase price being £6030. The first instalment of £2000 has already been paid to the Palestine Land Development Co., Ltd., in connection with this transaction.

Owing to the outbreak of the War, the work of the Achuzah Company had to be suspended, and, consequently, the branch companies in Paris, Antwerp and Cairo collapsed. In the United Kingdom, however, and particularly in Edinburgh, the activities of the Company have recently been revived, and a number of new members have joined, in spite of the unfavourable general conditions. In view of this unexpected success, the Directors of the Company intend in the near future to remove the restriction which prevents the Company from having more than fifty members (it having originally been registered as a private company).

The present Directors are: L. Eisen, W. Kirsch, Ch. Inwald, Ch. Kaufman, H. Teacher, Abraham Bendas, Ch. Warschawsky, Dr. J. M. Salkind (Managing Director).

The land purchased by the Achuzah in Palestine is most favourably situated from the point of view of communication. From the Arabah (Dothan) station it is only one hour’s journey by car to Toul Kerem, a station on the new railway line from Merchawia to Lud and Beersheba. Thus the Achuzah settlement will be in a position to keep in touch with Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem, and other places, by means of railway communication.

8. The Maccabean Land Company, Ltd.

The Maccabean Land Company is registered as a limited liability company, with a capital of £52,000, divided into forty founders’ shares (reserved for subscription by the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, its Beacons and Allied Societies) of the value of £50 each and 1000 land shares, offered for general subscription, of £50 each, each entitling to an allotment of land in the proposed Maccabean Settlement. The object of the Company is to enable its members, by the accumulation of small periodical payments, to acquire landholdings in Palestine, either for personal occupation or for profitable development. For this purpose it is proposed to acquire forthwith a large area of land (preferentially in the south of Palestine, in the district of Modin, the ancient home of the Maccabees), capable of being parcelled out in allotments and profitably cultivated. The minimum subscription of £10,000 has already been assured, and the Company proposes to enter into negotiations with one of the existing public bodies engaged in the acquisition of land in Palestine for the purchase of an area of land sufficient to provide allotments for all the subscribing members. Unfortunately, the War has compelled the Company to suspend its activities for the present.

C. Hebrew Schools in Palestine, and Other Institutions of the New Colonization

The new Jewish colonization movement in Palestine has led to the establishment of more than fifty primary schools, two high schools, two agricultural schools, one handicraft school and one school of arts and crafts. A polytechnic institute on a large scale, for the training of engineers and chemists, was about to be opened when the War broke out. Particulars concerning the Agricultural Experiment Station are given elsewhere in this volume.

The principal schools under the care and supervision of the Zionist Organization are the following:⁠—

The Hebrew Teachers’ Seminary and School of Commerce at Jerusalem, attended by ninety pupils. This school is situated in the centre of the Jewish Settlement, with sufficient space for classrooms, the teachers’ room, collections of specimens and instruments for instruction in natural science. The garden is used for drill and instruction in botany. All graduates of the Teachers’ Seminary are teachers in Palestine, and some of the graduates of the School of Commerce have also found employment as teachers. The students have organized evening classes for mothers, where they teach them to speak Hebrew, while their children attend the Kindergarten. (The Director is M. David Yellin.)

The Hebrew School for Boys at Jerusalem, attended by 205 pupils, including a great number of Sephardim (55 per cent). This number is continually increasing. Instruction is given in all Jewish subjects, as well as in Mathematics, History, Geography, Botany, Singing, Drawing, Gardening, in the Arabic language and some European languages. (Director: M. Sutta.)

The Girls’ School at Jerusalem is attended by 280 pupils, 55 per cent of whom are Ashkenazim, and 33 per cent Sephardim, the rest belonging to Georgian, Yemenite and Persian Jewish families. The subjects of instruction are: Hebrew, Bible, History, Arithmetic, Geography, Zoology, Botany, Drawing, Singing, Gardening, and Modern Languages. More than half of the regular pupils are boarded at the School.

The School for Kindergarten Teachers at Jerusalem is attended by thirty-three pupils. Here the girls are trained to become Kindergarten teachers. The instruction is practical as well as theoretical.

The Hebrew Boys’ School at Jaffa has eight classes and is attended by about 150 children. Pupils who have passed through this School enter the Teachers’ Seminary at Jerusalem, the Hebrew Gymnasium (High School) at Jaffa, or the Agricultural School at Petach-Tikvah, or take up their parents’ trade. (Director: Dr. Marschak.)

The Hebrew Kindergarten at Haifa is attended by seventy children, and is developing satisfactorily.

The Hebrew School at Haifa has 104 scholars (ninety-seven Ashkenazim, seven Sephardim), and consists of three elementary and four other classes. A preparatory course has also been established, which is attended by twenty-six children. As in all other Zionist schools, the instruction is given in Hebrew. The syllabus is that of a Continental secondary school.

The Agricultural School at Petach-Tikvah has about fifty pupils, children of the local colonists. Besides instruction in Jewish subjects, modern European languages and Arabic, practical instruction is given in agriculture and horticulture. Some of the pupils work with the colonists, and in that way not only acquire a good practical knowledge, but are able to earn their own living. This School has endeavoured to establish a special department for every branch of agriculture, each with its own plot of land for experimental purposes.

The Jewish Music Schools at Jaffa and Jerusalem, called “Shulamit,” and founded by the late Mrs. Ruppin in 1912, are attended by several pupils of other schools, and have gained great popularity in the country.

The Bezalel School of Arts and Crafts is an important element in the Palestinian Hebrew revival, and has already influenced the Jewish communities of Europe and America. Many Jewish homes possess specimens of the new Palestinian handicrafts, which remind them that in the home of the Jewish people deft handicraftsmen, inspired by the Jewish spirit, are giving a new expression to the genius of their race in metal-work and wood-carving, in carpet-weaving and embroidery. Hebrew characters and emblems enter into the woof and the warp of a Bezalel carpet and give character to the design.⁠¹ The School and Workshops, founded by an enthusiastic Zionist artist, Boris Schatz, are supported by several Committees on the Continent, in this country, and in America, and form a means of most successful Zionist propaganda among all classes of the Jewish and Gentile population. Many Bezalel exhibitions and bazaars have been held, one as recently as 1912, in London. The Bezalel includes also a beautiful little museum of Palestinian antiquities and specimens of Palestinian flora and fauna, as well as of modern Jewish art (including Glitzenstein’s masterpiece, Messiah, Joseph Israels’ portrait—one of the last works of his life, painted for the Bezalel, of which this great master, a sincere friend of the Zionist movement, was a patron). This museum has also the largest existing collection of old Jewish coins, described in M. S. Raffael’s (Raffalowitsch) Matbeoth Ha’ibrim Ha’kadmonim Jerusalem, 1913.

The Jaffa Hebrew High School (for boys and girls), the so-called Gymnasiah Ibrith (Herzliah, founded in 1906), is first and foremost among the institutions of the Hebrew revival in Palestine. No institution has proved so triumphantly the vitality and significance of the modern revival of the Hebrew language and of Jewish national education as the Gymnasiah Ibrith has done with its staff of pioneer-teachers, graduates of various European universities, and its eight hundred pupils from all parts of the world-wide Jewish Diaspora. The great merit of establishing this institution belongs to Dr. Methman-Cohn, who was assisted by the late Dr. Leo Kahn of Kishinew. The most vigilant and generous friend and patron of the Gymnasiah Ibrith, Mr. Jacob Moser, M.P., of Bradford, provided the institution with the means to erect the impressive building which forms the centre of the little Jewish town Tel Aviv, near Jaffa. This institution, equipped with everything that is necessary for the teaching of all branches of science, has attracted the best of the younger Zionist intellectuals, who have made it their life-work to inaugurate a system of national education in a modernized living Hebrew. (The most important workers in this institution are mentioned elsewhere in this volume.)

The Jaffa Hebrew School for Girls (Beth Sefer Le’banoth) was founded by the Odessa “Lovers of Zion” Association in 1894, and is attended by a few hundred girls. The principal is that most able pioneer and Hebrew educationist, Dr. Tourov. It is the best school of its kind in the country.

The Seminary for Women Teachers at Jaffa, also maintained by the Odessa “Lovers of Zion,” was founded in 1913 in a house built for the purpose, the means having been supplied by the Russian Zionist M. Isaac Feinberg, in the shape of a donation.

The Tachkemoni Secondary School at Jaffa, founded in 1905, and attended by a few hundred pupils, is chiefly supported by the strictly orthodox section of Zionists, the Mizrachi, and is doing important educational work on traditional lines, but with a modernized syllabus. Instruction is given in science, Arabic and modern languages. (The school was under the control of Rabbi Kuk and a Mizrachi Committee.)

The Jerusalem Gymnasium (High School), attended by about 150 pupils, boys and girls, was established in 1911 by a group of teachers interested in national education. Although it has not so far achieved its full development, it bids fair to produce good results.

The Odessa “Lovers of Zion” Association maintains Kindergartens in Safed, Tiberias and Jaffa; schools for children in the colonies of Chederah, Bir Jacob, Wadi el Chanin, Artuf, Moza and Kastinie; and schools at Tiberias, Haifa and Gaza. It contributes also to the support of the Tachkemoni and the Handicrafts School attached to the Talmud-Torah (religious school) at Jaffa, and of the Bezalel at Jerusalem.

The “Free Association for the Defence of the Interests of Orthodox Judaism” at Frankfort supports a number of schools in the colonies, which have also accepted Hebrew as the language of instruction. To this category belong the Talmud-Torah schools at Petach-Tikvah, Rishon Le’Zion, Ekron, Rechoboth and Haifa.

The Jewish Colonization Association maintains almost all the schools in the colonies, but the management of the schools is left to the colonists themselves. As we are confining ourselves mostly to “Lovers of Zion” and Zionist work, we refrain from giving full statistics of these schools, which are important from the standpoint of numbers as well as from that of efficiency. To mention just a few of them, the schools in Upper Galilee (at Rosh Pinah and other colonies) are excellent, both from the pedagogical point of view and in the teaching of living Hebrew, which is the language of instruction.

The Alliance Israélite Universelle of Paris has a long and important record of school work in Palestine, and the Hilfsverein der deutsche Juden has also established a large number of schools, etc. In 1913 the Alliance requested its schools in Palestine to give more attention to Hebrew. The Evelina de Rothschild School for Girls of the Anglo-Jewish Association, under the headship of Miss Landau, is doing very useful work.

Mention should be made also of the numerous religious old-fashioned schools and colleges (Talmud-Torah schools and Yeshiboth) for boys and young scholars at Jerusalem and in the provinces, in which thousands of Jewish children are educated in knowledge of the Bible and the Talmud. In spite of its defects, the old Jewish settlement in Palestine was instrumental in paving the way for the new colonization, and in this respect the old schools, notwithstanding their out-of-date methods, deserve the highest appreciation for having preserved in the children the knowledge of religion and ancient Hebrew literature. Gradually the new spirit is penetrating into some of these schools, as, for instance, into the Cheder Torah (founded in 1906), where the Hebrew language has been adopted as the language of instruction.

In connection with the ever-increasing and extensive work of national education in Palestine the “Union of Teachers” (Merchaz Ha’morim) calls for mention as one of the most important organizations. It was established some years ago for the purpose of fostering educational development in the new Jewish settlement, of providing means for the further training of teachers, and for completing the education of those engaged in school work, by such means as holiday courses, lectures, excursions, research work, discussions and debates dealing with the curriculum and methods of instruction, and so on.

The Merchaz has also established the nucleus of an Education Museum, with sections for history, pedagogy and hygiene.

The “Language Board” (Vaad Ha’lashon) at Jerusalem (including D. Yellin, E. Ben Jehuda, Dr. Maze, Sutta and others) plays an important part in the national awakening. The rebirth of the Jewish nation being impossible without the rebirth of the national language, the work of modernizing and enriching the national language is as essential and as indispensable for the realization of Zionism as the purchase and cultivation of land or the financial arrangements for that purpose. To unearth the treasures of our ancient language, to reveal to our people the wealth of our national intellect, to broaden national thought and to guide it towards clear expression in its own way—this is fundamental Zionist work. Prosperous and happy nations have established academies for this purpose, which are maintained out of public funds; our more unassuming task is still in a preliminary stage, although much useful work has already been done. The “Language Board” is publishing a series of pamphlets containing suggestions for new idioms, etc.

The good work of the two last-named institutions has earned the appreciation of the Zionist Actions Committee, which has decided to provide them with the necessary means.

The Public Hebrew Library “Bait Neeman,” “Midrash ♦Abrabanel” and “Ginze Joseph” at Jerusalem, founded by Dr. Joseph Chazanovitsch of Bialystok, is also worthy of record. It is the only big library in Palestine which is of use to scholars, and it is therefore of immeasurable value for the revival of Palestine. (There are also collections of rare Hebrew books and MSS. in some Sephardi Yeshiboth, and a Hebrew Library, “Shaar Zion,” founded in 1891 by the new Jewish settlers at Jaffa.) It is far from being adequate—it requires extending and systematizing—but this beginning must win the admiration of all those who fully conceive the immensity of the Zionist task.

The Gymnastic Societies (Maccabee) at Jaffa and Jerusalem, with branch societies in Rishon Le’Zion, Zichron Jacob, and other colonies, are doing useful work for the physical development of the new generation. All these Societies have been founded during recent years by Zionists, and are supported by the Zionist Organization.

Mr. Nathan Straus, the well-known philanthropist of New York, who has identified himself with the Zionist Organization, has established a number of useful institutions in Palestine, partly of a philanthropic and hygienic, partly of a pedagogical character. His “Health Department,” which is assisted by some other Jewish Societies on the Continent, has become a real blessing to Jerusalem, likewise his “Soup Kitchen,” his classes for instructing girls in handicrafts, and his workshop for manufacturing articles of mother-of-pearl.

To the hygienic institutions belongs also the Pasteur Institute at Jerusalem, which is controlled by the well-known Russian Zionist, Dr. Arji Behm, for vaccino-therapeutical work.

The People’s Hall (Bet-Am) at Jerusalem is a sort of Toynbee Hall for popular lectures in Hebrew, and for concerts and amusements. Institutions of this kind exist also in Rishon Le’Zion, and other colonies.

The best known of the Hebrew Publication Societies, and of the periodicals, newspapers and magazines founded by Zionists in Palestine and devoted to the revival are the following:⁠—

Kohelet, founded by the Association of Teachers for the publication of Hebrew text-books;

Le’am, for popular pamphlets and pamphlets on scientific subjects;

Yefet, for the translation of classical works of European literature;

Moledet, a literary periodical for young people;

Ha’chinuch, a periodical for teachers, dealing with pedagogical questions;

Ha’chaklai, a Hebrew monthly devoted to agriculture, gardening, etc.;

Yerushalaim, a year-book containing useful information regarding Palestine, by A. M. Luncz;

Luach Erez Israel, a Palestinian calendar with a literary section, by the same author.

Hebrew journalism was represented during many years by the old weekly Chabazelet (editor: M. Frumkin) and by the modern Hashkafa (editor: Elieser Ben-Jehuda). During recent years Ben-Jehuda has edited a daily paper, Ha’or. Until recently Palestine had two daily papers: Ha’cheruth and Moriah, and two weekly papers: Ha’poêl Ha’zair and Ha’achduth.

D. Miscellaneous Institutions

The most important institutions for the conduct, support and control of colonization work and companies for practical undertakings are:⁠—

The Zionist Office. Chief Administrators: Dr. Ruppin, Dr. Thon; Agricultural Engineers: Oettinger, Zagorodzki, Vilkansky, and others.

The Chovevé Zion Office (Dr. Chissin).

The Jewish Colonization Association Office (M. Frank, M. Brill, and others).

The Palestine Wine Company “Carmel,” and The Syndicate of Vine-Growers. (The “Carmel” Company has branches in Warsaw (1896), in America (1898), the “Carmel Oriental” in Alexandria (1902), with sister companies—The Palestine Wine Company (“Carmel Oriental”) in London (Manager: A. Günzburg)—and branches in several countries. The centre is at Rishon Le’Zion, under the management of M. Gluskin).

The Geoulah, for the purchase of land (founded in Warsaw, 1902, in the names of Goldberg, Gluskin and Oettinger, with a branch in Odessa).

The Pardess, a syndicate of orange-growers; the Ha-shaked for almond growing, and some other companies of the same kind.

The Ahuzat Bait, for house-building at Jaffa (this Company founded Tel-Aviv), and other Companies for the purchase of land for house-building, etc.

The Agudath Netaim (Association for Plantations), established in 1905 in Palestine, is a Company incorporated at Constantinople for promoting Jewish plantation work in the Holy Land. (The principal manager of the Company is Mr. Eisenberg of Rechoboth, who has achieved a reputation as a writer and organizer of great practical experience.)

The Histadrut Ha’moshavot, a union of the landed proprietors in the colonies.

The Lishkat Modiyim, an office for information established by the Odessa Chovevé Zion, managed by M. Schenkin.

The Bureau of Information, managed by the Poalim (the labourers), and

Ha’poêl Ha’zair (the Young Worker)—an organization of nationalist workers and intellectuals who have given an impetus to the enthusiasm and determination of the young Zionists in Palestine, as well as far beyond the boundaries of that country. The programme of the organization is a synthesis of Jewish Nationalism and Socialism, in which the Nationalist idea is more accentuated than in the programme of the Poalei Zion. They started their work during the first years of this century, and their organ was the Hebrew weekly Ha’poêl Ha’zair, of which Mr. Aronovitch was editor.

The Jewish Agricultural Experiment Station at Haifa

The Sixth Zionist Congress held at Basle in 1906 accepted a scheme presented by Professor Warburg to found an agricultural experiment station in Palestine, and the Zionist Organization started collecting money for that purpose. M. Aaron Aaronsohn,⁠¹ the son of a pioneer colonist of Zichron Jacob, a distinguished agronomist who had been some years engaged in colonization work, and particularly in connection with the inquiries and preparations undertaken on the initiative of Professor Warburg, who was at that time busy with all the schemes concerning Palestine, was commissioned by the Professor to study the question of the hybridization of wild wheat. In 1906, M. Aaronsohn had found, after painstaking investigation, a few ears of wild wheat growing on the declivities of Mount Hermon. The scientific world was very much interested in this discovery, because of its relation to the possibilities of dry farming in arid regions. M. Aaronsohn travelled on that scientific mission as a delegate of the Zionist Organization, in Northern Africa and Southern Europe, and came to America in 1910. While there, he established relations with the United States Department of Agriculture, which took an interest in his ideas, and published a Bulletin by him entitled Agricultural and Botanical Explorations in Palestine. Through the United States Department of Agriculture, M. Aaronsohn and his work were brought to the notice of a number of prominent American Jews, who at his initiative established, February 18, 1910, the Jewish Agricultural Experiment Station, a New York corporation with Julius Rosenwald, of Chicago, president; Morris Loeb, of New York, vice-president; Paul M. Warburg, of New York, treasurer; and Henrietta Szold, of New York, secretary. The objects of the corporation are “the establishment, maintenance and support of Agricultural Experiment Stations in Palestine and other countries; the development and improvement of cereals, fruit, and vegetables indigenous to Palestine and neighbouring lands, the production of new species therefrom and their distribution elsewhere; the advancement throughout the world, and the giving of instruction in new and improved methods of farming.” Funds were raised by the Corporation for the installation and the running expenses for a period of five years. The demonstration fields are situated at Atlit, at the foot of Mount Carmel, on land belonging to Baron Rothschild. Sub-stations are situated at Chedera, in the neighbourhood of Petach-Tikvah and elsewhere. The Station occupies itself since its establishment with the hybridization of wild cereals and with plantations of fruit frees, vines, mulberry trees, various sorts of fodder and ornamental plants. The Jewish colonists resort to this Station for advice and information.

### LXXXIII.

David Wolffsohn’s Autobiography

“My biography offers nothing of special interest to the general public. It may be divided into two parts: Zionist and personal. The Zionist portion is closely bound up with the history of our movement during the last ten years, and the facts concerning my modest work can hardly be distinguished from the general history of the movement. The personal portion of my career, on the other hand, contains nothing that transcends the ordinary. It is the simple story of a man of the Jewish people, of the Jewish Ghetto.

“I was born in the year 1856, in the village of Dorbiany, in the Government of Kovno, in the Province of Lithuania in Russia, close to the German frontier. My parents were poor, pious Jews. My late father, Isaac, was a talmudic scholar, and devoted his whole life to study and teaching. He earned a precarious livelihood from his lessons. My late mother, the type of a pious, good, clever Jewess, had to bear the burden of the household and the education of her children. Life in my parents’ house was thoroughly Jewish. Zionism at that time was, of course, not known under that name, but, so far as the ideal of Zionism is concerned, I can say that in our home our lives were thoroughly inspired by the Zionist ideal. Till my fourteenth year I studied, according to the old Jewish custom, in the Cheder and Beth Hamedrash of my native town. In the early seventies I went to Memel, where my oldest brother was then residing. Here I made the acquaintance of Rabbi Dr. I. J. Rülf, who had great influence on my future career and way of thinking. Shortly afterwards I went to West Prussia, where I served several years as apprentice in a pious Jewish business-house. I also spent six months in Lyck, where I frequently met in his own house David Gordon, the editor of Ha’magid, who was one of the earliest Zionist pioneers. In 1877 I returned to Memel, where I set up in business for myself, and married. After some time I removed to East Friesland, and in 1887 to my present home in Cologne.

“I can hardly give any data concerning my Zionist work. Zionism for me is hardly a thing that can be put into chronological, historical order. Zionism has been, rather, my life. Ever since I learned to think and feel I was a Zionist. I took a lively interest in the Chovevé Zion movement and was in active correspondence with all the leaders of this movement in Germany. In 1894 I delivered in Cologne my first address on Zionism and helped to found the local society for the promotion and support of Jewish agriculture in Syria and Palestine, which was established in the same year. The appearance of Herzl’s Judenstaat (in 1896) was epoch-making for me. This pamphlet made such a deep impression on me that I at once went to Vienna to introduce myself to Herzl. I placed myself entirely at his disposal. From that moment till the last days of his fruitful life, unhappily so prematurely ended, I remained in uninterrupted intercourse with our never-to-be-forgotten leader. To devote my strength to the continuance of this work I regarded as the task of my life. When, in the sad time after Herzl’s death, the Presidency was offered to me, I was surprised and embarrassed. It was only out of a sense of duty that I accepted this high dignity.”

### LXXXIV.

Some English Press Comments on the London Zionist Congress (1900)

Spectator: “As to the Jews being able to live on the land in Palestine there can be no doubt. Those who have seen a Jewish colony in Syria will testify to the excellent physical and moral and agricultural results achieved. Merely to see the children there is ample warrant of what is done for the Jew by release from the Ghetto.”

Saturday Review: “Restoration to Palestine symbolizes the recovery of self-respect, the reattainment of nationhood.”

Globe: “Zionism answers the aspirations of the majority of persecuted Jews, but it is important to those Jews who have become completely assimilated to their Christian surroundings, and who ought to have an interest in the raising of the economic, moral and intellectual status of the mass of their unhappy brethren, which raising of status will necessarily be the first outcome of their gathering in the land of their fathers.”

Daily News: “Whatever difference of opinion may prevail as to the policy of the Zionist movement, there can be no doubt as to the intense and fervid interest of those who, at no small self-sacrifice, are doing this work of revival.”

Daily Graphic: “Zionism appeals to many sides of human thought, but perhaps the final impression it leaves upon the public mind is something akin to Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones which lived again. Is it possible that the dispersed nation, whose career is one of the standing marvels of history, is about to gather itself again and open a new chapter of its romantic annals? It looks very like it. The movement is in the hands of practical and courageous men; it has behind it a stimulus, not only of subjective enthusiasm, but also of objective strife, and it entirely responds to a practical need.”

Yorkshire Post: “The striking feature of the meetings was the unity of purpose and enthusiasm which seem to characterize all the delegates. Persons who speak quite different tongues nevertheless fraternize and grow enthusiastic over the prospect of returning as a nation to the land of their fathers.”

Leeds Mercury: “This is not wholly a dream.... Several colonies have settled down within their historic territorial limits. A few of them are already self-supporting. The movement is essentially democratic.”

Nottingham Guardian: “The movement the Zionist Congress represents is an important one and it may possibly produce momentous results.”

Newcastle Courier: “This movement in Jewry is one which readily commands the sympathy of the outsider. It is the voicing of that inarticulate feeling which has for ages silently swayed and sustained forlorn and seemingly forsaken Jews. The inextinguishable hope and the unshaken faith of these stricken people as to their future constitutes a striking object-lesson in these days of scepticism.”

Liverpool Echo: “From every point of view, political, social, and religious, Zionism has much to recommend it, and the enthusiasm with which it has been taken up by many of the most prominent thinkers of the Hebrew race affords the best augury for its ultimate accomplishment.”

Glasgow Evening News: “Such a scheme as the re-peopling of Palestine, while demanding careful handling at every stage, must be gradually evolved.... If the Zionist movement creates a Jew with the tastes and aspirations of his forefathers it will not have been started in vain.”

Glasgow Evening Citizen: “It is a matter of considerable importance, looked at from what side we may. Should any effective system be found of dealing with it, then the present Congress will probably have operated to the advantage of this country quite as much as to the Jews in whose interests it is being held.”

North British Daily Mail: “There is no reason why Christians should not wish them well. The movement should provide a refuge for the Jewish race from the Anti-Semitic hate which pursues them in so many countries, and it should help somewhat to restore to its former prosperity the land of Palestine, towards which the Jewish heart ever turns with love and devotion.”

Review of the Week: “Why should not this homogeneous, intelligent and powerful race (the Jews) form a State of their own, and thus free themselves from persecution in other States, and enforce respect for their nationality? Millions of Jews have probably asked themselves this question. Trustworthy leaders having been found, a movement has been set on foot for the establishment of a Jewish centre in Palestine. The idea is glorious enough to take possession even of the minds of such a practical, prudent and commercial race as the Jews.”

### LXXXV.

Colonel Conder on the Value of the Jewish National Movement (1903)

“Enthusiasm is the power of feeling a strong interest in something that is not of personal material advantage. It is not a very common feeling anywhere, and is perhaps as rare among Jews as among others. It is generally regarded with suspicion: for it often upsets repose, and leads to unexpected and disturbing events. Ignorant enthusiasm has been the cause of many great troubles: but enthusiasm founded on real knowledge of events and of national movements has produced, in our own times, some of the greatest changes in history. It was the enthusiasm of the few which created a United Italy, or again which has made Japan the leading power in the Far East. It is the unexpected that comes to pass, because men’s attention is fixed on large and conspicuous objects, and because they find it so difficult to judge whether the new cause, advocated by the few, is based on reality, or whether it is merely a craze. Thus, while endless diplomacy and observation are directed to the management of affairs on the supposition that the facts are evident, there constantly comes a surprise which renders futile all the schemes of anxious Politicians, due to the silent action of some unsuspected element. The blind desires of the people find at length a definite expression, and the direction given by a few enthusiasts leads to new and startling events.... Enthusiasm for one’s own race and country, when genuine, is regarded with general favour: but when George Eliot raised her protest against the everlasting ‘Hep!’ which hounds the wandering Jew from land to land, people asked what she had to do with Judaism. Like Cain, we ask: ‘Am I my brother’s keeper?’ and especially when it is the poor brother whom we so much dislike. We can, however, understand that the great mass of poor and persecuted Jews feel for those who devote their time, money and thought to the raising up of their own people an amount of real affection and gratitude which renders them willing to be led to their realization of hopes that are not commonly regarded by the great mass of the prosperous and contented.... Among the higher class of those broad-minded Jews who sincerely believe in their ancient traditions, very noble efforts are made not only to help the poor and stem the tide of persecution, but also to raise the tone of the nation by appeal to its ancient memories and ideals. These men are the natural leaders to whom the destitute and oppressed turn for counsel and guidance, and it is among them that it has now become a fixed belief that the nation can only be raised from its misery by the creation of a national centre—a home to which all those who are scattered over the earth may turn their eyes: which must be one bound up with all that is best in the historic memories of the race, and which therefore must be the old home in Palestine itself. The Jew, they say, is tired of wandering and tired of being an alien. Emigration has not settled the eternal question, and a nation without a country must be content with toleration as all that it can expect.

“As regards ourselves, we should be only too glad to see Palestine increasing in civilization and prosperity as an outpost in the neighbourhood of Egypt.... It is clear that if the question of the Near East should again be raised, the Jews will have to be considered by statesmen in any settlement of the Syrian question: and that the solution of the question ... may be ... a ‘legally assured home for the Jewish People.’”

### LXXXVI.

Lord Gwydyr on Zionism and the Arabs

One of the most important factors the Zionists will have to reckon with in their further activity in Palestine is that of the Arabian population of the country. This population might consider the development of the Zionist movement undesirable: if the immigration of Jews into Palestine were to bring additional poverty into the land—if the Jewish element were restless, adventurous and inclined to disorder—if the country had or might have a homogeneous Arabic culture, and this new element were to disturb its uniformity through the introduction of its own cultural aspirations—or if that same element were threatening to oust the Arabs from their own position. But these and similar suppositions which might have led to the adoption of strong measures, or at least to a sentimental antipathy against immigration, are non-existent. The Jews bring no poverty into the land; nor is the immigrating population adventurous; Arabic culture does not already prevail in the country; and the Jews will not drive the Arab population from an established position.

The Jews who have been or are coming to Palestine have created considerable new economic values which are not only sufficient for their own maintenance but also contribute essentially towards the economic strengthening of the Arab element. Not only has the Government derived profit from the greater taxation returns of the Jewish colonies, but also from the enhanced taxability of the country, in consequence of the better methods of cultivation introduced by the Jews. The Arab population has also been considerably enriched, partly because the same masses which were formerly unemployed in large numbers found occupations and earnings with the Jews; partly through favourable sales of land, and also because they have learnt from the Jews how to obtain a greater yield from the soil.

Of course there can be no lack of competition in isolated cases, especially between Arab and Jewish traders, or Arab and Jewish artisans. But on the whole this competition can only bear upon individual cases. In general the new immigration can only maintain and support itself in the country if it creates new values, for the very simple reason that industrial conditions in Palestine are in a very low state of development, and that consequently the supplanting of those who hold established positions is practically impossible.

Therefore, from a comprehensive economic point of view, it is not only unnecessary to protect the native population against the immigration, but the latter should be encouraged in the interest of the country and its present inhabitants. The immigration brings about an increase of production as well as of consumption, and the greater part of the native population is thereby relieved from economic distress.

It is also possible that the native population, on having risen from its present state of depression to a higher level, may endeavour, in a measure, to better its economic position by settling down in neighbouring provinces. Colonization of the lands to the east of Palestine by Arabs would considerably reduce the Arab population of Palestine. Already, since the centre of gravity of the Arab race is not situated in Palestine, the area of friction arising from national-political motives is considerably reduced. The national-political relations of the Jews and their Arab fellow-citizens must be directed into the right channel from the very beginning. In this respect the Zionist programme is quite clear, simple and natural. The Jews wish to collaborate with the Arabs towards the elevation and strengthening of the country; but, in all they do, they want to appear as the Jewish nation, and always to show openly and freely their Jewish nationality. If it be a question of assimilation, Palestine is the only country in the world where the Jews, instead of being assimilated, are themselves the assimilating factor. It has, however, to be added that there can be no question of compulsory assimilation enforced by the Jews; they themselves have suffered too much from assimilation to wish to enforce it in any direction. But the Jewish culture will have an instructive and ennobling influence over others, through the force of example.

Lord Gwydyr wrote as follows on the question of the Turks and the Arabs in connection with the Jews:⁠—

“The difference between the Turkish and Arabic race is a curious subject of study and reflection. The Arabs, taken individually, are superior to the Turks. But in the struggle between nations the superiority of individuals is nothing: what gives ascendancy is the quality not of the individual but of the man: it is the spirit of ensemble, the aptitude to command or obey, which, after all, is the same thing. In this point of view the Arab is inferior to the Turk. Enthusiastic, witty, delicate, made for poesy and adventure, sober, inured to fatigue, as gay and as variable as the Turk is serious and grave, the Arabic race is still what we see it in history. But when, forgetting for a moment the brightness of their conquest, we closely examine, even in history, the character of the Arab race, what do we see? A race whose religious enthusiasm created an army rather than a nation, and incapable of founding an empire, as the Romans had done, it gave rise to I do not know how many empires and how short lived. What a chaos, and in this chaos what a rapid and tumultuous nation! Unity and duration were ever wanting in the governments created by the Arab race. These governments enjoyed the life of tropical plants, brilliant and brief, whilst the Turkish race has founded an empire, now expiring indeed, but which has lasted five hundred years or more. For an empire like the Turkish one, and in those countries, five hundred years’ duration is eternity. What is Palestine worth to the Arabs? Nothing. They did not appreciate its value, until the Jewish enterprise that forms a striking contrast with the dulness of the natives began to utilize this old garden of the human race, left desert and barren by the misfortunes of time. The Arabs will be useful when guided by an active and intelligent Jewish settlement.

“Racial rivalry is natural in every country, and is not to be disapproved so long as the aims are good, as, e.g. emulation in acquiring of knowledge in its multiple domains, such as agriculture, industry, etc.: but as soon as rivalry exceeds these bounds, it is to be deprecated. The legal power must resist with all its power this nefarious kind of rivalry, as nobody wishes to differentiate between the inhabitants in their liberties. All must be equal before the law, without the least distinction. But misunderstandings may always occur, and people with interested motives will try to make capital out of these misunderstandings. Everything depends on the goodwill and tact on both sides. Even the Bedawi may be won over to friendship more easily than he may be driven into subjection. And he is worth the winning over. Besides being a fighting man in his own style, he is, as history proves, quite capable of making valuable contributions to the welfare of the country, if he is properly treated. Experience shows that he responds more readily to appeal than to command, and is more easily led than driven. They must be given the blessings of a good administration and trained to take a gradually increasing share in the government of the country. Friendliness will replace inveterate mistrust: the inhabitants of the country will be bound together in close harmony by the ties of common interest. From a strictly Christian standpoint such a course is clearly the highest and wisest: while from that of the Moslems the old fears that closer intercourse with Christians might sap the religious earnestness of the followers of the Prophet are now generally seen to be groundless in the light of a longer and more intimate acquaintance. But there are reasons of a more practical nature than these ethical considerations. The position of Islam in the world’s political and religious geography supplies the followers of both faiths with a motive for common action that is yearly becoming better understood.... If it is true that a new spirit is stirring in the East of Asia, that the scientific knowledge by which in the past Europeans have held their own can no longer remain their monopoly and that the increase of the population in the Far East remains steady while that of Europe declines, then it is time for the Near East, when the inevitable struggle must take place, to put her house in order: and the first and most obvious requirement is that the tradition of misunderstandings between Christians and Moslems shall be replaced by a sympathy based upon community of interest.”

### LXXXVII.

Consular Reports

The movement of progress and hope which has awakened to consciousness in Palestine was born in the colonies, where the land began to yield a ready harvest in return for the husbandman’s toil, where the vine and the fruit tree began to surround with natural beauty a land that had all too long lain desolate, and the old joys of country life have brought anew to the toilful workers a spirit of independence and dignity which have penetrated from the country into the towns. Again the Jewish race has developed some of the fine physique that generations of the Ghetto life had threatened to destroy for ever.

The British Consular Reports show signs of a steady development of Palestinian trade:⁠—

Year. | Exports. | Imports.
--- | --- | ---
1885 | £132,579 | £287,740
1886 | 119,555 | 240,880
1887 | 186,371 | 232,045
1888 | 204,315 | 253,065
1889 | 244,561 | 275,622
1890 | 447,010 | 259,811
1891 | 410,530 | 288,290
1892 | 258,466 | 342,597
1893 | 332,628 | 349,540
1894 | 285,604 | 273,233
1895 | 282,907 | 275,990
1896 | 373,447 | 256,090
1897 | 309,389 | 306,630
1898 | 306,780 | 322,430

The increase of trade in 1890 and 1891 was due to the good harvest in oranges and sesame. In 1892, 1893, 1894, and 1897, all the wheat and the barley were exported via Gaza, and are therefore not included in the above table. The value of some of the goods exported and the growth of new industries is indicated in the following table, which shows the exports of wheat, maize, soap and oranges from 1885 to 1898:⁠—

Year. | Wheat. £ | Maize. £ | Soap. £ | Oranges. £
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
1885 | 3,600 | 7,875 | 13,722 | 26,500
1886 | 3,325 | 9,000 | 8,960 | 29,400
1887 | 15,000 | 21,000 | 38,000 | 36,000
1888 | 7,800 | 16,960 | 45,000 | 55,000
1889 | 16,950 | 18,200 | 33,600 | 51,200
1890 | 19,920 | 11,240 | 44,700 | 83,120
1891 | 3,300 | 17,300 | 124,000 | 108,400
1892 | — | 420 | 46,800 | 62,000
1893 | — | 2,580 | 112,000 | 96,500
1894 | — | 2,000 | 114,000 | 51,000
1895 | 3,560 | 3,200 | 93,240 | 65,000
1896 | 1,920 | 14,178 | 113,114 | 72,600
1897 | — | 8,450 | 81,900 | 75,800
1898 | 14,000 | 3,000 | 62,000 | 82,500

In the earlier reports some reference is made to the export of wine, but it is not worth special mention until 1894, from which date the following figures may be given:⁠—

Wine and Cognac.
1894 | £3,000
1895 | 2,600
1896 | 4,032
1897 | 4,340
1898 | 20,500

Comparative tables of imports and exports at Jaffa according to countries during the four years 1909‒1912.

Imports
Country. | 1909. £ | 1910. £ | 1911. £ | 1912. £
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
United Kingdom | 321,348 | 128,730 | 146,000 | 155,000
British Colonies | 4,629 | 3,105 | 49,000 | 54,000
Turkey | 107,842 | 328,965 | 340,000 | 305,000
Austria-Hungary | 92,244 | 83,840 | 114,000 | 126,000
Russia | 96,038 | 97,000 | 108,000 | 110,000
Germany | 87,308 | 68,615 | 74,000 | 80,000
France | 64,773 | 103,000 | 112,000 | 84,000
Egypt | 69,445 | 58,095 | 70,000 | 61,000
Belgium | 39,635 | 49,185 | 60,000 | 54,000
Italy | 25,232 | 24,940 | 16,000 | 5,000
United States | 13,483 | 10,400 | 25,000 | 12,000
Roumania | 10,565 | — | 22,000 | 17,000
Netherlands | 10,555 | 10,141 | 8,000 | 7,000
Bulgaria | — | 11,950 | 15,000 | 8,000
Other Countries | 9,848 | 24,485 | 10,910 | 12,000
| 973,143 | 1,002,450 | 1,169,910 | 1,090,000

Exports
Country. | 1909. £ | 1910. £ | 1911. £ | 1912. £
--- | --- | --- | --- | ---
United Kingdom | 158,090 | 173,085 | 185,000 | 190,000
British Colonies | 77 | 698 | 9,000 | 10,500
Turkey | 56,850 | 83,015 | 78,000 | 95,000
Austria-Hungary | 19,630 | 12,103 | 21,000 | 24,500
Russia | 18,370 | 29,589 | 33,000 | 45,000
Germany | 7,325 | 8,384 | 17,000 | 21,000
France | 15,080 | 22,255 | 46,000 | 50,000
Egypt | 255,215 | 277,328 | 270,000 | 290,000
Belgium | 1,863 | 1,101 | 15,000 | 12,000
Italy | 10,337 | 15,332 | 12,000 | 6,000
United States | 3,765 | 4,272 | 10,000 | 1,000
Roumania | 1,375 | — | 2,000 | 2,500
Netherlands | 418 | 1,192 | 1,000 | 2,000
Bulgaria | — | 5,221 | 6,000 | 4,500
Other Countries | 12,630 | 2,575 | 5,660 | 10,162
| 506,935 | 636,145 | 710,660 | 774,162

Hindrances to the Prosperity of Palestine

(From the British Diplomatic and Consular Reports, No. 4850. Annual Series: Turkey. Report for the Year 1911. London, 1912):⁠—

“The principal causes which impede a rapid increase in the prosperity of Palestine are three, viz.:⁠—

“1. The lack of a harbour in Jaffa.—This is greatly needed. Owing to the fact that Jaffa is an open roadstead subject to sudden and dangerous storms—it should be noted that a British steamer was wrecked in February, 1911—much delay is experienced in loading and unloading steamers with consequent loss and inconvenience. Many tourists and pilgrims are also deterred from visiting the country owing to the uncertainty as to whether disembarkation will be possible.

“2. The tithe.—The levying of a tax of 12½ per cent. ad valorem on products of the soil has greatly impeded the extension of the orange plantations. Recently a petition has been submitted to the authorities by agriculturists asking that this tax may be replaced by a fixed tax of 30 pias. (5s.) per dunum (about ¼ acre) on land planted with orange and other fruit trees. If this change were made, there would be an immediate increase in the number of orange plantations, with consequent benefit both to the Government and to the population. There are thousands of acres of light soil in the vicinity of Jaffa, which, although not suited for cereals or sesame, are well fitted for the cultivation of oranges.

“3. The existence of large plots of undivided (musho’a) land belonging to several owners jointly who are, however, unable to determine their respective shares.—The natural result is that, there being no inducements to carry out improvements, the land is neglected. If measures were taken to effect the division of the land, the results would be beneficial both to the Government and to the owners.”

In addition to this statement, Mr. Vice-Consul P. Abela of Haifa reported (1911):⁠—

“There is a possibility of great agricultural enterprise in the fertile and extensive plains near Haifa, and arrangements have been made with some big proprietors to let the property for development. Were it not for the Turkish laws prohibiting foreign companies to hold land in Turkey, great progress might have been made in this direction.”

(From the Jaffa Report for 1912, No. 5107. Annual Series. June, 1913):—

“Public works.—The roads have not been touched, except for a few patchings in the town, and are in the worst state of repair imaginable.

“The harbour concession, owing to the difficulties arising from the confused political state of the capital, has not yet been obtained.... It is now nearly fifteen years that negotiations have been going on with regard to the project, and considering the enormous benefits that would accrue from its realization to every branch of the local trade, its perpetual postponement is deplorable. The present open roadstead is dangerous both for passengers and goods trade, and frequently prevents vessels from communicating at all. The resulting losses to the district are too obvious to be mentioned.

“The lack of public security.—The inhabitants of the Jewish colonies have to pay from £6 10s. annually per family in organising their own means of defence, and even then suffer from insecurity.

“The tithe.—This tax is levied on a system which has the disadvantages both of discouraging cultivation and being wasteful and comparatively unproductive. Its incidence on individuals is also in many cases unfair and crippling. The whole system is in need of radical revision.

“The backward state of public works.—The present roads are fit for nothing but camel traffic, and agriculturists have no satisfactory means of embarking their goods at Jaffa without great expense and loss through deterioration.”

### LXXXVIII.

The following is an example of Moore’s Zionist songs:⁠—

ADVENT OF THE MILLENNIUM

But who shall see the glorious day,

When throned on Zion’s brow,

The Lord shall rend that veil away

Which blinds the nations now?

When earth no more beneath the fear

Of his rebuke shall lie;

When pain shall cease, and every tear

Be wiped from every eye?

Then, Judah, thou no more shalt mourn

Beneath the heathen’s chain;

Thy days of splendour shall return,

And all be new again.

The fount of life shall then be quaff’d,

In peace by all who come;

And every wind that blows shall waft

Some long-lost exile home.

Moore.

(See Volume I, page 12.)

### LXXXIX.

Cremieux’s Circular to the Jews in Western Europe⁠¹

“Aux Juifs de l’Occident.

“... Pendant mon séjour en Egypte, dans le cours de cette belle mission qui portait vers nos frères de l’Orient les sympathies si ardentes de leurs frères de l’Occident, j’étais vivement ému de l’aspect de la malheureux population qui s’offrait à mes yeux. Foules aux pieds depuis tant de siècles, les débris de la nation juive, autrefois nation puissante dans ces contrées même, ont perdu l’energie qui seule donné à l’homme quelque ressort en lui rappelant qu’il est l’œuvre de Dieu. La source qui vivifie toutes les facultés de notre intelligence, l’instruction n’est pas même connue du nom dans cette Alexandria, si brillante, il y a quelques siècles, par les lumières des juges et des docteurs israelites....

“De l’Orient est sortie la religion qui nous unit tous d’une chaîne à la fois si étroite et si noble.... Du Caire et d’Alexandria le feu sacre se répandra bientôt vers Dames et Jérusalem. L’Orient va se ranimer....”

(See Volume I, p. 180.)

### XC.

THE BANNER OF THE JEWS

(By Emma Lazarus)

Wake, Israel, Wake! Recall to-day

The Glorious Maccabean rage,

The sire heroic, hoary-gray,

His five-fold lion-lineage,

The wise, the elect, the Help-of-God,

The burst of Spring, the Avenging Rod.

From Murpeh’s mountain ridge they saw

Jerusalem’s empty streets: her shrine

Laid waste where Greeks profaned the law

With idol and with pagan sign.

Mourners in tattered black were there

With ashes sprinkled on their hair.

Then from the stony peak there rang

A blast to ope the graves: down poured

The Maccabean clan, who sang

Their battle anthem to the Lord.

Five heroes lead, and following, see

Ten thousand rush to victory!

Oh for Jerusalem’s trumpet now,

To blow a blast of shattering power,

To wake the sleepers high and low,

And rouse them to the urgent hour!

No hand for vengeance, but to save,

A million naked swords should wave.

Oh, deem not dead that martial fire,

Say not the mystic flame is spent!

With Moses’ law and David’s lyre,

Your ancient strength remains unbent.

Let such an era rise anew,

To lift the “Banner of the Jew!”

(See Volume I, p.243.)

### XCI.

“The Advanced Guard”

Programme of the Committee appointed to found a colony to be called Rishon Le’Zion (1882).

“A. The acquisition of land.—The Committee will select according to its judgment, a suitable site for the colony, will purchase the same from the owners of the ground and execute a deed of purchase, in the name of the President and two members of the Committee. If some charitable association make a grant of money towards the purchase of the land, in that case the Committee will be in a position to buy it in the name of such association. If it be bestowed as a gift the deed of purchase will be in accordance with its regulation and that of this Committee.

“B. The acquisition of houses.—The Committee have prepared plans respecting houses and stalls for herds and flocks, the purchase of bricks, wood and all the requisites of a dwelling-house. It will appoint inspectors over the work-people and a surveillance will be exercised by the officers of the colony or those of the Committee.

“C. The obtaining of cattle and implements.—The Committee will choose experienced men either from the members of the Committee or from the colony to hand over to them money for the purchase of cattle and proper implements of ploughing adapted to each family. These will be bestowed on them according to priority.

“D. The wants of the congregation.—The Committee will provide money for the erection of a synagogue, a Talmud Torah school, a hospital, bath and washhouses, also for the erection of a small trading mart to be managed in accordance with the regulations laid down by the officers of the colony for the necessary transactions.”

## ADDENDA

I. (vol. i., p. xxviii.)

It is a thorough confusion of ideas to identify Zionists with the Nationalists, Chauvinists and Jingoes of other nations. Judaism in its ethics is more cosmopolitan than any other doctrine in the world. In teaching that all men are brethren it lays the foundation of the equality of men and races, and excludes in principle every impulse of race egotism as immoral. In Judaism is therefore contained from the beginning the suppression of national limitation and animosity. And what is founded upon Judaism must necessarily prevail in Zionism, which represents the quintessence of Judaism, with all the power of logic and tradition. But it is just upon this point that those Jews who combat Zionism make a surprising mistake. They attempt to make use of this truth in order to prove that the Jewish nationality has to disappear from this world. Here lies the fallacy. It is true that Judaism rejects the ill-natured aloofness of one nation towards another, but it is not true that Judaism strives after the suppression of national distinctions, and it even borders on the ridiculous to suppose that Judaism requires the suppression of Jewish nationality. Judaism, which recognizes all natural formations, cannot wish to annihilate or to suppress the manifoldness of the national articulation of humanity.

Apart from this all that is alive and modern has a tendency towards the creation of a national culture. All valuable literature and art bears a national character. Everything international is bare of colour and expression. What the Jews do can generally also be done by others, in a worse or better manner. What is of importance to humanity, are the special values which the Jews as such create. The downfall of a nationality which represents a state of culture would be equivalent to a lessening of the spiritual possession of humanity. Besides, the abrasion of the national leads throughout to a loosening of the self-containing of the personality. It comes from the national instinct of the individuality, and the imprint cannot be effaced without internal injury. That is why Zionism means the return to the natural character of the Jewish personality.

II. (vol. i., p. 5)

Anglo-Israelism, the theory which identifies the ancient Britons with the Israelites, was originated by Richard Brothers (1757‒1829). The chief exponents of this doctrine, which became the teaching of a particular sect in England and America, were: J. Wilson, W. Carpenter, F. R. A. Glover, Edward Hine, S. W. Greenwood, the Rev. W. H. Poole, S. Bernatto and T. R. Howlett. The Anglo-Israelites have their literature and periodical publications, in which they propagate their idea with great zeal, and in the United States and in Britain to-day amount to a very large number of believers. Without entering into a scientific analysis of this doctrine, we must admit that the fact that a certain number of English people are endeavouring to prove their Israelite origin, is possible only in a country so strongly attached to the Bible, including the Old Testament, as England. Other people would shrink from the mere idea of being mixed up, even in the remotest degree, with Israelites. Even Jewish assimilationists are inclined to accept any extravagant hypothesis tending to prove that the present Jews are not of pure Jewish or Semitic origin.

III. (vol. i., p. 100

The anonymous author of A Treatise of the Future Restoration of the Jews and Israelites to their Own Land, etc. Addressed to the Jews. (London, 1746), defended the idea without any allusion to conversion, in a Jewish spirit, though he was evidently a non-Jew. He gave many interesting descriptions of Palestine.

President Edwards, in his History of Redemption, says: “In future glorious times, both Judah and Ephraim, or Judah and the Ten Tribes, shall be brought in together, and shall be united as one people.” Mr. Locke, giving the substance of the eleventh chapter of the Romans, says: “When the fulness of the Gentiles is come in, the whole Jewish nation shall again be restored to be the people of God.” Dr. W. Harris observes that, as this Epistle (the Romans) was written about the year 57 ... and as the prophecies were not accomplished then, they have to be accomplished.”

William Cunningham of Lainshaw, in his Letters and Essays (London, 1822), has a series of letters on “The Literal Restoration of Israel to their Own Land,” which are excellent both in style and learning.

IV. (vol. i., p. 106)

From the Archives at the Foreign Office

Carlow,

2nd March, 1841.

My Lord,

A Memorial has this day been transmitted to your lordship, praying that Her Majesty’s Government may now exert its commanding influence to secure the protection of the Jews in Palestine, and to afford them facilities for returning to their own land. Though signed by only 320 persons, it contains, I believe, almost the unanimous expression of Protestant feeling in this neighbourhood; almost every one to whom it was presented cheerfully appended his name. It contains the signatures of men of all ranks, of all political parties, and of different religious denominations. The names of many Roman Catholics, both clergy and laity, will be found attached to it.

The deep interest manifested by all classes in the subject of the Memorial, as well as its transcendent importance, will, I sincerely hope, secure for it an attentive consideration.

While the minds of a people, who have for many ages been crushed and trodden under foot by all nations, are fixed with intense anxiety on the measures which Her Majesty’s Government may now adopt for their relief, multitudes of Christians, both at home and abroad, are watching with intense interest the issue of our recent victories in Syria. The tide of popular feeling also throughout the civilized world is now turned in favour of the Jews, and nothing perhaps would tend more strongly to secure our national tranquillity, heal divisions at home, and unite men of all parties, than the adoption of vigorous measures for the benefit of ancient Israel.

I pray your lordship to forgive these remarks, and to bear with me while I add, that perhaps the very existence of our country depends upon the manner in which the people of God are now treated by us. The supreme Governor of Heaven and Earth has, by the prophet Isaiah (chap. xxix. 7 and 8), passed a sweeping and universal sentence which must operate with as unerring certainty as any of the ordinary laws of nature. The total disappearance from the map of the world of many of the most famous nations of antiquity—of Assyria, Babylon, Idumea, etc., form the most impressive commentary on these awful words. It is unnecessary to remind your lordship that England is implicated in this capital offence of plundering, banishing, and massacring the unresisting and often unoffending Jews, as it is indelibly engraven on the page of her history. By what means we are to escape the irreversible decree of Jehovah I know not, if not by manifesting repentance for the cruel deeds of our ancestors, and by employing every means now within our reach to render them kindness in return for the miseries formerly visited upon them.

We hope that God has raised your lordship to your present exalted station for such a time as this, and pray that He may honour you, by making you an instrument of breaking the chains which have long bound the land of His people, and that He may incline the heart of our Sovereign and of Her Government to extend the wings of their protection over that people from whom all our highest blessings and privileges have come.

“Blessed shall those be who bless Israel, and cursed shall those be who curse her.”

I am,

My Lord,

With much respect,

Your lordship’s obedient and humble servant,

(Signed) Warrain Carlile,

Minister of the Scots’ Church, Carlow.

To Lord Palmerston,

Her Majesty’s Secretary for Foreign Affairs.

Foreign Office,

March 8th, 1841.

Sir,

I am directed by Viscount Palmerston to request that you will acquaint the Parties resident at Carlow and in its vicinity who signed the Memorial transmitted to His Lordship from Carlow on the 2nd of this month, praying for the intervention of Her Majesty’s Government in favour of the Jews who may be settled in Palestine or who may desire to return there, that His Lordship has duly received their Memorial, and desires to assure them that the interesting subject to which it relates has not escaped the attention of Her Majesty’s Government, who have made and are still making endeavours which they trust will not be altogether without success, to obtain for such Jews as may wish to settle in Palestine, full security for their persons and property.

The Dean of Leighton
and the Petitioners from Carlow.

Carlow,

March 2, 1841.

To the Right Honourable

LORD PALMERSTON,

Her Majesty’s Secretary for Foreign Affairs

The Humble Memorial of the Undersigned Inhabitants of Carlow and its Vicinity.

Your Memorialists take the liberty of presenting the following statement to your Lordship in consequence of the success which the Almighty has lately been pleased to grant to Her Majesty’s Arms in Syria, and the peculiar position in which he has placed the British Government with respect to the Jews: and they feel the more encouraged to do it from the deep interest which your Lordship has already shown in the Welfare of that people.

Your Lordship must be fully aware of the unparalleled sufferings which the Jews have for Ages endured in the Land of their Fathers; and as that Land has recently in the providence of God, been thrown in some degree under British Power, Your Memorialists earnestly entreat that Her Majesty’s Government may employ their present Commanding influence to shield the unresisting Jews from further persecution, and to ensure for them complete protection.

Your Memorialists feel much confidence in pressing upon Your Lordship’s attention the claims of this much neglected people; for from whom could they better expect a prompt and vigorous attention to these claims, than from a Government which has already exerted itself so nobly in the cause of Humanity and has set an example worthy the imitation of the World in abolishing Slavery and in extending protection to the oppressed.

Your Memorialists beg leave further to remind Your Lordship that the Land of Palestine was bestowed by the Sovereign of the Universe upon the descendants of Abraham as a permanent and inalienable possession nearly 4000 Years ago, and that neither conquests nor treaties among men can possibly affect their Title to it. He has also decreed that they shall again return to their Country and that the Gentiles shall be employed as the means of their restoration. “For thus saith the Lord God, Behold I will lift up mine Hand to the Gentiles and set up my Standard to the people, and they shall bring thy sons in their Arms, and thy Daughters shall be carried upon their Shoulders, and Kings shall be thy Nursing Fathers and their Queens thy Nursing Mothers” (Isah. xlix.). Happy shall those be who shall be employed in accomplishing God’s purposes of Mercy to His Ancient People, for “They shall prosper who love Zion.” The honour and Happiness to be thus attained appear now to be within our reach, and indeed to be offered for our acceptance. It is foretold also that the Ships of Tarshish shall be first employed in conducting the dispersed Tribes of Israel to their Home; and who are more likely to be employed in this Service, or could more easily accomplish it, than the Nation whose Fleets have been long engaged in protecting and succouring the Wretched, and which have access to most of the Countries where Jews are to be found!

That the promises of Jehovah shall be accomplished by some Gentile Nation, is absolutely certain; and everything appears to indicate their speedy fulfilment; and it remains now to be seen whether Her Majesty’s Government is to be the chosen instrument in accomplishing this blessed Work (as Cyrus the Great King of Persia was in ancient times) or whether the Honour and Consequent prosperity are to be Conferred on some other Maritime power.

Your Memorialists cannot conclude without reminding Your Lordship that our own fate as a nation depends upon the manner in which we treat the Jews, for the irreversible decree of Heaven is “The Nation or Kingdom that will not serve Israel shall perish, Yea those Nations shall be utterly consumed.”

Your Memorialists therefore pray Your Lordship to adopt such measures as may appear to You best to secure full protection to the Jews in their own Country, also to afford them assistance in gaining possession of their Land, either by purchase or otherwise, and to afford facilities to all who may be disposed to return to their inheritance.

And Your Memorialists will ever pray, etc.

V. (vol. i., p. 119)

“... Sir Moses called on Colonel Campbell, but he had to wait some time before seeing him, as the Colonel was with the Pasha.⁠¹ The Colonel willingly consented to introduce Sir Moses to Boghoz Bey,⁠² and fixed four o’clock for the purpose. Colonel Campbell said he would call for Sir Moses, and bring one of his horses for him.

“The Colonel was punctual, and we rode together to the residence of Boghoz Bey. Sir Moses gave him three requests in writing, and he promised to lay them before Mohammad Ali and explain them to him. The Bey appeared well inclined to forward his requests, and offered to present him to the Pasha either the same evening or the next morning....

“Boghoz Bey, the Pasha’s Minister of Commerce, had read over and explained my requests to him on the previous evening, that he might be fully aware of the object of my visit to him. Being anxious to have Mohammad Ali’s answers in writing, which he said Boghoz Bey should give me, as he had been present at our interview, I called on the Bey, but he had not returned from the Palace.

“Between four and five I walked there with Dr. Loewe. Boghoz Bey received me most politely, and said as I had not put my signature to the written requests, he could not give me an answer in writing, but he hoped I was perfectly satisfied with what Mohammad Ali had promised me this morning. He added that as soon as I had made my several requests in writing, and signed them, he would write me the answer, agreeably with the Pasha’s words, as he had accorded me all I required.

“I thanked him, and immediately after the conclusion of Sabbuth I wrote, and sent the several requests to Boghoz Bey, properly signed in the form of letters....”⁠¹

VI. (vol. i., p. 138)

In 1849 Colonel George Gawler accepted an invitation from Sir Moses Montefiore to accompany him—together with Lady Montefiore—on a tour through the Holy Land. It was arranged that they should leave England about the 20th of April. They were, however, delayed three weeks by the illness of Lady Montefiore. Gawler himself was not disappointed at the delay, as he was hard at work studying Hebrew and Arabic, preparatory for the tour. Eventually they started on May the 15th, and arrived at Jerusalem on July 28th.⁠¹

An enthusiastic Christian Zionist, Gawler was at the same time a strong advocate of Jewish emancipation which was to him a duty of justice, because: “First, it would be part payment of a heavy debt of retribution that England owes to the Hebrew race for bygone centuries of cruelty and oppression. Westminster Abbey itself was rebuilt by money extorted from the Jews (Maddox’s History of the Exchequer, and Hunter’s History of London). And, secondly, it would be taking a part, which is to the honour and interest of the British Nation to perform, in assisting the great movement of deliverance from oppression and bondage that for many years past has been in operation throughout the whole civilized world, in behalf of the Ancient People of God.”⁠¹

VII. (vol. i., p. 139)

The Rev. Alex. B. C. Dallas (1791‒1869), author of several works, said in a lecture in 1845: ... “The first object is the time when Jerusalem is to be safely inhabited by the people of Judah, as of old. This we learn from Zechariah (XII. 6 and XIV. 11), and from all the prophets. If then the western Jews of Europe were to be placed under some political arrangement, with an independent jurisdiction over the city and suburbs alone, that prophecy would be fulfilled” (Present Times and Future Prospects, Rev. W. R. Fremantle. London, 1845, p. 116).

The Rev. W. R. Fremantle (1781‒1859), the editor of this volume and a priest of great learning, dealing with the same subject, remarked: “It has been thought that if cabinets of Europe only agree upon some terms, and draw up a treaty for the restoration of the Jews to Palestine, the whole matter would be speedily arranged. But if the position which our subject holds in the coming future be correctly stated, then are there many steps in this work of restoration. The first is evidently partial and preparatory” (Ibid., pp. 253‒4).

The Rev. Williams Cadman said in the same series of lectures: “When the storm is passed, Israel shall be found in peaceful and quiet possession. The desolate land shall be tilled; the ruined places shall be built, and the waste cities become fenced, and be inhabited, and filled with flocks of men” (Ibid., pp. 303‒4).

In a Paper⁠¹ read before the British Association of Science at Aberdeen, September 16th, 1859, by Major Scott Philipps, on the Resettlement of the Seed of Abraham in Syria and Arabia, it was shown that the small portion they have hitherto possessed, by no means comprises the whole grant of country given to Abraham, but that the whole of Arabia Felix is included in that grant. Their full inheritance is given in Deuteronomy xi. 24: ‘Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river, the River Euphrates even unto the uttermost sea shall your coast be.’

“Now rule a line from the northern roots of Lebanon to the southern roots of Sinai, and will not a perpendicular thereto point out the uttermost sea to be the East Sea, or Sea of Oman? And the uttermost sea opposite the River Euphrates, is it not the Red Sea?

“Thus the Euphrates, the Mediterranean, the Nile, and the Red Sea are proved to be the boundaries of the Promised Land.”

The Rev. Jacob H. Brooke Mountain wrote in a letter published by Miss Rosa Rame (The Restoration of the Jews, etc., dedicated to the Earl of Shaftesbury. London, 1860):⁠—

“There was a time, when the Duke of Wellington was at the head of affairs, when the Navy of England was absolute on the ocean, and her military glory at its height, and when the Jews would thankfully have paid the whole expense of the expedition, that they might have been put in possession of their own country. And England would have become the first of the nations in Europe—our influence over Turkey, Greece and Egypt rendered paramount—and a devoted ally attached to us. The opportunity was lost; if it is ever vouchsafed to us again, I fervently pray that we may embrace it with zeal and alacrity. The time may yet come, if England has grace to use it.”

VIII. (vol. i., p. 152)

The clause as it is to be found in the General Treaty between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia and Turkey, signed at Paris, March 30th, 1856, runs as follows:⁠—

“M.T.Maj. the Sultan having in his constant solicitude for the welfare of his subjects, issued a Firman which, while ameliorating their condition without distinction of religion or of race, records his generous intentions towards the Christian population of his Empire,” etc. It is quite clear that the principle was “without distinction of religion or race,” and that the grant of rights to the Christians is only an application of a general principle in a special case.

In the second Protocol of the Conference of the 30th of August, 1860, at Paris, signed by Metternich, Thouvenel, Cowley, Reuss, Kisseleff and Ahmed Vefik, where the autonomy of the Lebanon was decided, reference is made again to this paragraph:⁠—

“Neanmoins ils ne peuvent s’empêcher, en rappelant ici les actes emanes de Sa Majesté la Sultan dont l’article 9 du traité du 30 mars, 1856, a constate la haute valeur,” etc. (Recueil des Traités de la Porte Ottoman, 1884, T. 6, p. 45).

IX. (vol. i., p. 160)

It is noteworthy that Palestinian rabbis recognized the activity of the English Consul. James Finn was, indeed, an English pioneer of the idea of the colonization of Palestine and of England’s protection of Palestinian Jews. He was appointed Consul before the death of Bishop Alexander (who was a converted Jew and the first Bishop appointed by the English Government in Jerusalem), in 1848, and the chief reason for his appointment was his known love of the Jewish cause. He was at the time a member of the London Society’s Committee, had published an interesting and learned work on the History of the Spanish Jews, as well as a book upon the Chinese Jews, had devoted himself with great zeal and rare success to the study of Hebrew, which he spoke and wrote with fluency, and was considered on this account to be particularly well qualified for the post of Consul at Jerusalem (another proof of the great appreciation of the National Jewish character of Palestine on the part of the British Government at that time). Finn went out as a devoted friend to the Jewish cause, and as such he proved himself. Though an ardent Christian, he won the sympathy of the most orthodox Jerusalem rabbis, and their moral support for the colonization of Palestine. He was the son-in-law of Alexander McCaul, a distinguished Christian Hebraist who devoted the greater part of his active life to missionary work among the Jews. When the Bishopric of Jerusalem was established in 1842, under the joint protection of the Queen of England and the King of Prussia, McCaul was the first to be offered the See.

“By desire of the King of Prussia, and with the hearty concurrence of the heads of the Church, the bishopric in Jerusalem was tendered to Dr. McCaul, the worthiest, perhaps, of all the Gentiles for that high honour. He demanded, however, but short time for deliberation and refusal, declaring his firm belief that the Episcopate of St. James was reserved, in the providence of God, for the brethren of the apostle according to the flesh.”⁠¹ Bishop Alexander was thereupon offered and accepted the trust.

X. (vol. i., p. 194)

Zionism is not merely an economic, but also, and perhaps primarily, a spiritual movement. The Jewish people must be able to live in accordance with the requirements of its soul in Palestine. Economically it could perhaps live equally well elsewhere, but spiritually only in its own historical and actual home. No people on earth have so highly valued the spiritual as the Jews. The ever-recurring motif of the Thora (the Law) is the most striking proof of this conception. The spiritual capacity of a people is not its all, but certainly its highest possession. For this constituent complements all other possessions and ennobles every other interest. Traditions are of high standing, but ignorance and superstition cause otherwise good and great traditions to become forces which, instead of working for good, only interfere as disturbing, thwarting and perplexing elements in the activities of life.

“The ignorant cannot be pious” was a good old saying of the ancients, but of the impious learned ones, on the contrary, the saying was: “May they but cherish the Law, for the light of the Law will turn them towards the good.” Man must not, of course, regard learning as the goal, but without knowledge his life and existence are blind; only in the light of cognition can the traditions of a people assume the best possible form. Historical reminiscences are of the greatest importance for the consciousness of the people, but even they shrink into pitiful narrowness if the breadth of outlook upon life be wanting. In any case the fundamentally good is only sanctified when the pursuit of learning has widened the horizon of everything human, and has taught the art of building up with the best materials out of the past in harmony with the present. This is the universal function of learning, and in comparison with this sphere of action all other superficial functions sink into mere activities which only acquire value through learning.

This fundamental idea, upon which the whole of Judaism is based, may be illustrated from another aspect. When the Seventy Elders had translated the Pentateuch into Greek, which was the most cultured language of Antiquity, the learned ones complained and even went so far as to assert in a paradoxical sentence: “The day on which this happened is like unto the days of woe at the time of the destruction of the Temple.” We have only succeeded by degrees in grasping the deep truth of this sentence. Translation, generalization, localization may be necessary in the Dispersion. But one must not be deceived: only that which is written in the original tongue of the people is genuinely national. The Law of the Jewish nation can only be preserved in all its originality in the language of that nation.

That the Shechinah (the glory of God) should languish in exile, that the Thora should have to share the hard fate of its bearers, condemned to wander from place to place in foreign lands, seemed to many a mystical idea. But, in reality, this idea is but an expression of the conscious need or longing for the old home. There is not the slightest trace of mysticism in this: it is a clear and illuminating thought. Learning must, in order to be disseminated and perpetuated among the successive generations, have some kind of institution available for the purpose of an adequate interchange of ideas. For the purposes of the formation of scientific, professional classes, for the development of an organized system of education, for the vitalization of the language, for the purpose of entering into relation with natural surroundings, it is necessary to presume a whole series of cultural precedents, which would probably be for the greater part of a practical nature. Not until these conditions have been created will national Jewish culture, ancient but ever young, appear in all its glory. In the Dispersion there are, unfortunately, but a few who are able, through the power of intuition, to realize the sublimity and depth of a chapter from the Hebrew prophetic scriptures. They have preserved the Jewish spirit, partly through atavism, and partly through tradition and long study. But no outsider can experience the same feeling towards the Hebrew bible as a Palestinian Jew. No one else either can rightly understand a “Mishna” of the “Seder Z’raïm,” the part which treats of the Palestinian flora, in spite of the most ingenious commentaries. In the Ghetto, they only extract from the Thora that for which the Ghetto possesses understanding—the disputations concerning business (Dine momonoth) or the Dietary Laws, and the laws concerning the sabbath and the festivals. The Thora in its entirety can only be revived in Palestine. The Dispersion only possesses fragments of an ancient national culture, which are, in every country, differently valued, and vague remembrances and surmises of the nature of a national feeling.

It stands to reason that a real national feeling can only develop in Palestine. There this feeling would become what it is among all other sound, healthy and civilized peoples: the joyful consciousness of belonging to a nation that in life, customs and language bears the impress of an ancient and yet new culture. It is in this and not in the superficialities of a state that the centre of gravity of Zionist efforts consists. What Zionists want is to find in the historical fatherland the conditions requisite for the untrammelled development of a Jewish nation. Zionism is in its deepest sense a product of Jewish national consciousness.

What actually is national consciousness? National consciousness, a product of a national common consciousness and of an historically conditioned feeling of unity, is not based upon a single undertaking by a single group of men, or of a single impulse in the history of this group, but upon a certain inborn cultural value of a given people. National consciousness thus expresses this value as a peculiar embodiment of the human soul, which, during the course of special lives enriches humanity so that the right is claimed for the nation in question to safeguard its existence and to develop according to its own individuality within the world of nations. This consciousness is capable of a very varied development in strength, formation and tendency. It manifests itself in the joy felt in the preservation of its own national characteristics, in the promotion of its fitness, in the relation of the efficiency of the individual to the welfare of the whole, and in the willingness to sacrifice for the good of the whole people. This consciousness possesses, besides, certain specific aspects which are peculiar to the one nation more than to any other. It must possess these specific aspects or else it would be nothing more than an imitation or a continuation of its antithesis: assimilation.

Consequently a Jewish national consciousness must likewise lay emphasis upon the specific aspects which are of a spiritual nature. The Jewish people is essentially neither ambitious of domination, nor bent on proselytizing, neither adventurous nor aggressive; it is a people eminently endowed intellectually that wishes to enjoy the blessings of peace. Some of the immoral backwaters of the national consciousness are national pride, presumption, blindness to the qualities and efficiency of foreigners, malicious envy, lust of domination, ill-will. The Jewish people is sufficiently safeguarded against such failings by its spiritual endowment.

XI. (vol. i., p. 205)

Dr. Chas. F. Zimpel published in 1865 an Appel à la société Chrétienne toute entière ainsi qu’aux Israelites, pour la déliverance de Jerusalem (Frankfort-on-the-Main) in which he gave a description of the deplorable conditions in Palestine, and appealed to Christians and Jews to establish a new order of things in that country. He referred to the ideas of Napoleon I., and mentioned a statement that Napoleon III. made some definite promises in this matter: “Que S.M. Napoleon III. en ait le pressentiment ou la conviction, il est certain que, d’après ce qui m’a été communiqué, il a donné, il y a environ trois ans ... sa parole de travailler dans ce but” (p. 12). This statement is evidently related to the propaganda of M. Dunant, which was much stimulated by the beginning of the work on the Suez Canal. Earlier, in 1852, Zimpel had published a pamphlet, Die Israeliten in Jerusalem (Stuttgart, 1852), in which he appealed to his readers for support of the agricultural Jewish settlement established by the Americans in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. Zimpel, who declared himself to be a Christian, contributed five hundred florins. He mentioned among the promoters of the idea the American Dr. J. T. Barclay, and a prominent Jerusalemite, John Meshullam. About Meshullam, who was a baptized Jew, born in London, who had had an adventurous career, a part of which was spent in the service of Lord Byron, some interesting particulars are given, under date 20th March, 1852, in The Sabbath Recorder of New York, No. 413, of the 20th of May, 1852. This paper quotes an extract from a journal of Mr. C. S. Minor, an American (Christian) gentleman, who was associated with Meshullam in his agricultural settlement at Bethlehem:

“Through a recent petition of the Turkish Effendis of Jerusalem, the Sultan has lately sent him (Meshullam) an offer of the site of the ancient Cæsarea and its fertile vicinity, if he will undertake and superintend its rebuilding and cultivation. This is greatly surprising and important, as Cæsarea has the most lovely and easily rebuilt ruins in Palestine, and is a point of great commercial importance and entrance to the whole land, and was formerly the chosen port of the Romans. This he declines from his love to Jerusalem and his suffering brethren within its walls.”

Meshullam is again mentioned in Colonel George Gawler’s book, Syria, etc. (London, 1853, p. 78): “Some have supposed that the Hebrew people are at present unfitted for field or garden work. Such as think this cannot have witnessed Hebrew labourers, aye, and Hebrew Rabbis, at work in Mr. Meshullam’s farm at Urtan.”

XII. (vol. i., p. 216)

In the year 1884 the delegates of the Chovevé Zion Unions, mostly from Russia, met in conference at Kattowitz in Silesia, close to the Russo-Polish frontier. A Bne-Brith Union had formerly been founded there which had for its object: “To afford moral and material support for the foundation of colonies, to Jews undergoing religious persecution.” The words “In Palestine” were only introduced later. But in the appeal which this Union had circulated in 1882, Palestine was expressly mentioned as the future home of the Jewish nation, and the national future of the Jewish community was exalted with every conceivable distinctness. In this appeal Palestine was opposed to America, towards which the main stream of emigration was flowing, and was represented as a suitable land of immigration on account of all the reasons which it is usual to adduce: the low cost of the journey, the value of the concentration of Jewish masses upon common territory; the country’s fertility, among others. The president of this Bne-Brith Lodge, M. Moses, was known as a zealous Chovev Zion. This circumstance, and the proximity of the town to the Russo-Polish frontier, were the reasons for its selection for the Conference.

The Conference had elected a central committee, whose seat should originally have been in Berlin, but it turned out differently. Odessa remained the centre of the Friends of Zion. It also determined that henceforward a better administration of the funds was to be carried through. An attempt was to be made to obtain the recognition of the Society by the Russian Government; the position of the colonization was to be tested on the spot, and it was only then to be determined which colonies were to be supported. New foundations were not to be considered in the meantime. Finally, a delegation was to be sent to the Turkish Government to effect the removal of the difficulties standing in the way of Jewish colonization in Palestine. Although, as had been foreseen, it was not yet possible to gather all the threads into one hand, the organizing thought and a Zionistic programme were proclaimed here for the first time. The newly founded institution was given the name “Maskereth Moshe,” or “Montefiore Foundation for Supporting Colonies of the Holy Land,” so named in remembrance of Montefiore, whose hundreth birthday had been celebrated with widespread enthusiasm, especially in Russia. Through the sale of Montefiore pictures, the first common fund, 40,000 roubles, had been raised.

The Conference had no great real success. In spite of the propaganda undertaken by the central committee the movement came to a standstill. Already, in 1887, a Conference was arranged at Drusgenik, Russia, whose practical result differed but little from that of Kattowitz. It was decided to support certain colonies, and an office was set up in Palestine from which the negotiations with the Turkish Government were to be conducted and the land purchases controlled. Though this Conference was followed by a certain increase of the propaganda, the undertaking on the whole was in such a bad way, partly on account of the distressing condition of the Palestine colonies, that Pinsker finally resigned. Not till the Conference at Wilna was a change brought about, and when, in 1890, in consequence of the endeavours of the tenacious and energetic friend of Zion—M. Zederbaum—the authorization of the Russian Government had been obtained, the first general meeting of the Odessa Committee, “The Society for Supporting Jewish Agriculturists in Syria and Palestine” (as it called itself), was held, and Pinsker assumed again the leadership of the movement. At this point begins the really extensive activity of Chovevé Zion, chiefly in Russia, although there were Chovevé Zion Unions in nearly every country, even in America. At the beginning of the last decade of the nineteenth century the organization had reached its culminating point of activity. But the formal foundation of this committee had taken place at Kattowitz.

The Kattowitz Conference was, as Pinsker said, only a small beginning. But still it was a beginning. It created a principle and a method which only prevailed later. The insignificant real importance of the Conference is not inconsistent with its great historic significance. Result did not follow immediately upon this event, but the historian must trace back all the recent development of the Zionist idea to that date, because for the first time in a Jewish assembly the new spirit assumed shape and expression. Thus in the end history must consider the Kattowitz Conference as the seed out of which first of all a tender plant grew, but which, after wearisome development, spread out into a tree beneath whose shade Israel will some day find repose.

XIII. (vol. i., p. 276)

In the year 1840, Luzzatto wrote to Jost: “... and when at last, oh, Jewish scholars of Germany will the Lord open your eyes? How long will you refuse to see how wrongly you act by following the crowd, extinguishing national pride, allowing the language of our forefathers to fall into oblivion and letting Hellenism (Atticism) grow up in our midst? As long as you allow your brethren to persevere in the delusion that the ideal of perfection is nothing else than imitation of neighbours and the consideration gained therefrom; as long as you will not have attained enough self-consciousness to instruct the people out of full zeal for God, truth and Jewish confraternity to uphold that the greatest good is not anything visible but that which is felt deep within the heart, that the happiness of our nation is not dependent on emancipation but on our love to one another, on our holding together in brotherly union, and that this feeling of correlation is gradually dwindling as a result of emancipation; as long as you maintain that emancipation countries are paradisaic countries for the Jews, the saying of the prophet Malachi will necessarily apply to you:

“‘Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.’”

In a letter of the year 1855, Luzzatto writes to one of his disciples: “Your Hebrew letter gave me real pleasure.... Honour be to you for wishing to accustom yourself to write and speak Hebrew. For the language of our ancestors is the bond which links together the sons of the Jewish nation who are scattered all over the world, and it is that which conjoins all generations, and brings us nearer our ancestors as well as the generations which will come after us.”

On another occasion Luzzatto expressed himself on the idea of a Jewish mission in the Diaspora: “These are indeed words which charm the ear flatteringly, but in fact they are just empty phrases. The Bible has already been propagated among peoples for many generations, and gains in diffusion from day to day without Jewish assistance. Now, if the propagation of the Bible within a space of time of eighteen hundred years has not brought humanity perceptibly nearer perfection, what can the Jews contribute thereto, especially those who do not believe in the divinity of the Thora? But apart from the fact that, as I have expounded, it is a delusion to believe that the only purpose of existence of Judaism is to lead humanity towards perfection, as the author (Philipsohn) and his adherents believe, it is also a vain delusion to think that humanity will ever reach the state of perfection which the author describes in his writings.”

When Luzzatto heard, in the year 1854, that Albert Cohn, of Paris, was going to Palestine, he wrote to him:⁠—

“Only unthinking people can suggest that Jewish children should be sent from Asia to large European cities to be brought up there, and thus diffuse our culture among our brethren in Asia; that is heartless egoism and unbelief, fine outer forms and inward corruption.”

“Judaism must be relieved of foreign pressure. The Jews of the Holy Land must be provided with soil to till and means of exploitation. Care must also be taken that their crops are not robbed by the Pashas and Beduins. Then they will cultivate the soil as in the times of the Bible, Mishna and Talmud. This cannot succeed in Jerusalem, since, as a place of pilgrimage, it has become the abode of people who divest themselves of all worldly cares and true social duties. Judaism has never built cloisters for recluses and has never countenanced idleness. But is it to be wondered at that whilst all nations from far and wide went on pilgrimage to the Sepulchre, Jehuda Halevy, Nachmanides and other devout men, after a life of strenuous toil, should have wished to pay honour to the seat of holiness and to end their lives in saintly seclusion? Jerusalem will necessarily remain a sacred city for all peoples. Therefore, for the present, it cannot be regarded as a possible capital of the country. Otherwise all Palestine should be tilled and cultivated by the Jews, that it may flourish from an agricultural and industrial point of view and arise again in its old splendour. The main consideration is that no impediments should be placed by the Government in the way of the free development of Jewish industry. The Jews are known all over the world as particularly industrious and capable. Why, then, should they be loungers in Palestine? That they are so at present has two local reasons; the one, the pressure of neighbouring nations and the negligence of the administration, and the other the Indian as well as Mohammedan, but not at all Jewish, conception of the holiness of inactive life. The local pressure must be removed as far as possible. But we must rouse our brethren to useful activity, urge them onwards in every way, and breathe into them the spirit of a new life.”⁠¹

XIV. (vol. i., p. 280)

The eloquent passion with which Bialik expresses the woe of the Jewish people runs like a red thread through all his national poems; but it reaches its climax in The Poems of Wrath—a series of these poems written on the occasion of the Kishineff massacre in 1903. This series above all other poems of his is the most terrible expression of the national grief, despair and rage accumulated during the centuries of persecution, and is a masterpiece of vigour and impetuosity.

XV. (vol. i., p. 280)

Achad Ha’am’s writings offer an abundance of instructive historiosophic thoughts, mostly propounded in fragmentary, aphoristic form, which point in their entirety to a common root and a uniform outlook and system of ideas on the part of this thinker, and show the way thereto to many a reader. The stimulus of his theories lies in the fact that they have nearly always had a background of actuality. Achad Ha’am is no historiosopher within the narrow meaning of the word; his aim is primarily directed towards present-day problems of Judaism, but he often seeks their solution in the past. Thence he traces the primordial causes of what occupies us at present. This trait alone makes him not only national, like nearly all authors of our present Hebraic Renaissance period, but even more, it invests him with the sanction of a learned Hebrew thinker and an inspired intellectual leader. His methodology is philosophic and somewhat attuned to the Hegelian dialectic of thought, and in this connection too, apart from the community of national fundamental conception, it brings him close to Nachman Krochmal. Evolution is the idea which chiefly directs him, and psychology—particularly of human groups, parties and nations—appeals most to his refined mind. In all his endeavours he affirms the fluidity of the national character, and its adaptability under the pressure of historio-cultural factors. But it is just on this account that he is so firmly convinced of the necessity of Jewish individuality and its free development. He perceives the essence of this individuality in Jewish intellectual life, and he longs for a centre for it in Palestine.

Achad Ha’am expounded the essential Zionist idea long before the Zionist Organization was established, but opposed some political methods proposed by the Zionist Organization. He rejected the kind of Zionism which had its adherents mostly in Western Europe, and is inspired merely by anti-Semitism and its outrages, and he advocated Zionism as an expression of Judaism, of Jewish feeling, of a revival of the people by virtue of a great Jewish national idea—with a spiritual centre in Palestine.

XVI. (vol. i., p. 313)

Jews may have native countries, the Jewish nation has none, and this is its misfortune. The Jewish nation must again feel its own stretch of earth under its feet, and draw new material and moral forces from the native soil. But this must not be understood as if it were demanded that all Jews should leave their present homesteads in order to populate their chosen land. This is not what is meant. The Jewish idea of nationality does not aim at uniting the Jews in one country or at giving them a national status in their Dispersion, but at creating a national centre for Judaism. A considerable part of the nation, which will naturally be recruited first of all in the countries where Jewish oppression is heaviest, is to settle upon the soil which is intended to be the home of the Hebrew race. There it will win through agriculture that attachment to the soil which preserves a country to a nation, and it will find that bodily and moral welfare which must be the proper aim of all Jewish aspirations. The advantages of such an eventuality, also for those Jews remaining outside the national area and status, are self-evident. The foremost attainment would be that the Jewish population in the countries of European civilization would be constantly maintained as to numbers, through periodic eliminations, below that point of saturation, above which experience shows that the Jews are no longer welcome. Naturally this would also bring about a considerable relief to anti-Jewish tension, a decrease of the intensity of the struggle for life of the Jewish masses, and also, possibly, render easier the juridical equalization of the Jews in the countries of greatest pressure.

In addition to these will come the effect of the development of the Jewish land upon the Jews of other countries. The consciousness of the existence of a living Jewish people possessing a country of its own, a field of cheerful activity for sons at home, a refuge for sons from afar, will also ennoble and elevate, fortify and temper the Jews of the Diaspora. The curse of exciting ridicule, which makes misfortune doubly hard to bear, will recede from them: their whole status among the nations will become normal and healthy. The relations between Jews and Gentiles which, for all assimilations and emancipations, and notwithstanding all goodwill on both sides—why not admit it?—still retain so much of what is forced and painful, will only then become unconstrained and unaffected. Dislike of the Jews may possibly not cease; but, at any rate, it will lose all justification for existing in its peculiar shape and acuity. Should this dislike nevertheless prevail, the importance of a centre will become all the more apparent. The smallest national autonomous community has a seat and voice in the concert of nations. A nation without national worth is a nation outlawed. However pessimistic one may be with regard to the possibility of a small national centre to exert any material political influence in other countries, its moral authority is certain.

XVII. (vol. ii., p. 47)

The interest of Mr. C. P. Scott, Mr. H. Sidebotham, also of The Manchester Guardian but now of The Times, and other non-Jewish friends in Manchester in the Zionist Movement led to the establishment in that city, in the autumn of 1916, of the British Palestine Committee, formed to further the establishment of a Jewish commonwealth in Palestine, under British protection. In the words placed in the forefront of its programme: “The British Palestine Committee seeks to reset the ancient glories of the Jewish nation in the freedom of a new British dominion in Palestine.” The activities of this Committee have displayed themselves for the most part through its press organ, Palestine, which, appearing weekly, supplies the influential public among which it circulates with valuable information on all matters relating to Palestine, and at the same time discusses all the phases of international politics which touch upon the Palestine question in any of its facets. In addition to Palestine the Committee is responsible for two publications, England and Palestine, by Mr. H. Sidebotham, in which the author puts the case for a British mandateship, and British Projects for the Restoration of the Jews, a pamphlet by Mr. Albert M. Hyamson, wherein he sketches the attitude of British statesmen and publicists towards the projected restoration of the Jews to Palestine during the century and more that preceded the outbreak of the European War of 1914.

XVIII. (vol. ii., p. 54)

In the earlier part of the year 1917, about the date of the opening of the London Bureau of the Zionist Organization, the present writer, being the only member of the Inner Actions Committee in England, felt it desirable to give some definite status to those trusted supporters of the Zionist cause to whose advice Dr. Weizmann and he were continually informally having recourse. The constitution of the Organization did not permit of any definite responsibility being assigned to them. It was therefore possible to form only an Advisory Committee, without any executive authority. The Political Committee that came into existence at that time, and continued its existence until the arrival in England of a number of the members of the Greater Actions Committee enabled that constitutional Organization to resume its functions, was composed originally of Ahad Ha’am, Mr. Leopold Kessler, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Mr. Albert M. Hyamson, Mr. Simon Marks (who acted as Honorary Secretary), Mr. Harry Sacher, Mr. Israel Sieff, Mr. Leon Simon, two foreign Zionists—M. J. Ettinger, of the Jewish National Fund, and M. S. Tolkowsky, of Rechoboth, Palestine—who were temporarily resident in London, together with Dr. Weizmann and the present writer as chairman.

## ♦CORRIGENDA

Volume I.

Page xxvii.Six lines from the bottom. For “See the Chapter on Zionism and the War” substitute “See Volume II., pp. 1 ff.”

Page xl.Line  9. Delete “Arthur,” substitute “Albert.”

Line 22. Delete “Moro,” substitute “Morot.”

Line 23. Delete “Andre,” substitute “André.”

Five lines from the bottom. For “Frederick” substitute “Frederic.”

Page 8.The last three lines of the note contain the title of the Yiddish translation of “The Merchant of Venice.”

Page 12.Insert quotation marks (“) before “It” at opening of last paragraph.

Page 23.Line 12. For מרה substitute מרא.

Page 26.Three lines from the end. For “Gebirol” substitute “Gabirol.”

Last line. For “Kalonymus” substitute “Kalonymos.”

Page 27.Line  1. For “Kalonymus” substitute Kalonymos.”

Page 35.Line  2. Insert “shall” at end of line.

Page 59.Line  9. After “Manuel” insert “Noah.”

Page 82.Five lines from the end. Omit “de la Gironde.”

Page 95.Note  2. Transfer date “(1835‒1906)” to end of first line.

Page 126.Line  5. For “Reschid” substitute “Reshid.”

Page 144.First note. Delete second sentence. Substitute “He appeared as a pseudo-messiah about the year 1160.”

Line 24, and second note. Delete “1918.” Lord Morley is fortunately still alive.

Page 182.The three lines from the end. For “1826‒1887” substitute “1826‒1882.”

Page 193.Last line but one. For שחטה substitute שחטא.

Page 213.Line 18. After “poet” insert “and novelist.”

Page 222.Line 11. For אמתי substitute אימתי.

Page 235.Line  4. For “hoards” substitute “hordes.”

Page 254.Line  2. For “Frederick” substitute “Frederic.”

Page 257.Line  1. After “Jockey Club” insert “of Paris.”

Page 258.Line 13. For “Petrograd” substitute “St. Petersburg.”

Page 266.Line  3. For “Uganda” substitute “East African.”

Page 269.Line 22. For “Bahar” substitute “Behar.”

Page 275.Line  2 of note. For “Hakalah” substitute “Haskalah.”

Page 278.Line 22. For “Petrograd” substitute “St. Petersburg.”

Page 280.Line  3. For “Noach” substitute “Nachman.”

Line 27. For “Scernichowsky” substitute “Tschernichowsky.”

Page 284.Line 22. For “Shmarya” substitute “Shemaryah.”

Line 24. For “Viktor Jakobsohn” substitute “Victor Jacobsohn.”

Page 292.Line 38. For “Slouchz” substitute “Slousch.”

Page 296.Line 15. For “Jewish Territorial Association” substitute “Jewish Territorial Organization.”

Line 6 from the end. For “Uganda in East Africa” substitute “British East Africa.”

Page 297.Last line. For “Uganda” substitute “British East Africa.”

Page 302.First line of note. For “Araber” substitute “Arab et.”

Page 304.Paragraph 3, line  1. For “the first” substitute “an early.”

Paragraph 3, line 11. For “invasion” substitute “revolt.”

Volume II.

Page 44.Line  4. For “Uganda” substitute “a territory in East Africa.”

Page 62.Line  4. After “harmful” insert “but he afterwards withdrew his resignation.”

Mr. Gilbert did not resign from the Conjoint Committee, of which he was not a member. He resigned his membership of the Board of Deputies in order that the prospective president, Sir Stuart Samuel, might be elected in his place.

Line 24. Omit “late.”

Page 80.Line  9. For “judge” substitute “justice.”

Line 24. For “Shmaria” substitute “Shemaryah.”

Page 82.Line  1. For “Levin” substitute “Lewin.”

Page 87.Line  4. After “by any means” insert “a desert. But a little Jewish state in Palestine would serve as.”

Page 134.Line 18. For “Levin” substitute “Lewin.”

Page 140.Line  8 from the end. For “Jewish Territorial Association” substitute “Jewish Territorial Organization.”

Page 152.Line  3 from the end. For “Essalt” substitute “Es-Salt.”

Page 161.Line  4 from the end. For “generations” substitute “centuries.”

Page 215.Note 1. After “Breslau” insert “Jewish Theological.”

By a misunderstanding, words have in many instances in the first volume and in the earlier half of the second volume of this work been printed in italics quite unnecessarily. Chronological dates have also in some instances been supplied where they have not been called for.

## CATALOGUE

OF THE

ENGRAVINGS, LITHOGRAPHS, PAINTINGS, PHOTOGRAPHS, Etc.

From which the illustrations in this book have been taken.

(Prepared by Mr. ISRAEL SOLOMONS).

★ Israel Solomons’ Collection. B.M. British Museum.

Sizes are in inches and refer exclusively to the engraved surface.

★ABOAB, Isaac [da Fonseca] de David.

(1605‒1693.)

Doctissimo y Clarissimo Señor H. H. Yshack Aboab
Rabino del K. K. de Amsterdam.
Ydade sua 81 Anno 5446.

חרות בְעט ברזל וְעופרת

צורת תְמונת איש בעודו חי.

יצחק לְיום אחרון בְכותרת

לפני יְאָל י—עֳמד וחי.

Aernout Naghtegael.

Deling et fesit (sic).

(Mezzotint Engraving 11 × 7.)⁠¹

p. 44.

ABRAHAM VITA de Cologna.

See Cologna, Abraham Vita de.

ADAMS, John.

(1735‒1826.)

His Excellency John Adams,
President of the United States of America.
Respectfully dedicated to the Lovers of their Country and Firm Supporters of its Constitution.

Drawn & Engrav’d by H. Houston.

Published by D. Kennedy, 288 Market St., Philadᵃ.

(Line Engraving 11⅛ × 8¾. B.M.)

p. 92.

★ADLER, Nathan Marcus [Nathan ben Mordecai Hacohen].

(1803‒1890.)

Dr. Nathan Markus Adler Chief Rabbi.

My flesh and my heart may fail

the rock of my heart my portion—God

will remain for ever.

N. Adler.

(Facsimile autograph.)

St. Blatt zum Album Jsraels herausgegeben v. A. B. Perlmann.

(Lithograph 7 × 6½.)

p. 268.

ALLENBY, Edmund Henry Hynman.

[General Sir Edmund Henry Hynman, G.C.B., G.C.M.G.,
Grand Officer of the Legion of Honour, Knight of Grace of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem.]

(Photograph by H. Walter Barnett and Co., Ltd., 12 Knightsbridge, S. W.)

p. 84, ii.

AVIGDOR, Elim Henry d’ [Adam de Solomon].

(1841‒1895.)

[Elim Henry d’ Avigdor, B.A., C.E.]

E. d’ A. [18]90.

(Lithograph 7 × 6½.)⁠¹

p. 234.

BALFOUR, Arthur James.

[The Right Honourable Arthur James Balfour,
M.P., P.C., F.R.S., O.M., M.A., LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S.]

(Photograph by Olive Edis, F.R.P.S.)

p. 82, ii.

★BEN-ISRAEL, Manasseh de Joseph.

(1604‒1657.)

Menasseh Ben Israel,
Theologvs Et Philosophvs Hebrævs
Peregrinando Qværimvs.

Doctrina hic voluit, voluitque Modestia pingi.

An poterit vultus charta referre duos?

Hos oculos, hæc ora vide. Conuenit utrinque:

Ilia suos vultus dixit, & ilia suos.

D. I.

Ætatis Svæ
Anno XXXVIII. Salom Italia. Sculpsit. Anno
MDCXLII.

(Line Engraving 7⅜ × 5.)⁠¹

p. 44.

★BICHENO, James.

(1751‒1831.)

Revd. J. Bicheno, Newbury.

Theological Magazine.

Published by C. Taylor, 108, Hatton Garden, Octr. 1, 1809.

(Stipple Engraving 3¾ × 3.)

p. 92.

BOSELLI, Paolo.

[His Excellency Paolo Boselli,
Order of Annunziata, President of the Order of S. Maurizio and Lazzaro, Premier 1916‒1917.]

(Phototype.)

p. 128, ii.

BRIGHTMAN, Thomas.

(1562‒1607.)

Mr. Brightman Etat: suæ: 45:

Loe here A Brightman, Or A man of bright

Who that from darkeness brought this heauenly light

Thus shaddowed here turne ore and you shall see

Hee was A man was bright in prophecy.

Printed and are to be sould by Peter Stent at the Crowne in guilt spur street.

(Line Engraving 6⅜ × 4¾. B.M.)⁠¹

p. 52.

★BUENO (BONUS), Ephraim Hezekiah de Joseph.

(ob. 1665.)

Dor. Ephraim Bonvs, Medicvs Hebrævs.

Alter Avenzooar grandi sub judice magnus
in medicis, magni discipulus que patris.

Ioannes Lyvyus fecit.

Iohannis de Ram Excud.

(Etching 12 × 10½. Seventh State.)⁠¹

p. 44.

CAMBON, Jules-Martin.

[M. Jules-Martin Cambon,
Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour, Ambassador of France.]

(Photograph by Henri Manuel, Paris.)

p. 128, ii.

CHAMBERLAIN, Joseph.

(1836‒1913.)

[The Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain,

P.C., LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., J.P., M.P.]

(Photograph by the Stereoscopic Company, London,

3 Hanover Square, Regent Street, W.)

CLEMENCEAU, Georges-Eugène-Benjamin.

[M. Georges-Eugène-Benjamin Clemenceau,
President of the Council.]

(Photograph by Henri Manuel, Paris.)

p. 128, ii.

★COHN, Albert [Abraham].

(1814‒1877.)

Albert Cohn.
(Facsimile autograph.)

“... Und mir dem Sohne Ahrons ist ein Vorrecht noch geblieben das—zu segnen....”

(Lithograph 6 × 6.)⁠¹

p. 180.

★COLOGNA, Abraham Vita de

(1755‒1832.)

Abraham de Cologna, né à Mantoue.
Chevalier de l’Ordre Royal de la Couronne de Fer.
Membre du Collège Electoral des Dotti du Royaume d’Italie.
Grand-Rabbin du Consistoire Central des Israélites et du Consistoire de Turin.
Dedie Au Consistoire Central des Israélites.

Dessiné d’apres nature par Marchand.

Mariage Sculpt.

Déposé à la Bibliothèque Imperiale.

Se vend à Paris, chez l’Auteur, rue des Vieilles-Audriettes, No. 6, au Marais.

(Line and Stipple Engraving 7½ × 6¼.)

p. 84.

CONDER, Claude Reignier.

(1848‒1910.)

[Colonel Claude Reignier Conder,
D.C.L., LL.D., M.R.A.S., R.E.]

(Photograph, copyright.)⁠¹

p. 62.

★CRÉMIEUX, Isaac Moses Adolphe.

(1796‒1880.)

Ad. Crémieux,
Advocat am königlichen Gerichtshofe zu Paris,
Vice Präsident des israelitischen Central Consistoriums in Frankreich.
Avocat à la Cour royale de Paris,
vice president du Consistoire central des Israélitès français.

Druck u. Verlag den Steindruckerei des H. Engel in Wien.

(Lithograph 9¾ × 8¼.)

p. 180.

★DEUTZ, Emmanuel [Menachem].

(1763‒1842.)

Mr. Emmanuel Deutz,
Grand Rabbin du Consistoire Central des Israélites de France.

(Lithograph 8¼ × 6⅝.)

p. 84.

★DISRAELI, Benjamin de Isaac.

(1804‒1881.)

Benjamin Disraeli, Esquire, M.P.

Painted by A. E. Chalon, R.A.

Engraved by H. Robinson.

London, George Virtue.

(Stipple Engraving 8¾ × 6¾. Octagonal.)⁠¹

p. 176.

DUNANT, Jean Henri.

(1828‒1904.)

[Johannes Heinrich Dunant.]⁠¹

p. 234.

★ELIASBERG, Mordecai ben Joseph.

(1850‒1898.)

הרב הגאון ה״ג ר׳ מרדכי עליאסבערג זצ״ל אב״ד דבייסק

(Lithograph 4⅛ × 3½.)⁠¹

p. 202.

ELIOT, George [Mary Ann Cross, née Evans].

(1819‒1880.)

[George Eliot.]

(Photograph by the Stereoscopic Company, London,

3 Hanover Square, Regent Street, W.)

p. 208.

FINN, James.

(1806‒1872.)

[James Finn,
Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul for Jerusalem and Palestine,
M.R.A.S.]

(Photograph by Macandrew, 44 Regent Circus, W.)⁠¹

p. 208.

FUENN, Samuel Joseph.

(1819‒1891.)

Samuel Joseph Fuenn.⁠¹

p. 217.

★FURTADO, Abraham.

(1756‒1816.)

Mr. Furtado de la Gironde,
President de l’Assemblée des Députés Français & du Royaume d’Italie, Professant le Culte Mosaique 1806.

Dessiné d’après nature par Mr. Lheman.

Gravé par L. C. Ruotte.

A Paris chez l’Auteur Quai de l’Horloge du Paris près le Pont Neuf No. 75.

Déposé à la Bibliothèque Imperiale.

(Stipple Engraving 7¾ × 6.)

p. 84.

GEORGE, David Lloyd.

See Lloyd George, David.

GOLDSMID, Albert Edward Williamson [Michael ben Aaron Halevi].

(1846‒1904.)

[Colonel Albert Edward Williamson Goldsmid, M.V.O.]⁠¹

p. 234.

GORDON, David ben Dob Baer.

(1826‒1886.)

ר׳ דוד גארדאן נולד בשנת תקצ״ב⁠¹

p. 217.

★GOUGE, William.

(1578‒1653.)

Dr. William Gouge,
Effigies Guil. Gouge S.S. Theologiæ Professor Qui Obiit Ano.

Dui 1653.
Ætatis. 79 Ministerij in
Black-fr. Lon. 46.

John Dunstall fe.

(Etching 5¾ × 4⅜.)

p. 52.

★GOUGUENHEIM, Baruch.

(1752‒1842.)

Baruch Gouguenheim,
Grand Rabbin de Nancy, Membre du Consistoire du Grand Sanhédrin.

צורת הרב מהו׳ ברוך גוגענהיים אבד דקונסיסטאריום דק״ק נאנסי׃

C. Pannetier fecit.

Lith de C. Labouré à Nancy.

(Lithograph 4¼ × 4⅛.)⁠¹

p. 84.

★GROTIUS, Hugo [Huig van Groot].

(1583‒1645.)

Hugo Grotius.

Engraved by I. Tookey, from a Copy by P. van Gunst.

(Line Engraving 4⅝ × 4¾. Oval.)

p. 52.

HERZL, Theodor.

(1860‒1904.)

[Theodor Herzl.]⁠¹
(Facsimile autograph.)

Frontispiece, vol. i.

HERZL, Theodor.

(1860‒1904.)

[בנימן זאב בן יעקב]

Leopold Pilichowski.

(Oil Painting 100 × 50, copyright.)

p. 263.

HESS, Moses [Moritz].

(1812‒1875.)

Moses Hess.⁠¹

Geb. 21, Jan. 1812.

gest. 6 April, 1875.

p. 268.

HILDESHEIMER, Israel [Ezriel ben Löb].

(1820‒1899.)

The late Dr. Israel Hildesheimer.⁠¹

p. 202.

HIRSCH, Maurice (Moritz) de [Moses ben Joseph].

(1831‒1896.)

The late Baron Hirsch.

(Photograph by Mayall and Co.)⁠¹

p. 268.

IGNATIUS, Father [Joseph Leycester Lyne].

(1837‒1908.)

[Father Ignatius, O.S.B.]

(Photograph by W. and D. Downey, 61 Ebury Street,
London, S. W.)

p. 234.

★JESSEY (JACIE), Henry.

(1601‒1663.)

The Revd. Henry Jessey.

I. Caldwall sculp.

(Line Engraving 4⅝ × 3½.)

p. 52.

KAHN, Zadok.

(1839‒1905.)

[Zadok Kahn, Grand Rabbin de France.]

J. F. Aktuaryus [18]95.

(Pastel [copyright] 21 × 16¼.)

p. 180.

KALISCHER, Zebi Hirsch.

(1795‒1874.)

Zebi Hirsch Kalischer.⁠¹

p. 202.

KITCHENER, Horatio Herbert.

(1850‒1916.)

[Field Marshal Horatio Herbert, 1st Earl Kitchener of Khartoum,
K.G., K.P., G.C.B., O.M., G.C.S.I., G.C.M.G., G.C.I.E., D.C.L., LL.D.]

(Photograph by the Stereoscopic Company, London,
3 Hanover Square, Regent Street, W.)

p. 62.

LAZARE, Bernard [Lazare Bernard]

(1865‒1903.)

Bernard Lazare.

Drawn from life by Paul Renouard.⁠¹

p. 176.

LAZARUS, Emma.

(1849‒1887.)

Emma Lazarus.
(Facsimile autograph.)

Engraved by T. Johnson.

Photographed by W. Kurtz.

(Wood Engraving 6¾ × 4⅞.)⁠¹

p. 241.

★LEON (LEÃO) [TEMPLO], Jacob Judah Aryeh de Abraham de.

1603‒1675 ?)

Iaacob Ievda Leon Hebreo Ætat Svæ XXXVIIII.

(Line Engraving 7 × 5⅜.)⁠¹

p. 44.

★LEVI, David ben Mordecai.

(1742‒1801.)

David Levi.

Painted by Drummond.

Engraved by Bromley.

European Magazine.

Published by J. Sewell, Cornhill, June 1st, 1799.

(Line Engraving 3⅞ × 2⅞.)

p. 92.

LILIENBLUM, Moses Löb.

(1843‒1910.)

אנו צריכים לִחתִקיים־מפני שאנו קימים.
מ. ל. ליליניבלום.

(Collotype postcard.)

p. 217.

LLOYD GEORGE, David.

[The Right Honourable David Lloyd George, M.P., P.C., D.C.L.]

(Photograph by Vandyke, London.)

p. 132, ii.

LOEWE, Louis [Eliezer ben Mordecai Halevi].

(1809‒1888.)

Dr. L. Loewe,

Mitglied der Königlichen asiatischen Gesellschaft von Grossbritanien und Irland der asiatischen Gesellschaft zu Paris so wie der heiligen Mission nach Damascus und Constantinopel; Orientalist Seiner Königlichen Hoheit des Herzogs von Sussex Verfasser des “The origin of the Egyptian language,” “Briefe aus dem Orient,” and Uebersetzer des Efes Dammim.

אשרי ילדתו

משה הסיר חרפת עמו, אשריהו!

נלהם מלחמת אֵל, ואתה משנהו

הוא עשה חיל. ולו היית עזר

הכי נקרא שמך דמשק אליעזר⁠¹

Nach der Natur gemalt v. d. Gebr. Henschel.

Lith. Jnst. v. L. Sachse & Co., Berlin.

(Lithograph 8¾ × 8.)

p. 268.

LUZZATTO, Samuel David de Hezekiah.

(1800‒1865.)

Samuel David Luzzatto.⁠¹

p. 176.

MANASSEH BEN-ISRAEL.

See Ben-Israel.

MANDELSTAMM, Max [Emanuel] ben Ezekiel.

(1838‒1912.)

ד״ר מ. מאַנדעלשטאַם⁠¹

(Collotype postcard.)

p. 234.

★MEYER, Jacob (Jaekel) ben Isaac Seckel [Mutzig].

(1740?‒1830.)

Jacob Meyer,

Grand Rabbin et President du Consistoire Israélite du dept. du Bas-Rhin.⁠¹

תמונת החכם הכולל כל בינה ומדע
הגאון הגדול כבוד שמו מהורר יעקב מאיר נר״ו
א״ב״ד וראשון דקאנסיסטאריום דגליל התחתון רהין.

Beyer ft.

Litho: de G: Engelmann.

(Lithograph 6½ × 5. Oval.)

p. 84.

MOHILEWER, Samuel ben Judah Löb.

(1824‒1898.)

[Rabbi Samuel Mohilewer.]⁠¹

M.W. ph.

p. 202.

★MONTEFIORE, Moses Haim (Vita) de Joseph Eliahu.

(1784‒1885.)

Sir Moses Montefiore, Bart., F.R.S.

Painted by G. Richmond, R.A., D.C.L.

Engraved by T. L. Atkinson.

Proof.

London: Published 1st May, 1876, by P. and D. Colnaghi and Co.,
13 and 14 Pall Mall East.⁠¹

(Mezzotint Engraving 17 × 13¾.)

p. 115.

Armorial bearings on margin, Montefiore impaling Cohen.

★MUNK, Salomon.

(1803‒1867.)

[Salomon Munk.]

(Lithograph 2½ × 2.)

p. 180.

NETTER, Charles.

(1828‒1882.)

[Charles Netter.]

L. Kuppenheim.

(Lithograph 8 x 6.)

p. 180.

NOAH, Mordecai Manuel.

(1785‒1851.)

Mordecai Manuel Noah.

(Oil Painting⁠¹ [in the possession of L. Napoleon Levy].)

p. 241.

NORDAU, Max Simon [Mayer Simchah ben Gabriel.]

[Max Simon Nordau,

M.D. Paris, Budapesth; LL.D. hon. causa. Athens; Officier d’Académie France; Commander Royal Hellenic Order of St. Saviour; Hon. Mem. of Greek Acad. of the Parnassos and Corresponding Member of the Academy of Medicine at Madrid, 1918.]

(Photograph by Elliott and Fry, Ltd., London, W.)

p. 264.

OLIPHANT, Laurence.

(1829‒1888.)

[Laurence Oliphant.]⁠¹

(Photograph, copyright.)

p. 208.

PICHON, Stéphen-Jean-Marie.

[M. Stéphen-Jean-Marie,

Commander of the Legion of Honour, Minister for Foreign Affairs.]

(Photograph by Henri Manuel, Paris.)

p. 128, ii.

PINSKER, Leon [Löb ben Simchah].

(1821‒1891.)

Dr. L. Pinsker.⁠¹

Geb. 24 Dezbr., 1821.

Gest. 9 Dezbr., 1891

p. 217.

★PRIESTLEY, Joseph.

(1733‒1804.)

J. Priestley, LL.D., F.R.S.

Angus sculpt.

Literary Magazine.

Published as the Act directs, 1 Feb., 1792, by C. Foster, No. 41 Poultry.

(Line Engraving 3⅞ × 3¼. Oval.)

p. 92.

RAPHALL, Morris Jacob.

(1798‒1868.)

[Rabbi Morris Jacob Raphall, M.A., Ph.D.]

(Photograph [copyright] from an oil painting 8 × 6.)

p. 241.

★REINES, Isaac Jacob ben Solomon Naphtali.

(1839‒1916.)

הרב ריינעם⁠¹

(Collotype postcard.)

p. 202.

RIBOT, Alexandre-Félix-Joseph.

[M. Alexandre-Félix-Joseph Ribot,

Member of the Academy of France, late President of the Council.]

(Photograph.)

p. 128, ii.

ROBINSON, Edward.

(1794‒1863.)

Edward Robinson [D.D., LL.D.]⁠¹

(Facsimile autograph.)

Roberts sc.

(Wood Engraving 2 × 1¾.)

p. 62.

ROTHSCHILD, Edmond de

[Baron Edmond de Rothschild.]

(Photograph by A. Dupont, 8 Rue Dupuytren, Paris,

from an oil painting by M. Aime Moro.)⁠¹

Frontispiece, ii.

RÜLF, Isaac ben Judah.

(1834‒1902.)

[Rabbi Dr.] J. J. Rülf.⁠¹

p. 202.

★ST. JOHN, Oliver.

(1528?‒1673.)

Sr. Oliver St. John,
Lord Chief Justice during the Commonwealth.

From an original picture by Jansen in the possession of Lady Olivia Sparrow.

(Line Engraving 6¾ × 4⅞.)

p. 52.

SALVADOR, Joseph.

(1796‒1873.)

[Joseph Salvador.]

(Photograph [copyright] 5¾ × 4.)⁠¹

p. 176.

★SASPORTAS, Jacob de Aaron.

(1610‒1698.)

Doctissimo ÿ Clarissimo Señor H. H. Rebij Yahacob ♦Sasportas,
Rabino del K. K. de Amsterdam.

Faleció en 4 Hiyar Año 5458.

הרב הכולל ♦יעקב ששפורטש זל
נפטר יום ג׳ ארבעה לחודש אייר שנת נ׳ח׳ת׳ רוח לׄפׄקׄ

Retrato es de Jahacob, honor del Mundo del Mauro a España embaxador facundo en Sale ÿ Londrez fue de Leÿ secundo Eclipsose a Amsterdam con tanto Zelo de ochenta ÿocho años en la Gloria. tuvo en Tremezen Catreda notoria Loa Hamburgo ÿ Liorne su memoria. que no cupo en la tierra ÿ passò al çilio.

P. van Gunst sculp.

(Line Engraving 10⅛ × 9.)⁠¹

p. 42.

SCHAPIRA, Hermann.

(1840‒1898.)

[Prof. Dr. Hermann Schapira.]⁠¹

★SHAFTESBURY [Antony Ashley Cooper (7th)] Earl of.

(1801‒1885.)

The Earl of Shaftesbury.

Engraved by D. J. Pound from a photograph by Mayall.

(Line Engraving 8½ × 6¾.)

p. 208.

★SINZHEIM, Joseph David ben Isaac.

(1745‒1812.)

M. David Sinzheim,

Chef du Grand Sanhedrin, Premier Gd. Rabbin du Consistoire central.

Damame pinxit.

Prudhon sculpt.

Déposé à la Bibliothèque Impériale.

(Stipple Engraving 12⅜ × 8⅞.)

p. 84.

SMOLENSKIN, Peter [Perez ben Moses].

(1842‒1885.)

פ. סמאלענסקין

(Collotype postcard.)

p. 217.

SONNINO, Sidney.

[His Excellency Baron Sidney Sonnino, LL.D. Pisa,

Premier 1906 and 1909‒1910; Minister for Foreign Affairs 1914.]

(Photograph.)

p. 128, ii.

SYKES, Tatton Benvenuto Mark.

(1879‒1919)

[Lieut.-Colonel Sir Tatton Benvenuto Mark Sykes, Bt., M.P.]

Painted by Leopold Pilichowski, 1918.

p. xvii., ii.

TOURO, Judah de Isaac.

(1775‒1854.)

Judah Touro.⁠¹

p. 241.

TSCHLENOW, Ephim Wladimirovitch [Jechiel].

(1865‒1918.)

ד״ר י. צלינוב

(Collotype postcard.)

p. 234.

WARREN, Charles.

[General Sir Charles Warren,

Knight of Justice of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem,
G.C.M.G., K.C.B., R.E., F.R.S.]

(Photograph by Elliott and Fry, Ltd., London, W.)

p. 62.

★WHISTON, William.

(1667‒1752.)

The Revd. Mr. William Whiston.

Born 9 Decemr., 1667.

Died Augt. 22d., 1752.

B. Wilson Fecit 1753.

(Etching 7 × 4⅜.)

p. 92.

WILSON, Charles William.

(1836‒1905.)

[Major-General Sir Charles William Wilson,

R.E., K.C.B., K.C.M.G., D.C.L., LL.D., M.E., F.R.S.]

(Photograph by Maull and Fox, 187a Piccadilly, London.)⁠¹

p. 62.

WILSON, Thomas Woodrow.

[Dr. Thomas Woodrow Wilson,
28th President of the United States of America.]

(Photograph.)

p. 130, ii.

WOLFFSOHN, David ben Isaac.

(1856‒1914.)

David Woolffsohn.⁠¹

p. 288.

★ZACUT [ZACUTUS LUSITANUS], Abraham.

(1575‒1642.)

Doctor Zacutus Lusitanus Medicus. Ætatis Suæ. LIIII.
Anno 1634.

Zacuti faciem proclive est sculpere, mentem

Quod memoret Cœlum? quod vel Agalma ferat?

Quod nequeunt oculi, monstret doctrina Zacuti,

Et memorandi acies prœdicet ingenium.

Nicolaus Fontanus MED.

S. Saveri fe.

(Line Engraving 6½ × 4½.)⁠¹

p. 44.

THE CONFERENCE BETWEEN MANASSEH BEN-ISRAEL AND OLIVER CROMWELL.

Solomon Alexander Hart, R.A.

Oil painting [copyright] 60½ × 91.)⁠¹

p. 15.

★NAPOLEON LE GRAND.

rétablit le culte des Israélites, le 30 Mai, 1806.

Couche fils Sculp.

A Paris, au Bureau de l’Auteur des Fastes de la Nation Française,

M. Ternisien d’Haudricourt, Rue de Seine, No. 27, F. S. Germain.

(Etching 4 × 5½.)

p. 88.

★GRAND SANHÉDRIN des ISRAÉLITES

de l’Empire français & du Royaume d’Italie.
Convoqué à Paris par ordre de
NAPOLEON-LE-GRAND,
assemblé pour la première fois le 9 fev. 1807.
Ce Corps tombé avec le Temple va reparaître.

(Discours de M.M. les Commissaires Impériaux, du 18. 7 bre., 1806.)

Damame Dé Martrait del. et Sculpt.

Beaublé Script.

Déposé à la Bibliothèque Impériale.

A Paris chez l’Auteur, rue Neuve des Petits-Champs, No. 58.

(Aquatint printed in colours 17¼ × 25¾.)

p. 80.

DIE TEILNEHMER DER KATTOWITZER KONFERENZ.

[Members of the Kattowitz Conference, Nov. 6, 1884.]⁠¹

p. 288, ii.

MEMBERS
OF THE
5657 MACCABEAN PILGRIMAGE⁠¹ 1897

(Photograph [copyright] 5⅞ × 7¾.)

p. 246.

LAYING FOUNDATION STONE
OF THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS ON
MOUNT SCOPUS, JERUSALEM.

24 July, 1918.

15 Ab, 5678.

(Photograph by י. בן־דוב בצלאל ירושלם)

p. 144, ii.

## BOOKS CONSULTED

♦Abrabanel, Isaac ben Judah | Mashmia Yeshuah | Salonica, 1526
Abrabanel, Isaac ben Judah | Yeschuoth Meschico | Carlsruhe, 1828
Achad Ha’am (see Ginzberg, Usher) |  |
Acher, Mathias (see Birnbaum, Nathan) |  |
Alexandre, Charles (see Sibyls) |  |
Alkalay, Rabbi Juda | The Harbinger of Glad Tidings. An Address to the Jewish Nation on the propriety of organizing an Association to Promote their Regaining of their Fatherland | London, 1852
Alkalay, Judah ben Solomon | Gorol l’Adonai | Vienna, 1857
Anglo-Palestine Company, Limited | An Account, etc. | London, 1913
Ankel, Otto | Grundzüge der Landesnatur des Westjordanlandes | Frankfurt a M., 1887
Argyll, Duke of (see Douglas, George) |  |
Arnal, Z. | De la Race comme Explication da Monothéisme Sémitique | Strasbourg, 1864
Arnaud, Eugène | La Palestine, etc. | Paris, 1868
Ashley, Hon. Anthony Evelyn Melbourne (see Bulwer, H. L. E.) |  |
Atzberger, Leonhard | Die christliche Eschatologie, etc. | Freiburg im Breisgau, 1890
Aveling, Frederick Wilkins | Cromwell and Puritans | London, 1899
Avigdor, Sylvie d’ (see Herzl, Theodor) |  |
Azoury, Nedjib (Bey) | Le Réveil de la nation arabe | Paris, 1905
Bachrach, Jacob | Sepher Hamasa L’ Erez Hakdoshah | Warsaw, 1883
Baedeker, Carl | Palestine and Syria. Fifth Edition | London, 1912
Balkans, The (see Hogarth, D. G.) | pp. 319‒386, A History of Turkey. By ... D. G. Hogarth | Oxford, 1915
Basterot, Vicomte de | Le Liban, la Galilée et Rome | Paris, 1869
Beck, L. C. (see Hellwald, Friedrich, Baron von) |  |
Beeton, Samuel Orchart | Biblic Speaker | London, 1875
Belloc, J. T. de | Toujours Jérusalem | Paris, 1884
Belloc, J. T. de | Jérusalem Souvenirs, etc. | Paris, 1887
Bentwich, Norman | The Jewish Review, etc. | London, 1910
Bertie, Hon. Henry William | The Temple of Jerusalem | London, 1838
Bicheno, James (see Witherby, Thomas; Levi, David) | The Restoration of the Jews, the crisis of all Nations | London, 1800
Birnbaum, Dr. Nathan (Mathias Acher) | Die nationale Wiedergeburt, etc. | Wien, 1893
Birnbaum, Dr. Nathan (Mathias Acher) | Die Jüdische Moderne | Wien, 1896
Blech, Edward Charles | Annual Report on the Trade of Palestine | London, 1907
Brainin, Reuben | Chamesheth Ha-Kongressim Ha-Zionim | Warsaw, 1903
Brodrick, Mary | Handbook for ... Syria and Palestine (Edited by) | London, 1903
Brown, James, of Selkirk | Bible Truths with Shakespearean parallels | London, 1862
Buber, Martin | (1) Drei Reden, 1911. (2) Daniel, 1914. | Berlin, 1911‒14
Bulwer, Henry Lytton Earle (Lord Dalling and Bulwer) | The Life of Henry John Temple (Lord Palmerston), vols. i. and ii. London, 1870; vol. iii. edited by Ashley, A. E. M. | London, 1874
Bunny, Edmund | The Scepter of Judah | London, 1584
Bunny, Edmund | The Coronation of David | London, 1588
Byron, George Gordon Noel (Lord Byron) | Lord Byron’s Pilgrimage To The Holy Land. A Poem. In Two Cantos | London, 1817
Byron, George Gordon Noel (see Nathan, Isaac) | The Poetical Works | London, 1897
Caignart de Saulcy, Louis Félicien Joseph | Voyage autour de la Mer morte | Paris, 1853
[Calamy ? Edmund ?] | Cromwell’s Soldier’s Bible | London, 1895
Cameron, Verney Lovett | Our Future Highway [i.e. The Euphrates Valley] | London, 1880
Canton, William | The Bible and the Anglo-Saxon People | London, 1914
Carnarvon, (4th) Earl of (see Herbert, H. H. M.) |  |
Carpzov, Johann Gottlob | Critica sacra Veteris Testamenti ... iii. circa pseudo-criticam G. Whiston, Solicita. Lipsiæ, 1728. Translated from the Latin, with additional Notes, By Moses Marcus, A Converted Jew | London, 1729
Channebot, A. | L’Empire Ottoman, l’Italie et la France | Paris, 1891
Charmes, Gabriel | Voyage en Syrie | Paris, 1891
Charmes, Gabriel | L’Avenir de la Turquie | Paris, 1883
Chesshire, Reginald Stanley Pargeter | Some Incidents of the Last Journey to Jerusalem | London, 1909
Christmas, Henry | The Sultan of Turkey, Abdul Medjid Khan, chap. iii. pp. 38‒56, “The present state and prospects of the Ottoman Empire” | London, 1854
Churchill, Charles Henry | The Druzes and the Maronites | London, 1862
Clarke, Thomas | India and Palestine, etc. | Manchester, 1861
Claudel, Paul | The East I Know | London, 1914
Cohen, Israel (Editor) | Zionist Work in Palestine | London and Leipzig, 1911
Coles, Abraham | Hebrew Psalms in English Verse | New York, 1888
Conder, Claude Reignier | Eastern Palestine | London, 1892
Cook, Albert Stanburrough | The Bible and English Prose Style | Boston (U.S.A.), 1892
Coster, Jean Baptiste de | Relation de ce que Napoléon, etc. | Brussels?, 1816
Crémieux, Adolphe Isaac Moise | Discours et Lettres | Paris, 1883
Cresson, Warder | Jerusalem the Centre, etc. | London, 1844
Cresson, Warder | The Key of David | Philadelphia, 5612 [1851]
Crisis | The Crisis and Way of Escape. An Appeal for the Oldest of the Oppressed | London, 1856
Cromwell, Oliver (see Calamy, Edmund) |  |
Cuinet, Vital | La Turquie d’Asie: etc. | Paris, 1890, etc.
Cyprus (Laws) | The Statute Laws of Cyprus | London, 1906‒13
Daiches, Dr. Samuel | Lord Kitchener and his Work in Palestine | London, 1915
Dalling and Bulwer (Lord). (See Bulwer, H. L. E.) |  |
Dambmann, George (see Verney, N.) |  |
Davey, Richard Patrick Boyle | The Sultan and his Subjects | London, 1897 and 1907
Davidson, Thomas | The Glory of God Displayed in the building up of Zion | Edinburgh, 1802
Davitt, Michael | Within the Pale | London, 1903
Dawson, Sir John William | Egypt and Syria, etc. | London, 1883
Delpuget, David | Les Juifs d’Alexandrie, de Jaffa et de Jérusalem | Bordeaux, 1866
Disraeli, Benjamin (see Froude, J. A.; Kebbel, T. E.; Sichel, W.) | Works | London, 1826‒1900
Donnay, Maurice | Le Retour de Jérusalem | Paris, 1904
Douglas, George (8th Duke of Argyll) | Our Responsibilities for Turkey | London, 1896
Duff, Dr. Alexander (see Porteous, J. M.) |  |
Dunning, H. W. | To-day in Palestine | London, 1908
Dunoyer, A. | Coup d’œil sur l’état des chrétiens en Palestine | Paris, 1854
Dutemple, Edmond | En Turquie d’Asie | Paris, 1883
Ebers, Georg, and Guthe, Hermann | Palästina in Bild und Wort | Berlin, 1883‒84
Ehrenpreis, Dr. Marcus | Die Hebräische Sprache und Literatur Referat Zionistenkongress, 1900 | Berlin, 1900
Enault, Louis | La Terre Sainte | Paris, 1854
Engelhardt, Eduard | La Turquie et le Tanzimat | Paris, 1882‒84
English Consular Reports | Various Dates | London
Esthori ben Moses Parchi | Kaphtor Vapharach | Berlin, 1852
Ewing, William | Arab and Druze at Home | London and Edinb’gh, 1907
Finn, James | Stirring Times | London, 1878
Finn, James | Bishop Gobat, etc. | London, 1858
Finn, James | Opening Address | London, 1851
Finn, James | Byeways in Palestine | Edinburgh, 1868
Forder, Archibald | With the Arabs in Tent and Town | London, 1902
Franco, M. (of Constantinople) | Essai sur l’histoire des Israélites, etc. | Paris, 1897
Franklin, George Edward | Palestine depicted and described | London and New York, 1911
Fremantle, William Robert | Israel Restored, or the Scriptural claims of the Jews | London, 1841
Fremantle, William Robert | Present Times and Future Prospects | London, 1854
Friedemann, Adolf | Das Leben, Theodor Herzls | Berlin, 1914
Friedland, Nathan ben Joseph | Sepher Kos Jeshuah ve-Nehamah | Breslau and Amsterdam, 1859
Froude, James Anthony | The Life of the Earl of Beaconsfield | London [1914]
Garnier, E. | Jérusalem et la Judée, etc. | Tours, 1879
Gautier, L. C. | Au delà du Jourdain | Paris, 1894
Gawler, Lieut.-Col. George | Observations and Practical Suggestions in Furtherance of the Establishment of Jewish Colonies in Palestine, the most Sober and Sensible Remedy for the Miseries of Asiatic Turkey | London, 1845
Georgiades, Demetrios | La Turquie actuelle | Paris, 1892
Georgiades, Demetrios | Is the Regeneration of Turkey possible? | London, 1909
Ginzberg, Usher (Achad Ha’am) (see also Simon, Leon) | “Al Parashat Derachim,” and various other works, mostly in Hashiloach | Odessa, 1884‒1916
G. J. (see Young, James) | Christ the Messiah. A reply to ... J. Y. | London (N.D.)
Goodrich-Freer, Ada | In a Syrian Saddle | London, 1905
Gortschakoff-Ouvaroff, Nathalie | Juifs et Chretiens | Paris, 1888
Gottheil, Richard James Horace | (1) The Aims of Zionism (2) Zionism | London, 1899‒1914 (two items)
Graetz, Heinrich Hirsch | Geschichte der Juden | Leipzig, 1865‒90
Guérin, Victor | Description de la Palestine | Paris, 1868‒80
Guthe, Hermann (see Ebers, Georg) |  |
Handcock, Percy Stuart Peache | The Latest Light on Bible Lands | London, 1913
[Hawker, Robert] | Zion’s Warrior | London, 1802
Hellwald, Friedrich von (Baron) and Beck, L. C. | Die heutige Turkei | Berlin, 1878‒79
Heman | Die Religiose Weltstellung des judischen Volkes | Leipzig, 1882
Henderson, Archibald, M.A. | Palestine, etc. (Handbooks for Bible Classes) | London, 1893
Herbert, Henry Howard Molyneux (Earl of Carnarvon) | Recollections of the Druses of the Lebanon | London, 1860
Herzl, Theodor | Der Judenstaat | Leipzig and Vienna, 1896
Herzl, Theodor | A Jewish State | London, 1896
Herzl, Theodor (see Friedemann, Adolf) | Schriften | Wien, 1897‒1904
Hess, Moritz (Moses) | Rom und Jerusalem | Leipzig, 1862
Hess, Moritz (Moses) | Translated into English (Rome and Jerusalem) | London, 1899
Hichens, Robert Smythe | The Holy Land | London, 1910 and 1913
Hill, S. S. | Travels in Egypt and Syria | London, 1866
Hillesum, J. M. | Menasseh Ben Israel; pp. 28‒56, Amsterdamsch Jaar Boekje | Amsterdam, 1899
Hogarth, David George (see Balkans, The) | The Ancient East | London, 1914
Holland, Thomas Erskine | The European Concert in the Eastern Question | Oxford, 1885
Hollingsworth, Arthur George Harper | Remarks on the present condition, etc. | London, 1852 (2nd ed., 1853)
Hollingsworth, Arthur George Harper | The Holy Land Restored | London, 1849
Homes, Nathanael | The Resurrection Revealed, etc. | London, 1661
Horsley, Heneage | Tracts in controversy with Dr. Priestley, etc. | London, 1812
Huntington, Ellsworth | Palestine and its Transformation | Boston and New York, 1911
Hurd, Richard | Sermons, etc. | London, 1776‒80
Hyamson, Albert Montefiore | Palestine; The Rebirth of an Ancient People | London, 1917
Irby, Adeline Paulina (see Mackenzie, G. M. M., afterwards Lady Sebright) |  |
Israel | Israel and the Holy Land | Exeter, 1846
Israel | The Future Destiny of Israel | London, 1830
Israel | A Short Inquiry into the import of the Prophecies, etc. | London, 1820
Jaffé, Max | Die nationale Wiedergeburt der Juden | Berlin, 1897
Jellinek, Dr. Adolf | Der jüdische Stamm | Berlin, 1881‒85
Jewish Colonization Association | Recent de Matériaux sur la Situation Economique | New York, 1906
Jewish Encyclopedia, New York |  | New York, 1901‒6
Jews | The gathering together of the Jews for the Conquering of the Holy Land | London, 1647
Johnstone, William Henry | Israel in the World | London, 1854
Jortin, John | Remarks on Ecclesiastical History | London, 1751‒73
Judt, J. M. | Źydowska rasa, etc. | Warsaw, 1902
Judt, J. M. | Translated by the Author into German. Die Juden als Rasse | Berlin [1904]
Jurieu, Pierre | L’acomplissement des prophéties | [Paris] 1686
Kahn, Léon | Les Juifs de Paris, etc. | Paris, 1898
Kahn, Léon | Un Régard Rétrospectif, etc. | Paris, 1876
Kalischer, Hirsch | Derishat Zion | Thorn, 1862
Kebbel, Thomas Edward | Life of Lord Beaconsfield | London, 1888 and 1890
Kelman, John | The Holy Land | London, 1909
Kerry, Earl of (see Petty, W. T.) |  |
King, Edward, F.R.S. (see Moseley, William) | Remarks on the Signs of the Times | London, 1798‒99
Kirwan, F. D. (see Tama, Diogéne) |  |
Klausner, Joseph | Olam Mithhaveh | Odessa, 1915
Knell, Paul | Israel and England Paralelled | London, 1648
Kronberger, Emil | Zionisten und Christen | Berlin, 1900
Laharanne, Ernest | La Nouvelle Question d’Orient | Paris, 1860
Langston, Rev. Earle Legh | The Jew and the Promised Land | London, 1913
La Peyrère, Isaac de | Dv Rappel des Juifs | [Paris] 1643
Layard, Sir Austen Henry | The Turkish Question | London, 1854
Lazare, Bernard | L’Antisémitisme, etc. | Paris, 1894
Lazare, Bernard | Le Nationalisme Juif | Paris, 1898
Lazarus, Emma | The Poems of, etc. | Boston (U.S.A.), 1889
Lémann, Abbé Augustin | L’Avenir de Jérusalem | Paris, 1901
Leslie, Charles (see Wrangham, Francis) |  |
Le Strange, Guy | Palestine under the Moslems | London, 1890
Le Strange, Guy | Le devoir des Nations de rendre au Peuple sa Nationalité | Genève, 1864
Levi, David | Letters to Dr. Priestley in answer to those he addressed to the Jews | London, 1787, 1789, 1793
Levi, David | Letters to ... Dr. Priestley, ... 2. To Mr. Bicheno, ... 4. To Mr. Swain, ... | London, 1789
Lévy-Bing, Lazare | (1) La Fille de Sion ou le Rétablissement d’Israel | Paris, 1864
Lévy-Bing, Lazare | (2) Le devoir des Nations de rendre au Peuple sa Nationalité | Genève, 1864
Lévy-Bing, Lazare | Méditations religieuses | Paris, 1868
Liesching, Louis F. | Personal Reminiscences of Laurence Oliphant | Paris, [1891]
Ligne, Charles Joseph, Prince de | Juif Œuvres choisies, etc. | Genève, 1809
Locke, William John | At the Gate of Samaria | London, 1895
Lodge, Richard | The European Powers and the Eastern Question, Vol. 8 of “The Cambridge Modern History” | London, 1904
Loewe, Louis (see Montefiore, Sir Moses and Lady) |  |
Lortet, Louis (see Verney, N., and Dambmann, G.) | La Syrie d’aujourd’hui | Paris, 1884
Lunz, Abraham Moses | Jerusalem | Vienna, 1882
Lunz, Abraham Moses | Luach Erez Israel | Jerusalem, 1900‒16
Mackenzie, Georgina Mary Muir (afterwards Lady Sebright) and Irby, A. P. | The Turks, the Greeks, etc. | London, 1867
MacNeile, Hugh | Lectures on the Prophecies relative to the Jewish Nation | Liverpool, 1866
Manasseh ben Joseph Ben-Israel (see Hillesum, J. M., and Wall, M.) | Works (various years) |
Mangin, Edward | A Voice from the Holy Land | London [1843]
Marcus, Moses (see Carpzov, J. G.) |  |
Margoliouth, Moses | The Destinies of Israel, and the Claims of Hebrew Christians upon the sitting Congress | London, 1878
Margoliouth, George | The Story of the English Bible | London, 1911
Masterman, Ernest William Gurney | Studies in Galilee | Chicago, 1909
Meen, Joseph Austin | Historical and descriptive geography of Palestine | London [1860]
Menzies, Sutherland | Turkey, historical, geographical, etc. | London, 1880
Michelsen, Edward Henry | The Ottoman Empire, etc. | London, 1853
Miller, Ellen Clare (afterwards Pearson) | Eastern Sketches ... Palestine | Edinburgh, 1871
Milton, John | The Works of J. M. in verse and prose | London, 1851
Mitchell, Elizabeth Harcourt | Forty Days in the Holy Land | London, 1890
Monk, Henry Wentworth | A Simple Interpretation of the Revelation | London, [1859]
Montefiore, Sir Moses and Lady | Diaries of, edited by Dr. Louis Loewe | London, 1890
Moseley, William (see King, Edward) | The Fall of Babylon ... The Opinion of ... E. King, Esq. | London, 1799
Munk, Salomon | Palestine, Description géographique, historique, etc. | [Paris] 1835
Nathan, Isaac | Fugitive pieces and reminiscences of Lord Byron | London, 1829
Nawratzki, Curt | Die jüdische Kolonisation Palästinas | München, 1914
Neil, James | Palestine re-peopled | London, 1877 (3rd ed.)
Newcome, John | The Sure Word of Prophecy | Cambridge, 1724
Newton, John | The Works of the Rev. John Newton (Six Volumes) | London, 1808
Noah, Mordecai Manuel | Discourse on the Restoration of the Jews | New York, 1845
Noah, Mordecai Manuel | The Jews, Judea, and Christianity ... restoration of the Jews | London, 1849
Nordau, Max | Schriften (various about Zionism) | Wien, 1897‒1916
Nossig, Alfred, and Trietsch, Davis (see Trietsch, Davis) | Palestine | Berlin, 1902
Oliphant, Laurence | The Land of Gilead | Edinburgh and London, 1880
Oliphant, Laurence | Haifa, or life in Modern Palestine | Edinburgh, 1887
Palestine Exploration Fund | Various Publications | London, 1886‒1916
Palmerston, Lord (see Bulwer, H. L. E.) |  |
Pavet de Courteille, Abel Jean Baptist (see Ubicini, J. H. A.) |  |
Pétavel, Abram François | Israél, peuple de l’avenir: | Paris, 1861
Pétavel, Abram François | L’Epoque de rapprochement, etc. | Paris, 1863
Petrie, afterwards Carus-Wilson, Mary Louisa Georgina | The Debt of the Home to the Book ... etc. | London [1911]
Petty, afterwards Fitz-Maurice, William Thomas, Earl of Kerry | An Essay upon the Influence of the Translation of the Bible upon English literature, etc. | Cambridge, 1830
Pinsker, Dr. Leo | Auto-emanzipation | Berlin, 1882
[Porteous, James Moir] | The Eastern Question. Turkey: its mission and doom. With Preface by Dr. Alexander Duff | London, 1876
Priestley, Joseph | Letters to the Jews, etc. | Birmingham, 1786, 1787
Priestley, Joseph (see Levi, David) | The Evidence of the Resurrection ... to which is added an address to the Jews | Birmingham, 1791
Priestley, Joseph (see Horsley, Heneage; and Levi, David) | A Comparison of the Institutions of Moses, etc. | Northumberl’d [Penn.], 1799
Reifmann, Jacob | Maamar Teudath Israel | Berlin, 1864
Rix, Herbert | Tent and Testament | London, 1907
Robinson, Edward, D.D. | Biblical Researches in Palestine, etc. | London, 1841, 1856 (2nd ed.), 1867 (3rd ed.)
Roulliet, Antony | La Palestine au point de vue international | Paris, 1869
Rowntree, John Wilhelm | Palestine Notes, etc. | London, 1906
Sacher, Harry (Editor) | Zionism and the Jewish Future | London, 1916‒17
Salmoné, Habib Anthony | The Fall and Resurrection of Turkey | London, 1896
Saulcy, F. de (see Caignart de Saulcy, L. F. J.) |  |
Saunders, Trelawney | An Introduction to the survey of Western Palestine, etc. | London, 1881
Schaff, Philipp | Through Bible Lands | London, 1878
Schumacher, Gottlieb | (1) Across the Jordan. (2) The Land of Moab | London, ♠1885‒74
Schwarz, Joseph ben Menahem | Sepher Tebuoth Ha’arez | Jerusalem, 1845
Sibyls | Oracula Sibyllina ... curante C. Alexandre | Paris, 1841‒56
Sichel, Walter Sydney | Disraeli. A study, etc. | London, 1904
Siegfried, J. | Jüdisches Leben um heutigen Jerusalem | Basel, 1902
Sievier, Robert Standish | East is East, etc. | London [1909]
Simon, Leon | Aspects of the Hebrew Genius | London, 1910
Simon, Leon (see Ginzberg, Usher) | Selected Essays by Ahad Ha’-Am | Philadelphia, 1912
Smith, George Barnett | Eminent Christian Workers | London, 1893
Smith, Sir George Adam | The Historical Geography of the Holy Land | London, 1894
Smith, Haskett | Patrollers of Palestine | London, 1906
Sokolow, Nahum | Erez Hemdah | Warsaw, 1885
Sokolow, Nahum | Ha-Assif | Warsaw, 1884‒92
Sokolow, Nahum | Sefer Ha-Shanah | Warsaw, 1892‒95
Sokolow, Nahum | Report IV. Zion. Congress | London, 1900
Sokolow, Nahum | Le-Maranan ve-Rabanan | Warsaw, 1902
Sokolow, Nahum | Report IX. Zion. Congress | Hamburg, 1909
Sokolow, Nahum | Report X. Zion. Congress | Basle, 1911
Sokolow, Nahum | Taknith Ha-Zionouth | Warsaw, 1912
Sokolow, Nahum | Report XI. Zion. Congress | Wien, 1913
Spurgeon, Charles Haddon (see Young, James) |  |
Stanley, Arthur Penrhyn (Dean) | Sinai and Palestine | London, 1856
Strange, Guy Le (see Le Strange) |  |
Straus, Oscar Solomon | Roger Williams, the pioneer of English Liberty | New York, 1894
Streator, Martin Lyman | The Anglo-American Alliance in Prophecy, etc. | London, 1900
Swain, John Hadley (see Levi, David) | The Objections of Mr. David Levi ... examined | London, 1787
Syria | La Syrie à la France | Paris, 1861
Talmage, Thomas de Witt | Dr. Talmage’s visit to the Holy Land | London, 1891
Tama, Diogéne | ... Actes de l’Assemblée des Israélites de France ... convoquée à Paris ... 1806. | London, 1807
Tarring, Sir Charles James | British Consular Jurisdiction in the East | London, 1887
Thomson, William McClure | The Land and the Book | London, 1859
Tovey, D’Blossiers | Anglia Judaica | London, 1738
Treves, Sir Frederick | The Land that is Desolate | London, 1912
Trietsch, Davis (see Nossig, Alfred, and Trietsch, D.) | Palaestina Handbuch. Dritte Auflage | Berlin, 1912
Tschlenow, Jechiel | Sion and Africa | Warsaw, 1907
Tschlenow, Jechiel | 10 Jahre Palestina-arbeit (originally in Russia) | Berlin, 1913
Turkey | The Policy of the Turkish Empire | London, 1597
Turkey | The Turk and the Hebrew; or the Rule of the Crescent | London, 1853
Turkey | The Fall of Turkey | London, 1875
Turkey | The Partition of Turkey | London, 1876
Turkey | The Future of England, Turkey, and Russia | London [1878]
Turkey | Asiatic Turkey: past, present, and future | London, 1878
Turkey | What has God said concerning Turkey and Russia? With a glance at Palestine past and present | London [1878]
Ubicini, Jean Henri Abdolonyme and Panet de Courteille, A. J. B. | État présent de l’Empire Ottoman | 1876
Verney, Noël and Dambmann, G. (see Lortet, Louis) | Les Puissances étrangères dans le Levant, en Syrie et en Palestine. (Preface by Louis Lortet) | Paris, 1900
Walker, B. | The Future of Palestine | London, 1881
Wall, Moses | Some Discourses upon ... the Jewes in Manasseh Ben Israel’s “Hope of Israel” | London, 1651 and 1652
Warburg, Otto | Palestina Altneuland | Berlin, 1900‒9
Warren, Sir Charles | The Holy Land | London, 1905
Welch, Frances E. | Under Eastern Skies | Torquay, 1904
Whiston, William (see Carpzov, J. G.) | An Essay Towards Restoring the True Text of the Old Testament | London, 1722
Whiston, William | The Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies, pp. 259‒348 in “A Defence of Natural and Revealed Religion.” Vol. ii. | London, 1739 [1800]
Williams, Roger | The ♣Bloody Tenent of Persecution | London, 1644
Wingate, Sir Andrew | Mesopotamia, the Gateway to Palestine | London, 1911
[Witherby, Thomas] (see Bicheno, James) | Observations on Mr. Bicheno’s Book “The Restoration of the Jews” | London [1800]
Wolf, Lucien | Sir Moses Montefiore | London, 1884
Wolf, Lucien | Cromwell’s Jewish Intelligencers | London, 1891
Wolff, Sir Henry Drummond | Some Notes of the Past | London, 1893
Wolff, Sir Henry Drummond | Rambling Recollections | London, 1908
Wolff, Joseph | Journal of J. W., in a series of Letters to Sir T. Baring, Bart. | London, 1839
Worthington, John | Select Discourses, etc. | London, 1826
Worthington, Richard | A Discourse, etc. | London, 1830
Wrangham, Francis | The Truth of the Scripture History, abridged from Mr. (Charles) Leslie’s ... Easy method with the Deists | [London?] 1820
Wrangham, Francis | The Holy Land | Cambridge, 1800
Wrangham, Francis | The Restoration of the Jews | Cambridge, 1795
Young, James (see G. J.) | The Rev. C. H. Spurgeon in a fix, and completely confounded | London (N.D.)
Zangwill, Israel | A Land of Refuge | London, 1907
Zion | Zion’s Bank, or, Bible Promises, etc. | London [1854?]
Zion | A Song of Syon, etc. | London, 1642
Zionist Congresses Protocols | Wien—Berlin | Berlin 1897‒1914
Zwemer, Samuel Marinus | The Mohammedan World of To-Day | New York, 1906

PERIODICALS
The Jewish Chronicle | London
The Jewish World | London
The Times | London
Die Welt | Berlin
Young Israel (continued as Israel) | London, 1897‒1901
La terre Sainte | Paris, 1905
Palästina | London, 1892‒98
The Hebrew National | London, 1861
Revue Orientale. Vols. 1‒3 | Paris, 1841‒44
Hebraism. A Monthly Journal. Vol. 1 | London, 1884
Archives Israélites | Paris, 1864‒70
L’Univers Israélite | Paris, 1855‒60

## INDEX

[The Volumes are indicated by I and II respectively.]

- Aaronsohn, Aaron, Palestinian agriculturist, I, 287; II, 141
- Abdallah, Pasha of Acre, I, 73‒4
- Abdul Aziz, Sultan, I, 171, 186
- Abdul Hamid, Sultan, I, 259, 303;

  a petition to, I, 231; II, xxxviii, 279‒81

- Abdul Medjid, Sultan, I, 104, 107, 108, 150, 153, 180
- Abela, Mr. P., British Vice-Consul, on trade of Haifa, II, 398
- Aberdeen, Lord, and Sir Moses Montefiore, I, 117‒18
- Aboab, Rabbi Isaac, I, 44, 45; II, 183‒4
- Aboo, Samuel, on Palestinian agriculture, I, 115
- Abrabanel (Dormido), David, I, 16‒17; II, 170 note 1
- Abrabanel, Don Isaac, I, 18, 24‒6, 45 note; II, 170 note 1
- Abrabanel, Jona, I, 44 note 5
- Abrahams, Dr. Israel, II, 67;

  on the British and Foreign Bible Society, II, 218

- Abrahams, Sir Lionel, II, 67
- ♦Abramowitsch, S. J. See Mendele Mocher Sepharim
- “Achad Ha’am” (U. Ginzberg), Hebrew thinker and essayist, I, 279, 280, 281, 285; II, 51, 293, 422, 425;

  on Pinsker, I, 224‒5

- Acher, Matthias. See Birnbaum, Nathan
- Achmet Pasha, of Damascus, I, 170
- Achuzah Company, the first London, II, 378‒9
- Actions Committee, the Zionist, II, 359‒60
- Adams, President John, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 59, 136
- Addison, Joseph, on the influence of the Bible on English Literature, I, 11
- Adler, Dr. Cyrus, and the British Declaration, II, 136
- Adler, Mr. Elkan N., I, xi‒xii, ♦22 note 1, 46; II, 62, 237‒8
- Adler, Hermann, II, xxxvii;

  on the Jewish colonies in Palestine, I, 246‒7; II, 319, 321

- Adler, Marcus N., II, 321
- Adler, Nathan M., and Palestine Colonization, I, xii, 135; II, xxxviii f., 237 ff., 306
- Adrichomus, Christianus, I, 61
- Ahmad Jazzâr, Pasha of Acre, I, 67 ff.
- Ahroni, Dr., Palestinian zoologist, II, 316, 328
- Akenside, Mark, I, 11
- Akiba, Rabbi, I, 223
- Aktuaryus, J. F., I, xxxix
- Aleinikoff, M., Russian Zionist leader, II, 98, 283, 293
- Alexander, Mr. David L., and Zionism, II, 61, 62, 69
- Alexander, J. A., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 165
- Alexander the Great, I, xxiii, 173
- Alexander II., Tsar, I, 150, 217
- Alexeieff, General, and Russian Zionist soldiers, II, 40
- Algazi, Rabbi, of Jerusalem, I, 73, 77‒79
- Algerian Jews, Emancipation of, I, 180‒1
- Alkalai, Rabbi Jehouda, II, 297 note 1
- Allenby, General, II, 85, 152‒3
- Alliance Israélite Universelle, the, I, 112, 181 ff., 191 note 1, 202, 205, 249, 250, 262, 291; II, 262, 318‒24, 383
- Alperin, II, 284
- Alroy, David, I, 143‒4
- Altmann, Jewish painter, II, 344
- Ambrose, on Pythagoras and Jewish learning, I, 29
- America, admission of Jews to, I, 49‒51;

  the “Lovers of Zion” in, I, 241 ff.;

  Zionism in, II, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 49, 79‒82, 133‒4, 355‒7

- American Jewish Committee, the, on the British Declaration, II, 136‒7
- American Jewry and Palestine, II, 39;

  and War Relief Work, II, 37

- American Zionist Medical Unit for Palestine, the, II, 131, 133 ff.
- Amos, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 163‒4
- Amzulak, M. Haymen, British Consular Agent at Jaffa, II, 307‒8
- Anaxagoras, quoted, I, 30
- Anglo-Israelism, the theory of, II, 404
- Anglo-Jewish Association, the, and Zionism, II, xxxix, 58 ff., 318‒24
- Anglo-Jewish Zionism, I, 115 ff.
- Anglo-Levantine Banking Company, the, II, 374
- Anglo-Palestine Company, the, I, 287, 288, 296; II, 373‒4
- Annual Conference, the Zionist, II, xli, 360
- Anspach, the Margravine of, I, 58
- Anti-Semitism, I, 225‒6, 245, 290; II, xli;

  and philo-Semitism, II, xxi

- Anti-Socinus. See Bayly, Rev. A.
- Anti-Zionists, the, I, xx ff., 244‒6;

  manifesto by, II, 58 ff.

- Antokolski, Mark, II, 340, 346
- Arab Question, the, I, 300‒2; II, 52, 107‒8, 109‒10, 121, 141, 392 ff.
- Arama, Rabbi Isaac, I, 26
- Argentine, Jewish Colonies in the, I, 258 ff.
- Argyll, the Duke of, on the Earl of Shaftesbury, I, 121 note 1
- el-Arish Expedition, the, II, xlv, 44
- Aristotle, I, 27;

  reputed to have been influenced by Jewish learning, I, 29

- Armenian Question, the, I, 271; II, 19
- Armenians and Jews, II, 107, 112, 116, 121
- Arnold, Sir B., on Palestine, II, xlv‒xlvi
- Arnold, Matthew, on the Old Testament, I, 3; II, 169
- Arnold, Dr. Thomas, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 165
- Aronovitz, M., Palestinian editor, II, 317, 387
- Art, Jewish, and Zionism, I, 287; II, 333‒46
- Artom, Benjamin, II, 140
- Asch, Shalom, Hebrew and Yiddish writer, II, 316
- Asher, Asher, I, 250
- Asser, M. S., I, 81
- Assimilation, Jewish school of, I, 128, 178, 254;

  and English Jewry, I, 194‒5;

  versus Zionism, I, 188 ff.;

  Luzzatto on, II, 420

- Athanasius, quoted, I, 28
- Atlas, Eleasar, II, 315
- Auberlen, Carl August, Swiss divine, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 164
- Auerbach, the brothers Elias and Israel, II, 302
- Augustine on Miracles, I, 28
- Australia, Zionism in, II, 23, 27
- d’Avigdor, Elim, leader of the “Lovers of Zion,” I, 234‒6;

  on Palestine Colonization, I, 239‒40

- Azoury, M., anti-Zionist Arab, I, 301
- Babkow, S. S., II, 293
- Bacon, Lord, influenced by Scripture, I, 7‒8
- Bahar, Jacques, I, 269
- Bahia ibn Pakuda, I, 222
- Balfour, Mr. A. J., on Zionism, I, xxix‒xxxiv; II, viii, xxvi, xxxi, 82, 83 ff., 131, 143, 147;

  and American Zionist Medical Unit, II, 136;

  and Hebrew University, II, 151‒2

- Balfour of Burleigh, Lord, on the British Declaration, II, 115
- Balkan War, the, II, lv‒lvi
- Bambus, Willy, II, 302
- Barbasch, S. N., II, 293
- Barlaeus, C., I, 42
- Barnes, Mr. G. N., on the British Declaration, II, 131;

  speech at Zionist Demonstration, II, 134‒5

- Barrow, Isaac, and the Bible, I, 10, 13;
- Basle Programme, the Zionist, I, xxiv, 134, 153, 311‒2
- Bayly, the Rev. Anselm, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 93
- Beaconsfield, Lord. See Disraeli, Benjamin
- Beaufort d’Hautpoul, General, I, 170
- Bechir, Sheehab, Emir, I, 167
- Beck, Mr., II, xxxiii
- Becker, J., II, 304‒5
- Bedersi, Rabbi Jedaiah, I, 26
- Beer, F., Jewish artist, II, 344
- Begley, the Rev. Walter, I, 52 note 1; II, 176‒9
- Behar, Nissim, II, 216, 218, 321
- Behm, Dr. A., Russian Zionist, II, 385
- Beilis, the trial of, II, xix‒xx
- Belgian Zionists, the, II, xlix, 25, 27, 358
- Belkind, Deborah, II, 307
- Belkind, Israel, I, 287; II, 80, 81, 306‒8, 316, 333
- Belkovsky, Prof. Gregor, I, 269; II, 285‒6, 293
- Benas, Baron Louis, account of journey to Palestine, II, 319 ff.
- Ben-Avigdor, Hebrew writer and editor, II, 309
- Bendemann, Edward, II, 335, 336
- Bendetsohn, Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Benisch, Abraham, and Palestine, I, 152 f., 174, 185 note 1; II, xxxix‒xl, 319
- Ben-Jehuda, Elieser, I, 287; II, 81, 284, 384
- Bentwich, Mr. Herbert, I, 246, 296; II, xxxvii, xlii, xliii, liv, lvi, lvii, 50, 51, 52, 349, 425
- Bentwich, Major Norman, II, liv, 51
- Benzion (Gutmann), S., II, 293, 309
- Berditchewski, Dr., Hebrew writer, II, 309
- Berkman, P., Hebrew educationist, II, 318
- Berkowitsch, J. D., Hebrew writer, II, 318
- Berkowitz, Hebrew novelist, II, 315
- Berkowitz, Dr., Hebrew writer, II, 318
- Berman, S., Hebrew educationist, II, 318
- Bermann, Vassyli, II, 284‒5
- Bernfeld, Dr. Simon, II, 309
- Bernstamm, Leopold, Jewish sculptor, II, 340
- Berr, M. Michael, I, 82‒83
- Berr, M., I, 292
- Berschadski, Hebrew novelist, II, 315
- Bertinoro, Rabbi Obadiah, I, 224
- Beshir Shehaab, prince of the Lebanon, I, 167
- Beverwijck, Jan van, I, 24
- Bezalel, the, Hebrew art school in Jerusalem, I, 287; II, 346, 381‒2
- Bialik, Hebrew poet, I, 280, 293; II, 422
- Bianchini, Commandante, II, 140
- Bible, the, I, 91, 165;

  its influence on English history, literature and character, I, 2‒3;

  its translation into English, I, 4;

  and Lord Byron, I, 95 note 1;

  and modern Hebrew writers, I, 273‒4

- Bible Societies, British, I, 61; II, 218
- Bicheno, the Rev. James, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 65, 88‒89, 92; II, 223‒4
- Bierer, Ruben, II, 305
- “Bilu,” the, agricultural pioneers in Palestine, I, 286‒7; II, 10, 147, 306‒8;

  manifesto of, II, 332‒3;

  “The Advanced Guard,” II, 401

- Birnbaum, Bernard, II, xxxvii
- Birnbaum, Nathan (Matthias Acher), I, 283; II, 296
- Black, W. H., I, 185 note 1
- Bloch, F., II, 344
- Blondel, David, I, 42
- Blood Libel, the, in Damascus, I, 110 ff., 119, 158, 159, 180
- Blosz, K., II, 335
- Board of Deputies of British Jews, the, and Zionism, II, 58 ff.
- Bodenheimer, Dr. Max, I, 269; II, 302, 303, 357, 359
- Boghos Nubar Pasha, on the British Declaration, II, 116, 409 note 1
- Boghoz Bey, and Sir Moses Montefiore, I, 118; II, 409
- Bogratschow, Dr., II, 304
- Bohemia, Zionism in, II, 25
- Bomesch, Ch., II, 293
- Bonar Law, Mr. A. See Law
- Bornstein, Ch. J., Hebrew writer, I, 8 note; II, 315
- Boruchow, A. U., II, 304
- Boselli, Signor Paolo, and Zionism, II, 53
- Bourgeois, M. Léon, on Zionism, I, 289‒91
- Bowring, Sir John, on the Farhis of Damascus, I, 75
- Braham, John, I, 97; II, 228
- Brainin, Reuben, II, 309‒10
- Brandeis, Justice L. D., II, 80, 355
- Braude, Jacob, II, 294
- Braude, Dr. M., II, 295, 305
- Braun, M. Hirsch, II, 308
- Braunstein, M., II, 317‒18
- Brenner, Hebrew novelist, II, 315
- Bright, John, and the Bible, I, 14 note 1
- Brightman, Thomas, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 42‒3
- Brill, Jechiel M., Hebrew editor in Palestine, I, 286; II, 286, 306
- Britain, mission and policy in the East, I, viii, 155, 207;

  and Palestine, II, 56;

  and Turkey, I, 303‒4

- British Declaration, the, II, xxxi, 83 ff.;

  and the Entente Governments, II, 127‒31

- British Palestine Committee (in Manchester), II, 54, 424‒5
- British Protection of the Palestinian and the Eastern Jews, I, 112, 116 ff., 132, 134, 158 ff., 161 ff.
- Brodetzky, Dr. Selig, II, 116
- Brodski, J. J., II, 344
- Brody, Dr. H., II, 286
- Broides, R. A., II, 310
- Brothers, Richard, and Anglo-Israelism, II, 404
- Brown, Dr. David, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 164
- Browne, Prof. E. G., II, xxii, xxiii
- Browne, Sir Thomas, and the Bible, I, 12
- Browning, and the Hebrew language, I, 14 note 1
- Brutzkus, Julius, II, 281, 283
- Bryce, Lord, on Zionism, I, xxxv‒xxxvii;

  on the British Declaration, II, 114

- Buber, Martin, I, 284; II, 286
- Bueno, Dr. Ephraim H., I, 44‒45
- Bulgaria, Zionism in, II, 1, 358
- Bunny, Edmund, on ancient Israel, I, 41
- Burghas Bey. See Boghoz Bey
- Burnet, Thomas, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 43
- Busher, Leonard, on religious liberty, I, 19
- Bychowski, Dr., II, 294
- Byron, Lord, and the Bible, I, 12;

  his “Hebrew Melodies,” I, 95‒99, 108; II, 228

- Cabbala, the, I, 23, 28
- Cadman, the Rev. Williams, on the Restoration of Israel, II, 411
- Cahen, Isidore, on Dumas’s “La Femme du Claude,” II, 264
- Calmet, Augustin, I, 61
- Cambon, M. Jules, and Zionism, II, 53
- Canada, General Conference of Jews in, II, lxii f.
- Canada, Zionism in, II, xliv, lvii, 22, 29, 354
- Canton, Mr. Wm., II, 218
- Capitulations, the Turkish, I, 149‒50
- Carcassone, Rabbi David, I, 31, 32, 33
- Carlile, the Rev. W., and the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, II, 405 ff.
- Carlow, the inhabitants of, petition to Lord Palmerston for Restoration of Israel to Palestine, II, 405 ff.
- Carlyle, Thos., I, 3
- Carnarvon, the Earl of, on the Eastern Question, I, 172‒3
- Cartwright, Johanna and Ebenezer, petition for readmission of Jews to England, I, 51; II, 210
- Cassel, Sir Ernest, I, 254
- Cattaui Pasha, II, 146
- Catzius, Josias, II, 181‒2
- Cazalet, Edward, on the Eastern Question, I, 207; II, 267‒9
- Cecil, Lord Hugh, on the British Declaration, II, 115
- Cecil, Lord Robert, and Zionism, I, 299; II, 62, 101‒3, 116
- Cellarius, Christophorus, I, 61
- Cerf-Berr, Lipman, I, 83
- Challemel-Lacour, M., on Disraeli and Heine, II, 248‒9
- Chamberlain, Joseph, I, xxix; II, xlv
- Chaneles, Rabbi, II, 296
- Charles I., I, 40
- Charles II., I, 45
- Chauvinism and Zionism, II, 403
- Chazanovitch, Dr. Joseph, II, 293‒4, 344
- Chissin, Dr., Palestinian educationist, II, 304, 333
- Christadelphians, the, II, lxiii
- Christian propaganda for the Restoration of Israel, I, 163 ff.; II, lxiii
- “Christian Observer,” the (1838), on the Restoration of Israel, I, 99‒100
- Christian, Prince and Princess, and Palestine Colonization, I, 208
- Christina, Queen, of Sweden, I, 44
- Church of Scotland, memorial for the Restoration of Israel (1840), I, 131‒2
- Churchill, Colonel Charles H., on England and the East, I, 155‒7
- Citizenship and Jewish Nationalism, I, 92;

  and the Torah, I, 194

- Claff, Mr. S., II, xlii
- Clarke, Dr. Thos., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 138‒9
- Clearchus, quoted, I, 29
- Clement, of Alexandria, I, 29
- Cohen, Sir Benjamin Louis, I, 254
- Cohen, the Rev. F. L., on Isaac Nathan, II, 227
- Cohen, Mr. Israel, II, 116
- Cohen, Mr. Leonard L., II, 67
- Cohen, Mordecai, in “Daniel Deronda,” I, 210‒11
- Cohen, Mr. S. J., II, 133
- Cohn, Albert, I, 182
- Colonization of Palestine: see Palestine Colonization
- Columbus, and Abraham Zacuto, II, 185
- Conder, Colonel Claude R., I, 62;

  on Palestine Colonization, I, 230; II, 274‒6;

  on Zionism, I, 299‒300; II, lii‒liii, 391‒2

- Conjoint Committee, the, and Zionism, II, 58 ff.;

  protests against, II, 67 ff.

- Conversionist tendencies, in the Christian propaganda for the Restoration of Israel, I, 93
- Cooper, the Rt. Rev. James, on the British Declaration, II, 115‒16
- Cossacks, massacres of Jews by, I, 31, 32, 33
- Cowen, Mr. Joseph, I, 296; II, xliii, liv, lvi, lvii, 50, 51, 52, 116, 140, 349, 425
- Cowley, Abraham, and the Bible, I, 9‒10
- Cowper, and the Bible, I, 11‒12
- Crémieux, Isaac Moses Adolphe, I, 173, 180‒2; II, 262, 319;

  Circular Letter to the Jews in Western Europe, II, 400

- Cresson, Warder, American consul in Jerusalem, I, 136‒7
- Crewe, the Marquess of, on the British Declaration, II, 114
- Crimean War, the, I, 176 ff.
- Cromer, Lord, I, 304;

  and Zionism, II, 73

- Cromwell, Oliver, I, 4‒5, 14, 40, 44, 52; II, 87
- Cromwell, Richard, I, 44
- Cunningham, Wm., and the Restoration of Israel, II, 404
- Cylkow, Jewish artist, II, 344
- Cyprus, I, 142, 303‒4;

  and Palestine, II, 247‒8

- Dagutzky, Rabbi, II, xliii
- Daher, Sheikh, Pasha of Acre, I, 67
- Dahl, Basil, I, 8 note 1
- Daiches, Rabbi Israel H., II, 286‒7, 351
- Daiches, Dr. Salis, II, lvi, 351
- Daiches, Dr. Samuel, II, liv, lvi, 351;

  on Lord Kitchener and the Palestine Exploration Fund, II, 219

- Dallas, the Rev. Alex. B. C., on the Restoration of Israel, II, 410
- Damascus, the Jews of (1860), I, 173‒4;

  massacres of Jews of, I, 110‒11;

  massacres of Christians, I, 168

- Damoiseau, French renegade, I, 74
- Daniel, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 167
- “Daniel Deronda,” I, 209‒12; II, 43
- “David Alroy,” I, 143‒4
- David Pasha, I, 170
- Davidsohn, Elie, II, 300
- Dawson, Sir John Wm., on the future of Palestine, II, 276‒9
- Declaration of the British Government, the, I, xxvii; II, xxxi, 83 ff.;

  and American Zionists, II, 99;

  and Russian Zionists, II, 98‒99

- Denmark, Zionism in, II, 358
- De Quincey, on the Hebrew language, I, 7
- “Der Orient” (1840), on Palestine as the Jewish homeland, I, 114
- Dibdin, Sir L. T., on England and the Bible, I, 4
- Die Welt, Zionist press organ, II, 21, 357
- Dight, Mr. M. S., II, xliii
- Dillon, M. L., II, 344
- D’Israeli, Isaac, I, 140
- Disraeli, Benjamin, Earl of Beaconsfield, I, 140‒5, 208 note 3; II, xvii, 3, 246‒50;

  and Heine contrasted, II, 248‒9;

  and the Suez Canal, II, 246‒7

- Doddridge, Dr. Philip, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 94
- Dolitzky, M. M., II, 310
- “Doomes-Day,” II, 181‒2
- Draxe, the Rev. T., on Palestine under the Jews, I, 42
- Dreyfus Affair, the, I, 112, 293
- Dreyfus, Dr. Charles, II, 350
- Drujanow, Hebrew publicist, II, 310
- Drumont, Edouard, I, 293
- Druses, the, I, 167 ff.
- Dryden, John, and Scripture, I, 10
- Dubnow, Shimon, II, 293
- Dulberg, Captain, II, 133
- Dumas’s “La Femme de Claude,” I, 204; II, 263‒5
- Dunant, Jean Henri, I, xxvii, 198‒9;

  appeals for Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 199‒201, 203‒4, 270; II, 259‒61, 265‒7, 417

- Dunlop, Mr., II, xxxiii
- Durham, the Rev. James, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 43
- Dury, John, and the Readmission of Jews to England, I, 19, 51‒52; II, 211, 212
- Dutch West India Company, the, I, 57
- East African Project, see Uganda Offer
- Eastern Europe, the Jews of, and the War, II, 2‒3
- Eastern Question, the, I, 102 ff.
- Ebner, Dr. Meyer, I, 269
- Edel, Edmund, II, 335
- Eder, Dr. M. D., II, 140
- Edersheim, Dr., II, xlix
- Edward, King, and Palestine Colonization, I, 208
- Edwards, President, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 404
- Egmont, Earl of. See Perceval, John
- Egypt and Turkey, I, 101 ff.;

  British policy in, I, 304‒5

- Egypt, Zionism in, II, 355
- Ehrenpreis, Dr. Mordecai, II, 310
- Eisenberg, Mr., II, 386
- Eisenstadt, Rabbi Eleasar, II, 310
- Eisenstadt (Barzilai), Joshua, II, 287
- Eldad Ha-Dani, I, 25
- Eliasberg, Rabbi Mordecai, II, 287
- Eliaschew, Isidor, Hebrew and Yiddish writer, II, 300
- Eliot, George, and Zionism, I, xxvii, 209‒12
- Elizabeth, Queen, I, 4
- Eljaschew, J., II, 283
- Elyashar, Chief Rabbi Nissim, of Jerusalem, II, 147
- Emancipation and Zionism, I, xx‒xxi, 130
- Emden, Rabbi Jacob, I, 35 note 1
- Emigration, the problem of, in 1906, II, li‒lii
- Emmott, Lord, on the British Declaration, II, 115
- England and Palestine, II, 43;

  and the Restoration of Israel, I, 91 ff.;

  and the study of Hebrew, I, 13‒14;

  and Syria, I, 104‒6;

  and Zionism, I, xxvi‒xxvii, 93, 295 ff.; II, xlii ff., liv, 42 ff., 58 ff.

- English art of speaking, the, influenced by Scripture, I, 13
- English Clergy, the (in the 17th century), and the Jewish people, I, 2
- English Jewry and Assimilation, I, 194‒5
- English Press, the, and Zionism, II, 46‒47
- English Reformation, the, I, 4
- English Zionist Federation, the, I, 299; II, xl‒xli, 23, 27, 30, 48, 54 ff., 69, 99, 347 ff., 360‒2
- Episcopius, Simon, I, 42
- Epstein, Isaac, II, 316‒7
- Epstein, Jacob, II, 344
- Epstein, Jehuda, II, 344
- Epstein, Rabbi Zerach, II, 147
- Epstein, S. E., Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Epstein, Zalman, II, 311
- Erlanger, M. Michel, I, 291‒2; II, 290, 308
- Erter, Isaac, I, 276
- Ester, Julius, II, 335
- l’Estrange, Hamon, II, 211
- Ettinger, Mr. Jacob, II, 51, 425
- Eugenie, ex-Empress, and Palestine Colonization, I, 203
- European War, the, and Zionism, II, 1 ff.
- Eyre, Joseph, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 99
- Ezekiel, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 166
- Ezekiel, Moses Jacob, Jewish sculptor, II, 336, 345
- Fairbairn, the Rev. Patrick, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 165
- Fairfax, Lord, I, 51
- Farbstein, Dr. David, II, 305
- Farbstein, H., II, 295
- Farhi, Haim, I, 63, 67‒75
- Farhi, Moses, I, 68
- Farhi, Mourad, I, 75
- Farhi, Raphael, I, 68, 75, 76
- Farhi, Saul, I, 67, 68, 69
- Farhi, Solomon, I, 68, 75
- Faud Pasha, I, 168, 173, 174
- Federations, the Zionist, II, 360
- Feinberg, David, I, 259
- Feinberg, Mr. Is., II, 383
- Feinberg, Joseph, II, 306‒8
- Feisal, Prince, and Zionism, II, 142
- Feiwel, M. Berthold, I, 284; II, 287
- Feldstein, Mr. M., II, 294, 378
- Felgenhauer, P., I, 42
- Fels, Mrs. Mary, II, 134
- Ferdinandus, Philip, II, 209
- Fersht, Mr. B. A., II, 62
- Feuchtwanger, Dr., II, 368
- Feuerstein, Hebrew novelist, II, 315
- Financial Institutions of Zionism, the, II, 371 ff.
- Finburgh, Mr. S., II, 133
- Finch, Sir Henry, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 48‒49; II, 207‒9
- Finkel, E. D., II, 318
- Finn, James, British Consul, in Jerusalem, I, 159, 161 ff.; II, 412‒13
- Finn, S. J., II, 296
- Finzi, Mr., British Consular agent at Acre, I, 161
- Fischel, E. B., II, 335
- Fischer, M. Jean, Belgian Zionist leader, II, xlix, 358
- Fischer, M. Oscar, II, xlix
- ♦Fischmann, Hebrew writer, II, 315, 317
- Fox, Dr. Samuel, II, 351
- France, Zionism in, I, 176 ff., 200, 289 ff.
- Frank, Dr., II, 303, 359
- Frankel, Zacharias, II, 288
- Frankfurter, Professor Felix, II, 82
- Franklin, Mr. Ernest L., II, 67
- Franklin, Mr. Jacob, II, xl
- Fremantle, the Rev. W. R., on the Restoration of Israel, II, 410‒11
- French Government, the, and the British Declaration, I, xxvii; II, 127‒8;

  and the Hebrew University, II, 152;

  and Zionism, II, 52, 53

- French Jewry, the, I, 84‒85;

  and the Restoration of Israel (in 1798), I, 65‒66; II, 220‒2;

  and Zionism, I, 291 ff.

- French Revolution, the, I, 178, 290
- French Society of the Promised Land, the, I, 182
- French West India Company, the, I, 57
- Frenk, N. J., II, 317
- Friedberg, A. S., II, 311
- Friedemann, Dr. Arthur, II, 302, 359
- Friedenwald, Dr. Harry, II, 82
- Friedlaender, W., II, 335
- Friedlaender, Prof. Israel, II, 82
- Friedmann, N. M.,II, 293
- Friedson, Mr. L., II, 133
- Frug, Simon, II, 318
- Frumkin, M., II, 386
- Fuchs, Dr., II, xliv
- Fuchs, S. I., II, 311
- Fuller, Thomas, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 42 note 4, 52‒53, 61
- Furtado, Abraham, I, 82, 87
- Gabirol, Solomon ibn, I, 26
- Galicia, Zionism in, II, 22‒23;

  the Jews of, and Baron de Hirsch, I, 261‒2

- Galilee, Josephus on the population of, I, 309
- Gasparri, Cardinal, and Zionism, II, 53
- Gaster, Haham Moses, I, 272, 296; II, xxxvii, xlii, liv, lvi, lvii, 45, 48, 50, 51, 52, 106, 108‒9, 307, 348;

  letter to “The Times” (1897), II, xli‒xlii

- Gawler, Colonel George, on the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 137‒8, 162, 174‒5; II, 410, 417
- George, Mr. D. Lloyd, and Zionism, II, xxxi, 131‒3
- Germany, Zionism in, II, 357
- Gerondi, Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, I, 223
- Gerondi, Rabbi Zerahiah, I, 27
- Ghetto, the, I, 191‒2, 215
- Gilbert, Mr. S., II, 62, 68, 427
- Gill, Dr. John, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 99
- Ginsberg, Usher. See Achad Ha’am.
- ♦Ginzburg, Ilja, II, 340, 346
- Gladstone, I, 133, 144;

  and Zionism, I, 237‒8;

  on the Jewish people, I, 238‒9;

  on Palestine and Greece contrasted, I, 239

- Glitzenstein, H., II, 342, 343
- “Globe,” the, (in 1846), on the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 129 ff.
- Gluskin, M. W., II, 294, 386
- Goethe’s “Hermann and Dorothea,” translated into Hebrew, I, 275
- Goldberg, Boris and Isaac, I, 282; II, 51, 98, 141, 146, 287, 296, 329, 359
- Goldbloom, the Rev. J. K., II, liv, 351
- Goldin, E., Hebrew writer, II, 318
- Goldschmidt, Salomon H., I, 254
- Goldsmid, Lt.-Col. Albert, I, 217 note 1, 233‒4, 258; II, xxxvii, 43
- Goldstein, A., II, 283, 293
- Gollancz, Professor (Sir) Israel, II, 67
- Gollancz, Rev. Prof. H., II, xxxvii, 353
- Goodman, Mr. Paul, II, 51
- Gordon, David, I, 227, 277; II, xxxviii, 9, 306, 388
- Gordon, General C. G., I, 3
- Gordon, Judah Löb, I, 276
- Gordon, S. L., I, 8; II, 295
- Gorst, Sir John, II, xxii
- Gott, Samuel, author of “Nova Solyma,” II, 176 note 2
- Gottheil, Prof. Richard, II, 82, 356
- Gottlieb, Dr., II, 295
- Gottlieb, Leopold and Moritz, II, 341‒2, 344
- Gottlober, A. B., Hebrew poet, II, 315
- Gouge, the Rev. Dr. Wm., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 47‒49
- Graetz, Heinrich, and Jewish Nationalism, II, 320;

  influenced by Moses Hess, I, 179 note 1, 277

- Gray, Thos., I, 11
- Grazowski, J., II, 287
- Greece’s influence on mankind, I, 1;

  Zionism in Greece, II, 27, 29

- Green, John Richard, on the English Reformation, I, 4
- Green, Mr. Michael, II, 67
- Greenberg, Mr. L. J., I, 296; II, xlii, xliii, liv, 349‒50
- Greenwood, Frederick, on Disraeli and the Suez Canal, II, 246‒7
- Grégoire, Abbé, I, 41 note 2
- Grey of ♦Falloden, Viscount, on the Declaration, II, 113
- Grinberg, Ch., II, 283, 293
- Gronemann, Dr., II, 302
- Gross, August, II, 335
- Grossmann, W., II, 293
- Grotius, Hugo, I, 42
- Grunbaum, Isaac, II, 283, 294, 295
- ♦Guedalla, Haim, II, xxxvii, 302
- Günzburg, Baron Horace, I, 258‒9
- Günzburg, M. A., I, 275‒6
- Gurevitsch, Ch. D., II, 301
- Gurevitsch, E. R., II, 293
- Gutmacher, Rabbi Elias, appeals to English Jews for Palestine Colonization, I, 202; II, 262‒3
- Gwydyr, Lord, on Arabs and Zionists, I, 300; II, 392 ff.
- Ha’am, Hebrew-Russian paper, II, 21
- de Haas, Mr. Jacob, II, xlii, xliii, 82
- Hadassah, American Women Zionists’ Union, II, 133 ff.
- Haffkine, Dr. W. M. W., I, 292
- Halévy, Joseph, I, 292
- Hall, Alfred, I, ♦185 note 1
- Hallevi, Jehudah. See Jehudah Hallevi
- Halpern, G., II, 301
- Hamelsveld, Ijsbrand van, I, 61
- Hantke, Dr. Arthur, I, 284; II, 302, 359
- Harkavy, Dr. Abraham, Hebraist, II, 315
- Harris, Dr. W., and the Restoration of Israel, II, 404
- Harrison, John, on Jewish Emancipation, I, 51; II, 210‒11
- “Haskalah” writers, the, I, 274‒6
- Havelock, Sir H., and the Bible, I, 3
- Hebrew Culture, I, 279;

  fund for, II, 377‒8

- Hebrew Language, the, I, 6 ff., 274;

  not a dead language, I, 6;

  Luzzatto and, II, 420;

  Board at Jerusalem, II, 317, 384;

  Revival Societies, II, lvi, 350‒1

- Hebrew Library, the, in Jerusalem, II, 293‒4, 384‒5
- Hebrew literature (in Holland), I, 23‒24;

  modern, I, 273‒80; II, 309 ff.

- “Hebrew Melodies,” Byron’s, I, 95 ff.; II, 228
- Hebrew music, I, 97, 99
- Hebrew printing (in Amsterdam), I, 22
- Hebrew Revival in Palestine, the, I, 285 ff.
- Hebrew Schools in Palestine, the, II, 380 ff.
- Hebrew teachers in Palestine, Union of, II, 384
- Hebrew translation of Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” I, 9 note 2;

  of Pope’s “Messiah,” I, 10 note 4;

  of some of Shakespeare’s plays, I, 8 note 1

- Hebrew University in Jerusalem, the, II, xxxiv‒xxxv, 48;

  laying of foundation stones of, II, 145 ff.;

  President Wilson on, II, 130;

  Sir John Gray Hill on, II, lx‒lxi

- Hebron, II, 323
- Hechler, Rev. Dr. W. H., Christian Zionist, I, 270
- Hedjaz, the King of, and Zionism, II, 142
- Heine, Heinrich, I, 241;

  and Disraeli contrasted, II, 248‒9

- Hellenistic theories of life, Hess on the, I, 290
- Hellenists, the, I, 223
- Heman, Professor C. F., and Zionism, I, 271
- Henderson, Mr. Arthur, on the British Declaration, II, 113‒14
- Henderson, Dr. Ebenezer, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 165
- Henriques, Mr. H. S. Q., II, 67, 68, 69
- Henry, Sir Charles S., II, 67
- Hermoni, Hebrew writer, II, 318
- Herschell, Chief Rabbi Solomon, I, 113 note 2
- Hertz, Chief Rabbi J. H., and Zionism, II, 45, 62, 65, 66, 104‒6, 116, 354
- Herzberg, Dr. William, II, 288
- Herzl, Theodor, I, xxv, 112, 259, 263 ff., 281, 282, 283, 288‒9, 292, 297, 298; II, xxxviii, xlviii, lxii, 5‒6, 10, 13, 84, 98, 122, 146;

  and Baron de Hirsch, I, 259;

  and England, I, 295, 296; II, xliv, 43‒44;

  and Wolffsohn, II, 389

- Hess, Moses, I, 277, 290;

  on the Mission of Israel, I, 179;

  his “Rome and Jerusalem,” I, 179 note 1

- Heymann, Dr. H. G., II, 303, 359
- Hildesheimer, Dr. Hirsch, II, 302
- Hildesheimer, Dr. Israel, II, 302
- Hill, Sir J. G., II, 145;

  on Palestine Colonization, II, lviii‒lix;

  on the Hebrew University, II, lx‒lxi

- Hillel, the elder, I, 222
- Hillesum, M. J. M., I, 22
- Hindes, Dr. T., II, 294
- Hirsch, Baron de, I, 248 ff.;

  Baroness Clara de, I, 248, 256, 262;

  Lucien de, I, 256

- Hirsch, Dr. S. A., II, xxxvii, 353
- Hirschenberg, Samuel, II, 342
- Hirschensohn, Isaac M., II, 288
- Hochman, Dr. Joseph, II, lvi
- Hochmann, II, 344
- Hodge, Mr. John, on the British Declaration, II, 115
- Hoga, Stanislaus, I, 10 note 4
- Holland, Zionism in, II, xlix, 22, 23, 25‒6, 30, 357‒8
- Hollingsworth, the Rev. A. G. H., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 36 note 3;

  on the Jews of Palestine, I, 137

- Holy Places, the, in Palestine, I, 157; II, 53, 57;

  the Russian guardianship of, I, 146 ff.

- Homer, quoted, I, 30
- Homes, Dr. Nathanael, I, 44
- Horowitz, Leopold, II, 339‒40
- Horowitz, Mr. P., II, 116
- Horsley, Bishop Samuel, on the Restoration of, I, 56‒7
- Horwitz, Rabbi Isaiah, I, 23, 24
- Hosea, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 164
- Hugo, Victor, and the Russian massacres in 1881‒2, I, 213
- Hunt, Holman, in Palestine, I, 163;

  on the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 298‒9

- Hunter, Rev. Dr. Henry, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 99
- Hurwitz, J. B., I, 275
- Hurwitz, S. J., II, 311
- Huszar, Adolf, II, 336
- Huxley, Thomas, on the Bible, I, 4
- Hyamson, Mr. Albert M., I, 286 note 1; II, vi, 51, 87, 348, 425
- Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, and the Bible, I, 12
- Ibrahim Pasha, I, 122
- Idelsohn, M. A., II, 281, 283, 293, 359
- Ignatius, Father, on the Jewish race and Palestine, I, 237‒8
- Imperiali, the Marquis, II, 129, 139
- India, Zionism in, II, 24
- Inquisition, the Spanish, I, 30, 32, 33, 45
- Isaiah, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 164‒5
- Ismail Abdul-al-Akki, Shaikh, on Zionism, II, 109‒10
- Israel, the name, “spiritually” explained, I, 165;

  use of name, in the 17th century, I, 2

- Israel’s national future, I, xv
- Israels, Joseph, II, 337‒8, 345
- Italian Government, the, and Zionism, II, 53;

  and the British Declaration, I, xxvii; II, 129

- Jabotinski, Vladimir, Hebrew and Russian journalist, II, 316
- Jacobs, Joseph, on “Daniel Deronda,” I, 211 note 1
- Jacobs, the Rev. S., II, 319
- Jacobsohn, Dr. Victor, I, 284, 292; II, 299, 359
- Jacoby, C., II, 335
- Jaffa in 1885, II, 320;

  the Hebrew High School in, II, 381

- Jaffe, L., II, 283, 301
- James I., I, 4, 48, 49
- Jannaway, Mr. Frank, II, lxiii
- Janowski, S. J., II, 283, 293
- Jasinowski, M. Isidore, I, 269; II, 294
- Jastrow, Dr. Marcus, II, 356
- Jatzkan, S., II, 317
- Jawitz, M. Wolf, II, 311
- Jehoash, II, 318
- Jehudah Hallevi, I, 95, 223;

  on the Jewish soul, I, 31

- Jellicoe, Lord, II, xxxi
- Jellinek, Dr. Adolf, and Baron de Hirsch, I, 261‒2
- Jelski, Dr., II, 298
- Jeremiah, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 165‒6
- Jerusalem, the consulates in, I, 157;

  the Jews of, during Napoleon’s Campaign, I, 72‒73;

  statistics of, in 1885, II, 320 ff.

- Jessel, Albert H., II, xxxvii
- Jessey (Jacie), Henry, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 52; II, 212‒15
- Jewish Colonial Trust, the, I, 288, 296; II, 371‒3
- Jewish colonies, in America, I, 57‒8;

  in Palestine: see Palestine, the colonies in

- Jewish Colonization Association, the, I, 249, 253‒4, 262; II, 49, 383
- Jewish Colonization in Palestine, and the French Government, II, 53
- “Jewish Culture,” I, 264, 310
- Jewish emigration, I, 214‒15;

  immigration to England, I, 228

- Jewish National Fund, the, I, 270, 296; II, 11, 31‒32, 374‒7
- Jewish nationalism, the term of, I, xi;

  the idea of, I, 188, 190, 193;

  and Manasseh Ben-Israel, I, 29

- Jewish problem, the, I, 111, 215‒16, 226, 256 (in Russia), 265 ff.; II, 37;

  at the conclusion of the War, II, 155 ff.;

  Emma Lazarus on, I, 242;

  an English publicist on, II, 255‒6;

  George Eliot on, I, 211

- Jewish race, the, I, 140‒1, 245;

  Disraeli on, I, 143;

  Laharanne on, I, 189;

  Manasseh Ben-Israel on, I, 36 ff.;

  Shaftesbury on, I, 123

- Jewish soul, the, Jehudah Halevi on, I, 31;

  Manasseh Ben-Israel on, I, 29

- Jewish sufferings during the War, I, xxii‒xxiii; II, 33 ff.
- Jewish Territorial Organization, the, I, 296; II, 140, 349
- Jewish tragedy, the, I, 66, 69
- Jewish University in Jerusalem, proposed in 1864, I, 182 note 1
- Jochelmann, Dr. D., II, 116, 304, 305
- Joel, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 163
- Johnstone, the Rev. W. H., on the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 153‒4
- Jortin, Dr. John, on the Jewish people, I, 56
- Josephus, on the population of Galilee, I, 309
- Judaism, the spiritual character of, I, xvi‒xvii;

  a national tie, I, 188 ff.

- Jüdischer Verlag, der, II, 357
- Junker, Hermann, II, 335
- Justin Martyr, I, 28, 29
- Justinian, the laws of, I, 1
- “Kadima” formed in East London for Palestine Colonization, I, 228
- “Kadima,” Jewish-national students’ association, I, 283‒4; II, 296‒8;

  appeals for Palestine Colonization, II, 325‒6

- Kahn, Grand Rabbin Zadoc, and Zionism, I, 271‒2, 291; II, 290, 308
- Kahn, Dr. Leo, II, 382
- Kalischer, Rabbi Hirsch, appeals for Palestine Colonization, I, 202; II, 262‒3
- Kaliski, Julian, II, 295
- Kalonymos ben Kalonymos, quoted, I, 26‒7
- Kalwaryjski, M., II, 305
- Kaminer, Isaac, II, 311‒12
- Kaminka, Aaron, II, 312
- Kann, M. Jacobus, II, xlviii‒xlix, 357, 359
- Kantor, J. L., Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Kantowitz, P., Hebrew educationist, II, 318
- Kaplan, Eleasar, II, 294
- Karan, Joseph, I, 170
- Kassab Farid, on Jewish Colonization in Palestine, I, 301‒2
- Katib, the office of, I, 68
- Kattowitz Conference, the, of the “Lovers of Zion,” II, 418‒9
- Katz, Benzion, Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Katzenelsohn, Isaac, Hebrew poet, II, 316
- Katzenelsohn, Dr. J. C., II, 312
- Katzenelsohn, Dr. N., II, 288‒9
- Kauffmann, Isidor, II, 340‒1
- Kaufmann, Professor David, and Zionism, I, 277
- “Kedem,” Hebrew Literary and Educational Fund, II, 377‒8
- Keith, Dr. Alexander, I, 137
- Kerry, Lord (Marq. of Lansdowne), on the influence of Scripture translation on English literature, I, 13
- Kerschberg, A. S., Hebrew writer, II, 312
- Kesrawani, M. Wadia, on the British Declaration, II, 110
- Kessler, Mr. Leopold, II, 350, 425
- King Edward, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 56
- Kingsborough, Viscount, and proposed Jewish Colonization in Mexico, I, 58
- Kinnaird, the Hon. D. J. W., and Byron’s “Hebrew Melodies,” I, 97
- Kirszrot, Jan, II, 294‒5
- Kirwan, F. D., on the French “Sanhedrim,” I, 86 ff.; II, 222
- Kitchener, Lord, II, xxvi;

  and the Palestine Exploration Fund, I, 62; II, ♦liii, 219

- Klausner, Dr. Joseph, II, 293, 312
- Klazkin, Dr., II, 304
- Klebanow, J., II, 283
- Klee, Dr., II, 302, 359
- Klein, Max, Jewish sculptor, II, 336
- Klein, Rabbi D., and Mizrachi Zionism, II, 368
- Kleinmann, Moses, II, 317
- Knell, the Rev. Paul, on Israel and England, I, 2; II, 168
- Kohan-Bernstein, Dr. J., I, 269; II, 289
- Kokesh, Dr. Oser, I, 269
- Korkis, Dr., I, 269
- Kornfeld, Dr. Sigmund, I, 269
- Kramstück, II, 344
- Kremenetzky, Julius M., I, 269; II, 308, 359
- Krochmal, Nachman, I, 276‒7; II, 422
- Lachmann, S., II, 302
- Lachower, P., Hebrew writer, II, 318
- Lachowski, A. B., II, 344
- Laharanne, Ernest, appeals for Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 179‒80;

  on Jewish genius, I, 189

- Lamartine, M. de, I, 128
- Lamb, Lady Caroline, I, 98
- Lamington, Lord, on the British Declaration, II, 116‒17
- Landau, Miss Annie, II, 383
- Landau, Mr. Herman, II, xxxvii
- Landau, the Rev. Dr. J. L., II, 354
- Landau, Dr. S. R., II, 296
- Langdon, Mr. E. H., II, 133
- Lansdowne, Lord, and the East African offer, I, 297
- La Peyrère, Isaac de, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 41‒42; II, 180
- Laski, Mr. Nathan, II, 133
- Laud, Archbishop, I, 42 note 3, 48
- Law, Mr. A. Bonar, and Zionist representatives, II, 123‒4
- Layard, Sir A. H., on England and Syria, I, 157
- Lazar, II, 318
- Lazare, Bernard, and Zionism, I, xxvii, 269, 292‒4
- Lazarus, Emma, I, 241 ff.;

  “The Banner of the Jews,” II, 400‒1

- League of Nations, the, II, 160
- Lebanon, the, the constitution of, I, 171 ff.;

  the, the problem of, I, 167 ff.

- Lebensohn, Abraham Dob Bär, I, 275
- Lebensohn, Micah Joseph, I, 275
- Leibnitz, on the conquest of Egypt, I, 42 note 1
- Leibowitz, M., II, 318
- Leman, Moses, I, 81
- Leon (Templo), Rabbi J. J. A. de, I, 45; II, 185‒6
- Lepsius, Dr. Johannes, and Zionism, I, 270‒1
- Lesser, Alexander, Jewish painter, II, 339
- Leverson, Montague, I, 185 note 1
- Levi, Aaron, on the Lost Ten Tribes, I, 18, 19, 25, 29, 40
- Levi, David, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 93‒94;

  against Dr. Priestley, II, 226

- Lévi, Professor Sylvain, II, 140
- Levin, Dr. Shemaryah, I, 284; II, 80, 298‒9, 355, 359
- Levinski, L., II, 293, 312‒13
- Levitan, Isaac, II, 340
- Levontin, Mr. David, I, 287; II, 51, 147, 306‒7
- Levy, Benoit, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 179
- Levy, Dr. Camille, II, 1
- Lévy, Emil, II, 335, 336
- Levy, H. Leopold, II, 336‒7
- Levy, Mr. Joshua M., II, 67, 69
- Lévy-Bing, Lazar, on Jewish nationalism, I, 178‒9, 204
- Lewin-Epstein, Mr. Elisha, II, 82, 134
- Lewis-Barned, Captain H., II, xxxvii
- Lewite, J., II, 294
- Lewite, Leon, II, 295
- Libowitz, M., II, 147, 333
- Libuschitzki, A., Hebrew educationist, II, 318
- Lichtheim, Richard, II, 303
- Liebermann, Professor Max, II, 338‒9
- Lightfoot, John, I, 61
- Ligne, Prince de, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 90
- Lilien, Ephraim M., I, 284; II, 341‒2
- Lilienblum, Moses L., I, 278, 281; II, 293
- Lima, Mr. de, II, xlix
- Lindsay, Lord, and his travels in the Holy Land, I, 122, 124
- Lippe, Dr. Karl, I, 269; II, 307
- Lipsky, Mr. Louis, II, 82
- Litvak, Juda, I, 81
- Livingstone, and the Bible, I, 3
- Locke, Mr., and the Restoration of Israel, II, 404
- Löwe, Dr. H., II, 302
- Loewe, Dr. Louis, II, xxxviii, 252‒3, 409
- London Opera House, the great Zionist demonstration at the, II, xxx, 47, 99 ff.
- Long, Mr. Walter, on the British Declaration, II, 113
- “L’Orient,” appeals for Restoration of Israel to Palestine in 1866, I, 200‒1
- Loudvipol, Abraham, II, 317
- “Lovers of Zion” (Chovevé Zion), the, I, viii, xxiv, 112, 216, 227, 231 ff., 280 ff., 288; II, 43, 124;

  the Kattowitz Conference, II, 418‒19;

  in England and America, I, 245‒6; II, xxxvii;

  send petition to Sultan, I, 231; II, 279‒81;

  in France, I, 232‒3; II, xxxvii;

  in Russia, I, 278;

  in Odessa, I, 227, 281; II, 293, 383;

  in Bialystok, II, 293‒4;

  in Warsaw, II, 294‒5;

  in Lodz, II, 295;

  in Minsk, II, 295‒6;

  in Pinsk, II, 296;

  in Wilna, II, 296;

  in Charkow, II, 306 ff.;

  and Baron de Hirsch, I, 259‒60;

  and Zionism, II, xxxvii, xl, xlviii

- Löwenthal, Dr. G. and Baron de Hirsch, I, 258
- Lowth, Bishop, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 94
- Löwy, Dr. Albert, II, xxxix, 319
- Lubarski, A. E., II, 293
- Lucy, Sir Henry, II, 246
- Luncz, Abraham Moses, I, 286; II, 289, 385
- Luria, Rabbi Isaac, I, 23, 28, 29
- Luria, Samuel, II, 294
- Lurie, Joseph, II, 289
- Luzzatto, S. D., I, 276‒7;

  on Assimilation, II, 420;

  on the Hebrew language, II, 420;

  on the Jewish Mission, II, 420‒1;

  on Palestine Colonization, II, 421

- “Maccabean” tour in Palestine, I, 246‒7
- Maccabean Land Company, the, II, 380
- Maccabeans, Order of Ancient, the, I, 285; II, xl, 349
- Maccabœans, the, I, 223
- M’Caul, Alexander, I, 10 note 4, 126; II, 413
- MacInnes, Bishop, of Jerusalem, II, 146, 147
- Mack, Judge Julian W., American Zionist leader, II, 82, 136
- Magnes, Dr. J. L., II, 356
- Magnus, Mr. Laurie, II, 67
- Magnus, Sir Philip, II, 68
- Mahmud II., Sultan, I, 102, 107, 147
- Maighen, Mr., on Palestine and England, II, lxii‒lxiii
- Maimon, Moses, II, 343‒4
- Maimonides, I, 28, 276
- Malachi, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 167
- Manasseh ben Israel, I, 15 ff., 42, 44, 52, 54, 183; II, 169 ff., 176, 181, 183, 188‒9, 211, 214, 215;

  as Zionist, I, 16;

  his Jewish national self-consciousness, I, 26

- “Manchester Guardian,” the, and Zionism, II, 46
- Mandelkern, Solomon, Hebrew poet and scholar, II, 315
- Mandelstamm, Professor Max, I, 269; II, 306
- Mane, M. Z., II, 313
- Maneritsch, A. A., II, 344
- Manifesto to the Jewish people, a Zionist, II, 124‒7
- Mann, Mr. Jacob, II, vi
- Mapu, Abraham, I, 276
- Marks, Mr. Simon, II, 133, 425
- Markus, II, 344
- Marmorek, Dr. Alexander, I, 292; II, 359
- Marmorek, Isidore, I, 292
- Marmorek, Oscar, I, 292; II, xliv
- Maronites, the, I, 167 ff.
- Marranos, the, I, 15, 23, 25, 31, 32‒3
- Marschak, Dr., II, 304, 381
- Marsh, the Rev. William F., on the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 113 note 2
- Marshall, Mr. Louis, and the British Declaration, II, 136
- Massarini, Tullo, II, 335‒6
- Massel, J., I, 40 note 1; II, xlii, xliii, 350, 384
- Maze, Rabbi Jacob, II, 281
- Mazzini, I, xvii
- Mead (Mede), the Rev. Joseph, on Sir Henry Finch, II, 208;

  on the literal interpretation of the Bible, I, 166

- Mehemet Ali, I, 101 ff., 116, 118, 119, 125, 126, 147, 167, 180, 186; II, xxxviii, 409
- Melamed, Dr., II, 304
- Menasse, Baron Felix, II, 146
- “Mendele Mocher Sepharim,” I, 276
- Mendelssohn, Jechiel, I, 278‒9
- Mendelssohn, Moses, I, 46, 278; II, 189
- Menschikoff, Prince A. S., I, 150
- Merriman, Rt. Hon. J. X., on Zionism, II, lxi‒lxii
- Messianic Hopes, the, I, 18, 24, 40, 45, 51, 94
- Methmann-Cohen, Dr., II, 304, 382
- Meursius, Johann., I, 42
- Meyer, Mr. Walter, II, 141
- Meyersohn, Dr. Emil, I, 292
- Mexico, proposed Jewish colonies in, I, 58
- Meyuchas, Rabbi, of Jerusalem, I, 64, 73, 77‒79
- Meyuchas, Palestinian writer, II, 316
- Micah, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 165
- Michaelis, J. H., I, 61
- Mikveh Israel, agricultural school in Palestine, I, 182‒3; II, 319‒20, 326 note 1
- Milner, Lord, and Dr. Herzl, I, 295
- Mills, the Rev. John, I, 185 note 1
- Milton, John, influenced by the Hebrew spirit, I, 9, 40, 95; II, 176;

  and the Restoration of Israel, II, 179

- Minkowski, II, 344
- Mintz, the brothers B. and S., II, 281, 283‒4
- Misenberg, Leo, II, 344
- Mission of the Jews, the, and Zionism, I, xvii‒xviii, 178;

  Luzzatto on, II, 420‒1

- Mitzkun, David Moses, I, 275
- Mizrachi, Orthodox Zionist party, II, 23, 26, 30, 80, 291, 367‒8
- Mocatta, F. D., I, 254
- Modern Civilization and Zionism, I, xviii‒xix
- Mohilewer, Rabbi Samuel, II, xlii, 186 note 3, 289‒90, 293‒4, 305
- Molé, le Comte de, I, 82
- Molyneux, the Rev. Capel, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 164
- Monk, Henry W., on Jewish nationality, I, 197‒8
- Montefiore, Lady, I, 115, 135
- Montefiore, Sir Moses, I, xii, xxvii, 112;

  pioneer of Anglo-Jewish Zionism, ♦I, 115 ff., 125 ff., 162, 173, 180, 181, 186, 200, 202, 277; II, xxxviii, xxxix, 43, 237 ff., 252‒3, 262, 306, 337 note 1, 409‒10, 419‒20;

  aids the Christians of Syria, I, 173

- Montefiore, Mr. C. G., II, 61, 62
- Montezinos, Antonio, on the Ten Lost Tribes, I, 18‒19, 29, 40; II, 211
- Moore, Mr., British Consul at Jerusalem, II, 307
- Moore, Thomas, and the Bible, I, 12;

  “Advent of the Millennium,” II, 399

- Mordecai ben Hillel Hacohen, Hebrew publicist, II, 287‒8
- Morgenthau, Mr. Henry, II, 40
- Morning Herald, the, on Zionist propaganda in France (in 1866), I, 200
- Moro, Arthur R., II, 67
- Mortara Case, the, I, 112
- Mosaic Constitution, the, Manasseh ben Israel on, I, 35‒36
- Moscow “Sons of Zion,” the, I, 281; II, 281 ff.
- Moser, Mr. Jacob, II, lvi, lvii, 350
- Moses and the Restoration of Israel, II, 161‒2
- Moses ben Nachman, Rabbi, I, 223 f.
- Mosseri, Mr. Victor, II, 146
- Mossinsohn, Dr. Ben-Zion, I, 287; II, 80, 304
- Mostditschian, M. H. N., Armenian Delegate, on Zionism, II, 112
- Motzkin, Dr. Leo, II, 290, 359
- Mountain, the Rev. Jacob H. Brooke, on the Restoration of Israel, II, 411‒12
- Müntz, Dr., I, 269
- Myersohn, J. M., II, 294
- Nacht, Dr., II, 1
- Nadelmann, II, 344
- Naiditsch, M. I. A., II, 296, 359
- Napoleon the First, I, xxiii, 42 note 1, 69, 70;

  his call to the Jews of Asia and Africa, I, 63, 66; II, 222;

  his campaign in the East, I, 63 ff.;

  in Palestine, ♦I, 72 ff., 76;

  his “Sanhedrin,” I, 80 ff.

- Napoleon III, I, 198, 200
- Narboni, Rabbi Moses, I, 28
- Nasi, David, I, 57
- Nasi, Don Joseph, I, 224
- Nathan, Isaac, II, 227;

  and Byron’s “Hebrew Melodies,” I, 97‒99; II, 228

- Nathan, Mr. Joseph, II, xxxvii
- Nathan, M. D., on Jewish nationalism, I, 179
- Nathan, Sir Matthew, II, 67
- Nathansohn, B., I, 275
- Neil, Rev. James, on Palestine Colonization, II, 272‒4
- Neimanowitsch, H., Hebrew Journalist, II, 318
- Nelson, Ernst, II, 336
- Nemirower, Dr., II, 1
- Netter, M. Charles, and Palestine Colonization, I, 182‒3; II, 319
- Neumann, Abraham, Jewish artist, II, 344
- Neumark, Dr. David, II, 313
- Neuschul, II, 296
- Neustaeter, L., II, 335
- Newdegate, Ch., I, 144
- “Newes from Rome,” I, 47; II, 191‒206
- Newton, Bishop Thomas, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 56, 108; II, 216‒17
- Nicholas, Edward, I, 44; II, 182‒3
- Nicholas I, Tsar, I, 150, 217
- Nissenbaum, Isaac, II, 290
- Noah, Major M. M., I, 59, 135‒6
- Nobel, Rabbi Dr., II, 368
- Nordau, Dr. Max, I, 264‒5, 269, 292; II, liv, 6
- Nossig, Dr. Alfred, II, 290, 306, 344
- Nova Solyma, I, 41; II, 176‒8
- Numberg, Ch. D., Hebrew and Yiddish writer, II, 316
- Nunez da Fonseca, Joseph, I, 57
- Odessa group of the “Lovers of Zion,” the, I, 227, 281; II, 293, 383
- Oliphant, Laurence, I, 207 ff., 250, 278; II, 289, 306‒7
- d’Oliveyra, Rabbi Solomon, I, 23‒24
- Oppenheim, M. D., II, 337, 345
- Oppenheimer, Professor Franz, II, 303, 357
- Oppenheimer, Henry, II, 246
- d’Ordel, Major George, II, xxiii
- Orenstein, Prof., II, xlix
- Oriental Jews, the, and Baron de Hirsch, I, 249‒50;

  during the War, II, xxxiii

- Origen, on Demons, I, 28
- Ormsby-Gore, Major the Hon. W., on the British Declaration, II, xxxii, 111;

  and the Palestine Commission, II, 141;

  speech at the Conference of Palestinian Jews, II, 142‒5

- Owen, Hugh, I, 185 note 1
- Owen, Sir Isambard, I, 240 note 2
- Pacifico, Don David, I, 133‒4
- “Palestine,” II, 352
- Palestine Colonization, the problem of, I, 112, 115 ff., 202, 203, 208, 228, 229‒31, 289; II, xxxix, xl, xlii;

  opinions of English Christian authorities on, II, 269‒79;

  English Societies for, I, 185; II, 273;

  London Hebrew Society for, II, 256‒8;

  Berlin Society for, II, 302;

  Rumanian Society for, II, 307

- Palestine Exploration Fund, the, I, 62, 299‒30; II, lii;

  and Lord Kitchener, II, 219

- Palestine Land Development Company, the, I, 284; II, 377
- Palestine Societies, I, 61‒62; II, 362‒4
- Palestine, the Holiness of, I, 31
- Palestine, the Jewish Colonies in, I, 112, 161‒2, 246‒7, 262, 279; II, 37, 88, 326‒31 (in 1910 and 1913);

  “The Times” (1899) on, I, 299

- Palestine, Zionist institutions in, II, 10, 387 ff.
- Palestine and England, II, 43;

  and Dr. Herzl, I, 266‒7;

  and Manasseh ben Israel, I, 22‒24

- Palestine as the Jewish homeland, I, xxiii‒xxiv, 195‒6, 307‒10;

  meetings in favour of, II, 69 ff.;

  Press comments on the meetings, II, 73 ff.

- Palestinian Jews helped by Christians, I, 52; II, 212‒13
- Palestinian trade with Britain, I, 306;

  consular reports, II, 395 ff.

- Palmerston, Lord, I, 75, 101 ff., 116 ff., 122, 123‒4, 127, 128, 131, 133, 158, 167; II, 229 ff., 405 ff.
- Paperna, A. J., Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Parker, Admiral Sir Wm., I, 133
- Parliamentary Elections, the, in 1900, and Zionism, I, 299
- Parnell, Thomas, and the Bible, I, 10
- Pasmanik, Dr. Daniel, II, 283, 290, 305
- Pasquier, Baron, I, 82
- Pasternak, L., II, 340
- Patriotism and Zionism, I, xix‒xx
- Peace Conference, the, II, xxxi, xxxvi, 23, 28, 160
- Peel, Sir Robert, I, 134
- Perceval, John, Earl of Egmont, I, 58
- Peretz, J. L., Hebrew and Yiddish writer, II, 316
- Pétavel, Dr. A. F., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 179
- Peters, Hugh, on the Readmission of Jews to England, I, 44; II, 183
- Pffeffermann, II, 344
- Philipps, Major Scott, on the Restoration of Israel, II, 411
- Philo, I, 27
- Pichon, M. Stéphen, I, xxvii;

  on Zionism, II, Introduction, vii‒ix;

  on the British Declaration, II, 128

- Picot, M. Georges, II, xxvi, xxix, xxxi, 52
- Pilgrim Fathers, the, and the Bible, I, 4, 195
- Pilichowski, M. Leopold, II, 342‒3
- Pineles, M. Samuel, I, 269; II, 1, 307
- Pines, Jechiel M., I, 286; II, 290, 306
- Pinkus, Dr. Felix, II, 1, 304, 305
- Pinsker, Dr. Leo, I, 217 ff., 265, 281; II, 9, 285, 293, 326, 328, 419
- Pinsker, Simchah, I, 217
- Pitt influenced by Bible, I, 13
- Plato, I, 27, 29, 30
- Poale Zion, II, 24, 25, 29, 30, 80, 81, 364‒7;

  and the “Young Worker” in Palestine, II, 387

- Podlischewski, M. A., II, 295, 359
- Pogroms, the Russian, in 1906, II, li‒liv
- Poland, massacres in, I, 31, 32

  Zionism in, II, 24‒25, 26, 27, 30

- Political Zionism. See Zionism, political
- Pollack, Leopold, II, 335
- Ponsonby, Lord, I, 126
- Pope, the, and Zionism, II, 53
- Pope, Alexander, and the Bible, I, 10
- Portalis, le Comte J. M., I, 82
- Possart, Felix, II, 335
- Powel, Senator, on Zionism, II, lxii
- Powel, V., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 43
- Poznanski, Dr. Samuel, II, 291, 295
- Prag, Mr. Joseph, II, xxxvii
- Press, the English, comments on the British Declaration, II, 84 ff.;

  on the meetings in favour of Palestine as the Jewish homeland, II, 73 ff.;

  and Zionism, II, 21

- Priestley, Dr. Joseph, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 93; II, 225‒6
- Prilutzki, Z., II, 318
- Prophets, the, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 160 ff.
- Pross, M. M., II, 294, 318
- Puritan Saints, the, I, 15, 18
- Puritans, the, I, 4, 14, 25;

  their interpretation of the Bible, I, 55;

  their ministers study Hebrew, I, 40

- Pym, John, influenced by the Bible, I, 13
- Pythagoras, I, 29, 30
- Rabbinowicz, Mr. E. W., II, xxxvii
- Rabbinowitch, Rabbi, S. J., II, 291
- Rabinovitch, Michael, II, 281, 284
- Rabinowitsch, Leon, II, 318
- Rabinowitsch, Saul Pinchas, II, 294, 313
- Rabinowitzsch, Ben-Ami, II, 316
- Rabinsohn, II, 318
- Raffalovich, the Rev. I., II, 350
- Raffalovich, Samuel, I, 9 note 2
- Rapaport, A. J., II, 293
- Rapaport, Rabbi Salomon Löb, I, 276‒7
- Raphall, the Rev. M. J., II, xl
- Raudnitz, Albert, II, 336
- Raudnitz, Ernest, II, 336
- Ravanellus, Petrus, I, 61
- Rawnitzki, J. Ch., II, 293, 313‒14
- Razswiet, the, Russian Zionist paper, II, 21
- Readmission of the Jews to England, the, I, 14, 15, 17, 20, 25, 55;

  readmission and restoration, I, 53‒4

- “Red Cross,” the founding of the, I, 198‒9
- Redlich, Joseph, II, 339
- Redmond, John, on the British Declaration, II, 114
- Reform Movement, the Jewish, I, 291
- Reformation, the, I, 19, 40;

  and the Bible, I, 14

- Reich, Dr. Leon, II, 359
- Reichersohn, Moses, Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Reifman, Jacob, I, 277
- Reinach, M. Solomon, I, 254
- Reines, Rabbi I. J., II, 291, 368
- Reisin, Abraham, Yiddish writer, II, 316
- Religion and Nationalism, II, 163
- Rembrandt and Manasseh ben Israel, I, 44; II, 181
- Renaissance, the, I, 40
- Reshid Pasha, I, 126
- Restoration of Israel, the, I, 25, 31, 40, 65, 66, 85;

  meaning given to it in the early 19th century, I, 91 ff.;

  in the Palmerston period, I, 101 ff., 134‒5;

  English appeal for, I, 163, 221; II, 255‒6;

  restoration and dispersion, Manasseh ben Israel on, I, 17‒18, 33‒35;

  and emancipation, I, 92‒93;

  and the prophets, II, 161 ff.;

  and the problem of Syria, I, 108‒9

- Reuchlin and the Cabbalah, I, 29
- Rhodes, the Jews of, in 1840, I, 110
- Ribot, M., and Zionism, II, 53
- Rigg, Mr. J. M., I, 48
- Ritter, Mr. B., II, xlii
- Robinson, Dr. Edward, on Palestine, I, 118
- Roebuck, J. A., I, 133
- Rogers, Edward Thomas, British Vice-Consul at Haifa, I, 161
- Rogers, Samuel, and Isaac d’Israeli, I, 140
- Rosebery, Lord, I, 231; II, 279, 280
- Rosenack, M., II, 141
- Rosenbaum, M. S., II, 296, 359
- Rosenberg, Mr. Murray, II, xliii
- Rosenfeld, S., Hebrew journalist, II, 318
- Rosenthal, Toby, II, 335
- Rosoff, M. Israel, II, 141, 293, 323
- Rosowski, Rabbi Pinchas, II, 291
- Roth, Rabbi Dr., II, 368
- Rothenstein, Will, II, 344
- Rothschild, Baron Edmond de, and Palestine Colonization, I, 232‒3, 240, 262, 286, 291‒2; II, 47‒48, 49, 146, 290, 306, 319;

  visits Palestine, II, lviii

- Rothschild, Baron James de, II, 48
- Rothschild Schools in Jerusalem, the Lionel de, II, 322‒3;

  the Evelina de, II, 323

- Rothschild, Lord (the 1st), I, 142, 253; II, 247;

  and Zionism, II, 48

- Rothschild, Lord, and Zionism, II, 48, 52, 62‒3, 65, 83 ff., 99, 122‒3
- Rothschild, M. James de, and Zionism, II, xxxi, 52, 99, 112, 123
- Rothstein, F., translates “Hermann und Dorothea” into Hebrew, I, 275
- Roumania, the rights of the Jews of, I, 293; II, 131, 137‒9;

  Zionism in, II, 1, 22, 358

- Rubenstein, S. B., II, xxxvii, lvi, 350
- Rülf, Rabbi Dr. Isaac, I, 269; II, 302, 388
- Rundstein, Shimon, II, 295
- Ruppin, Dr. Arthur, II, 303, 386
- Ruskin, John, and the Bible, I, 3
- Russell, Lord John, protects Jews of Damascus (in 1869), I, 174
- Russia and the guardianship of the Holy Places, I, 146 ff.
- Russia, Zionism in, II, 25, 26, 27‒28, 29;

  after the Revolution, II, 38 ff.

- Russian Jews, the, and Baron de Hirsch, I, 250‒1, 254‒5, 260‒1
- Russian massacres, the, in 1881‒2, I, 112, 213 ff.
- Russian Revolution, the, I, 193; II, 38 ff., 54 ff., 87
- Russo-Japanese War, the, II, 34
- Russo-Turkish War (1878), the, I, 303‒4; II, 34
- Sabbathai Zebi, the Pseudo-Messiah, I, 45
- Sacher, Mr. Harry, I, 285; II, lvi, lvii, 51, 52, 425
- Sachs, M., II, 293
- Sacrifices, the Mosaic, the Rev. Capel Molyneux on, I, 164
- Sadler, John, I, 40, 44; II, 176
- Safed, I, 24, 29, 73
- St. John, Oliver, I, 20
- St. Petersburg, Zionism in, II, 293
- Salisbury, Lord, I, 208, 304
- Salkind, Solomon, I, 275
- Salkinson, I. A., I, 8 note 1
- Salomon, A. S. A., II, 336
- Salomon, Rabbi Dr. B., II, 133
- Salvador, Joseph, I, xxvii;

  on Palestine as the Jewish homeland, I, 176‒8

- Salz, Dr., I, 269
- Samuel, Charles, II, 336
- Samuel, Mr. Herbert, and Zionism, II, 47, 52, 103‒4
- Samuely, Nathan, Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Sandler, Dr., II, 302
- Sanhedrin, Napoleon’s, I, 41 note 2, 80 ff.; II, 20, 222;

  and Jewish Nationalism, I, 83;

  English opinion on, I, 86 ff.

- Saphir, Elie, II, 291‒2
- Saphir, Jacob, I, 22 note 3; II, 291
- Sasportas, Rabbi Jacob, I, 45;

  on the Marranos, I, 33 note 1

- de Saulcy on Palestine, I, 247
- de Saxe, Marshal, proposes a Jewish Commonwealth in South America, I, 57‒8
- Scandinavia, Zionism in, II, 1, 24
- Schach, Mdlle. Marie, I, 292
- Schachtel, H., II, 303
- Schafrom, M. L., II, 344
- Schapira, Professor Hermann, I, 269‒70; II, 301, 308
- Schatz, Professor Boris, I, 287; II, 346, 382, 386
- Schatzkes, M. A., Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Schechter, Professor Solomon, on Zionism, II, xli
- Schein, M., II, 1, 307
- Scheinkin, M. M. M., II, 80, 293, 317
- Schereschewski, Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Schiff, Mr. Jacob, on the British Declaration, II, 136
- Schlesinger, Felix, II, 335
- Schloss, Louis, II, xxxvii
- Schnirer, Dr. N. T., I, 269; II, 296, 308
- Schofman, Hebrew novelist, II, 315
- “Scholom Aleichem” (S. Rabinowitsch), Hebrew and Yiddish novelist, II, 316
- Scholz, Professor, M. A., on Haim Farhi’s death, I, 74
- Schulman, Kalman J. M. A., I, 276
- Schwarz, Rabbi Joseph, on Haim Farhi’s death, I, 74
- Scott, Mr. C. P., Editor of “Manchester Guardian,” and Zionism, II, xxxi, 46‒7, 424
- Scott, the Rev. John, on the Preservation of the Jews, I, 99
- Scott, Sir Walter, I, 99
- Sczernichowsky, Saul, I, 280; II, 301
- Sebag-Montefiore, Mr. Edmund, II, 67
- Sebastiani, Colonel, on the Jews of Turkey, I, 64 note 1
- Seddon, Thomas, in Palestine, I, 163
- Seidemann, A., II, 283, 293
- Seidemann, S., II, 295
- Segal, the Rev. M. H., II, 353
- Selborne, the Earl of, on the British Declaration, II, 114
- “Self-emancipation,” Pinsker’s theory of Jewish, I, 217 ff.;

  the doctrine in the Bible, I, 218‒21;

  in Jewish literature, I, 221‒2

- Selim I., Sultan, I, 167
- Sequerra, Solomon, I, 185 note 1
- Sereni, Commendatore, II, 53
- Serrarius, Petrus, I, 42
- Shaftesbury, the Earl of, I, xxvii;

  and the Restoration of Israel, I, 121 ff.;

  his project in 1840, I, 125 ff.;

  his new appeal in 1876, I, 206‒7;

  his memorandum, II, 229 ff.

- Shakespeare, influenced by Bible, I, 3, 8;

  Hebrew and Yiddish translations of some of his plays, I, 8 note 1

- Shelley, influenced by Ezekiel, I, 12
- Shoshana, the Rev. Abraham, I, 115
- Sichel, Nathanael, II, 335
- Sidebotham, Mr. H., and Zionism, II, 424‒5
- Sieff, Mr. Israel, II, 109, 140, 425
- Silbernagel, J., II, 336
- Silberstrom, Dr., II, 295
- Simon, Mr. Julius, ♦II, 303, 357, 359
- Simon, Mr. Leon, I, xii, 279; II, liv, lvii, 51, 140, 353, 425
- Sinai Peninsula, the, offered to Zionists by the British Government, I, 296
- Sintzheim, Rabbi David, I, 80 ff.
- Slouchz, Dr. Nahum, I, 292
- Slutzki, A. J., II, 314
- Smartt, Sir Thomas, on Zionism, II, lxii
- Smilanski, M., II, 292
- Smith, Admiral Sir W. Sidney, I, 104, 105
- Smolenskin, Perez, I, 39, 278; II, 9, 288, 297, 308;

  and Pinsker contrasted, I, 226‒7;

  on Manasseh ben Israel, I, 39

- Sneersohn, Rabbi Chayim, of Jerusalem, appeals to English Jews for Palestine Colonization, I, 186, 197, 202‒3, 206; II, 253‒5
- Sneur, Hebrew poet, II, 315‒16
- Snowman, Abraham, II, xlii
- Snowman, Isaac and Louis, Jewish artists, II, 344
- Sokolow, M. N., II, 50 ff., 79, 99, 101, 112, 123, 127, 324;

  statement on behalf of the Zionist Organization, II, 117‒23

- Sola, the Rev. A. de, II, xl
- Sola, Mr. Clarence de, II, 22, 82, 354
- Solomon, Simeon, II, 337
- Solomon, Mr. Solomon J., II, 337, 339
- Solomons, Mr. Israel, I, xii, xxxix‒xli
- Soloveitschik, M. A., II, 283
- Sonnenschein, Mrs. Rose, on the Restoration of Israel to Palestine, I, 243‒4
- Sonnino, Baron Sidney, on the British Declaration, II, 129;

  on the rights of the Jews of Roumania, II, 139

- Soskin, Dr., II, 300
- Soul, the immortality of the, view of Manasseh Ben-Israel on, I, 27
- South Africa, Zionism in, II, 24, 45, 354
- Southey and the Bible, I, 12
- Spielmann, Sir Isidore, II, 67
- Spire, M. André, II, vi
- Spitzer, Emanuel, II, 336
- Stand, Adolf, II, 22, 306, 359
- Stanley, Lord, and the Don Pacifico case, I, 133
- Steinberg, Jehuda, Hebrew novelist, II, 315
- Steinschneider, Moritz, II, xxxix, 319
- Stoics, the, I, 27
- Stopford, Admiral Sir Robert, I, 104‒5
- Stratford de Redcliffe, Viscount, and Sir M. Montefiore, I, 117
- Straus, Mr. Nathan, II, 82, 385
- Stricker, M. Robert, II, 359
- Struck, Hermann, I, 284; II, 303, 343
- Stungo, Mr. S., II, xliii
- Suez Canal shares, the, and Disraeli, I, 142, 303; II, 246‒7
- Suleiman Pasha, of Acre, I, 73
- Sulzberger, ex-Judge Mayer, and the British Declaration, II, 136
- Sutta, M., II, 381
- Suttner, Baroness Bertha von, and Zionism, I, 289‒91
- Suwalski, J., II, 351
- Swaythling, the first Lord, and the “Lovers of Zion,” I, 231, 239, 250; II, xxxvii, 279‒81, 289
- Swaythling, Lord, II, 67
- Switzerland, Zionism in, II, 1, 24, 27, 304, 358
- Sydenham, Lord, on the British Declaration, II, 115
- Sykes, Sir Mark, A Tribute, II, xvii‒xxxvi;

  and Zionism, I, xxxvii‒viii; II, 52, 106‒8, 111

- Sykes, Lady, II, xxii, xxxvi
- Syria, the problem of, in 1840, I, 107 ff.;

  and the Lebanon in 1860, I, 167 ff.

- Syrkin, Joshua, II, 295‒6
- Syrkin, Dr. Nahum, II, 295, 317
- Syrkin, Nachman, II, 300
- Szold, Miss H., II, 82
- Tacitus, II, 225
- Taine, Hippolyte, on the Bible and England, I, 3
- “Tancred,” Disraeli’s, I, 145; II, 43
- Tannenbaum, A., Hebraist, II, 292
- Tardieu, M. André, addresses American Zionist Medical Unit, II, 135
- Taviev, O., II, 314, 318
- Taylor, Bishop Jeremy, and the Bible, I, 10
- Temkin, Isaac, II, 308
- Temkin, Vladimir, II, 292, 326
- Tennyson and Hebrew, I, 14 note 1
- Tennyson, Lord, on the British Declaration, II, 115
- Ten Tribes, the Lost, I, 15, 18‒19, 31, 40, 47
- Teretschenko, M., Russian ex-Foreign Minister, II, 28, 39
- Tertullian on Miracles, I, 28
- Thales, I, 30
- Theodores, Tobias, on the character of the Hebrew language, I, 7
- Theodoret, I, 29
- Theœtetus, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 57; II, 217‒18
- Thomas, Father of, Damascus, I, 110
- Thomson, James, and the Bible, I, 11
- Thon, Dr. Jacob, II, 147, 386
- Thon, Rabbi Dr. Joshua, II, 314
- Thouvenal, M. E. A., French Foreign Minister, protects Jews of Damascus in 1840, I, 174
- “Times,” the, on the Restoration of Israel in 1840, I, 127‒8, 131;

  and Zionism, II, 58 ff.

- Tobhi, Rabbi H. M., of Damascus, I, 75
- Tolkowsky, M. Semmi, II, xlix, 51, 425
- Torah, the, I, 190
- Touro, Judah, II, 238, 321
- Tourov, Dr., II, 382
- Trietsch, Mr. Davis, I, 284; II, 292
- Triwusch, J. E., Hebrew journalist, II, 318
- Troupianski, J. A., II, 344
- Tschernichowsky, Saul. See Sczernichowsky
- Tschernowitz, Dr. Chaim, II, 293, 314
- Tschernowitz, Samuel, II, 317
- Tschlenow, Dr. Jechiel, I, 281; II, 26, 28, 39‒40, 50, 83, 99, 127, 281‒2, 359
- Tschrenow, M., II, 308
- Turkey, I, 146 ff. (in 1853);

  after the Crimean War, I, 150 ff.; II, 412;

  in 1910‒14, II, lv‒vi, lviii;

  and England, I, 101 ff.;

  offers an asylum to persecuted Jews, I, 32

- Turkestan, Zionism in, II, 27
- Turkish Jewry, after the Crimean War, I, 152 ff.
- Turkish Revolution, the (1908), I, 289, 305‒6
- Turow, M., II, 302
- Uganda Offer, the, I, 296 ff.; II, xlv, 44;

  Mr. Balfour on, I, xxix

- Ulmann, Benjamin, II, 335
- Umanski, Dr., II, xlii
- University Students’ Zionist Groups, I, 280 ff.; II, 294 ff.;

  in Warsaw, II, 294‒5;

  in Vienna, II, 296‒8;

  in Berlin, II, 298‒301;

  in Heidelberg, II, 301;

  in Munich, II, 301;

  in Leipzig, II, 301;

  in Bern, II, 304;

  in Geneva, II, 304;

  in Zürich, II, 304;

  in Montpellier, II, 305;

  in Galicia, ♦II, 305‒6;

  in England, II, 351‒3

- Urwick, Dr. Wm., on the Restoration of Israel, I, 165
- Ury, Lesser, II, 339
- Ussishkin, M. M., I, 281; II, 281‒3, 293, 359
- Uziel, Chief Rabbi of Jaffa, II, 147
- Valero, M., of Jerusalem, II, 321, 322
- Vane, Sir Harry, influenced by the Bible, I, 13
- Vatican, the, and Zionism, II, 53
- Vecht, Mr. A., II, 350
- Veneziani, M. Emanuel F., and Baron de Hirsch, I, 250
- Victoria, Queen, receives Hebrew address from Jerusalem, I, 159; II, 250‒1
- Vilkomitsch, Hebrew educationist, II, 317
- Vishnepolski, Bezalel, I, 8 note 1
- Volkov, S., II, 318
- Vossius, Dionysius, I, 42 note 3
- Vossius, Gerard J., I, 42, 46
- Vossius, Isaac, I, 42, 44; II, 180‒1
- Wachtel, II, 344
- Waddington, M. W. H., and Laurence Oliphant, I, 208
- Waley, Mr. Philip S., II, 67
- Walker, Mr., II, lxiii
- Wall, Moses, translates into English some of Manasseh Ben-Israel’s works, I, 19
- War, the European, the Jewish tragedy during, I, xxii‒xxiii; II, 33 ff.;

  Zionist relief work during, II, 33‒8;

  the conclusion of, II, 153 ff.

- Warburg, Professor Otto, I, 284; II, xlviii, 303, 359, 387
- Warren, Sir Charles, on Palestine Colonization, I, 62, 230; II, 269‒72, 273
- Warton, Thomas, and the Psalms, I, 11
- Weber, M., Hebrew journalist, II, 318
- Weinles, II, 344
- Weissenberg, Simeon, II, 292‒3
- Weizmann, Dr. Chaim, I, xxix, 282; II, xxx, xxxii, xxxiv, liv, lvi, lvii, 44, 46 ff., 63‒4, 65, 68, 79, 99, 101, 111‒13, 123, 127, 299‒300, 304, 353, 425;

  the Weizmann Commission to Palestine, II, 130, 141, 144, 145;

  speech at the laying of the foundations of the Hebrew University, II, 147‒52;

  and Arab leaders in Egypt, II, 141‒2

- Weizmann, Zelig, II, 295
- Wellington on the Eastern Question, I, 103 note 1
- Weston, Bishop, I, 200
- Whiston, William, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 94
- White, Mr. Arnold, and Baron de Hirsch, I, 258
- Wilbuschewitsch, Grigory, II, 300
- Wilde, Sir William R. W., on the Jews and Palestine, I, 113
- Williams, Roger, I, 49‒51
- Wilson, President Woodrow, on the Weizmann Commission and the Hebrew University, II, 130‒1
- Wilson, the Rev. John, on Haim Farhi, I, 70‒1;

  on the Farhis of Damascus, I, 75‒76

- Wilson, Sir Charles W., I, 62
- Wilson, Serjeant, II, xxxii, xxxvi
- Wissotski, Kolonimos Wolf, II, 284
- Witherby, Thomas, on the Restoration of Israel, I, 91‒2, 108; II, 225
- Wohlmann, M., Hebrew writer, II, 315
- Wolf, Mr. Lucien, I, 17 note 3;

  on Sir Moses Montefiore, I, 118‒19

- Wolf, Rabbi, II, xliii
- Wolff, Dr. Joseph, I, 124
- Wolfsohn, David, I, 265, 289; II, xlviii, liv, lvi‒vii, 302, 303, 389;

  his autobiography, II, 388‒9

- Wolmark, Mr. A., II, 344
- Wolseley, Viscount, I, 304
- Women’s Zionist Societies, II, 368‒71
- Woolf, Mr. Albert M., II, 67
- Wortsmann, Ezekiel, II, 304, 305
- Yellin, Mr. David, I, 286; II, 293, 317, 351, 381, 384
- Yemen Jews, the, in Palestine, II, 321
- Yiddish Press, the, in Poland, II, 21
- Yoffey, Rabbi, II, xliii
- Young, Edward, poet, I, 11
- Young, Mr. W., British Vice-Consul in Jerusalem, I, 116, 121, 157
- Zacuto Lusitanus, Dr. Abraham, I, 45; II, 184‒5
- Zagorodzki, Ch., II, 318
- Zamenhof, Dr., II, 294
- Zangwill, Mr. Israel, I, 296; II, 110‒11, 116, 349
- Zechariah, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 167
- Zederbaum, Alexander, I, 278
- Zeitlin, Hillel, II, 314‒15
- Zephaniah, the prophet, and the Restoration of Israel, II, 165
- Zerahiah Ha’levi, Rabbi, I, 27
- Zimpel, Dr. Chas. F., on Palestine, II, 416‒17
- Zionism, its meaning, I, vii;

  its objects, I, xxv;

  its principles, I, 307 ff.;

  its motive forces, I, 273 ff.; II, 413;

  philanthropic, I, 184 ff.;

  political, I, xxv‒xxvi, 134, 150, 224, 310 ff.; II, 44;

  Sir Moses Montefiore’s, I, 120;

  political Zionist work during the War, II, 42 ff.

- Zionism in America, II, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 49, 79‒82, 133‒4, 355‒7;

  in Australia, II, 23, 27;

  in Belgium, II, xlix, 25, 27, 358;

  in Bohemia, II, 25;

  in Bulgaria, II, 1, 358;

  in Canada, II, xliv, lvii, 22, 29, 354;

  in Denmark, II, 358;

  in Egypt, II, 355;

  in England: see England and Zionism, and English Zionist Federation;

  in Galicia, II, 22‒3;

  in Germany, II, 357;

  in Greece, II, 27, 29;

  in Holland, II, xlix, 22, 23, 25‒6, 30, 357‒8;

  in India, II, 24;

  in Poland, II, 24‒5, 26, 27, 30;

  in Roumania, II, 1, 22, 358;

  in Russia, II, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 38 ff.;

  in St. Petersburg, II, 293;

  in Scandinavia, II, 1, 24;

  in South Africa, II, 24, 45, 354;

  in Switzerland, II, 1, 24, 27, 304, 358

- Zionism and Emancipation, I, 92‒3;

  and Jewish art, II, 333‒46;

  and Judaism, I, xvi‒xvii;

  versus Assimilation, I, 188 ff.

- Zionist Bureau, the, in Copenhagen, II, 33;

  in London, II, 425

- Zionist Commission to Palestine, the, II, xxxii, xxxiv, 139 ff.
- Zionist Congress, the, II, 358‒9;

  the first, I, 268 ff.; II, xxxvii, xli, 5‒6, 124;

  the second, II, xlii‒xliii;

  the “Jewish Chronicle” on, II, xlii‒xliii;

  the third, II, xliii‒xliv;

  the fourth (in London, 1900), I, 296; II, xliv;

  Press opinions on, II, 389 ff.;

  the sixth and the East African offer, I, 297;

  the eighth, II, liv;

  the ninth, II, liv;

  the tenth, II, lvi;

  the eleventh, II, lvi‒lvii

- Zionist literature in England, II, 351‒3
- Zionist literature, Christian, I, 138 f.
- Zionist organization, the, its institutions, II, 358 ff.;

  in Palestine, II, 386 ff.;

  the Greater and Inner Actions Committees, II, 32, 359‒60;

  during the War, II, 5 ff.

- Zionist poetry, I, 95
- Zionist propaganda in war time, II, 21 ff.
- Zionist Review, the, II, 54, 352
- Zitron, S. L., Hebrew journalist, II, 318
- Zlocisti, Dr., II, 302
- Zohar, the, on the composition of man, I, 28;

  on the Jewish soul, I, 31

- Zweifel, Eleazar Ha-Cohen, Hebrew writer, II, 315

PRINTED BY WM. BRENDON AND SON, LTD., PLYMOUTH, ENGLAND