HISTORY OF THE JEWSIN RUSSIA AND POLAND

FROM THE EARLIEST TIMESUNTIL THE PRESENT DAY

BYS. M. DUBNOW

TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIANBYI. FRIEDLAENDER

VOLUME II

FROM THE DEATH OF ALEXANDER I. UNTIL THE DEATH OF ALEXANDER III. (1825-1894)

PHILADELPHIATHE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA5706--1946

Copyright 1918 byTHE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE

It was originally proposed to give the history of RussianJewry after 1825--the year with which the first volume concludes--in asingle volume. This, however, would have resulted in producing a volumeof unwieldy dimensions, entirely out of proportion to the one precedingit. It has, therefore, become imperative to divide Dubnow's work intothree, instead of into two, volumes. The second volume, which isherewith offered to the public, treats of the history of Russian Jewryfrom the death of Alexander I. (1825) until the death of Alexander III. (1894). The third and concluding volume will deal with the reign ofNicholas II. , the last of the Romanovs, and will also contain thebibliographical apparatus, the maps, the index, and other supplementarymaterial. This division will undoubtedly recommend itself to the reader. The next volume is partly in type, and will follow as soon ascircumstances permit. 

Of the three reigns described in the present volume, that of AlexanderIII. , though by far the briefest, is treated at considerably greaterlength than the others. The reason for it is not far to seek. The eventswhich occurred during the fourteen years of his reign laid theirindelible impress upon Russian Jewry, and they have had a determininginfluence upon the growth and development of American Israel. Theaccount of Alexander III. 's reign is introduced in the Russian originalby a general characterization of the anti-Jewish policies of RussianTzardom. Owing to the rearrangement of the material, to which referencewas made in the preface to the first volume, this introduction, whichwould have interrupted the flow of the narrative, had to be omitted. Buta few passages from it, written in the characteristic style of Mr. Dubnow, may find a place here:

 Russian Tzardom began its consistent role as a persecutor of the Eternal People when it received, by way of bequest, the vast Jewish population of disintegrated Poland. At the end of the eighteenth century, when Western Europe had just begun the emancipation of the Jews, the latter were subjected in the East of Europe to every possible medieval experiment. . . . The reign of Alexander II. , who slightly relieved the civil disfranchisement of the Jews by permitting certain categories among them to live outside the Pale and by a few other measures, forms a brief interlude in the Russian policy of oppression. His tragic death in 1881 marks the beginning of a new terrible reaction which has superimposed the system of wholesale street pogroms upon the policy of disfranchisement, and has again thrown millions of Jews into the dismal abyss of medievalism. 

 Russia created a lurid antithesis to Jewish emancipation at a time when the latter was consummated not only in Western Europe, but also in the semi-civilized Balkan States. . . . True, the rise of Russian Judaeophobia--the Russian technical term for Jew-hatred--was paralleled by the appearance of German anti-Semitism in which it found a congenial companion. Yet, the anti-Semitism of the West was after all only a weak aftermath of the infantile disease of Europe--the medieval Jew-hatred--whereas culturally retrograde Russia was still suffering from the same infection in its acute, "childish" form. The social and cultural anti-Semitism of the West did not undermine the modern foundations of Jewish civil equality. But Russian Judaeophobia, more governmental than social, being fully in accord with the entire régime of absolutism, produced a system aiming not only at the disfranchisement, but also at the direct physical annihilation of the Jewish people. The policy of the extermination of Judaism was stamped upon the forehead of Russian reaction, receiving various colors at various periods, assuming the hue now of economic, now of national and religious, now of bureaucratic oppression. The year 1881 marks the starting-point of this systematic war against the Jews, which has continued until our own days, and is bound to reach a crisis upon the termination of the great world struggle. 

Concerning the transcription of Slavonic names, the reader is referredto the explanations given in the preface to the first volume. Thefoot-notes added by the translator have been placed in square brackets. The poetic quotations by the author have been reproduced in Englishverse, the translation following both in content and form the originallanguages of the quotations as closely as possible. As in the case ofthe first volume, a number of editorial changes have become necessary. The material has been re-arranged and the headings have been supplied inaccordance with the general plan of the work. A number of pages havebeen added, dealing with the attitude of the American people andGovernment toward the anti-Jewish persecutions in Russia. Theseadditions will be found on pp. 292-296, pp. 394-396, and pp. 408-410. Iam indebted to Dr. Cyrus Adler for his kindness in reading the proof ofthis part of the work. 

The dates given in this volume are those of the Russian calendar, exceptfor the cases in which the facts relate to happenings outside of Russia. 

As in the first volume, the translator has been greatly assisted by theHon. Mayer Sulzberger, who has read the proofs with his usual care anddiscrimination, and by Professor Alexander Marx, who has offered anumber of valuable suggestions. 

I. F. 

NEW YORK, February 25, 1918. 

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

XIII. THE MILITARY DESPOTISM OF NICHOLAS I. 1. Military Service as a Means of De-Judaization 13 2. The Recruiting Ukase of 1827 and Juvenile Conscription 18 3. Military Martyrdom 22 4. The Policy of Expulsions 30 5. The Codification of Jewish Disabilities 34 6. The Russian Censorship and Conversionist Endeavors 41

XIV. COMPULSORY ENLIGHTENMENT AND INCREASED OPPRESSION. 1. Enlightenment as a Means of Assimilation 46 2. Uvarov and Lilienthal 50 3. The Abolition of Jewish Autonomy and Renewed Persecutions 59 4. Intercession of Western European Jewry 66 5. The Economic Plight of Russian Jewry and Agricultural Experiments 69 6. The Ritual Murder Trial of Velizh 72 7. The Mstislavl Affair 84

XV. THE JEWS IN THE KINGDOM OF POLAND. 1. Plans of Jewish Emancipation 88 2. Political Reaction and Literary Anti-Semitism 94 3. Assimilationist Tendencies Among the Jews of Poland 100 4. The Jews and the Polish Insurrection of 1831 105

XVI. THE INNER LIFE OF RUSSIAN JEWRY DURING THE PERIOD OF MILITARY DESPOTISM. 1. The Uncompromising Attitude of Rabbinism 111 2. The Stagnation of Hasidism 116 3. The Russian Mendelssohn (Isaac Baer Levinsohn) 125 4. The Rise of Neo-Hebraic Culture 132 5. The Jews and the Russian People 138

XVII. THE LAST YEARS OF NICHOLAS I. 1. The "Assortment" of the Jews 140 2. Compulsory Assimilation 143 3. New Conscription Horrors 145 4. The Ritual Murder Trial of Saratov 150

XVIII. THE ERA OF REFORMS UNDER ALEXANDER II. 1. The Abolition of Juvenile Conscription 154 2. "Homeopathic" Emancipation and the Policy of "Fusion" 157 3. The Extension of the Right of Residence 161 4. Further Alleviations and Attempts at Russification 172 5. The Jews and the Polish Insurrection of 1863 177

XIX. THE REACTION UNDER ALEXANDER II. 1. Change of Attitude Toward the Jewish Problem 184 2. The Informer Jacob Brafman 187 3. The Fight Against Jewish "Separatism" 190 4. The Drift Toward Oppression 198

XX. THE INNER LIFE OF RUSSIAN JEWRY DURING THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II. 1. The Russification of the Jewish Intelligenzia 206 2. The Society for the Diffusion of Enlightenment 214 3. The Jewish Press 216 4. The Jews and the Revolutionary Movement 221 5. The Neo-Hebraic Renaissance 224 6. The Harbinger of Jewish Nationalism (Perez Smolenskin) 233 7. Jewish Literature in the Russian Language 238

XXI. THE ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER III. AND THE INAUGURATION OF POGROMS. 1. The Triumph of Autocracy 243 2. The Initiation of the Pogrom Policy 247 3. The Pogrom at Kiev 251 4. Further Outbreaks in South Russia 256

XXII. THE ANTI-JEWISH POLICIES OF IGNATYEV. 1. The Vacillating Attitude of the Authorities 259 2. The Pogrom Panic and the Beginning of the Exodus 265 3. The Gubernatorial Commissions 269 4. The Spread of Anti-Semitism 276 5. The Pogrom at Warsaw 280

XXIII. NEW MEASURES OF OPPRESSION AND PUBLIC PROTESTS. 1. The Despair of Russian Jewry 284 2. The Voice of England and America 287 3. The Problem of Emigration and the Pogrom at Balta 297 4. The Conference of Jewish Notables at St. Petersburg 304

XXIV. LEGISLATIVE POGROMS. 1. The "Temporary Rules" of May 3, 1882 309 2. Abandonment of the Pogrom Policy 312 3. Disabilities and Emigration 318

XXV. INNER UPHEAVALS. 1. Disillusionment of the Intelligenzia and the National Revival 324 2. Pinsker's "Autoemancipation" 330 3. Miscarried Religious Reforms 333

XXVI. INCREASED JEWISH DISABILITIES. 1. The Pahlen Commission and New Schemes of Oppression 336 2. Jewish Disabilities Outside the Pale 342 3. Restrictions in Education and in the Legal Profession 348 4. Discrimination in Military Service 354

XXVII. RUSSIAN REACTION AND JEWISH EMIGRATION. 1. Aftermath of the Pogrom Policy 358 2. The Conclusions of the Pahlen Commission 362 3. The Triumph of Reaction 369 4. American and Palestinian Emigration 373

XXVIII. JUDAEOPHOBIA TRIUMPHANT. 1. Intensified Reaction 378 2. Continued Harassing 382 3. The Guildhall Meeting in London 388 4. The Protest of America 394

XXIX. THE EXPULSION FROM MOSCOW. 1. Preparing the Blow 399 2. The Horrors of Expulsion 401 3. Effect of Protests 407 4. Pogrom Interludes 411

XXX. BARON HIRSCH'S EMIGRATION SCHEME AND UNRELIEVED SUFFERING. 1. Negotiations with the Russian Government 434 2. The Jewish Colonisation Association and Collapse of the Argentinian Scheme 419 3. Continued Humiliations and Death of Alexander III. 423

CHAPTER XIII

THE MILITARY DESPOTISM OF NICHOLAS I. 

1. MILITARY SERVICE AS A MEANS OF DE-JUDAIZATION

The era of Nicholas I. Was typically inaugurated by the bloodysuppression of the Decembrists and their constitutional demands, [1]proving as it subsequently did one continuous triumph of militarydespotism over the liberal movements of the age. As for the emancipationof the Jews, it was entirely unthinkable in an empire which had becomeEurope's bulwark against the inroads of revolutionary or even moderatelyliberal tendencies. The new despotic regime, overflowing with aggressiveenergy, was bound to create, after its likeness, a novel method ofdealing with the Jewish problem. Such a method was contrived by the ironwill of the Russian autocrat. 

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 410, n. 1. ]

Nicholas I. , who was originally intended for a military career, wasplaced on the Russian throne by a whim of fate. [1] Prior to hisaccession, Nicholas had shown no interest in the Jewish problem. TheJewish masses had flitted across his vision but once--in 1816--when, still a young man, he traveled through Russia for his education. Theimpression produced upon him by this strange people is recorded by thethen grand duke in his diary in a manner fully coincident with theofficial views of the Government:

[Footnote 1: After the death of Alexander I. The Russian crown fell tohis eldest brother Constantine, military commander of Poland. Accordingly, Constantine was proclaimed emperor, and was recognized assuch by Nicholas. Constantine, however, who had secretly abdicated sometime previously, insisted on resigning, and Nicholas became Tzar. ]

 The ruin of the peasants of these provinces [1] are the Zhyds. [2] As property-holders they are here second in importance to the landed nobility. By their commercial pursuits they drain the strength of the hapless White Russian people. . . . They are everything here: merchants, contractors, saloon-keepers, mill-owners, ferry-holders, artisans. . . . They are regular leeches, and suck these unfortunate governments [3] to the point of exhaustion. It is a matter of surprise that in 1812 they displayed exemplary loyalty to us and assisted us wherever they could at the risk of their lives. 

[Footnote 1: Nicholas is speaking of White Russia. Compare Vol. I, pp. 329 and 406. ]

[Footnote 2: See on this term Vol. I, p. 320, n. 2. ]

[Footnote 3: See on this term Vol. I, p. 308, n. 1. ]

The characterization of merchants, artisans, mill-owners, andferry-holders as "leeches" could only spring from a conception whichlooked upon the Jews as transient foreigners, who, by pursuing any lineof endeavor, could only do so at the expense of the natives and thusabused the hospitality offered to them. No wonder then that the futureTzar was puzzled by the display of patriotic sentiments on the part ofthe Jewish population at the fatal juncture in the history of Russia. 

This inimical view of the Jewish people was retained by Nicholas when hebecame the master of Russian-Jewish destinies. He regarded the Jews asan "injurious element, " which had no place in a Slavonic Greek-Orthodoxmonarchy, and which therefore ought to be combated. The Jews must berendered innocuous, must be "corrected" and curbed by such energeticmilitary methods as are in keeping with a form of government based uponthe principles of stern tutelage and discipline. As a result of theseconsiderations, a singular scheme was gradually maturing in the mind ofthe Tzar: to detach the Jews from Judaism by impressing them into amilitary service of a wholly exceptional character. 

The plan of introducing personal military service, instead of thehitherto customary exemption tax, [1] had engaged the attention of theRussian Government towards the end of Alexander I's reign, and hadcaused a great deal of alarm among the Jewish communities. Nicholas I. Was now resolved to carry this plan into effect. Not satisfied withimposing a civil obligation upon a people deprived of civil rights, theTzar desired to use the Russian military service, a service marked bymost extraordinary features, as an educational and disciplinary agencyfor his Jewish subjects: the barrack was to serve as a school, or ratheras a factory, for producing a new generation of de-Judaized Jews, whowere completely Russified, and, if possible, Christianized. 

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 318. ]

The extension of the term of military service, marked by the ferociousdiscipline of that age, to a period of twenty-five years, the enrolmentof immature lads or practically boys, their prolonged separation from aJewish environment, and finally the employment of such methods as werelikely to produce an immediate effect upon the recruits in the desireddirection--all this was deemed an infallible means of dissolving RussianJewry within the dominant nation, nay, within the dominant Church. Itwas a direct and simplified scheme which seemed to lead in a straightline to the goal. But had the ruling spheres of St. Petersburg known thehistory of the Jewish people, they might have realized that theannihilation of Judaism had in past ages been attempted more than onceby other, no less forcible, means and that the attempt had always proveda failure. 

In the very first year of the new reign, the plan of transforming theJews by "military" methods was firmly settled in the emperor's mind. In1826 Nichola instructed his ministers to draft a special statute ofmilitary service for the Jews, departing in some respects from thegeneral law. In view of the fact that the new military reform wasintended to include the Western region [1], which was under the militarycommand of the Tzar's brother. Grand Duke Constantine [2], the draft wassent to him to Warsaw for further suggestions and approval, and was inturn transmitted by the grand duke to Senator Nicholas Novosiltzev, hisco-regent [3], for investigation and report. As an experienced statesman, who had familiarized himself during his administrative activity with theJewish conditions obtaining in the Western region, Novosiltzev realizedthe grave risks involved in the imperial scheme. In a memorandumsubmitted by him to the grand duke, he argued convincingly that thesudden imposition of military service upon the Jews was bound to causean undesirable agitation among them, and that they should, on thecontrary, be slowly "prepared for such a radical transformation. "

[Footnote 1: The official designation for the territories of WesternRussia which were formerly a part of the Polish Empire. ]

[Footnote 2: Constantine was appointed by his brother Alexander I, Commander-in-chief of the Polish army after the restoration of Poland in1815. He remained in this post until his death in 1831. See also above, p. 13, n. 2. ]

[Footnote 3: He was the imperial Russian Commissary in Warsaw, and waspractically in control of the affairs in Poland. See below, p. 92 etseq. ]

Novosiltzev was evidently well informed about the state of mind of theJewish masses. No sooner had the rumor of the proposed ukase reached thePale of Settlement than the Jews were seized by a tremendous excitement. It must be borne in mind that the Jewish population of Western Russiahad but recently been incorporated into the Russian Empire. Clingingwith patriarchal devotion to their religion, estranged from the Russianpeople, and kept, moreover, in a state of civil rightlessness, the Jewsof that region could not be reasonably expected to gloat over theprospect of a military service of twenty-five years' duration, which wasbound to alienate their sons from their ancestral faith, detach themfrom their native tongue, their habits and customs of life, and throwthem into a strange, and often hostile, environment. The ultimate aim ofthe project, which, imbedded in the mind of its originators, seemedsafely hidden from the eye of publicity, was quickly sensed by thedelicate national instinct, and the soul of the people was stirred toits depths. Public-minded Jews strained every nerve to avert thecalamity. Jewish representatives journeyed to St. Petersburg and Warsawto plead the cause of their brethren. Negotiations were entered intowith dignitaries of high rank and with men of influence in the world ofofficialdom. Rumor had it that immense bribes had been offered toNovosiltzev and several high officials in St. Petersburg for the purposeof receiving their co-operation. But even the intercession of leadingdignitaries was powerless to change the will of the Tzar. He chafedunder the red-tape formalities which obstructed the realization of hisfavorite scheme. Without waiting for the transmission of Novosiltzev'smemorandum, the Tzar directed the Minister of the Interior and the Chiefof the General Staff to submit to him for signature an ukase imposingmilitary service upon the Jews. The fatal enactment was signed on August26, 1827. 

2. The Recruiting Ukase of 1827 and Juvenile Conscription

The ukase announces the desire of the Government "to equalize militaryduty for all estates, " without, be it noted, equalizing them in theirrights. It further expresses the conviction that "the training andaccomplishments, acquired by the Jews during their military service, will, on their return home after the completion of the number of yearsfixed by law (fully a quarter of a century!), be communicated to theirfamilies and make for greater usefulness and higher efficiency in theireconomic life and in the management of their affairs. "

However, the "Statute of Conscription and Military Service, " subjoinedto the ukase, was a lurid illustration of a tendency utterly at variancewith the desire "to equalize military duty. " Had the Russian Governmentbeen genuinely desirous of rendering military duty uniform for allestates, there would have been no need of issuing separately for theJews a huge enactment of ninety-five clauses, with supplementary"instructions, " consisting of sixty-two clauses, for the guidance of thecivil and military authorities. All that was necessary was to declarethat the general military statute applied also to the Jews. Instead, thereverse stipulation is made: "The general laws and institutions are notvalid in the case of the Jews" when at variance with the special statute(Clause 3). 

The discriminating character of Jewish conscription looms particularlylarge in the central portion of the statute. Jewish families werestricken with terror on reading the eighth clause of the statuteprescribing that "the Jewish conscripts presented by the [Jewish]communes shall be between the ages of twelve and twenty-five. " Thisprovision was supplemented by Clause 74: "Jewish minors, i. E. , below theage of eighteen, shall be placed in preparatory establishments formilitary training. "

True, the institution of minor recruits, called _cantonists_, [1] existedalso for Christians. But in their case it was confined to the childrenof soldiers in active service, by virtue of the principle laid down byArakcheyev [2] that children born of soldiers were the property of theMilitary Department, whereas the conscription of Jewish minors was to beabsolute and to apply to all Jewish families without discrimination. Tomake things worse, the law demanded that the years of preparatorytraining should not be included in the term of active service, thelatter to start only with the age of eighteen (Clause 90); in otherwords, the Jewish cantonists were compelled to serve an additional termof six years over and above the obligatory twenty-five years. Moreover, at the examination of Jewish conscripts, all that was demanded for theirenlistment was "that they be free from any disease or defectincompatible with military service, but the other qualificationsrequired by the general rules shall be left out of consideration"(Clause 10). 

[Footnote 1: From _Canton_, a word applied in Prussia in the eighteenthcentury to a recruiting district. In Russia, beginning with 1805, the term"cantonists" is applied to children born of soldiers and therefore liableto conscription. ]

[Footnote 2: See Vol. I, p. 395, n. 1. ]

The duty of enlisting the recruits was imposed upon the Jewish communes, or Kahals, which were to elect for that purpose between three and sixexecutive officers, or "trustees, " in every city. The community as suchwas held responsible for the supply of a given number of recruits fromits own midst. It was authorized to draft into military service any Jewguilty "of irregularity in the payment of taxes, of vagrancy, and othermisdemeanors. " In case the required number of recruits was notforthcoming within a given term, the authorities were empowered toobtain them from the derelict community "by way of execution. " [1] Anyirregularity on the part of the recruiting "trustees" was to be punishedby the imposition of fines or even by sending them into the army. 

[Footnote 1: The term "execution" (_ekzekutzia_) is used in Russian todesignate a writ empowering an officer to carry a judgment into effect, in other words, to resort to forcible seizure. ]

The following categories of Jews were exempted from military duty:merchants holding membership in guilds, artisans affiliated withtrade-unions, mechanics in factories, agricultural colonists, rabbis, and the Jews, few and far between at that time, who had graduated from aRussian educational institution. Those exempted from military service inkind were required to pay "recruiting money, " one thousand rubles foreach recruit. The general law providing that a regular recruit couldoffer as his substitute a "volunteer" was extended to the Jews, with theproviso that the volunteer must also be a Jew. 

The "Instructions" to the civil authorities, appended to the statute, specify the formalities to be followed both at the recruiting stationsand in administering the oath of allegiance to the conscripts in thesynagogues. The latter ceremony was to be marked by gloomy solemnity. The recruit was to be arrayed in his prayer-shawl (Tallith) and shroud(Kittel). With his philacteries wound around his arm, he should beplaced before the Ark and, amidst burning candles and to theaccompaniment of shofar blasts, made to recite a lengthy awe-inspiringoath. The "Instructions" to the military authorities accompanying thestatute prescribe that every batch of Jewish conscripts "shall beentrusted to a special officer to be watched over, prior to theirdeparture for their places of destination, and shall be kept apart fromthe other recruits. " Both in the places of conscription and on thejourney the Jewish recruits were to be quartered exclusively in thehomes of Christian residents. 

The promulgated "military constitution" surpassed the very worstapprehension of the Jews. All were staggered by this sudden blow, whichdescended crushingly upon the mode of life, the time-honored traditions, and the religious ideals of the Jewish people. The Jewish family nestsbecame astir, trembling for their fledglings. Barely a month after thepublication of the military statute, the central Government in St. Petersburg was startled by the report that the Volhynian town ofOld-Constantine had been the scene of "mutiny and disorders among theJews" on the occasion of the promulgation of the ukase. Benckendorff, the Chief of the Gendarmerie, [1] conveyed this information to the Tzar, who thereupon gave orders that "in all similar cases the culprits becourt-martialed". Evidently, the St. Petersburg authorities apprehended awhole series of Jewish mutinies, as a result of the dreadful ukase, andthey were ready with extraordinary measures for the emergency. 

[Footnote 1: Since 1827 the Gendarmerie served as the executive organ ofthe political police, or of the so-called Third Section, dreadedthroughout Russia on account of its relentless cruelty in suppressingthe slightest manifestation of liberal thought. The Third Section wasnominally abolished in 1880. ]

However, their apprehensions were unfounded. Apart from the incidentreferred to, there were no cases of open rebellion against theauthorities. As a matter of fact, even in Old-Constantine, the "mutiny"was of a nature little calculated to be dealt with by a court-martial. According to the local tradition, the Jewish residents, Hasidim almostto a man, were so profoundly stirred by the imperial ukase that theyassembled in the synagogues, fasting and praying, and finally resolvedto adopt "energetic" measures. A petition reciting their grievancesagainst the Tzar was framed in due form and placed in the hands of amember of the community who had just died, with the request that thedeceased present it to the Almighty, the God of Israel. This childlikeappeal to the heavenly King from the action of an earthly sovereign andthe emotional scenes accompanying it were interpreted by the Russianauthorities as "mutiny. " Under the patriarchal conditions of Jewish lifeprevailing at that time a political protest was a matter ofimpossibility. The only medium through which the Jews could give vent totheir burning national sorrow was a religious demonstration within thewalls of the synagogue. 

3. MILITARY MARTYRDOM

The ways and means by which the provisions of the military statute werecarried into effect during the reign of Nicholas I. We do not learn fromofficial documents, which seem to have drawn a veil over this dismalstrip of the past. Our information is derived from sources far morecommunicative and nearer to truth--the traditions current among thepeople. Owing to the fact that every Jewish community, at the mutualresponsibility of all its members, was compelled by law to supply adefinite number of recruits, and that no one was willing to become asoldier of his own volition, the Kahal administration and the recruiting"trustees, " who had to answer to the authorities for any shortage inrecruits, were practically forced to become a sort of police agents, whose function it was to "capture" the necessary quota of recruits. Prior to every military conscription, the victims marked for prey, theyoung men and boys of the burgher class, [1] very generally took toflight, hiding in distant cities, outside the zone of their Kahals, orin forests and ravines. A popular song in Yiddish refers to theseconditions in the following words;

[Footnote 1: Compare on the status of the burgher in Russian law Vol. I, p. 308, n. 2. Nearly all the higher estates were exempt. ]

 _Der Ukas is arobgekumen auf judische Selner, Seinen mir sich zulofen in die puste Wälder. . . . . In alle puste Wälder seinen mir zulofen, In puste Gruber seinen mir verlofen_. . . . . Oi weih, oi weih!_. . . . [1]

[Footnote 1:

 When the ukase came down about Jewish soldiers, We all dispersed over the lonesome forests; Over the lonesome forests did we disperse, In lonesome pits did we hide ourselves. . . . Woe me, Woe!]

The recruiting agents hired by the Kahal or its "trustees, " who receivedthe nickname "hunters" or "captors, " [1] hunted down the fugitives, trailing them everywhere and capturing them for the purpose of making upthe shortage. In default of a sufficient number of adults, littlechildren, who were easier "catch, " were seized, often enough inviolation of the provision of the law. Even boys under the required ageof twelve, sometimes no more than eight years old, were caught andoffered as conscripts at the recruiting stations, their age beingmisstated. [2] The agents perpetrated incredible cruelties. Houses wereraided during the night, and children were torn from the arms of theirmothers, or lured away and kidnapped. 

[Footnote 1: More literally "catchers"; in Yiddish _Khappers_. ]

[Footnote 2: This was the more easy, as regular birth-registers were notyet in existence. ]

After being captured, the Jewish conscripts were sent into therecruiting jail where they were kept in confinement until theirexamination at the recruiting station. The enlisted minors were turnedover to a special officer to be dispatched to their places ofdestination, mostly in the Eastern provinces including Siberia. For itmust be noted that the cantonists were stationed almost to a man in theoutlying Russian governments, where they could be brought up at a safedistance from all Jewish influences. The unfortunate victims who weredrafted into the army and deported to these far-off regions were mournedby their relatives as dead. During the autumnal season, when therecruits were drafted and deported, the streets of the Jewish townsresounded with moans. The juvenile cantonists were packed into wagonslike so many sheep and carried off in batches under a militaryconvoy. When they took leave of their dear ones it was for a quarter of acentury; in the case of children it was for a longer term, too often itwas good-bye for life. 

How these unfortunate youngsters were driven to their places ofdestination we learn from the description of Alexander Hertzen, [1] whochanced to meet a batch of Jewish cantonists on his involuntary journeythrough Vyatka, in 1835. At one of the post stations in someGod-forsaken village of the Vyatka government he met the escortingofficer. The following dialogue ensued between the two:

[Footnote 1: Hertzen, a famous Russian writer (d. 1870), was exiled to thegovernment of Vyatka for propagating liberal doctrines. ]

 "Whom do you carry and to what place?"

 "Well, sir, you see, they got together a bunch of these accursed Jewish youngsters between the age of eight and nine. I suppose they are meant for the fleet, but how should I know? At first the command was to drive them to Perm. Now there is a change. We are told to drive them to Kazan. I have had them on my hands for a hundred versts or thereabouts. The officer that turned them over to me told me they were an awful nuisance. A third of them remained on the road (at this the officer pointed with his finger to the ground). Half of them will not get to their destination, " he added. 

 "Epidemics, I suppose?", I inquired, stirred to the very core. 

 "No, not exactly epidemics; but they just fall like flies. Well, you know, these Jewish boys are so puny and delicate. They can't stand mixing dirt for ten hours, with dry biscuits to live on. Again everywhere strange folks, no father, no mother, no caresses. Well then, you just hear a cough and the youngster is dead. Hello, corporal, get out the small fry!"

 The little ones were assembled and arrayed in a military line. It was one of the most terrible spectacles I have ever witnessed. Poor, poor children! The boys of twelve or thirteen managed somehow to stand up, but the little ones of eight and ten. . . . No brush, however black, could convey the terror of this scene on the canvas. 

 Pale, worn out, with scared looks, this is the way they stood in their uncomfortable, rough soldier uniforms, with their starched, turned-up collars, fixing an inexpressibly helpless and pitiful gaze upon the garrisoned soldiers, who were handling them rudely. White lips, blue lines under the eyes betokened either fever or cold. And these poor children, without care, without a caress, exposed to the wind which blows unhindered from the Arctic Ocean, were marching to their death. I seized the officer's hand, and, with the words: "Take good care of them! ", threw myself into my carriage. I felt like sobbing, and I knew I could not master myself. . . . 

The great Russian writer saw the Jewish cantonists on the road, but heknew nothing of what happened to them later on, in the recesses of thebarracks into which they were driven. This terrible secret was revealedto the world at a later period by the few survivors among these martyredJewish children. 

Having arrived at their destination, the juvenile conscripts were putinto the cantonist battalions. The "preparation for military service"began with their religious re-education at the hands of sergeants andcorporals. No means was, neglected so long as it bade fair to bring thechildren to the baptismal font. The authorities refrained from givingformal instructions, leaving everything to the zeal of the officers whoknew the wishes of their superiors. The children were first sent forspiritual admonition to the local Greek-Orthodox priests, whose efforts, however, proved fruitless in nearly every case. They were then taken inhand by the sergeants and corporals who adopted military methods ofpersuasion. 

These brutal soldiers invented all kinds of tortures. A favoriteprocedure was to make the cantonists get down on their knees in theevening after all had gone to bed and to keep the sleepy children inthat position for hours. Those who agreed to be baptized were sent tobed, those who refused were kept up the whole night till they droppedfrom exhaustion. The children who continued to hold their own wereflogged and, under the guise of gymnastic exercises, subjected to allkinds of tortures. Those that refused to eat pork or the customarycabbage soup prepared with lard were beaten and left to starve. Otherswere fed on salted fish and then forbidden to drink, until the littleones, tormented by thirst, agreed to embrace Christianity. 

The majority of these children, unable to endure the tortures inflictedon them, saved themselves by baptism. But many cantonists, particularlythose of a maturer age (between fifteen and eighteen), bore theirmartyrdom with heroic patience. Beaten almost into senselessness, theirbodies striped by lashes, tormented to the point of exhaustion byhunger, thirst, and sleeplessness, the lads declared again and againthat they would not betray the faith of their fathers. Most of theseobstinate youths were carried from the barracks into the militaryhospitals to be released by a kind death. Only a few remained alive. 

Alongside of this passive heroism there were cases of demonstrativemartyrdom. One such incident has survived in the popular memory. Thestory goes that during a military parade [1] in the city of Kazan thebattalion chief drew up all the Jewish cantonists on the banks of theriver, where the Greek-Orthodox priests were standing in theirvestments, and all was ready for the baptismal ceremony. At the commandto jump into the water, the boys answered in military fashion "Aye, aye!" Whereupon they dived under and disappeared. When they were draggedout, they were dead. In most cases, however, these little martyrssuffered and died noiselessly, in the gloom of the guard-houses, barracks, and military hospitals. They strewed with their tiny bodiesthe roads that led into the outlying regions of the Empire, and thosethat managed to get there were fading away slowly in the barracks whichhad been turned into inquisitorial dungeons. This martyrdom of children, set in a military environment, represents a singular phenomenon even inthe extensive annals of Jewish martyrology. 

[Footnote 1: A variant of the legend speaks of a review by the Tzarhimself. ]

Such was the lot of the juvenile cantonists. As for the adult recruits, who were drafted into the army at the normal age of conscription(18-25), their conversion to Christianity was not pursued by the samedirect methods, but their fate was not a whit less tragic from themoment of their capture till the end of their grievous twenty-fiveyears' service. Youths, who had no knowledge of the Russian language, were torn away from the heder or yeshibah, often from wife and children. 

In consequence of the early marriages then in vogue, most youths at theage of eighteen were married. The impending separation for a quarter ofa century, added to the danger of the soldier's apostasy or death infar-off regions, often disrupted the family ties. Many recruits, beforeentering upon their military career, gave their wives a divorce so asnot to doom them to perpetual widowhood. 

At the end of 1834 rumors began to spread among the Jewish massesconcerning a law which was about to be issued forbidding early marriagesbut exempting from conscription those married prior to the promulgationof the law. A panic ensued. Everywhere feverish haste was displayed inmarrying off boys from ten to fifteen years old to girls of an equallytender age. Within a few months there appeared in every city hundredsand thousands of such couples, whose marital relations were oftenconfined to playing with nuts or bones. The misunderstanding which hadcaused this senseless matrimonial panic or _beholoh, _[1] as it wasafterwards popularly called, was cleared up by the publication, on April13, 1835, of the new "Statute on the Jews. " To be sure, the new lawcontained a clause forbidding marriages before the age of eighteen, butit offered no privileges for those already married, so that the onlyresult of the _beholoh_ was to increase the number of families robbed byconscription of their heads and supporters. 

[Footnote 1: A Hebrew word, also used in Yiddish, meaning _fright, panic_. ]

The years of military service were spent by the grown-up Jewish soldiersamidst extraordinary hardships. They were beaten and ridiculed becauseof their inability to express themselves in Russian, their refusal toeat _trefa_, and their general lack of adaptation to the strangeenvironment and to the military mode of life. And even when this processof adaptation was finally accomplished, the Jewish soldier was neverpromoted beyond the position of a non-commissioned under-officer, baptism being the inevitable stepping-stone to a higher rank. True, theStatute on Military Service promised those Jewish soldiers who hadcompleted their term in the army with distinction admission to the civilservice, but the promise remained on paper so long as the candidateswere loyal to Judaism. On the contrary, the Jews who had completed theirmilitary service and had in most cases become invalids were not evenallowed to spend the rest of their lives in the localities outside thePale, in which they had been stationed as soldiers. Only at a laterperiod, during the reign of Alexander II. , was this right accorded tothe "Nicholas soldiers" [1] and their descendants. 

[Footnote 1: In Russian, _Nikolayevskiye soldaty_, i. E. , those that hadserved in the army during the reign of Nicholas I. ]

The full weight of conscription fell upon the poorest classes of theJewish population, the so-called burgher estate, [1] consisting of pettyartisans and those impoverished tradesmen who could not afford to enrolin the mercantile guilds, though there are cases on record where poorJews begged from door to door to collect a sufficient sum of money for aguild certificate in order to save their children from military service. The more or less well-to-do were exempted from conscription either byvirtue of their mercantile status or because of their connections withthe Kahal leaders who had the power of selecting the victims. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 23, n. 1. ]

4. THE POLICY OF EXPULSIONS

In all lands of Western Europe the introduction of personal militaryservice for the Jews was either accompanied or preceded by theiremancipation. At all events, it was followed by some mitigation of theirdisabilities, serving, so to speak, as an earnest of the grant of equalrights. Even in clerical Austria, the imposition of military duty uponthe Jews was preceded by the _Toleranz Patent_, this would-be Act ofEmancipation. [1]

[Footnote 1: Military service was imposed upon the Jews of Austria bythe law of 1787. Several years previously, on January 2, 1782, EmperorJoseph II. Had issued his famous Toleration Act, removing a number ofJewish disabilities and opening the way to their assimilation with theenvironment. Nevertheless, most of the former restrictions remained inforce. ]

In Russia the very reverse took place. The introduction of militaryconscription of a most aggravating kind and the unspeakable crueltiesattending its practical execution were followed, in the case of theJews, by an unprecedented recrudescence of legislative discriminationand a monstrous increase of their disabilities. The Jews were lashedwith a double knout, a military and a civil. In the same ill-fated yearwhich saw the promulgation of the conscription statute, barely threemonths after it had received the imperial sanction, while the moans ofthe Jews, fasting and praying to God to deliver them from the calamity, were still echoing in the synagogues, two new ukases were issued, bothsigned on December 2, 1827--the one decreeing the transfer of the Jewsfrom all villages and village inns in the government of Grodno into thetowns and townlets, the other ordering the banishment of all Jewishresidents from the city of Kiev. 

The expulsion from the Grodno villages was the continuation of thepolicy of the _rural_ liquidation of Jewry, inaugurated in 1823 in WhiteRussia. [1] The Grodno province was merely meant to serve as a startingpoint. Grand Duke Constantine, [2] who had brought up the question, wasordered "_at first_ to carry out the expulsion in the government ofGrodno alone, " and to postpone for a later occasion the application ofthe same measure to the other "governments entrusted to his command. "Simultaneously considerable foresight was displayed in instructing thegrand duke to wait with the expulsion of the Jews "until the conclusionof the military conscription going on at present. " Evidently there wassome fear of disorders and complications. It was thought wiser to seizethe children for the army first and then to expel the parents--to gethold of the young birds and then to destroy the nest. 

[Footnote 1: It may be remarked here that the principal enactments ofthat period, down to 1835, were, drafted in their preliminary stage bythe "Jewish Committee" established in 1823. See Vol. I, p. 407 _etseq. _]

[Footnote 2: Commander-in-Chief of the former Polish provinces. See p. 16, n. 2. ]

The expulsion from Kiev was of a different order. It marked thebeginning of a new system, the narrowing down of the _urban_ areaallotted to the Jews within the Pale of Settlement. Since 1794 [1] theJews had been allowed to settle in Kiev freely. They had formed there, with official sanction, an important community and had vastly developedcommerce and industry. Suddenly, however, the Government discovered that"their presence is detrimental to the industry of this city and to theexchequer in general, and is, moreover, at variance with the rights andprivileges conferred at different periods upon the city of Kiev. " Thediscovery was followed by a grim rescript from St. Petersburg, forbidding not only the further settlement of Jews in Kiev but alsoprescribing that even those settled there long ago should leave the citywithin one year, those owning immovable property within two years. Henceforward only the temporary sojourn of Jews, for a period notexceeding six months, was to be permitted and to be limited, moreover, to merchants of the first two guilds who arrive "in connection withcontracts and fairs" or to attend to public bids and deliveries. 

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 317. ]

In 1829 the whip of expulsion cracked over the backs of the Jewsdwelling on the shores of the Baltic and the Black Sea. In Courland andLivonia measures were taken "looking to the reduction of the number ofJews" which had been considerably swelled by the influx of"newcomers"--of Jews not born in those provinces and therefore having noright to settle there. The Tzar endorsed the proposal of the "JewishCommittee" to transfer from Courland all Jews not born there into thecities in which their birth was registered. Those not yet registered ina municipality outside the province were granted a half-year's respitefor that purpose. If within the prescribed term they failed to attend totheir registration, they were to be sent to the army, or, in case ofunfitness for military service, deported to Siberia. 

In the same year an imperial ukase declared that "the residence ofcivilian Jews in the cities of Sevastopol and Nicholayev wasinconvenient and injurious, " in view of the military and navalimportance of these places, and therefore decreed the expulsion of theirJewish residents: those owning real property within two years, theothers within one year. By a new ukase issued in 1830 the Jews wereexpelled from the villages and hamlets of the government of Kiev. Thuswere human beings hurled about from village to town, from city to city, from province to province, with no more concern than might be displayedin the transportation of cattle. 

This process of "mobilization" had reached its climax when the Polishinsurrection of 1830-1831 broke out, affecting the whole Westernregion. [1] Fearing lest the persecuted Jews might be driven into thearms of the Poles, the Government decided on a strategic retreat. InFebruary, 1831, in consequence of the representations of the localmilitary commander, who urged the Government "to take into considerationthe present political circumstances, in which they (the Jews) mayoccasionally prove useful, " the final expulsion of the Jews from Kievwas postponed for three years. At the end of the three years, thegovernor of Kiev made similar representations to St. Petersburg, emphasizing the desirability of allowing the Jews to remain in the city, even though it might become necessary to segregate them in a specialquarter, "this (i. E. , their remaining in the city) being found usefulalso in this respect that, on account of their temperate and simplehabits of life, they are in a position to sell their goods considerablycheaper, whereas in the case of their expulsion many articles andmanufactures will rise in price. " Nicholas I. Rejected this plea, andonly agreed to postpone the expulsion until February, 1835, for thereason that the new "Statute Concerning the Jews, " then in preparation, which was to define the general legal status of Russian Jewry, wasexpected to be ready by that time. Similar short reprieves were grantedto the Jews about to be exiled from Nicholayev, from the villages of thegovernment of Kiev, and from other places. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 16, n. 1. ]

5. THE CODIFICATION OF JEWISH DISABILITIES

No sooner had the conscription ukase been issued than the bureaucrats ofSt. Petersburg began to apply themselves in the hidden recesses of theirchancelleries to a new civil code for the Jews, which was to supersedethe antiquated Statute of 1804. The work passed through a number ofdepartments. The projected enactment was framed by the "JewishCommittee, " which had been established in 1823 for the purpose ofbringing about "a reduction of the number of Jews in the monarchy, " andconsisted of cabinet ministers and the chiefs of departments. [1]Originally the department chiefs had elaborated a draft covering 1230clauses, a gigantic code of disabilities; evidently founded on theprinciple that in the case of Jews everything is forbidden which, is notpermitted by special legislation. The dimensions of the draft were suchthat even the Government was appalled and decided to turn it over to theministerial members of the Committee. 

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 407 et seq. ]

Modified in shape and reduced in size, the code was submitted in 1834 tothe Department of Laws forming part of the Council of State, and aftercareful discussion by the Department of Laws was brought up at theplenary sessions of the Council. The "ministerial" draft, though smallerin bulk, was marked by such severity that the Department of Laws foundit necessary to tone it down. The ministers, with the exception of theMinister of Finance, had proposed to transfer all Jews, within a periodof three years, from the villages to the towns and townlets. TheDepartment of Laws considered this measure too risky, pointing to theWhite Russian expulsion of 1823, which had failed to produce theexpected results, and, "while it has ruined the Jews, it does not in theleast seem to have improved the condition of the villagers. " [1] Theplenum of the Council agreed with the Department of Laws that "theproposed expulsion of the Jews (from the villages), being extremelydifficult of execution and being of problematic benefit, should beeliminated from the Statute and should be stopped even there where ithad been decreed but not carried into effect. "

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 407. ]

The report was laid before the Tzar, who attached to it the following"resolution": [1] "Where this measure (of expulsion) has been started, itis inconvenient to repeal it; but it shall be postponed for the timebeing in the governments in which no steps towards it have as yet beenmade. " For a number of years this "resolution" hung like the sword ofDamocles over the heads of rural Jewry. 

[Footnote 1: See on the meaning of the term "resolution" Vol. I, p. 253, n. 1. ]

Less yielding was the Tzar's attitude on the question of the partialenlargement of the Pale of Settlement. The Department of Laws hadsuggested to grant the merchants of the first guild the right ofresidence in the Russian interior in the interest of the exchequer andbig business. At the general meeting of the Council of State only aminority (thirteen) voted for the proposal. The majority (twenty-two)argued that they had no right to violate the time-honored tradition, "dating from the time of Peter the Great, " which bars the Jews from theRussian interior; that to admit them "would produce a very unpleasantimpression upon our people, which, on account of its religious notionsand its general estimate of the moral peculiarities of the Jews, hasbecome accustomed to keep aloof from them and to despise them;" that thecountries of Western Europe, which had accorded fall citizenship to theJews, "cannot serve as an example for Russia, partly because of theincomparably larger number of Jews living here, partly because ourGovernment and people, with all their well-known tolerance, are yet farfrom that indifference with which certain other nations look uponreligious matters. " After marking his approval of the last words by themarginal exclamation "Thank God!", the Tzar disposed of the whole matterin the following brief resolution: "This question has been determined byPeter the Great. I dare not change it; I completely share the opinion ofthe twenty-two members. "

While on this occasion the Tzar endorsed the opinion of the Council asrepresented by its majority, in cases in which it proved favorable tothe Jews he did not hesitate to set it aside. Thus the Department ofLaws, as part of the Council of State, and, following in its wake, theCouncil itself had timidly suggested to Nicholas to comply in part withthe plea of the Jews for a mitigation of the rigors of conscription, [1]but the imperial verdict read: "To be left as heretofore. " Nicholasremained equally firm on the question of the expulsions from Kiev. TheDepartment of Laws, guided by the previously-mentioned representationsof the local governor, favored the postponement of the expulsion, andfourteen members of the plenary Council agreed with the suggestion ofthe Department, and resolved to recommend it to the "benevolentconsideration of his Majesty, " in other words to request the Tzar torevoke the baneful ukase. But fifteen, members rejected all suchpropositions on the ground that, as far as that question was concerned, the imperial will was unmistakable, the Tzar having decided the matterin a sense unfavorable to the Jews. In a similar manner, numerous otherdecisions of the Council of State were dictated not so much by innerconviction as by fear of the clearly manifested imperial will, which noone dared to cross. 

[Footnote 1: The Kahal of Vilna, in a memorandum submitted in 1835, pleaded for the abolition of the dreadful institution of cantonists, andbegged that the age limit of Jewish recruits be raised from 12-15 to20-35. ]

Under these circumstances, the entire draft of the statute passedthrough the Council of State. In its session of March 28, 1835, theCouncil voted to submit it to the emperor for his signature. On thisoccasion a solitary and belated voice was raised in defence of the Jews, without evoking an echo. A member of the Council, Admiral Greig, who wasbrave enough to swim against the current, submitted a "special opinion"on the proposed statute, in which he advocated a number of alleviationsin the intolerable legal status of the Jews. Greig put the whole issuein a nut-shell: "Are the Jews to be suffered in the country, or not?"If they are, then we must abandon the system "of hampering them in theiractions and in their religious customs" and grant them at least "equalliberty of commerce with the others, " for in this case "we mayanticipate more good from their gratitude than from their hatred. "Should, however, the conclusion be reached that the Jews ought not to betolerated in Russia, then the only thing to be done is "to banish themall without exception from the country into foreign lands. " This mightbe "more useful than to allow this estate to remain in the country andto keep it in a position which is bound to arouse in them continualdissatisfaction and resentment. " It need scarcely be added that thevoice of the "queer" admiral found no hearing. 

Nor did the Jewish people manage to get a hearing. Stunned by theuninterrupted succession of blows and moved by the spirit of martyrdom, Russian Jewry kept its peace during those dismal years. Yet, when thenews of an impending general regulation of the Jewish legal status beganto leak out, a section of Russian Jewry became astir. For to anticipatea blow is more excruciating than to receive one, and it was quitenatural that an attempt should be made to stay the hand which was liftedto strike. Towards the end of 1833 the Council of State received, aspart of the material bearing on the Jewish question, two memoranda, onefrom the Kahal of Vilna, signed by six elders, and another from LitmanFeigin of Chernigov, well known in administrative circles as merchantand public contractor. 

The Kahal of Vilna declared that the repressive policy, pursued duringthe last few years by the "Jewish Committee, " had thrown a large part ofthe Jewish people "into utmost disorder, " and had made the Jews "shiverand shudder at the thought that a general Jewish statute had beendrafted by the same Committee and had now been submitted to the Councilof State for revision. " The petitioners go on to say that, weighed downby a succession of cruel discriminations affecting not only their rightsbut also their mode of discharging military service, the Jews wouldsuccumb to utter despair, did they not repose their hopes in thebenevolence of the Tzar, who, on his recent trip through the Westernprovinces, had expressed to the deputies of the Jewish communes hisimperial satisfaction with the loyalty to the throne displayed by theJews during the Polish insurrection of 1831. The Kahal of Vilna, therefore, implored the Council of State "to turn its attention to thisunfortunate and maligned people" and to stop all further persecutions. 

A more emphatic note of protest is sounded in the memorandum of Feigin. By a string of references to the latest Government measures hedemonstrates the fact that "the Jewish people is hunted down, notbecause of its moral qualities but because of its faith. "

 The Jews, faced by the new statute, have lost all hope for a better lot, inasmuch as the Government has embarked upon this measure without having solicited the explanations or justifications of this people, whereas, according to common legal procedure, even an individual may not be condemned without having been called upon to justify himself. 

The rebuke had no effect. The Government preferred to render its verdict_in absentia_, without listening to counsel for the defence and withoutany safeguards of fair play. In line with this attitude, it also deniedthe petition of the Vilna Kahal to be allowed "to send at least fourdeputies to the capital as spokesmen of the entire Jewish people for thepurpose of submitting to the Government their explanations andpropositions concerning the reorganization of the Jews, after havingbeen presented with a draft of the statute. " The final verdict waspronounced in the spring of 1835, and in April the new "Statuteconcerning the Jews" received the signature of the Tzar. 

This "Charter of Disabilities, " which was destined to operate for manydecades, represents a combination of the Russian "ground laws"concerning the Jews and the restrictive by-laws issued after 1804. ThePale of Settlement was now accurately defined: it consisted of Lithuania[1] and the South-western provinces, [2] without any territorialrestrictions, White Russia [3] minus the Villages, Little Russia [4]minus the crown hamlets, New Russia [5] minus Nicholayev and Sevastopol, the government of Kiev minus the city of Kiev, the Baltic provinces forthe old settlers only, while the rural settlements on the entirefifty-verst zone along the Western frontier were to be closed tonewcomers. As for the interior provinces, only temporary "furloughs"(limited to six weeks and to be certified by gubernatorial passports)were to be granted for the execution of judicial and commercial affairs, with the proviso that the travellers should wear Russian instead ofJewish dress. The merchants affiliated with the first and second guildswere allowed, in addition, to visit the two capitals, [6] the sea-ports, as well as the fairs of Nizhni-Novgorod, Kharkov, and other big fairsfor wholesale buying or selling. [7]

[Footnote 1: The present governments of Kovno, Vilna, Grodno, and Minsk. ]

[Footnote 2: The governments of Volhynia and Podolia. ]

[Footnote 3: The governments of Vitebsk and Moghilev. ]

[Footnote 4: The governments of Chernigov and Poltava. ]

[Footnote 5: The governments of Kherson, Yekaterinoslav, Tavrida, andBessarabia. ]

[Footnote 6: St. Petersburg and Moscow. ]

[Footnote 7: The time-limit was six months for the merchants of thefirst guild and three months for those of the second. ]

The Jews were further forbidden to employ Christian domestics forpermanent employment. They could hire Christians for occasional servicesonly, on condition that the latter live in separate quarters. Marriagesat an earlier age than eighteen for the bridegroom and sixteen for thebride were forbidden under the pain of imprisonment--a prohibition whichthe defective registration of births and marriages then in vogue made iteasy to evade. The language to be employed by the Jews in their publicdocuments was to be Russian or any other local dialect, but "under nocircumstances the Hebrew language. "

The function of the Kahal, according to the Statute, is to see to itthat the "instructions of the authorities" are carried out precisely andthat the state taxes and communal assessments are "correctly remitted. "The Kahal elders are to be elected by the community every three yearsfrom among persons who can read and write Russian, subject to theirbeing ratified by the gubernatorial administration. At the same time theJews are entitled to participation in the municipal elections; those whocan read and write Russian are eligible as members of the town councilsand magistracies--the supplementary law of 1836 fixed the rate atone-third, [1] excepting the city of Vilna where the Jews were entirelyexcluded from municipal self-government. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 368. ]

Synagogues may not be built in the vicinity of churches. The Russianschools of all grades are to be open to Jewish children, who "are notcompelled to change their religion" (Clause 106)--a welcome provision inview of the compulsory methods which had then become habitual. Thecoercive baptism of Jewish children was provided for in a separateenactment, the Statute on Conscription, which is declared "to remain inforce. " In this way the Statute of 1835 reduces itself to a codificationof the whole mass of the preceding anti-Jewish legislation. Its onlypositive feature was that it put a stop to the expulsion from thevillages which had ruined the Jewish population during the years1804-1830. 

6. THE RUSSIAN CENSORSHIP AND CONVERSIONIST ENDEAVORS

With all its discriminations, the promulgation of this general statutewas far from checking the feverish activity of the Government. Withindefatigable zeal, its hands went on turning the legislative wheel andsqueezing ever tighter the already unbearable vise of Jewish life. Theslightest attempt to escape from its pressure was punished ruthlessly. In 1838 the police of St. Petersburg discovered a group of Jews in thecapital "with expired passports, " these Jews having extended their staythere a little beyond the term fixed for Jewish travellers, and the Tzarcurtly decreed: "to be sent to serve in the penal companies ofKronstadt. " [1] In 1840 heavy fines were imposed upon the landedproprietors in the Great Russian governments for "keeping over" Jews ontheir estates. 

[Footnote 1: A fortress in the vicinity of St Petersburg. ]

Considerable attention was bestowed by the Government on placing thespiritual life of the Jews under police supervision. In 1836 acensorship campaign was launched against Hebrew literature. Hebrewbooks, which were then almost exclusively of a religious nature, such asprayer-books, Bible and Talmud editions, rabbinic, cabalistic, andhasidic writings, were then issuing from the printing presses of Vilna, Slavuta, [1] and other places, and were subject to a rigorous censorshipexercised by Christians or by Jewish converts. Practically every Jewishhome-library consisted of religious works of this type. The suspicionsof the Government were aroused by certain Jewish converts who hadinsinuated that the foreign editions of these works and those that hadappeared in Russia itself prior to the establishment of a censorshipwere of an "injurious" character. As a result, all Jewish home-librarieswere subjected to a search. Orders were given to deliver into the handsof the local police, in the course of that year, all foreign Hebrewprints as well as the uncensored editions, published at any previoustime in Russia, and to entrust their revision to "dependable" rabbis. These rabbis were instructed to put their stamp on the books approved bythem and return the books not approved by them to the police fortransmission to the Ministry of the Interior. The regulation involvedthe entire ancient Hebrew literature printed during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, prior to the establishment of theRussian censorship. In order to "facilitate the supervision" over newpublications or reprints from older editions, all Jewish printingpresses which existed at that time in various cities and towns wereordered closed, and only those of Vilna and Kiev, [2] to which specialcensors were attached, were allowed to remain. 

[Footnote 1: A town in Volhynia. ]

[Footnote 2: The printing-press of Kiev was subsequently transferred toZhitomir. ]

As the Hebrew authors of antiquity or the Middle Ages did not fullyanticipate the requirements of the Russian censors, many classic workswere found to contain passages which were thought to be "at variancewith imperial enactments. " By the ukase of 1836 all books of this kind, circulating in tens of thousands of copies, had to be transported to St. Petersburg under a police escort to await their final verdict. Theprocedure, however, proved too cumbersome, and, in 1837, the emperor, complying with the petitions of the governors, was graciously pleased tocommand that all these books be "delivered to the flames on the spot. "This _auto-da-fé_ was to be witnessed by a member of the gubernatorialadministration and a special "dependable" official dispatched by thegovernor for the sole purpose of making a report to the centralGovernment on every literary conflagration of this kind and forwardingto the Ministry of the Interior one copy of each "annihilated" book. 

But even this was not enough to satisfy the lust of the Russiancensorship. It was now suspected that even the "dependable" rabbis mightpass many a book as "harmless, " though its contents were subversive ofthe public weal. As a result, a new ukase was issued in 1841, placingthe rabbinical censors themselves under Government control. Alluncensored books, including those already passed as "harmless, " wereordered to be taken away from the private libraries and forwarded to thecensorship committees in Vilna and Kiev. The latter were instructed toattach their seals to the approved books and "deliver to the flames" thebooks condemned by them. Endless wagonloads of these confiscated bookscould be seen moving towards Vilna and Kiev, and for many yearsafterwards the literature of the "People of the Book, " covering a periodof three milleniums, was still languishing in the gaol of censorship, waiting to be saved from or to be sentenced to a fiery death by aRussian official. 

It is almost unnecessary to add that the primitive method of solving theJewish problem by means of conversion, was still the guiding principleof the Government. The Russian legislation of that period teems withregulations concerning apostasy. The surrender of the Synagogue to theChurch seemed merely a question of time. In reality, however, theGovernment itself believed but half-heartedly in the sincerity of theconverted Jews. In 1827 the Tzar put down in his own handwriting thefollowing resolution: "It is to be strictly observed that the baptismalceremony shall take place unconditionally on a Sunday, and with allpossible publicity, so as to remove all suspicion of a pretendedadoption of Christianity. " Subsequently, this watchfulness had to berelaxed in the case of those "who avoid publicity in adoptingChristianity, " more especially in the case of the cantonists, "who havedeclared their willingness to embrace the orthodox faith"--under theeffect, we may add, of the tortures in the barracks. Sincerity underthese circumstances was out of the question, and, in 1831, the battalionchaplains were authorized to baptize these helpless creatures, even"without applying for permission to the ecclesiastical authorities. "

The barrack missionaries were frequently successful among theseunfortunate military prisoners. In the imperial rescripts of that periodthe characteristic expression "privates from among the Jews _remainingin the above faith_" figures as a standing designation for that group ofrefractory and incorrigible soldiers who disturbed the officiallypre-established harmony of epidemic conversions by remaining loyal toJudaism. But among the "civilian" Jews, who had not been detached fromtheir Jewish environment, apostasy was extraordinarily rare, and lawafter law was promulgated in vain, offering privileges to converts orleniency to criminals who were ready to embrace the orthodox creed. [1]

[Footnote 1: Under Clause 157 of the Russian Penal Code of 1845, thepenalty of the law was softened, not only in degree but also in kind, for those criminals who had embraced the Greek-Orthodox faith during theinvestigation or trial. ]

CHAPTER XIV

COMPULSORY ENLIGHTENMENT AND INCREASED OPPRESSION

1. ENLIGHTENMENT AS A MEANS OF ASSIMILATION

There was a brief moment of respite when, in the phrase of the Russianpoet, "the fighter's hand was tired of killing. " The Russian Governmentsuddenly felt the need of passing over from the medieval forms ofpatronage to more enlightened and perfected methods. Among the leadingstatesmen of Russia were men, such as the Minister of PublicInstruction, Sergius Uvarov, who were well acquainted with WesternEuropean ways and fully aware of the fact that the reactionarygovernments of Austria and Prussia had invented several contrivances forhandling the Jewish problem which might be usefully applied in their owncountry. Though anxious to avoid all contact with the "rotten West, " andbeing in constant fear of European political movements, the RussianGovernment was nevertheless ready to seize upon the relics of"enlightened absolutism" which were still stalking about, particularlyin Austria, in the early decades of the nineteenth century. As far asPrussia was concerned, the abundance of assimilated and converted Jewsin that country and their attempts at religious reform, which to amissionary's imagination were identical with a change of front in favorof Christianity, had a fascination of its own for the Russiandignitaries. No wonder then that the Government yielded to thetemptation to use some of the contrivances of Western European reaction, while holding in reserve the police knout of genuine Russianmanufacture. 

In 1840 the Council of State was again busy discussing the Jewishquestion, this time from a theoretic point of view. The reports of theprovincial administrators, in particular that of Bibikov, governor-general of Kiev, dwelled on the fact that even the "Statute" of1835 had not succeeded in "correcting" the Jews. The root of the evillay rather in their "religious fanaticism and separatism, " which couldonly be removed by changing their inner life. The Ministers of PublicInstruction and of the Interior, Uvarov and Stroganov, took occasion toexpound the principles of their new system of correction before theCouncil of State. The discussions culminated in a remarkable memorandumsubmitted by the Council to Nicholas I. 

In this document the Government confesses its impotence in grapplingwith the "defects" of the Jewish masses, such as "the absence of usefullabor, their harmful pursuit of petty trading, vagrancy, and obstinatealoofness from general civic life. " Its failure the Government ascribesto the fact that the evil of Jewish exclusiveness has hitherto not beenattacked at its root, the latter being imbedded in the religious andcommunal organization of the Jews. The fountain-head of all misfortunesis the Talmud, which "fosters in the Jews utmost contempt towards thenations of other faiths, " and implants in them the desire "to rule overthe rest of the world. " As a result of the obnoxious teachings of theTalmud, "the Jews cannot but regard their presence in any other landexcept Palestine as a sojourn in captivity, " and "they are held to obeytheir own authorities rather than a strange government. " This explains"the omnipotence of the Kahals, " which, contrary to the law of thestate, employ secret means to uphold their autonomous authority both incommunal and judicial matters, using for this purpose the uncontrolledsums of the special Jewish revenue, the meat tax. The education of theJewish youth is entrusted to melammeds, "a class of domestic teachersimmersed in profoundest ignorance and superstition, " and, "under theinfluence of these fanatics, the children imbibe pernicious notions ofintolerance towards other nations. " Finally, the special dress worn bythe Jews helps to keep them apart from the surrounding Christianpopulation. 

The Russian Government "had adopted a series of protective measuresagainst the Jews, " without producing any marked effect. Even theConscription Statute "had succeeded to a limited extent only in alteringthe habits of the Jews. " Mere promotion of agriculture and of Russianschooling had been found inadequate. The expulsions from the villageshad proved equally fruitless; "the Jews, to be sure, have been ruined, but the condition of the rustics has shown no improvement. "

 It is evident, therefore--the Council declares--that restrictions which go only half way or are externally imposed by the police are not sufficient to direct this huge mass of people towards useful occupations. With the patience of martyrs the Jews of Western Europe had endured the most atrocious persecutions, and had yet succeeded in keeping their national type intact until the governments took the trouble to inquire more deeply into the causes separating the Jews from general civic life, so as to be able to attack the causes themselves. 

After blurting out the truth that the Government's ultimate aim was theobliteration of the Jewish individuality, and modestly yielding the palmin inflicting "the most atrocious persecutions" upon the Jews to WesternEurope, where after all they were receding into the past, while inRussia they were still the order of the day, the Council of Stateproceeds to consider "the example set by foreign countries, " and lingerswith particular affection over the Prussian Regulation of 1797 issued bythat country for its recently occupied Polish provinces--the PrussianEmancipation Edict of 1812 the memorandum very shrewdly passes over insilence--and on the system of compulsory schooling adopted by Austria. 

Taking its clue from the West, the Council delineates three ways ofbringing about "a radical transformation of this people":

1: _Cultural reforms_, such as the establishment of special secularschools for the Jewish youth, the fight against the old-fashionedheders and melammeds, the transformation of the rabbinate, and theprohibition of Jewish dress. 

2. _Abolition of Jewish autonomy_, consisting in the dissolution ofthe Kahals and the modification of the system of special Jewishtaxation. 

3. _Increase of Jewish disabilities_, by segregating from theirmidst all those who have no established domicile and are without adefinite financial status, with a view of subjecting them todisciplinary correction through expulsions, legal restrictions, intensified conscription, and similar police measures. 

 In this manner--the memorandum concludes--it may be hoped that by co-ordinating all the particulars of this proposition with the fundamental idea of reforming the Jewish people, and _by taking compulsory measures to aid_, the goal of the Government will be attained. 

As a result of this _exposé_ of the Council of State, an imperialrescript was issued on December 27, 1840, calling for the establishmentof a "Committee for Defining Measures looking to the RadicalTransformation of the Jews of Russia. " Count Kiselev, Minister of theCrown Domains, was appointed chairman. The other members included theMinisters of Public Instruction and the Interior, the Assistant-Ministerof Finance, the Director of the Second Section of the imperialchancellery, and the Chief of the Political Police, or the dreaded"Third Section. " [1] The latter was entrusted with the special task "tokeep a watchful eye on the intrigues and actions which may be resortedto by the Jews during the execution of this matter. "

[Footnote 1: See p. 21, n. 1. ]

Moreover, the _exposé_ of the Council of State, which was to serve asthe program of the new Committee, was sent out to the governors-generalof the Western region [1] "confidentially_, for personal information andconsideration. " The reformatory campaign against the Jews was thusstarted without any formal declaration of war, under the guise ofsecrecy and surrounded by police precautions. The procedure to befollowed by the Committee was to consider the project in the orderindicated in the memorandum: first "enlightenment, " then abolition ofautonomy, and finally disabilities. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 16, n. 1. ]

2. UVAROV AND LILIENTHAL

An elaborate _exposé_ on the question of enlightenment was composed andlaid before the Committee by the Minister of Public Instruction, SergiusUvarov. Having acquired the _bon ton_ of Western Europe, Uvarov prefaceshis statement by the remark that the European governments have abandonedthe method of "persecution and compulsion" in solving the Jewishquestion and that "this period has also arrived for us. " "Nations, "observes Uvarov, "are not exterminated, least of all the nation whichstood at the foot of Calvary. " From what follows, it seems evident thatthe Minister is still in hopes that the gentle measures of enlightenmentmay attract the Jews towards the religion which derives its origin fromCalvary. 

 The best among the Jews--he states--are conscious of the fact that one of the principal causes of their humiliation lies in the perverted interpretation of their religious traditions, that . . . The Talmud demoralized and continues to demoralize their co-religionists. But nowhere is the influence of the Talmud so potent as among us (in Russia) and in the Kingdom of Poland. [1] This influence can be counteracted only by enlightenment, and the Government can do no better than to act in the spirit that animates the handful of the best among them. . . . The re-education of the learned section among the Jews involves at the same time the purification of their religious conceptions. 

[Footnote 1: See on the meaning of the latter term Vol. I, p. 390, n. 1. ]

What "purification" the author of the memorandum has in mind may begathered from his casual remark that the Jews, who maintain theirseparatism, are rightly afraid of reforms: "for is not the religion ofthe Cross the purest symbol of universal citizenship?" This, however, Uvarov cautiously adds, should not be made public, for "it would have noother effect except that of arousing from the very beginning theopposition of the majority of the Jews against the (projected) schools. "

Officially the reform must confine itself to the opening in all thecities of the Jewish Pale of elementary and secondary schools in whichJewish children should be taught the Russian language, secular sciences, Hebrew, and "religion, according to the Holy Writ. " The instructionshould be given in Russian, though, owing to the shortage in teachersfamiliar with this language, the use of German is to be admittedtemporarily. The teachers in the low-grade schools shall provisionallybe recruited from among melammeds who "can be depended upon"; those inthe higher-grade schools shall be chosen from among the modernized Jewsof Russia and Germany. 

The Committee endorsed Uvarov's scheme in its principal features, andurgently recommended that, in order to prepare the Jewish masses for theimpending reform, a special propagandist be sent into the Pale ofSettlement for the purpose of acquainting this obstreperous nation with"the benevolent intentions of the Government. " Such a propagandist wassoon found in the person of a young German Jew, Dr. Max Lilienthal, aresident of Riga. 

Lilienthal; who was a native of Bavaria (he was born in Munich in 1815)and a German university graduate, was a typical representative of theGerman Jewish intellectuals of that period, a champion of assimilationand of moderate religious reform. Lilienthal had scarcely completed hisuniversity course, when he was offered by a group of educated Jews inRiga the post of preacher and director of the new local Jewish school, one of the three modern Jewish schools then in existence in Russia. [1]In a short time Lilienthal managed to raise the instruction insecular and Jewish subjects to such a high standard of modernity that heelicited a glowing tribute from Uvarov. The Minister was struck by theidea that the Riga school might serve as a model for the net of schoolswith which he was about to cover the whole Pale of Settlement, andLilienthal seemed the logical man for carrying out the planned reforms. 

[Footnote 1: The other two schools were located in Odessa and inKishinev. ]

In February, 1841, Lilienthal was summoned to St. Petersburg, where hehad a prolonged conversation with Uvarov. According to the testimony ofthe official Russian sources, he tried to persuade the Minister toabolish all "private schools, " the heders, and to forbid all privateteachers, the melammeds, to teach even temporarily in the projected newschools, and to import, instead, the whole teaching staff from Germany. Lilienthal himself tells us in his Memoirs that he made bold to remindthe Minister that all obstacles in the path of the desired re-educationof the Russian Jews would disappear, were the Tzar to grant themcomplete emancipation. To this the Minister retorted that the initiativemust come from the Jews themselves who first must try to "deserve thefavor of the Sovereign. " At any rate, Lilienthal accepted the profferedtask. He was commissioned to tour the Pale of Settlement, to organizethere the few isolated progressive Jews, "the lovers of enlightenment, "or Maskilim, as they styled themselves, and to propagate the idea of aschool-reform among the orthodox Jewish masses. 

While setting out on his journey, Lilienthal himself did not fullyrealize the difficulties of the task he had undertaken. He was toinstill confidence in the "benevolent intentions of the Government" intothe hearts of a people which by an uninterrupted series of persecutionsand cruel restrictions had been reduced to the level of pariahs. He wasto make them believe that the Government was a well-wisher of Jewishchildren, those same children, who at that very time were hunted likewild beasts by the "captors" in the streets of the Pale, who were turnedby the thousands into soldiers, deported into outlying provinces, andbelabored in such a manner that scarcely half of them remained alive andbarely a tenth remained within the Jewish fold. Guided by an infallibleinstinct, the plain Jewish people formulated their own simplified theoryto account for the step taken by the Government: up to the present theirchildren had been baptized through the barracks, in the future theywould be baptized through the additional medium of the school. 

Lilienthal arrived in Vilna in the beginning of 1842, and, calling ameeting of the Jewish Community, explained the plan conceived by theGovernment and by Uvarov, "the friend of the Jews. " He was listened towith unveiled distrust. 

 The elders--Lilienthal tells us in his Memoirs [1]--sat there absorbed in deep contemplation. Some of them, leaning on their silver-adorned staffs or smoothing their long beards, seemed as if agitated by earnest thoughts and justifiable suspicions; others were engaging in a lively but quiet discussion on the principles involved; such put to me the ominous question: "Doctor, are you fully acquainted with the leading principles of our government? You are a stranger; do you know what you are undertaking? The course pursued against all denominations but the Greek proves clearly that the Government intends to have but one Church in the whole Empire; that it has in view only its own future strength and greatness and not our own future prosperity. We are sorry to state that we put no confidence in the new measures proposed by the ministerial council, and that we look with gloomy foreboding into the future. "

[Footnote 1: I quote from _Max Lilienthal, American Rabbi, Life andWritings_, by David Philipson, New York, 1915, p, 264. ]

In his reply Lilienthal advanced an impressive array of arguments:

 What will you gain by your resistance to the new measures? It will only irritate the Government, and will determine it to pursue its system of repression, while at present you are offered an opportunity to prove that the Jews are not enemies of culture and deserve a better lot. 

When questioned as to whether the Jewish community had any guaranteethat the Government plan was not a veiled attempt to undermine theJewish religion, Lilienthal, by way of reply, solemnly pledged himselfto throw up his mission the moment he would find that the Governmentassociated with it secret intentions against Judaism. [1] The circle of"enlightened" Jews in Vilna pledged its support to Lilienthal, and heleft full of faith in the success of his enterprise. 

[Footnote 1: Op. Cit. P. 266. ]

A cruel disappointment awaited him in Minsk. Here the arguments whichthe opponents advanced in a passionate debate at a public meeting wereof a utilitarian rather than of an idealistic nature. 

 So long as the Government does not accord equal rights to the Jew, general culture will only he his misfortune. The plain uneducated Jew does not balk at the low occupation of factor [1] or peddler, for, drawing comfort and joy from his religion, he is reconciled to his miserable lot. But the Jew who is educated and enlightened, and yet has no means of occupying an honorable position in the country, will be moved by a feeling of discontent to renounce his religion, and no honest father will think of giving an education to his children which may lead to such an issue. [2]

[Footnote 1: The Polish name for agent. See Vol. I, p. 170, n. 1. ]

[Footnote 2: Quoted from Lilienthal's own account in _Die AllgemeineZeitung des Judentums_, 1842, No. 41, p. 605b. ]

The opponents of official enlightenment in Minsk were not content withadvancing arguments that appealed to reason. Both at the meeting and inthe street, Lilienthal was the target of insulting remarks from thecrowd. 

On his return to St. Petersburg, Lilienthal presented Uvarov with areport which convinced the Minister that the execution of theschool-reform was a difficult but not a hopeless task. 

On June 22, 1842, an imperial rescript was issued, placing all Jewishschools, including the heders and yeshibahs, under the supervision ofthe Ministry of Public Instruction. Simultaneously it was announced thatthe Government had summoned a Commission of four Rabbis to meet in St. Petersburg for the purpose of "supporting the efforts of the Government"in the realization of the school-reform. This Committee was to serveRussian Jewry as a security that the school-reforms would not bedirected against the Jewish religion. 

At the same time Lilienthal was ordered to proceed again to the Pale ofSettlement. He was directed to tour principally through theSouth-western and New-Russian governments and exert his influence uponthe Jewish masses in accordance with the instructions received from theministry. Before setting out on his journey, Lilienthal published aHebrew pamphlet under the title _Maggid Yeshu'ah_ ("Herald ofSalvation") which called upon the Jewish communities to comply readilywith the wishes of the Government. In his private letters, addressed toprominent Jews, Lilienthal expressed the assurance that the school ukasewas merely the forerunner of a series of measures for the betterment ofthe civic status of the Jews. 

This time Lilienthal met with a greater measure of success than on hisfirst journey. In several large centers, such as Berdychev, Odessa, Kishinev, he was accorded, a friendly welcome and assured of theco-operation of the communities in making the new school system asuccess. Filled with fresh hopes, Lilienthal returned in 1843 to St. Petersburg to participate in the work of the "Rabbinical Commission"which had been convoked by the Government and was now holding itssessions in the capital from May till August. 

The make-up of the Rabbinical Commission did not fully justify itsappellation. Only two "ecclesiastics" were on it, the president of theTalmudic Academy of Volozhin, [1] Rabbi Itzhok (Isaac) Itzhaki, and theleader of the White Russian Hasidim, Rabbi Mendel Shneorsohn, [2] whilethe South-western region and New Russia had sent two laymen: the bankerHalperin of Berdychev, and the director of the Jewish school in Odessa, Bezalel Stern. The two representatives of the "clergy" put up a warmdefence for the traditional Jewish school, the heder, endeavoring tosave it from the ministerial "supervision, " which aimed at itsannihilation. Finally a compromise was effected: the traditional hederwas to be left intact for the time being, but the proposed Crown schoolwas to be given full scope in competing with it. The Commission evenwent so far as to work out a program of Jewish studies for the new typeof school. 

[Footnote 1: In the government of Vilna. See Vol I, p. 380, et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: The grandson of Rabbi Shneor Zalman, the founder of thatfaction. See Vol. I, p. 372. ]

The labors of the Rabbinical Commission were submitted to the JewishCommittee, under the chairmanship of Kiselev, and discussed by it inconnection with the general plan of a Russian school-reform. It wasnecessary to find the resultant between two opposing forces: between thedesire of the Government to substitute the Russian Crown school for theold-fashioned Jewish school and the determination of Russian Jewry topreserve its own school as a bulwark against the official institutionsfoisted upon it. The Government was bent on carrying out its policy, andfound itself compelled to resort to diplomatic contrivances. 

On November 13, 1844, Nicholas signed two enactments, the one a publicukase relating to "the Education of the Jewish Youth. " the other aconfidential rescript addressed to the Minister of Public Instruction. The public enactment called for the establishment of Jewish schools oftwo grades, corresponding to the courses of instruction in the parochialand county schools, and ordered the opening of two rabbinical institutesfor the training of rabbis and teachers. The teaching staff in theJewish Crown schools was to consist both of Jews and Christians. Thegraduates of these schools were granted a reduction in the term ofmilitary service. The execution of the school reforms in the respectivelocalities was placed in the hands of "School Boards, " composed of Jewsand Christians, which were to be appointed provisionally for thatpurpose. 

In the secret rescript the tone was altogether different. There it wasstated that "the aim pursued, in the training of the Jews is that ofbringing them nearer to the Christian population and eradicating theprejudices fostered in them by the study of the Talmud"; that with theopening of the new schools the old ones were to be gradually closed orreorganized, and that as soon as the Crown schools have been establishedin sufficient numbers, attendance at them would become obligatory; thatthe superintendents of the new schools should only be chosen from amongChristians; that every possible effort should be made "to put obstaclesin the way of granting teaching licenses" to the melammeds who lacked asecular education; that after the lapse of twenty years no one shouldhold the position of teacher or rabbi without having obtained his degreefrom one of the official rabbinical schools. 

It was not long, however, before the secret came out. The Russian Jewswere terror-stricken at the thought of being robbed of their ancientschool autonomy, and decided to adopt the well-tried tactics of passiveresistance to all Government measures. The school-reform was making slowprogress. The opening of the elementary schools and of the tworabbinical institutes in Vilna and Zhitomir did not begin until 1847, and for the first few years they dragged on a miserable existence. Lilienthal himself disappeared from the scene, without waiting for theconsummation of the reform plan. In 1845 he suddenly abandoned his postat the Ministry of Public Instruction, and left Russia for ever. A moreintimate acquaintance with the intentions of the leading Governmentcircles had made Lilienthal realize that the apprehensions voiced in hispresence by the old men of the Vilna community were well-founded, and hethought it his duty to fulfill the pledge given by him publicly. Fromthe land of serfdom, where, to use Lilienthal's own words, the only wayfor the Jew to make peace with the Government was "by bowing down beforethe Greek cross, " he went to the land of freedom, the United States ofAmerica. There he occupied important pulpits in New York and Cincinnatiwhere he died in 1882. 

3. THE ABOLITION OF JEWISH AUTONOMY AND RENEWEDPERSECUTIONS

No sooner had the school reform, which was tantamount to the abrogationof Jewish school autonomy, been publicly announced than the Governmenttook steps to realize the second article of its program, theannihilation of the remnants of Jewish communal autonomy. An ukasepublished on December 19, 1844, ordered "the placing of the Jews in thecities and countries under the jurisdiction of the general (i. E. , Russian) administration, with the abolition of the Kahals. " By thisukase all the administrative functions of the Kahals were turned over tothe police departments, and those of an economic and fiscal character tothe municipalities and town councils; the old elective Kahaladministration was to pass out of existence. 

Carried to its logical conclusions, this "reform" would necessarily haveled, as it actually did lead in Western Europe, to the abolition of theJewish community, outside the narrow limits of a synagogue parish, hadthe Jews of Russia been placed at the same time on a footing of equalityin regard to _taxation_. But such European consistency was beyond themental range of Russian autocracy. It was neither willing to abandon thespecial, and for the Jews doubly burdensome, method of conscription, norto forego the extra levies imposed upon the Jews, over and above thegeneral state taxes, for needs which, properly speaking, should havebeen met by the exchequer. Thus it came about that for the sake ofmaintaining Jewish disabilities in the matter of conscription andtaxation, the Government itself was obliged to mitigate the blow atJewish autonomy by allowing the institutions of Jewish "conscriptiontrustees" and tax-collectors, elected by the Jewish communes "from amongthe most dependable men, " to remain in force. The Government, moreover, found it necessary to establish a special department for Jewish affairsat each municipality and town council. In this way the law managed todestroy the self-government of the Kahal and yet preserve itsrudimentary function as an autonomous fiscal agency which was to becontinued under the auspices of the municipality. In point of fact, theKahal, which, through its "trustees" and "captors, " had acted the partof a Government tool in carrying out the dreadful military conscription, had long become thoroughly demoralized and had lost its former prestigeas a great Jewish institution. Its transformation into a purely fiscalagency was merely the formal ratification of a sad fact. 

Having disposed of the Kahal as a vehicle of Jewish "separatism, " theGovernment next attacked the special Jewish "system of taxation, " not toabolish it, of course, but rather to place it under a more rigorouscontrol for the purpose of preventing it from serving in the hands ofthe Jews as an instrument for the attainment of specific Jewish ends. Itis significant that on the same day on which the Kahal ukase was madepublic was also issued the new "Regulation Concerning the Basket Tax. "[1] The revenue from this tax which had for a long time been imposedupon Kosher meat was originally placed at the free disposal of theKahals, though subject, since 1839, to the combined control of theadministration and municipality. According to the new enactment, theproceeds from the meat tax which was to be let to the highest bidderwere to be left entirely in the hands of the gubernatorialadministration. The latter was instructed to see to it that the incomefrom the tax should first be applied to cover the fiscal arrears of theJews, then to provide for the maintenance of the Crown schools and theofficial promotion of agriculture among Jews, and only as a last item tobe spent on the local charities. 

[Footnote 1: The tax is called in Russian _korobochny sbor_, or, forshort, _korobka_, a word related to German _Korb_. It was partly in usealready under the Polish régime. ]

In addition to the general basket tax, imposed upon all Jews who useKosher meat, an "auxiliary basket tax" was instituted to be levied onimmovable property as well as on business pursuits and bequests. Moreover, following the Austrian model, the Government instituted, orrather reinstituted, the "candle tax, " a toll on Sabbath candles. Theproceeds from this impost on a religions ceremony were to gospecifically towards the organization of the Jewish Crown schools, andwere placed entirely at the disposal of the Ministry of PublicInstruction. 

Thus in exact proportion to the curtailment of communal autonomy, voluntary self-taxation was gradually supplanted by compulsoryGovernment taxation, a circumstance which not only increased thefinancial burden of the Jewish masses, but also tended to aggravate itfrom a moral point of view. The "tax, " as the meat tax was called forshort, became in the course of time one of the scourges of Jewishcommunal life, that same life which the "measures" of the Government hadmerely succeeded in disorganizing. 

Anxious as the Government was to act diplomatically and, for fear ofintensifying the distrust of Russian Jewry towards the new scheme, tostem the flood of restrictions during the execution of the schoolreform, it could not long restrain itself. The third plank in theplatform of the Jewish Committee, the increase of Jewish disabilities, which had hitherto been kept in reserve, was now pressing forward, andissued forth from the recesses of the chancelleries somewhat earlierthan tactical considerations might have dictated. On April 20, 1843, while the "enlightenment" propaganda was in full swing, there suddenlyappeared, in the form of a resolution appended by the Tzar's own hand tothe report of the Council of Ministers, the following curt ukase:

 All Jews living within the fifty verst zone along the Prussian and Austrian frontier are to be transferred into the interior of the (border) governments. Those possessing their own houses are to be granted a term of two years within which to sell them. _To be carried out without any excuses. _

On the receipt of this grim command, the Senate was at first puzzled asto whether the imperial order was a mere repetition of the former lawconcerning the expulsion of the Jews from the villages and hamlets onthe frontier, [1] or whether it was a new law involving the expulsion ofall Jews on the border, without discrimination, including those in thecities and towns. Swayed by the harsh and emphatic tone of the imperialresolution, the Senate decided to interpret the new order in the senseof a complete and absolute expulsion. This interpretation received theTzar's approbation, except that the time-limit for the expulsion of realestate owners was extended for two years more and the ruined exiles werepromised temporary relief from taxation. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 40. ]

The new catastrophe which descended upon tens of thousands of families, particularly in the government of Kovno, caused a cry of horror, notonly throughout the border-zone but also abroad. When the Jews doomed toexpulsion were ordered by the police to state the places whither theyintended to emigrate, nineteen communities refused to comply with thisdemand, and declared that they would not abandon their hearths and thegraves of their forefathers and would only yield to force. Publicopinion in Western Europe was running high with indignation. The French, German, and English papers condemned in no uncertain terms the policy of"New Spain. " Many Jewish communities in Germany petitioned the RussianGovernment to revoke the terrible expulsion decree. There was even anattempt at diplomatic intervention. During his stay in England, NicholasI. Was approached on behalf of the Jews by personages of high rank. Yetthe Government would scarcely have yielded to public protests, had itnot become patent that it was impossible to carry out the decree withoutlaying waste entire cities and thereby affecting injuriously theinterests of the exchequer. The fatal ukase was not officially repealed, but the Government did not insist on its execution. 

In the meantime the "Jewish Committee" kept up a correspondence with thegovernors-general in regard to the ways and means of carrying intoeffect the third article of its program, the "assortment, " or"classification" of the Jews. The plan called for the division of allRussian Jews into two categories, into useful and useless ones. Theformer category was to consist of merchants affiliated with guilds, artisans belonging to trade-unions, agriculturists, and those of theburgher class who owned immovable property with a definite income. Allother burghers who could not claim such a financial status and had nodefinite income, in other words, the large mass of petty tradesmen andpaupers, were to be labelled as "useless" or "detrimental, " andsubjected to increased disabilities. 

The inquiry of the Ministry of the Interior regarding the feasibility ofsuch an "assortment" met with a strongly-worded rebuttal from thegovernor-general of New Russia, Vorontzov. While on a leave of absencein London, this Russian dignitary, who had evidently been affected byEnglish ideas, prepared a memorandum and sent it, in October, 1843, toSt. Petersburg with the request to have it submitted to the Tzar. 

 I venture to think--quoth Vorontzov with reference to the projected segregation of the "useless" Jews--that the application of the term "useless" to several hundred thousand people who by the will of the Almighty have lived In this Empire from ancient times is in itself both cruel and unjust. The project labels as "useless" all those numerous Jews who are engaged either in the retail purchase of goods from their original manufacturers for delivery to wholesale merchants, or in the useful distribution among the consumers of the merchandise obtained from the wholesalers. Judging impartially, one cannot help wondering how these numerous tradesmen can be regarded as useless and consequently as detrimental, if one bears in mind that by their petty and frequently maligned pursuits they promote not only rural but also commercial life. 

The atrocious scheme of "assorting" the Jews is naileddown by Vorontzov as "a bloody operation over a whole classof people, " which is threatened "not only with hardships, butalso with annihilation through poverty. "

 I venture to think--with these words Vorontzov concludes his memorandum--that this measure is both harmful, and cruel. On the one side, hundreds of thousands of hands which assist petty industry in the provinces will be turned aside, when there is no possibility, and for a long time there will be none, of replacing them. On the other side, the cries and moans of such an enormous number of unfortunates will serve as a reproach to our Government not only in our own country but also beyond the confines of Russia. 

Since the time of Speranski and the like-minded members of the "JewishCommittee" of 1803 and 1812[1] the leading spheres of St. Petersburg hadhad no chance to hear such courageous and truthful words. Vorontzov'sobjections implied a crushing criticism of the whole fallacious economicpolicy of the Government in branding the petty tradesmen and middlemenas an injurious element and building thereon a whole system ofanti-Jewish persecutions and cruelties. But St. Petersburg was notamenable to reason. The only concession wrested from the "JewishCommittee" consisted in replacing the term "useless" as applied to smalltradesmen by the designation "not engaged in productive labor. "

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 340. ]

The cruel project continued to engage the attention of the "JewishCommittee" for a long time. In April, 1815, the chairman of theCommittee, Kiselev, addressed a circular to the governors-general inwhich he pointed out that after the promulgation of the laws concerningthe establishment of Crown schools and the abolition of theKahals--laws-which were aimed at "the weakening of the influence of theTalmud" and the destruction of all institutions "fostering the separateindividuality of the Jews"--the turn had come for carrying into effect, by means of the proposed classification, the measures directed towards"the transfer of the Jews to useful labor. " Of the regulations tendingto affect the Jews "culturally" the circular emphasizes the prohibitionof Jewish dress to take effect after the lapse of five years. 

 All the regulations alluded to--Kiselev writes--have been issued and will be issued separately, _in order to conceal their interrelation and common aim from the fanaticism, of the Jews_. For this reason his Imperial Majesty has been graciously pleased to command me to communicate all the said plans to the Governors-General _confidentially_. 

It would seem, however, that the Russian authorities had grosslyunderestimated the political sense of the Jews. They were not aware ofthe fact that St. Petersburg's conspiracy against Judaism had long beenexposed in the Pale of Settlement, if only for the reason that theconspirators were not clever enough to hide even for a time thechastising knout beneath the cloak of "cultural" reforms. 

4. INTERCESSION OF WESTERN EUROPEAN JEWRY

The mask of the Russian Government was soon torn down also before theyes of Western Europe. In the initial stage of Lilienthal's campaign, public-minded Jews of Western Europe were inclined to believe that ahappy era was dawning upon their coreligionists in Russia. At theinstance of Uvarov, Lilienthal had entered into correspondence withPhilippson, Geiger, Crémieux, Montefiore, and other leaders ofWest-European Jewry, bespeaking their moral support on behalf of theschool-reform and going so far as to invite them to participate in theproceedings of the Rabbinical Commission convened at St. Petersburg. Thereplies from these prominent Jews were full of complimentary referencesto Uvarov's endeavors. The _Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums_, [1] in thebeginning of the forties, voiced the general belief that the era ofpersecutions in Russia had come to an end. 

[Footnote 1: A weekly founded by Dr. Ludwig Philippson in 1837. It stillappears in Berlin. ]

The frontier expulsions of 1843 acted like a cold douche on theseenthusiasts. They realized that the pitiless banishment of thousands offamilies from home and hearth was not altogether compatible with"benevolent intentions. " A sensational piece of news made its roundsthrough Germany: the well-known painter Oppenheim of Frankfurt-on-the-Mainhad given up working at the large picture ordered by the leaders ofseveral Jewish communities for presentation to the Tzar. The paintinghad been intended as an allegory, picturing a sunrise in a dark realm, but the happy anticipations proved a will o' the wisp, and the plan hadto be given up. Instead, Western Europe was resounding with moans fromRussia, betokening new persecutions and even more atrocious schemes ofrestrictions. The sufferings of the Russian Jews suggested the thoughtthat it was the duty of the influential Jews of the West to intercede onbehalf of their persecuted brethren before the emperor of Russia. 

The choice fell on the famous Jewish philanthropist in London, Sir MosesMontefiore, who stood in close relations to the court of Queen Victoria. Having established his fame by championing the Jewish cause in Turkeyduring the ritual murder trial of Damascus in 1840, Montefiore resolvedto make a similar attempt in the land of the Tzar. In the beginning of1846 he set out for Russia, ostensibly in the capacity of a travelerdesirous of familiarizing himself with the condition of hiscoreligionists. Montefiore, who was the bearer of a personalrecommendation from Queen Victoria to the Russian emperor, was receivedin St. Petersburg with great honors. During an audience granted toMontefiore in March, 1846, the Tzar expressed his willingness to receivefrom him, through the medium of the "Jewish Committee, " suggestionsbearing on the condition of the Russian Jews, based on the informationto be gathered by him on his travels. Montefiore's journey through thePale of Settlement, including a visit to Vilna, Warsaw, and othercities, was marked by great solemnity. He was courteously received bythe highest local officials, who acted according to instructions fromSt. Petersburg, and he met everywhere with an enthusiastic welcome fromthe Jewish masses, who expected great results from his intercessionbefore the Tzar. 

Needless to say, these expectations were not realized. On his return toLondon, Montefiore addressed various petitions to Kiselev, the chairmanof the Jewish Committee, to Minister Uvarov and to Paskevich, the thenviceroy of Poland. Everywhere he pleaded for a mitigation of the harshlaws which were pressing upon his unfortunate brethren, for therestoration of the recently abolished communal autonomy, for theharmonization of the school-reform with the religious traditions of theJewish masses. The Tzar was informed of the contents of these petitions, but it was all of no avail. 

In the same year another influential foreigner made an unsuccessfulattempt to improve the condition of the Russian Jews by emigration. Arich Jewish merchant of Marseille, named Isaac Altaras, came to Russiawith a proposal to transplant a certain number of Jews to Algiers, whichhad recently passed under French rule. Fortified by letters ofrecommendation from Premier Guizot and other high officials in France, Altaras entered into negotiations with the Ministers Nesselrode andPerovski in St. Petersburg and with Viceroy Paskevich in Warsaw, for thepurpose of obtaining permission for a certain number of Jews to emigratefrom Russia. [1] He gave the assurance that the French Government wasready to admit into Algiers, as full-fledged citizens, thousands ofdestitute Russian Jews, and that the means for transferring them wouldbe provided by Rothschild's banking house in Paris. At first, while inSt. Petersburg, Altaras was informed that permission to leave Russiawould be granted only on condition that a fixed ransom be paid for everyemigrant. 

In Warsaw, however, which city he visited later, in October, 1846, hewas notified that the Tzar had decided to waive the ransom. For someunexplained reason Altaras left Russia suddenly, and the scheme of aJewish mass emigration fell through. 

[Footnote 1: A law on the Russian statute books forbids the emigrationof Russian citizens abroad. See later, p. 285, n. 1. ]

5. THE ECONOMIC PLIGHT OF RUSSIAN JEWRY AND AGRICULTURALEXPERIMENTS

The attempt at thinning the Jewish population by emigration havingfailed, the congested Jewish masses continued to gasp for air in theirPale of Settlement. The slightest effort to penetrate beyond the Paleinto the interior was treated as a criminal offence. In December, 1847, the Council of State engaged in a protracted and earnest discussionabout the geographical point up to which the Jewish coachmen of Polotzkshould be allowed, to drive the inmates of the local school of cadets ontheir annual trips to the Russian capital. The discussion arose out ofthe fact that the road leading from Polotzk to St. Petersburg is crossedby the line separating the Pale from the prohibited interior. A proposalhad been made to permit the coachmen to drive their passengers as far asPskov. But when the report was submitted to the Tzar, he appended thefollowing resolution: "Agreeable; though not to Pskov, but toOstrov"--the town nearest to the Pale. Of this trivial kind wereRussia's methods in curtailing Jewish rights three months before thegreat upheaval which in adjoining Germany and Austria dealt thedeath-blow to absolutism and inaugurated the era of the "SecondEmancipation. "

As for the economic life of the Jews, it had been completely underminedby the system of ruthless tutelage, which the Government had employedfor a quarter of a century in the hope of "reconstructing" it. All thesedrumhead methods, such as the hurling of masses of living beings fromvillages into towns and from the border-zone into the interior, theprohibition of certain occupations and the artificial promotion ofothers, could not but result in economic ruin, instead of leading toeconomic reform. 

Nor was the governmental system of encouraging agriculture among Jewsattended by greater success. In consequence of the expulsion of tens ofthousands of Jews from the villages of White Busier in 1823, some twothousand refugees had drifted into the agricultural colonies of NewRussia, but all they did was to replace the human wastage from increasedmortality, which, owing to the change of climate and the unaccustomedconditions of rural life, had decimated the original settlers. Duringthe reign of Nicholas, efforts were again made to promote agriculturalcolonization by offering the prospective immigrants subsidies andalleviations in taxation. Even more valuable was the privilege relievingthe colonists from military service for a term of twenty-five to fiftyyears from the time of settlement. Yet only a few tried to escapeconscription by taking refuge in the colonies. For the military regimegradually penetrated into these colonies as well. The Jewish colonistwas subject to the grim tutelage of Russian "curators" and"superintendents, " retired army men, who watched his every step andpunished the slightest carelessness by conscription or expulsion. 

In 1836 the Government conceived the idea of enlarging the area ofJewish agricultural colonization. By an imperial rescript certain landsin Siberia, situated in the government of Tobolsk and in the territoryof Omsk, were set aside for this purpose. Within a short time 1317 Jewsdeclared their readiness to settle on the new lands; many had actuallystarted on their way in batches. But in January, 1837, the Tzar quiteunexpectedly changed his mind. After reading the report of the Councilof Ministers on the first results of the immigration, he put down theresolution: "The transplantation of Jews to Siberia is to be stopped. " Afew months later orders were issued to intercept those Jews who were ontheir way to Siberia and transfer them to the Jewish colonies in thegovernment of Kherson. The unfortunate emigrants were seized on the wayand conveyed, like criminals, under a military escort into places inwhich they were not in the least interested. Legislative whims of thiskind, coupled with an uncouth system of tutelage, were quite sufficientto crush in many Jews the desire of turning to the soil. 

Nevertheless, the colonization made slow progress, gradually spreadingfrom the government of Kherson to the neighboring governments ofYekaterinoslav and Bessarabia. Stray Jewish agricultural settlementsalso appeared in Lithuania and White Russia. But a comparative handfulof some ten thousand "Jewish peasants" could not affect the generaleconomic make-up of millions of Jews. In spite of all shocks, theeconomic structure of Russian Jewry remained essentially the same. Asbefore, the central place in this structure was occupied by the liquortraffic, though modified in a certain measure by the introduction of amore extensive system of public leases. Above the rank and file oftavern keepers, both rural and urban, there had arisen a class ofwealthy tax-farmers, who kept a monopoly on the sale of liquor or thecollection of excise in various governments of the Pale. They functionedas the financial agents of the exchequer, while the Jewish employees intheir mills, store-houses, and offices acted as their sub-agents, forming a class of "officials" of their own. The place next inimportance to the liquor traffic was occupied by retail and wholesalecommerce. The crafts and the spiritual professions came last. Pauperismwas the inevitable companion of this economic organization, and "peoplewithout definite occupations" were counted by the hundreds of thousands. 

6. THE RITUAL MURDER TRIAL OF VELIZH

The "ordinary" persecutions under which the Jews in Russia were groaningwere accompanied by afflictions of an extraordinary kind. The severestamong these were the ritual murder trials which became of frequentoccurrence, tending to deepen the medieval gloom of that period. True, ritual murder cases had occurred during the reign of Alexander I. , butit was only under Nicholas that they assumed a malign and dangerousform. In the year 1816, shortly before Passover, a dead body was foundin the vicinity of Grodno and identified as that of the four year olddaughter of a Grodno resident, Mary Adamovich. Rumors were spread amongthe superstitious Christian populace to the effect that the girl hadbeen killed for ritual purposes, and the police, swayed by these rumors, set about to find the culprit among the Jews. Suspicion fell on a memberof the Grodno Kahal, Shalom Lapin, whose house adjoined that of theAdamovich family. The only "evidence" against him were a hammer and apike found in his house. A sergeant, named Savitzki, a converted Jew, appeared as a material witness before the Commission of Inquiry, anddelivered himself of a statement full of ignorant trash, which wasintended to show that "Christian blood is exactly what is neededaccording to the Jewish religion"--here the witness referred to theBible story of the Exodus and to two mythical authorities, "thephilosopher Rossié and the prophet Azariah. " He further deposed that"every rabbi is obliged to satisfy the whole Kahal under hisjurisdiction by smearing with same (with Christian blood) the lintels ofevery house on the first day of the feast of Passover. " Prompted bygreed and by the desire to distinguish himself, the sergeant declaredhimself ready to substantiate his testimony from Jewish literature, "ifthe chief Government will grant him the necessary assistance. "

The results of this "secret investigation" were laid before the governorof Grodno and reported by him to St. Petersburg. In reply, Alexander I. Issued a rescript in February, 1817, ordering that the "secretinvestigation be cut short and the murderer be found out" intimatingthereby that search be made for the criminal and not for the tenets ofthe Jewish religion. However, all efforts to discover the culpritfailed, and the case was dismissed. 

This favorable issue was in no small measure due to the endeavors of the"Deputies of the Jewish People, " [1] in particular to Sonnenberg, thedeputy from Grodno. These deputies, who were present in St. Petersburgat that time, addressed themselves to Golitzin, the Minister ofEcclesiastical Affairs, protesting against the ritual murder libel. Thetrial at Grodno and the ritual murder accusations which simultaneouslycropped up in the Kingdom of Poland made the Minister of EcclesiasticalAffairs realize that there was in the Western region a dangeroustendency of making the Jews the scapegoats for every mysterious murdercase and of fabricating lawsuits of the medieval variety by bringingpopular superstition into play. Golitzin, a Christian pietist, who wasnevertheless profoundly averse to narrow ecclesiastic fanaticism, decided to strike at the root of this superstitious legend which wasdisgracing Poland in her period of decay and was about to fall as a darkstain upon Russia. He succeeded in impressing this conviction upon hislike-minded sovereign Alexander I. In the same month in which the ukaseconcerning "the Society of Israelitish Christians" was published [2]Golitzin sent out the following circular to the governors, dated March6, 1817:

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 394. ]

[Footnote 2: Compare Vol. I, p. 396. ]

 In view of the fact that in several of the provinces acquired from Poland, cases still occur in which the Jews are falsely accused of murdering Christian children for the alleged purpose of obtaining blood, his Imperial Majesty, taking into consideration that similar accusations have on previous numerous occasions been refuted by impartial investigations and royal charters, has been graciously pleased to convey to those at the head of the governments his Sovereign will: that henceforward the Jews shall not be charged with murdering Christian children, without any evidence and purely as a result of the superstitious belief that they are in need of Christian blood. 

One might have thought that this emphatic rescript would suffice to puta stop to the efforts of ignorant adventurers to resuscitate the bloodymyth. And, for several years, indeed, the sinister agitation kept quiet. But towards the end of Alexander's reign it came to life again, and gaverise to the monstrous Velizh case. 

In the year 1823, on the first day of the Christian Passover, a boy ofthree years, Theodore Yemelyanov, the son of a Russian soldier, disappeared in the city of Velizh, in the government of Vitebsk. Tendays later the child's body was found in a swamp beyond the town, stabbed all over and covered with wounds. The medical examination andthe preliminary investigation were influenced by the popular belief thatthe child had been tortured to death by the Jews. This belief wasfostered by two Christian fortune-tellers, a prostitute beggar-woman, called Mary Terentyeva, and a half-witted old maid, by the name ofYeremyeyeva, who by way of divination made the parents of the childbelieve that its death was due to the Jews. At the judicial inquiry, Terentyeva implicated two of the most prominent Jews of Velizh, themerchant Shmerka [1] Berlin, and Yevzik [2] Zetlin, a member of thelocal town council. 

[Footnote 1: A popular form of the name Shemariah. ]

[Footnote 2: The Russian form of _Yozel_, a variant of the name Joseph. ]

Protracted investigations failed to substantiate the fabrications ofTerentyeva, and in the autumn of 1884 the Supreme Court of thegovernment of Vitebsk rendered the following verdict:

 To leave the accidental death of the soldier boy to the will of God; to declare all the Jews, against whom the charge of murder has been brought on mere surmises, free from all suspicion; to turn over the soldier woman Terentyeva, for her profligate conduct, to a priest for repentance. 

However, in view of the exceptional gravity of the crime, the Courtrecommended to the gubernatorial administration to continue itsinvestigations. 

Despite the verdict of the court, the dark forces among the localpopulation, prompted by hatred of the Jews, bent all their efforts onputting the investigation on the wrong track. The low, mercenaryTerentyeva became their ready tool. When in September, 1825, AlexanderI. Was passing through Velizh, she submitted a petition to him, complaining about the failure of the authorities to discover themurderer of little Theodore, whom she unblushingly designated as her ownchild and declared to have been tortured to death by the Jews. The Tzar, entirely oblivious of his ukase of 1817, [1] instructed the White-Russiangovernor-general, Khovanski, to start a new rigorous inquiry. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 74. ]

The imperial order gave the governor-general, who was a Jew-hater and abeliever in the hideous libel, unrestricted scope for his anti-Semiticinstincts. He entrusted the conduct of the new investigation to asubaltern, by the name of Strakhov, a man of the same ilk, conferringupon him the widest possible powers. On his arrival in Velizh, Strakhovfirst of all arrested Terentyeva, and subjected her to a series ofcross-examinations during which he endeavored to put her on what heconsidered the desirable track. Stimulated by the prosecutor, theprostitute managed to concoct a regular criminal romance. She deposedthat she herself had participated in the crime, having lured littleTheodore into the homes of Zetlin and Berlin. In Berlin's house, andlater on in the synagogue, a crowd of Jews of both sexes had subjectedthe child to the most horrible tortures. The boy had been stabbed andbutchered and rolled about in a barrel. The blood squeezed out of himhad been distributed on the spot among those present, who thereuponproceeded to soak pieces of linen in it and to pour it out inbottles. [1] All these tortures had been perpetrated in her own presence, and with the active participation both of herself and the Christianservant-girls of the two families. 

[Footnote 1: According to her testimony, the Jews are in the habit ofusing Christian blood to smear the eyes of their new-born babies, since"the Jews are always born blind, " also to mix it with the flour inpreparing the unleavened bread for Passover. ]

It may be added that Terentyeva did not make these statements at onetime, but at different intervals, inventing fresh details at each newexamination and often getting muddled in her story. The implicatedservant-girls at first denied their share in the crime, but, yielding toexternal pressure--like Terentyeva, they, too, were sent for frequent"admonition" to a local priest, called Tarashkevich, a ferociousanti-Semite--they were gradually led to endorse the depositions of theprincipal material witness. 

On the strength of these indictments Strakhov placed the implicated Jewsunder arrest, at first two highly esteemed ladies, Slava Berlin andHannah Zetlin, later on their husbands and relatives, and finally anumber of other Jewish residents of Velizh. In all forty-two people wereseized, put in chains, and thrown into jail. The prisoners were examined"with a vengeance"; they were subjected to the old-fashioned judicialprocedure which approached closely the methods of medieval torture. Theprisoners denied their guilt with indignation, and, when confronted withTerentyeva, denounced her vehemently as a liar. The excruciatingcross-examinations brought some of the prisoners to the verge ofmadness. But as far as Strakhov was concerned, the hysterical fits ofthe women, the angry speeches of the men, the remarks of some of theaccused, such as: "I shall tell everything, but only to the Tzar, "served in his eyes as evidence of the Jews' guilt. In his reports heassured his superior, Khovanski, that he had got on the track of amonstrous crime perpetrated by a whole Kahal, with the assistance ofseveral Christian women who had been led astray by the Jews. 

In communicating his findings to St. Petersburg, the White Russiangovernor-general presented the case as a crime committed on religiousgrounds. In reply he received the fatal resolution of Emperor Nicholas, dated August 16, 1828, to the following effect:

 Whereas the above occurrence demonstrates that the Zhyds[1] make wicked use of the religious tolerance accorded to them, therefore, as a warning and as an example to others, let the Jewish schools (the synagogues) of Velizh be sealed up until farther orders, and let services be forbidden, whether in them or near them. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p, 320, n. 2. ]

The imperial resolution was couched in the fierce language of the newreign which had begun in the meantime. It rose in the bloody mist of theVelizh affair. The fatal consequences of this synchronism were notlimited to the Jews of Velizh. Judging by the contents and the harshwording of the resolution, Nicholas I. Was convinced at that time of thetruth of the ritual murder libel. The mysterious and unloved tribe rosebefore the vision of the new Tzar as a band of cannibals and evil-doers. This sinister notion can be traced in the conscription statute which wasthen in the course of preparation in St. Petersburg and was soonafterwards to stir Russian Jewry to its depths, dooming their littleones to martyrdom. 

While punishment was to be meted out to the entire Jewish population ofRussia, the fate of the Velizh community was particularly tragic. It wassubjected to the terrors of a unique state of siege. The whole communitywas placed under suspicion. All the synagogues were shut up as if theywere dens of thieves, and the hapless Jews could not even assemble inprayer to pour out their hearts before God. All business was at astandstill; the shops were closed, and gloomy faces flitted shyly acrossthe streets of the doomed city. 

The stern command from St. Petersburg ordering that the case be"positively probed to the bottom" and that the culprits be apprehendedgladdened only the heart of Strakhov, the chairman of the Commission ofInquiry, who was now free to do as he pleased. He spread out the net ofinquiry in ever wider circles. Terentyeva and the other femalewitnesses, who were fed well while in prison, and expected not onlyamnesty but also remuneration for their services, gave more and morevent to their imagination. They "recollected" and revealed before theCommission of Inquiry a score of religious crimes which they alleged hadbeen perpetrated by the Jews prior to the Velizh affair, such as themurder of children in suburban inns, the desecration of church utensilsand similar misdeeds. 

The Commission was not slow in communicating the new revelations to theTzar who followed vigilantly the developments in the case. But theCommission had evidently overreached itself. The Tzar began to suspectthat there was something wrong in this endlessly growing tangle ofcrimes. In October, 1827, he attached to the report of the Commissionthe following resolution: "It is absolutely necessary to find out whothose unfortunate children were; this ought to be easy if the wholething is not a miserable lie. " His belief in the guilt of the Jews hadevidently been shaken. 

In its endeavors to make up for the lack of substantial evidence, thecommission, personified by Khovanski, put itself in communication withthe governors of the Pale, directing them to obtain informationconcerning all local ritual murder cases in past years. The effect ofthese inquiries was to revive the Grodno affair of 1818 which had been"left to oblivion. " A certain convert by the name of Gradlnski from thetownlet of Bobovnya, in the government of Minsk, declared before theCommission of Inquiry that he was ready to point out the description ofthe ritual murder ceremony in a "secret" Hebrew work. When the book wasproduced and the incriminated passage translated, it was found that itreferred to the Jewish rite of slaughtering animals. The apostate, thuscaught red-handed, confessed that he had turned informer in the hope ofmaking money, and was by imperial command sent into the army. Theconfidence of St. Petersburg in the activity of the Velizh Commission ofInquiry vanished more and more. Khovanski was notified that "his Majestythe Emperor, having observed that the Commission bases its deductionsmostly on surmises, by attaching significance to the fits and gesturesof the incriminated during the examinations, is full of apprehensionlest the Commission, carried away by zeal and anti-Jewish prejudice, actwith a certain amount of bias and protract the case to no purpose. "

Soon afterwards, in 1830, the case was taken out of the hands of theCommission which had become entangled in a mesh of lies--Strakhov haddied in the meantime--, and was turned over to the Senate. 

Weighed down by the nightmare proportions of the material, which theVelizh Commission had managed to pile up, the members of the FifthDepartment of the Senate which was charged with the case were inclinedto announce a verdict of guilty and to sentence the convicted Jews todeportation to Siberia, with the application of the knout and whip(1831). In the higher court, the plenary session of the Senate, therewas a disagreement, the majority voting guilty, while three senators, referring to the ukase of 1817, were in favor of setting the prisonersat liberty, but keeping them at the same time under police surveillance. 

In 1834 the case reached the highest court of the Empire, the Council ofState, and here for the first time the real facts came to light. Truthfound its champion in the person of the aged statesman, Mordvinov, whoowned some estates near Velizh, and, being well-acquainted with the Jewsof the town, was roused to indignation by the false charges concoctedagainst them. In his capacity as president of the Department of Civiland Ecclesiastical Affairs of the Council of State, Mordvinov, aftersifting the evidence carefully, succeeded in a number of sessions todemolish completely the Babel tower of lies erected by Strakhov andKhovanski and to adduce proofs that the governor-general, blinded byanti-Jewish prejudice, had misled the Government by his communications. The Department of Civil and Ecclesiastical Affairs was convinced by thearguments of Mordvinov and other champions of the truth, and handed downa decision that the accused Jews be set at liberty and rewarded fortheir innocent sufferings, and that the Christian women informers hedeported to Siberia. 

The plenary meeting of the Council of State concurred in the decision ofthe Department, rejecting only the clause providing for the reward ofthe sufferers. The verdict of the Council of State was submitted to theTzar and received his endorsement on January 18, 1835. It read asfollows:

 The Council of State, having carefully considered all the circumstances of this complex and involved case, finds that the depositions of the material female witnesses, Terentyeva, Maximova, and Koslovska, containing as they do numerous contradictions and absurdities and lacking all positive evidence and indubitable conclusions, cannot be admitted as legal proof to convict the Jews of the grave crimes imputed to them, and, therefore, renders the following decision:

 1. The Jews accused of having killed the soldier boy Yemelyanov and of other similar deeds, which are implied in the Velizh trial, no indictment whatsoever having been found against them, shall be freed from further judgment and inquiry. 

 2. The material witnesses, the peasant woman Terentyeva, the soldier woman Maximova, and the Shiakhta woman[1] Kozlovsta, having been convicted of uttering libels, which they have not in the least been able to corroborate, shall be exiled to Siberia for permanent residence. 

 3. The peasant maid Yeremyeyeva, having posed among the common people as a soothsayer, shall be turned over to a priest for admonition. 

[Footnote 1: i. E. , a member of the Polish nobility; comp. Vol. I, p. 58, n. 1. ]

After attaching his signature to this verdict. Nicholas I. Added in hisown handwriting the following characteristic resolution, which was notto be made public:

 While sharing the view of the Council of State that in this case, owing to the vagueness of the legal deductions, no other decision than the one embodied in the opinion confirmed by me could have been reached, I deem it, however, necessary to add that I do not have, and, indeed, cannot have, the inner conviction that the murder has not been committed by the Jews. Numerous examples of similar murders. . . . Go to show that among the Jews there probably exist fanatics or sectarians who consider Christian blood necessary for their rites. This appears the more possible, since unfortunately even among us Christians there sometimes exist such sects which are no less horrible and incomprehensible. In a word, I do not for a moment think that this custom is common to all Jews, but I do not deny the possibility that there may be among them fanatics just as horrible as among us Christians. 

Having taken this idea into his head, Nicholas I. Refused to sign thesecond decision of the Council of State, which was closely allied withthe verdict: that all governors be instructed to be guided in the futureby the ukase of 1817, forbidding to stir up ritual murder cases "fromprejudice only. " While rejecting this prejudice in its full-fledgedshape, the Tzar acknowledged it in part, in a somewhat attenuated form. 

Towards the end of January of 1835 an imperial ukase reached the city ofVelizh, ordering the liberation of the exculpated Jews, the reopening ofthe synagogues, which had been sealed since 1826, and the handing backto the Jews of the holy scrolls which had been confiscated by thepolice. The dungeon was now ready to give up its inmates, whose strengthhad been sapped by the long confinement, while several of them had diedduring the imprisonment. The synagogues, which had not been allowed toresound with the moans of the martyrs, were now opened for the prayersof the liberated. The state of siege which for nine long years had beenthrottling the city was at last taken off; the terror which had hauntedthe ostracized community came to an end. A new leaf was added to theannals of Jewish martyrdom, one of the gloomiest, in spite of its"happy" finale. 

7. THE MSTISLAVL AFFAIR

The ritual murder trials did not exhaust the "extraordinary" afflictionsof Nicholas' reign. There were cases of wholesale chastisementsinflicted on more tangible grounds, when misdeeds of a few individualswere puffed up into communal crimes and visited cruelly upon entirecommunities. The conscription horrors of that period, when the Kahalswere degraded to police agencies for "capturing" recruits, had bred the"informing" disease among the Jewish communities. They produced the typeof professional informer, or _moser_[1], who blackmailed the Kahalauthorities of his town by threatening to disclose their "abuses, " theabsconding of candidates for the army and various irregularities incarrying out the conscription, and in this way extorted "silence money"from them. These scoundrels made life intolerable, and there wereoccasions when the people took the law into their own hands and secretlydispatched the most objectionable among them. 

[Footnote 1: The Hebrew and Yiddish equivalent for "informer. "]

A case of this kind came to light in the government of Podolia in 1836. In the town Novaya Ushitza two _mosers_, named Oxman and Schwartz, whohad terrorized the Jews of the whole province, were found dead. Rumorhad it that the one was killed in the synagogue and the other on theroad to the town. The Russian authorities regarded the crime as thecollective work of the local Jewish community, or rather of severalneighboring Jewish communities, "which had perpetrated this wicked deedby the verdict of their own tribunal. "

About eighty Kahal elders and other prominent Jews of Ushitza andadjacent towns, including two rabbis, were put on trial. The case wassubmitted to a court-martial which resolved "to subject the guilty to anexemplary punishment. " Twenty Jews were sentenced to hard labor and topenal military service, with a preliminary "punishment by _Spiessruten_through five hundred men. " [1] A like number were sentenced to bedeported to Siberia; the rest were either acquitted or had fled fromjustice. Many of those who ran the gauntlet died under the strokes, andare remembered by the Jewish people in Russia as martyrs. 

[Footnote 1: Both the word and the penalty were introduced by Peter theGreat from Germany. The culprit was made to run between two lines ofsoldiers who whipped his bare shoulders with rods. The penalty wasabolished in 1863. ]

The scourge of informers was also responsible for the Mstislavl affair. In 1844, a Jewish crowd in the market-place of Mstislavl, a town in thegovernment of Moghilev, came into conflict with a detachment of soldierswho were searching for contraband goods in a Jewish warehouse. Theresults of the fray were a few bruised Jews and several broken rifles. The local police and military authorities seized this opportunity toingratiate themselves with their superiors, and reported to the governorof Moghilev and the commander of the garrison that the Jews hadorganized a "mutiny. " The local informer, Arye Briskin, a converted Jew, found this incident an equally convenient occasion to wreak vengeance onhis former coreligionists for the contempt in which he was held by them, and allowed himself to be taken into tow by the official Jew-baiters. 

In January, 1844, alarming communications concerning a "Jewish mutiny"reached St. Petersburg. The matter was reported to the Tzar, and a swiftand curt resolution followed: "To court-martial the principal culpritsimplicated in this incident, and, in the meantime, as a punishment forthe turbulent demeanor of the Jews of that city, to take from them onerecruit for every ten men. " Once more the principles of that period wereapplied: one for all; first punishment, then trial. 

The ukase arrived in Mstislavl on the eve of Purim, and threw the Jewsinto consternation. During the Fast of Esther the synagogues resoundedwith wailing. The city was in a state of terror: the most prominentleaders of the community were thrown into jail, and had to submit todisfigurement by having half of their heads and beards shaved off. Thepenal recruits were hunted down, without any regard to age, since, according to the Tzar's resolution, a tenth of the population had to beimpressed into military service. Pending the termination of the trial, no Jew was allowed to leave the city, while natives from Mstislavl inother places were captured and conveyed to their native town. A largeJewish community was threatened with complete annihilation. 

The Jews of Mstislavl, through their spokesmen, petitioned St. Petersburg to wait with the penal conscription until the conclusion ofthe trial, and endeavored to convince the central Government that thelocal administration had misrepresented the character of the incident. To save his brethren, the popular champion of the interests of hispeople, the merchant Isaac Zelikin, of Monastyrchina, [1] calledaffectionately Rabbi Itzele, journeyed to the capital. He managed to getthe ear of the Chief of the "Third Section" [2] and to acquaint him withthe horrors which were being perpetrated by the authorities inMstislavl. 

[Footnote 1: A townlet in the neighborhood of Mstislavl. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 21, n. 1. ]

As a result, two commissioners were dispatched from St. Petersburg inquick succession. On investigating the matter on the spot, theydiscovered the machinations of the over-zealous officials andapostasized informers who had represented a street quarrel as anorganized uprising. The new commission of inquiry, of which one of theSt. Petersburg commissioners, Count Trubetzkoy, was member, disclosedthe fact that the Jewish community as such had had nothing whatsoever todo with what had occurred. The findings of the commission resulted in an"Imperial Act of Grace": the imprisoned Jews were set at liberty, thepenal conscripts were returned from service, several local officialswere put on trial, and the governor of Moghilev was severely censured. 

This took place in November, 1844, after the Mstislavl community had fornine long months tasted the horrors of a state of siege. The synagogueswere filled with Jews praising God for the relief granted to them. Thecommunity decreed to commemorate annually the day before Purim, on whichthe ukase inflicting severe punishment on the Jews of Mstislavl waspromulgated, as a day of fasting and to celebrate the third day of themonth of Kislev, on which the cruel ukase was revoked, as a day ofrejoicing. Had all the disasters of that era been perpetuated in thesame manner, the Jewish calendar would consist entirely of thesecommemorations of national misfortunes, whether in the form of"ordinary" persecutions or "extraordinary" afflictions. 

CHAPTER XV

THE JEWS IN THE KINGDOM OF POLAND

1. PLANS OF JEWISH EMANCIPATION

Special mention must be made of the position occupied by the Jews in thevast province which had be n formed in 1815 out of the territory of theformer duchy of Warsaw and annexed by Russia under the name of "Kingdomof Poland. " [1] This province which from 1815 to 1830 enjoyed fullautonomy, with a local government in Warsaw and a parliamentaryconstitution, handled the affairs of its large Jewish population, numbering between three hundred to four hundred thousand souls, independently and without regard to the legislation of the RussianEmpire, Even after the insurrection of 1830, when subdued Poland waslinked more closely with the Empire, the Jews continued to be subject toa separate provincial legislation. The Jews of the Kingdom remainedunder the tutelage of local guardians who were assiduously engaged insolving the Jewish problem during the first part of this period. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 390, n. 1. ]

The initial years of autonomous Poland were a time of storm and stress. After having experienced the vicissitudes of the period of partitionsand the hopes and disappointments of the Napoleonic era, the Polishpeople clutched eagerly at the shreds of political freedom which wereleft to it by Alexander I. In the shape of the "ConstitutionalRegulation" of 1815. [1] The Poles brought to bear upon the upbuilding ofthe new kingdom all the ardor of their national soul and all theirenthusiasm for political regeneration. The feverish organizing activitybetween 1815 and 1820 was attended by a violent outburst of nationalsentiment, and such moments of enthusiasm were always accompanied inPoland by an intolerant and unfriendly attitude towards the Jews. With afew shining exceptions, the Polish statesmen were far removed from theidea of Jewish emancipation. They favored either "correctional" orpunitive methods, though modelled after the pattern of Western Europeanrather than of primitive Russian anti-Semitism. 

[Footnote 1: The author refers to the Constitution granted by AlexanderI. , on November 15, 1815, to the Polish territories ceded to him by theCongress of Vienna. The Constitution vouchsafed to Poland an autonomousdevelopment under Russian auspices. It was withdrawn after theinsurrection of 1830. ]

In 1815 the Provisional Government in Warsaw appointed a specialcommittee, under the chairmanship of Count Adam Chartoryski, to considerthe agrarian and the Jewish problem. The Committee drew up a generalplan of Jewish reorganization which was marked by the spirit ofenlightened patronage. In theory the Committee was ready to concede tothe Jews human and civil rights, even to the point of considering thenecessity of their final emancipation. But "in view of the ignorance, the prejudices and the moral corruption to be observed among the lowerclasses of the Jewish and the Polish people"--the patrician members ofthe Committee in charge of the agrarian and Jewish problem accorded anequal share of compliments to the Jews and the Polish peasants--immediateemancipation was, in their opinion, bound to prove harmful, since itwould confer upon the Jews freedom of action to the detriment of thecountry. It was, therefore, necessary to demand, as a prerequisite forJewish emancipation, the improvement of the Jewish masses which wasto be effected by removal from the injurious liquor trade and inducementto engage in agriculture, by abolishing the Kahals, i. E. , their communalautonomy, and by changing the Jewish school system to meet the civicrequirements. In order to gain the confidence of the Jews for theproposed reforms, the Committee suggested that the Government shouldinvite the "enlightened" representatives of the Jewish people toparticipate in the discussion of the projected measures of reform. 

Turning their eyes towards the West, where Jewish assimilation hadalready begun its course, the Polish Committee decided to approach theJewish reformer David Frieländer, of Berlin, who was, so to speak, theofficial philosopher of Jewish emancipation, and to solicit his opinionconcerning the ways and means of bringing about a reorganization ofJewish life in Poland. The bishop of Kuyavia, [1] Malchevski, addressedhimself in the name of the Polish Government to Friedländer, callingupon him, as a pupil of Mendelssohn, the educator of Jewry, to state hisviews on the proposed Jewish reforms in Poland. Flattered by thisinvitation, Friedländer hastened to compose an elaborate "Opinion on theImprovement of the Jews in the Kingdom of Poland. " [2]

[Footnote 1: A former Polish province, compare Vol. I, p. 75, n. 2. ]

[Footnote 2: It was written in February, 1816, and published later in1819. ]

According to Friedländer, the Polish Jews had in point of cultureremained far behind their Western coreligionists, because their progresshad been hampered by their talmudic training, the pernicious doctrine ofHasidism, and the self-government of their Kahals. All these influencesought, therefore, to be combated. The Jewish school should be broughtinto closer contact with the Polish school, the Hebrew language shouldbe replaced by the language of the country, and altogether assimilationand religious reform should be encouraged. While promoting religious andcultural reforms, the Government, in the opinion of Friedländer, oughtto confirm the Jews in the belief that they would "receive in time civilrights if they were to endeavor to perfect themselves in the spirit ofthe regulations issued for them. "

 This flunkeyish notion of the necessity of _deserving_ civil rights coincided with the views of the official Polish Committee in Warsaw. Soon afterwards a memorandum, prepared by the Committee, was submitted through its Chairman, Count Chartoryski, to the Polish viceroy Zayonchek. [1] Formerly a comrade of Koszciuszko, Zayonchek later turned from a revolutionary into a reactionary, who was anxious to curry favor with the supreme commander of the province, Grand Duke Constantine Pavlovich. [2] No wonder, therefore, that the plan of the Committee, conservative though it was, seemed too liberal for his liking. In his report to Emperor Alexander I. , dated March 8, 1816, he wrote as follows:

[Footnote 1: He was appointed viceroy in 1815, after the formation ofthe Kingdom of Poland, and continued in this office until his death in1826. ]

[Footnote 2: He was the military commander of the province. See above, p. 13, n. 2. ]

 The growth of the Jewish population in your Kingdom of Poland is becoming a menace. In 1790 they formed here a thirteenth part of the whole population; to-day they form no less than an eighth. Sober and resourceful, they are satisfied with little; they earn their livelihood by cheating, and, owing to early marriages, multiply beyond measure. Shunning hard labor, they produce nothing themselves, and live only at the expense of the working classes which they help to ruin. Their peculiar institutions keep them apart within the state, marking them as a foreign nationality, and, as a result, they are unable in their present condition to furnish the state either with good citizens or with capable soldiers. Unless means are adopted to utilize for the common weal the useful qualities of the Jews, they will soon exhaust all the sources of the national wealth and will threaten to surpass and suppress the Christian population. 

In the same year, 1816, a scheme looking to the solution of the Jewishquestion was proposed by the Russian statesman Nicholas Novosiltzev, theimperial commissioner attached to the Provincial Government inWarsaw. [1] Novosiltzev, who was not sympathetic to the Poles, showedhimself in his project to be a friend of the Jews. Instead of theprinciple laid down by the official Committee: "correction first, andcivil rights last, " he suggests another more liberal procedure: theimmediate bestowal of civil and in part even political rights upon theJews, to be accompanied by a reorganization, of Jewish life along thelines of European progress and a modernized scheme of autonomy. Allcommunal and cultural affairs shall be put in charge of "directorates, "one central directorate in Warsaw and local ones in every province ofthe Kingdom, after the pattern of the Jewish consistories of France. These directorates shall be composed of rabbis, elders of the community, and a commissioner representing the Government; in the centraldirectorate this commissioner shall be replaced by a "procurator" to beappointed directly by the king. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 16. ]

This whole organization shall be placed under the jurisdiction of theMinister of Public Instruction, who shall also exercise the right ofconfirming the rabbis nominated by the directorates. The functions ofthe directorates shall include the registration of the Jewishpopulation, the management of the communal finances, the dispensation ofcharity, and the opening of secular schools for Jewish children. Acertificate of graduation from such a school shall be required fromevery young man who applies for a marriage license or for a permit toengage in a craft or to acquire property. "All Jews fulfilling theobligations imposed by the present statute shall be accorded fullcitizenship, " while those who distinguish themselves in science an artmay even be deemed worthy of political rights, not excluding membershipin the Polish Diet. For the immediate future Novosiltzev advises torefrain from economic restrictions, such as the prohibition of theliquor traffic, though he concedes the advisability of checking itsgrowth, and advocates the adoption of a system of economic reforms bystimulating crafts and agriculture among the Jews. In the beginning of1817 Novosiltzev's project was laid before the Polish Council of State. It was opposed with great stubbornness by Chartoryski, the Polishviceroy Zayonchek, Stashitz, and other Polish dignitaries, whosehostility was directed not so much against the pro-Jewish plan asagainst its Russian author. The Council of State appointed a specialcommittee which, after examining Novosiltzev's project, arrived at thefollowing conclusions:

 1. It is impossible to carry out a reorganization of Jewish life through the Jews themselves. 

 2. The establishment of a separate cultural organization for the Jews will only stimulate their national aloofness. 

 3. The complete civil and political emancipation of the Jews is at variance with the Polish Constitution which vouchsafes special privileges to the professors of the dominant religion. 

In the plenary session of the Polish Council of State the debate aboutNovosiltzev's project was exceedingly stormy. The Polish members of theCouncil scented in the project "political aims in opposition to thenational element of the country. " They emphasized the danger which theimmediate emancipation of the Jews would entail for Poland. "Let theJews first become real Poles, " exclaimed the referee Kozhmyan, "thenwill it be possible to look upon them as citizens. " When the samegentleman declared that it was impossible to accord citizenship tohordes of people who first had to be accustomed to cleanliness and curedfrom "leprosy and similar diseases, " Zayonchek burst out laughing andshouted: "Hear, hear! These sluts won't get rid of their scab soeasily. " After such elevating "criticism, " Novosiltzev's project wasvoted down. The Council inclined to the belief that "the psychologicalmoment" for bringing about a radical reorganization of the inner life ofthe Jews had not yet arrived, and, therefore, resolved to limit itselfto isolated measures, principally of a "correctional" and repressivecharacter. 

2. POLITICAL REACTION AND LITERARY ANTI-SEMITISM

Such "measures" were not long in coming. The only restriction theGovernment of Warsaw failed to carry through was the enforcement of thelaw of 1812 forbidding the Jews to deal in liquor. This drastic measurewas vetoed by Alexander I. , owing to the representations of the Jewishdeputies in St. Petersburg, and in 1816 the Polish viceroy was compelledto announce the suspension of this cruel law which had hung like thesword of Damocles over the heads of hundreds of thousands of Jews. 

On the other hand, the Polish Government managed in the course of a fewyears (1816-1823) to put into operation a number of other restrictivelaws. Several cities which boasted of the ancient right _de nontolerandis Judaeis_[1] secured the confirmation of this shamefulprivilege, with the result that the Jews who had settled there duringthe existence of the duchy of Warsaw were either expelled or confined toseparate districts. In Warsaw a number of streets were closed to Jewishresidents, and all Jewish visitors to the capital were forced to pay aheavy tax for their right of sojourn, the so-called "ticket impost, "amounting to fifteen kopecks (7½c) a day. Finally the Jews wereforbidden to settle within twenty-one versts of the Austrian andPrussian frontiers. [2]

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, pp. 85 and 95. ]

[Footnote 2: The law in question was passed by the Polish Government onJanuary 31, 1823, barring the Jews from nearly one hundred towns. It wasrepealed by Alexander II. In 1862. See below, p. 181. ]

At the same time, the Polish legislators were fair-minded enough torefrain from forcing the Jews, these disfranchised pariahs, intomilitary service. In 1817 an announcement was made to the effect that, so long as the Jews were barred from the enjoyment of civil rights, theywould be released from personal military service in Poland, in lieuwhereof they were to pay a fixed conscription tax. About the same time, during the third decade of the nineteenth century, was also realized theold-time policy of curtailing the Jewish Kahal autonomy, though, as willbe seen later, this "reform" did not proceed from the Governmentspheres, but was rather the product of contemporary social movementsamong the Poles and the Jews. 

The political literature of Poland manifested at that time a tendencysimilar to the one which had prevailed during the Quadrennial Diet. [1]Scores of pamphlets and magazine articles discussed with polemical ardorthe Jewish problem, the burning question of the day. The old Jew-baiterStashitz, a member of the Warsaw Government who served on the Commissionof Public Instruction and Religious Denominations, resumed his attackson Judaism. In 1816 he published an article under the title "Concerningthe Causes of the Obnoxiousness of the Jews, " in which he asserted thatthe Jews were responsible for Poland's decline. They multiplied withincredible rapidity, forming now no less than an eighth of thepopulation. Should this process continue, the Kingdom of Poland would beturned into a "Jewish country" and become "the laughing-stock of thewhole of Europe. " The Jewish religion is antagonistic to Catholicism: wecall them "Old Testament believers, " [2] while they brand us as"pagans. " It being impossible to expel the Jews from Poland, they oughtto be isolated like carriers of disease. They should be concentrated inseparate quarters in the cities to facilitate the supervision over them. Only well-deserving merchants and craftsmen, who have plied their tradehonestly for five or ten years, should be allowed to reside outside theghetto. The same category of Jews, in addition to those married toChristian women, should also be granted the right of acquiring landedproperty. The ghetto on the one end of the line, and baptism on theother--this medieval policy did not in the least abash the patrioticreformers of the type of Stashitz. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 279 et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: Referring to the term _Starozakonni_, the Polishdesignation for Jews. ]

Stashitz's point of view was supported by certain publicists and opposedby others, but all were agreed on the necessity of a system ofcorrection for the Jews. The discussion became particularly heated in1818, after the convocation and during the sessions of the first [1]Polish Diet in Warsaw. Three different tendencies asserted themselves: amoderate, an anti-Jewish, and a pro-Jewish tendency. The first wasrepresented by General Vincent Krasinski, a member of the Diet. In his"Observations on the Jews of Poland, " he proceeds from the followingtwofold premise: "The voice of the whole nation is raised against theJews, and it demands their transformation. " This titled publicistdeclares himself an opponent of the Jews as they are at present. Heshares the popular dread of their multiplication, the fear of a "JewishPoland, " and is somewhat sceptical about their being corrigible. Nevertheless he proposes liberal methods of correction, such as theencouragement of big Jewish capital, the promotion of agriculture andhandicrafts among the Jewish masses, and the bestowal of the rights ofcitizenship upon those worthy of it. 

[Footnote 1: i. E. , the first to be convoked after the reconstitution ofPoland in 1815. ]

Krasinski was attacked by an anonymous writer in an anti-Semiticpamphlet entitled "A Remedy against the Jews. " Proceeding from theconviction that no reforms, however well conceived, could have anyeffect on the Jews, the writer puts the question in a simplified form:"Shall we sacrifice the welfare of three million Poles to that of300, 000 Jews, or _vice versa?_" His answer is just as simple: the Jewsshould be forced to leave Poland. Emperor Alexander I. , "the benefactorof Poland, " ought to be petitioned to rid the country of the Jews bytransferring them to the uninhabited steppes in the South of Russia oreven "on the borders of Great Tartary. " The 300, 000 Jews might bedivided into 300 parties and settled there in the course of one year. The means for expelling and settling the Jews should be furnished by theJews themselves. 

This barbarous project aroused the ire of a noble-minded Polish armyofficer, Valerian Lukasinski, a radical in politics, who subsequentlylanded in the dungeon of the Schlueselburg fortress. [1] In his"Reflections of an Army Officer Concerning the Need of Organizing theJews, " published in 1818, Lukasinski advances the thought that theoppression and disfranchisement of the Jews are alone responsible fortheir demoralized condition. They were useful citizens in the golden ageof Casimir the Great and Sigismund the Old [2] when they were treatedwith kindness. The author lashes the hypocrisy of the Shlakhta who holdthe Jews to account for ruining the peasants by selling them alcohol inthose very taverns which are leased to them by the noble pans. Lukasinski contends that the Jews will become good citizens once theywill be allowed to participate in the civil life of Poland, when thatlife will be founded on democratic principles. 

[Footnote 1: In the government of St. Petersburg. ]

[Footnote 2: i. E. , Sigismund I. (1506-1548). See on his attitude towardsthe Jews Vol. I, p. 71 et seq. ]

The choir of Polish voices was but faintly disturbed by the opinionsexpressed by the Jews. An otherwise unknown rabbi, who calls himselfMoses ben Abraham, echoes in his pamphlet "The Voice of the People ofIsrael" the sentiments of Jewish orthodoxy. He begs the Poles not tomeddle in the inner affairs of Judaism: "You refuse to recognize us asbrothers; then at least respect us as fathers! Look at your genealogicaltree with the branches of the New Testament, a d you will find the rootsin us. " Polish culture cannot be foisted upon the Jews. Barbarous as mayappear the plan of expelling the Jews from Poland, the persecuted tribewill rather submit to this alternative than renounce its faith and itsancestral customs. 

The views of the progressive Jews of Poland were voiced by a youngpedagogue in Warsaw, subsequently the well-known champion ofassimilation, Jacob Tugenhold. In a treatise entitled "Jerubbaal, or aWord Concerning the Jews, " Tugenhold contends that the Jews have alreadybegun to assimilate themselves to Polish culture. It was now within thepower of the Government to strengthen this movement by admitting"distinguished Jews to civil service. "

While this literary feud concerning the problem of Judaism was raging, an unhealthy movement against the Jews started among the dregs of thePolish population. In several localities of the Kingdom there suddenlyappeared "victims of ritual murder" in the shape of dead bodies ofchildren, the discovery of which was followed by a series of legaltrials against the Jews (1815-1816). Innocent people were thrown intoprison, where they languished for years, and were subjected tocross-examinations, though without the inquisitorial apparatus ofancient Poland. It is impossible to say whither this orgy ofsuperstition might have led, had it not been stopped by a word ofcommand from St. Petersburg. In 1817, as a result of the energeticrepresentations of "the Deputies of the Jewish People, " [1] Sonnenbergand his fellow-workers, the Minister of Ecclesiastical Affairs, Golitzin, gave orders that the ukase which had just been issued by him, forbidding the arbitrary injection of a ritual element into criminalcases, be strictly enforced in the Kingdom of Poland. This action savedthe lives of scores of prisoners, and put a stop to the obscureagitation which endeavored to revive the medieval spectre. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 394, and above, p. 74. ]

The Polish Diet of 1818 reflected the same state of mind which hadpreviously found expression in political literature: an unmistakablepreponderance of the anti-Jewish element. Some of the deputies appealedto Alexander I. In their speeches and openly called upon him to giveorders to lay before the next session of the Diet "a project of Jewishreform, with a view to saving Poland from the excessive growth of theHebrew tribe, which now forms a seventh of all the inhabitants, and in afew years will surpass in numbers the Christian population of thecountry. " For the immediate future the deputies recommend theenforcement of the suspended law barring the Jews from the liquortraffic [1] and their subjection to military conscription. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 304, and above, p. 94. ]

One might have thought that the Diet had no need of extra measures to"curb" the Jews. It was quite enough that it tacitly sanctioned theprolongation of the ten years term of Jewish rightlessness which hadbeen fixed by the Government of the Varsovian duchy in 1808. [1] Thisterm ended in 1818, while the first Diet of the Kingdom of Poland washolding its sessions, but neither the Polish Diet nor the Polish Councilof State gave any serious thought to the question whether the Governmentof the province had a right to prolong the disfranchisement of the Jews. This right was taken for granted by the Polish legislators who wereplanning even harsher restrictions for the unloved tribe of Hebrews. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 299. ]

3. ASSIMILATIONIST TENDENCIES AMONG THE JEWS OFPOLAND

In the beginning of the third decade of the nineteenth century the noisecaused by the Jewish question had begun to subside both in Polishpolitical circles and in Polish literature. Instead, the agitationwithin the Jewish ranks became more vigorous. That group of Jews alreadyassimilated or thirsting for assimilation, which on an earlier occasion, during the existence of the Varsovian duchy, had segregated itself fromthe rest of Jewry, assuming the label of "Old Testament believers, " [1]occupied a very influential position within the Jewish community of thePolish capital. It was made up of wealthy bankers and merchants andboasted of a few men with a European education. The members of thisgroup were hankering after German models and were anxious to renouncethe national separatism of the Jews which was a standing rebuke in themouths of their enemies. To these "Old Testament believers" theabolition of the Kahal and the limitation of communal self-government tothe narrow range of synagogue interests appeared the surest remedyagainst anti-Semitism. Behind the abrogation of communal autonomy theysaw the smiling vision of a Jewish school-reform, leading to thePolonization of Jewish education, while in the far-off distance theycould discern the promised land of equal citizenship. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 96, n. 1. ]

The efforts of the Jewish reformers of Warsaw were now systematicallydirected towards this goal. In 1820 there appeared an anonymous pamphletunder the title "The Petition, or Self-defence, of the Members of theOld Testament Persuasion in the Kingdom of Poland. " The main purpose ofthis publication is to show that the root of the evil lies in the Kahalorganization, in the elders, rabbis, and burial societies, who expendenormous sums of taxation money without any control--i. E. , without thecontrol of the Polish municipality--who oppress the people by their_herems_ (excommunications), and altogether abuse their power. It is, therefore, necessary to abolish this power of the Kahals and transfer itto the Polish municipalities, or even, police authorities; only thenwill order be established in the Jewish communities, and the Jews willbe transformed into "useful citizens. "

The Government spheres of Poland were greatly pleased by theseutterances of the "Old Testament believers" of Warsaw. They had longcontemplated the curtailment of the autonomy of the Kahals, and now "thevery Jews" clamored for it. In consequence, there appeared in 1821 aseries of edicts by the viceroy and various rescripts by the Commissionof Public Instruction and Religious Denominations, resulting in thedemolition of the ancient communal scheme, in which certain forms ofself-government, but by no means its underlying fundamental principles, had become obsolete. 

These measures were sanctioned by an imperial ukase dated December 20, 1821, [1] decreeing the abolition of the Kahals and their substitution by"Congregational Boards, " whose scope of activity was strictly limited toreligious matters, while all civil and fiscal affairs were placed underthe jurisdiction of the local Polish administration. The CongregationalBoards were to consist of the rabbi, his assistant or substitute, andthree trustees or supervisors. 

[Footnote 1: Corresponding to January 1, 1822, of the West-Europeancalendar. ]

At first, the majority of Jewish communities in Poland were indignant atthis curtailment of their autonomy, and adopted a hostile attitudetowards the new communal organization. The "supervisors" elected on theCongregational Boards often refused to serve, and the authorities werecompelled to appoint them. But in the course of time the communitiesbecame reconciled to the new scheme of congregations, or _Gminas, _[1]whose range of activity was gradually widened. In 1830 the suffrage ofthe Polish Jews within the Jewish communities was restricted by a newlaw to persons possessed of a certain amount of property. The result wasparticularly noticeable in Warsaw where the new state of things helpedto strengthen the influence of the group of the "Old Testamentbelievers" and enabled them to gain control of the affairs of themetropolitan community. The leaders of Warsaw Jewry managed soon toestablish intimate relations with the Polish Government, and co-operatedwith it in bringing about the "cultural reforms" of the Jews of Poland. 

[Footnote 1: _Gmina_ is the Polish word for community, derived from theGerman _Gemeinde_. ]

In 1825 the Polish Government appointed a special body to deal withJewish affairs. It was called "Committee of Old Testament Believers, "though composed in the main of Polish officials. It was supplemented byan advisory council consisting of five public-spirited Jews and theiralternates. Among the members of the Committee, which included severalprominent Jewish merchants of Warsaw, such as Jacob Bergson, M. Kavski, Solomon Posner, T. Teplitz, was also the well-known mathematicianAbraham Stern, one of the few cultured Jews of that period who remaineda steadfast upholder of Jewish tradition. The "Committee of OldTestament Believers" embarked upon the huge task of civilizing the Jewsof Poland and purging the Jewish religion of its superstitiousexcrescences. 

The first step taken by the Committee was the establishment of aRabbinical Seminary in Warsaw for the training of modernized rabbis, teachers, and communal workers. The program of the school was arrangedwith a view to the Polonization of its pupils. The language ofinstruction was Polish, and the teachers of many secular subjects wereChristians. No wonder then that when the Seminary was opened in 1826, Stern refused to accept the post of director which had been offered tohim, and yielded his place to Anton Eisenbaum, a radical assimilator. The tendency of the school may be gauged from the fact that thedepartment of Hebrew and Bible was entrusted to Abraham Buchner, who hadgained notoriety by a German pamphlet entitled _Die Nicktigkeit desTalmuds_, "The Worthlessness of the Talmud. " [1]

[Footnote 1: He was also the author of a Jewish catechism in Hebrew, entitled _Yesode ha-Dat_, "The Fundamental Principles of the JewishReligion. "]

Characteristically enough, Buchner had been recommended by the ferociousJew-baitor Abbé Chiarini, a member of the "Committee of Old TestamentBelievers, " which, one might almost suspect, was charged with thesupervision of Jewish education for no other reason, than that to spitethe Jews. Chiarini was professor of Oriental Languages at the Universityof Warsaw. As such he considered himself an expert in Hebrew literature, and cherished the plan of translating the Talmud into French to unveilthe secrets of Judaism before the Christian world. In 1828 Chiarinisuggested to the "Committee of Old Testament Believers" to arrange acourse in Hebrew Archaeology at the Warsaw University for the purpose ofacquainting Christian students with rabbinic literature and thusequipping prospective Polish officials with a knowledge of thingsJewish. The plan having been approved by the Government, Chiarini beganto deliver a course of lectures on Judaism. The fruit of these lectureswas a French publication, issued in 1829 under the title _Theorie duJudaïsme_. It was an ignorant libel upon the Talmud and rabbinism, aworthy counterpart of Eisenmenger's "Judaism Exposed. " [1] Chiarini didnot even shrink from repeating the hideous lie about the use ofChristian blood by the Jews. He was taken to task by Jacob Tugenhold inWarsaw and by Jost and Zunz in Germany. Yet the evil seed had sunk intothe soil. Polish society, which had long harbored unfriendly sentimentsagainst the Jews, became more and more permeated with anti-Semitic bias, and this bias found tangible expression during the insurrection of1830-1831. 

[Footnote 1: The book of a famous anti-Semitic writer who lived inGermany in the seventeenth century. _Entdecktes Judentum_, the bookreferred to in the text, appeared in 1700. ]

4. THE JEWS AND THE POLISH INSURRECTION OF 1831

When, under the effect of the July revolution in Paris, the "Novemberinsurrection" of 1830 broke out in Warsaw, it put on its mettle thatsection of Polish Jewry who hoped to improve the Jewish lot by theirpatriotic ardor. In the month of December one of the "Old Testamentbelievers, " Stanislav Hernish, [1] addressed himself to the Polishdictator, Khlopitzki, in the name of a group of Jewish youths, assuringhim of their eagerness to form a special detachment of volunteers tohelp in the common task of liberating their fatherland. The dictatorreplied that, inasmuch as the Jews had no civil rights, they could notbe permitted to serve in the army. The Minister of War Moravskidelivered himself on this occasion of the following characteristicutterance: "We cannot allow that Jewish blood should mingle with thenoble blood of the Poles. What will Europe say when she learns that infighting for our liberty we have not been able to get along withoutJewish help?"

[Footnote 1: Polish patriot and publicist. He subsequently fled toFrance. See later, p. 109. ]

The insulting refusal did not cool the ardor of the Jewish patriots. Joseph Berkovich, the son of Berek Yoselovitch, who had laid down hislife for the Polish cause, decided to repeat his father's experiment [1]and issued a proclamation to the Jews, calling upon them to join theranks of the fighters for Polish independence. The "National Government"in Warsaw could not resist this patriotic pressure. It addressed itselfto the "Congregational Board" of Warsaw, inquiring about the attitude ofthe Jewish community towards the projected formation of a separateregiment of Jewish volunteers. The Board replied that the community hadalready given proofs of its patriotism by contributing 40, 000 Guldentowards the revolutionary funds, and by collecting further contributionstowards the equipment of volunteers. The formation of a _special_ Jewishregiment the Board did not consider advisable, inasmuch as such actionwas not in keeping with the task of uniting all citizens in the defenceof the fatherland. Instead, the Board favored the distribution of theJewish volunteers over the whole army. 

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 293 et seq. ]

From now on the Jews were admitted to military service, but more intothe militia than into the regular army. The commander of the NationalGuard in Warsaw, Anton Ostrovski, one of the few rebel leaders who werenot swayed by the anti-Semitic prejudices of the Polish nobility, admitted into his militia many Jewish volunteers on condition that theyshave off their beards. Owing to the religious scruples of many Jewishsoldiers, the latter condition had to be abandoned, and a special"bearded" detachment of the metropolitan guard was formed, comprising850 Jews. 

The Jewish militia acquitted itself nobly of its duty in the grave taskof protecting the city of Warsaw against the onrush of the Russiantroops. The sons of wealthy families fought shoulder to shoulder withchildren of the proletariat. The sight of these step-children of Polandfighting for their fatherland stirred the heart of Ostrovski, and hesubsequently wrote: "This spectacle could not fail to make your heartache. Our conscience bade us to attend to the betterment of this mostdown-trodden part of our population at the earliest possible moment. "

It is worthy of note that the wave of Polish-Jewish patriotism did notspread beyond Warsaw. In the provincial towns the inhabitants of theghetto were, as a rule, unwilling to serve in the army on the groundthat the Jewish religion forbade the shedding of human blood. Thisindifference aroused the ire of the Polish population, which threatenedto wreak vengeance upon the Jews, suspecting them of pro-Russiansympathies. Ostrovski's remark with reference to this situation deservesto be quoted: "True, " he said, "the Jews of the provinces may possiblybe guilty of indifference towards the revolutionary cause, but can weexpect any other attitude from those we oppress?" [1] It may be addedthat soon afterwards the question of military service as affecting theJews was solved by the Diet. By the law of May 30, 1831, the Jews werereleased from conscription on the payment of a tax which was four timesas large as the one paid by them in former years. 

[Footnote 1: In the Western provinces outside the Kingdom of Poland, inLithuania, Volhynia, and Podolia, the Jewish population held itselfaloof from the insurrectionary movement. Here and there the Jews evensympathized with the Russian Government, despite the fact that thelatter threw the Polish rulers into the shade by the extent of itsJewish persecutions. In some places the Polish insurgents made the Jewspay with their lives for their pro-Russian sympathies. ]

When the "aristocratic revolution, " having failed to obtain the supportof the disinherited masses, had met with disaster, the revolutionaryleaders, who saved themselves by fleeing abroad, indulged in remorsefulreflections. The Polish historian Lelevel, who lived in Paris as arefugee, issued in 1832 a "Manifesto to the Israelitish Nation, " callingupon the Jews to forget the insults inflicted upon them by present-dayPoland for the sake of the sweet reminiscences of the Polish Republic indays gone by and of the hopes inspired by a free Poland in days to come. He compares the flourishing condition of the Jews in the ancient Polishcommonwealth with their present status on the same territory, under theyoke of "the Viennese Pharaohs, " [1] or in the land "dominated by theNorthern Nebuchadnezzar, " [2] where the terror of conscription reignssupreme, where "little children, wrenched from the embraces of theirmothers, are hurled into the ranks of a debased soldiery, " "doomed tobecome traitors to their religion and nation. "

[Footnote 1: Referring to Galicia. ]

[Footnote 2: Nicholas I. ]

 The reign of nations--exclaims Lelevel--is drawing nigh. All peoples will be merged into one, acknowledging the one God Adonai. The rulers have fed the Jews on false promises; the nations will grant them liberty. Soon Poland will rise from the dust. Let then the Jews living on her soil go hand in hand with their brother-Poles. The Jews will then be sure to obtain their rights. Should they insist on returning to Palestine, the Poles will assist them in realizing this consummation. 

Similar utterances could be heard a little later in the mystic circle ofTovyanski and Mitzkevitch in Paris, [1] in which the historic destiny ofthe two martyr nations, the Poles and the Jews, and their universalMessianic calling were favorite topics of discussion. But alongside ofthese flights of "imprisoned thought" one could frequently catch in thevery same circle the sounds of the old anti-Semitic slogans. TheParisian organ of the Polish refugees, _Nowa Polska_, "New Poland, "occasionally indulged in anti-Semitic sallies, calling forth apassionate rebuttal from Hernish, [2] an exiled journalist, who remindedhis fellow-journalists that it was mean to hunt down people who were the"slaves of slaves. " Two other Polish-Jewish revolutionaries, Lublinerand Hollaenderski, shared all the miseries of the refugees and, while inexile, indulged in reflections concerning the destiny of their brethrenat home. [3]

[Footnote 1: Andreas Tovyanski (In Polish _Towianski_, 1799-1878), aChristian mystic, founded in Paris a separate community which fosteredthe belief in the restoration of the Polish and the Jewish people. Thecommunity counted among its members several Jews. The famous Polish poetAdam Mitzkevich (in Polish _Mickiewicz_, 1798-1855) joined Tovyanski inhis endeavors, and on one occasion even appeared in a Paris synagogue onthe Ninth of Ab to make an appeal to the Jews. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 105. ]

[Footnote 3: Lubliner published _Des Juifs en Pologne_, Brussels, 1839;Hollaenderski wrote _Les Israélites en Pologne_, Paris, 1846. ]

In pacified Poland, which, deprived of her former autonomousconstitution, was now ruled by the iron hand of the Russian viceroy, Paskevich, the Jews at first experienced no palpable changes. Theircivil status was regulated, as heretofore, by the former Polishlegislation, not by that of the Empire. It was only in 1843 that thePolish Jews were in one respect equalized with their Russian brethren. Instead of the old recruiting tax, they were now forced to dischargemilitary service in person. However, the imperial ukase extending theoperation of the Conscription Statute of 1827 to the Jews of the Kingdomcontained several alleviations. Above all, its most cruel provision, theconscription of juveniles or cantonists, was set aside. The age ofconscription was fixed at twenty to twenty-five, while boys between theage of twelve and eighteen were to be drafted only when the parentsthemselves wished to offer them as substitutes for their elder sons whowere of military age. Nevertheless, to the Polish Jews, who had neverknown of conscription, military service lasting a quarter of a century, to be discharged in a strange Russian environment, seemed a terriblesacrifice. The "Congregational Board" of Warsaw, having learned of theukase, sent a deputation to St. Petersburg with a petition to grant theJews of the Kingdom equal rights with the Christians, referring to thelaw of 1817 which distinctly stated that the Jews were to be releasedfrom personal military service so long as they were denied equal civilrights. The petition of course proved of no avail; the very term "equalrights" was still missing in the Russian vocabulary. 

Only in point of disabilities were the Jews of Poland gradually placedon an equal footing with their Russian brethren. In 1845 the Russian lawimposing a tax on the traditional Jewish attire [1] was extended in itsoperation to the Polish Jews, descending with the force of a realcalamity upon the hasidic masses of Poland. Fortunately for the Jews ofPoland, the other experiments, in which St. Petersburg was revellingduring that period, left them unscathed. The crises connected with theproblems of Jewish autonomy and the Jewish school, which threatened todisrupt Russian Jewry in the forties, had been passed by the Jews ofPoland some twenty years earlier. Moreover, the Polish Jews had theadvantage over their Russian brethren in that the abrogated Kahal hadafter all been replaced by another communal organization, howevercurtailed it was, and that the secular school was not forced upon themin the same brutal manner in which the Russian Crown schools had beenimposed upon the Jews of the Empire. Taken as a whole, the lot of thePolish Jews, sad though it was, might yet be pronounced enviable whencompared with the condition of their brethren in the Pale of Settlement, where the rightlessness of the Jews during that period borderedfrequently on martyrdom. 

[Footnote 1: A law to that effect had been passed on February 1, 1843. It was preparatory to the entire prohibition of Jewish dress. See below, p. 143 et seq. ]

CHAPTER XVI

THE INNER LIFE OF RUSSIAN JEWRY DURINGTHE PERIOD OF MILITARY DESPOTISM

1. THE UNCOMPROMISING ATTITUDE OF RABBINISM

The Russian Government had left nothing undone to shatter the old Jewishmode of life. Despotic Tzardom, whose ignorance of Jewish life was onlyequalled by its hostility to it, lifted its hand to strike not merely atthe obsolete forms but also at the sound historic foundations ofJudaism. The system of conscription which annually wrenched thousands ofyouths and lads from the bosom of their families, the barracks whichserved as mission houses, the method of stimulating and even forcing theconversion of recruits, the establishment of Crown schools for the samecovert purpose, the abolition of communal autonomy, civildisfranchisement, persecution and oppression, all were set in motionagainst the citadel of Judaism. And the ancient citadel, which had heldout for thousands of years, stood firm again, while the defenders withinher walls, in their endeavor to ward off the enemies' blows, had notonly succeeded in covering up the breaches, but also in barring theentrance of fresh air from without. If it be true that, in pursuing itssystem of tutelage and oppression, the Russian Government was genuinelyactuated by the desire to graft the modicum of European culture, towhich the Russia of Nicholas I. Could lay claim, upon the Jews, itcertainly achieved the reverse of what it aimed at. The hand which dealtout blows could not disseminate enlightenment; the hammer which waslifted to shatter Jewish separatism had only the effect of hardening it. The persecuted Jews clutched eagerly at their old mode of life, thetarget of their enemies' attacks; they clung not only to its permanentfoundations but also to its obsolete superstructure. The despotism ofextermination from without was counterbalanced by a despotism ofconservation from within, by that rigid discipline of conduct to whichthe masses submitted without a murmur, though its yoke must have weighedheavily upon the few, the stray harbingers of a new order of things. 

The Government had managed to disrupt the Jewish communal organizationand rob the Kahal of all its authority by degrading it to a kind ofposse for the capture of recruits and extortion of taxes. But while theJewish masses hated the Kahal elders, they retained their faith in theirspiritual leaders, the rabbis and Tzaddiks. [1] Heeding the command ofthese leaders, they closed their ranks, and offered stubborn resistanceto the dangerous cultural influences threatening them from without. Lifewas dominated by rigidly conservative principles. The old scheme offamily life, with all its patriarchal survivals, remained in force. Inspite of the law, embodied in the Statute of 1835, which fixed theminimum age of the bridegroom at eighteen (and that of the bride atsixteen), the practice of early marriages continued as theretofore. Parents arranged marriages between children of thirteen and fifteen. Boys of school age often became husbands and fathers, and continued toattend heder or yeshibah after their marriage, weighed down by thetriple tutelage of father, father-in-law, and teacher. The growinggeneration knew not the sweetness of being young. Their youth witheredunder the weight of family chains, the pressure of want or materialdependence. The spirit of protest, the striving for rejuvenation, whichasserted itself in some youthful souls, was crushed in the vise of atime-honored discipline, the product of long ages. The slightestdeviation from a custom, a rite, or old habits of thought met withsevere punishment. A short jacket or a trimmed beard was looked upon asa token of dangerous free-thinking. The reading of books written inforeign languages, or even written in Hebrew, when treating of secularsubjects, brought upon the culprit untold hardships. The scholasticeducation resulted in producing men entirely unfit for the battle oflife, so that in many families energetic women took charge of thebusiness and became the wage earners, [2] while their husbands werelosing themselves in the mazes of speculation, somewhere in the recessesof the rabbinic _Betha-Midrash_ or the hasidic _Klaus_. 

[Footnote 1: See on the latter term, Vol. I, p. 227. ]

[Footnote 2: This type of Jewish woman, current in Russia until recenttimes, was called _Eshet Hayil_, "a woman of valour, " with allusion toProv. 31. 10. ]

In Lithuania the whole mental energy of the Jewish youth was absorbed byTalmudism. The synagogue served as a "house of study" outside the hoursfixed for prayers. There the local rabbi or a private scholar gavelectures on the Talmud which were listened to by hosts of _yeshibahbahurs_. [1] The great yeshibahs of Volozhin, Mir, [2] and other townssent forth thousands of rabbis and Talmudists. Mentality, erudition, dialectic subtlety were valued here above all else. Yet, as soon as themind, whetted by talmudic dialectics, would point its edge against theexisting order of things, or turn in the direction of living knowledge, of "extraneous sciences, " [3] it was checked by threats ofexcommunication and persecution. Many were the victims of this petrifiedmilieu, whose protests against the old order of things and whosestrivings for a newer life were nipped in the bud. 

[Footnote 1: On the _bahur_ or Talmud student see Vol. I, p. 116 etseq. ]

[Footnote 2: On the yeshibah in Volozhin, in the government of Vilna, see Vol. I, p. 380 et seq. Mir is a townlet in the government of Minsk. ]

[Footnote 3: An old Hebrew expression for secular learning. ]

Instructive in this respect is the fate of one of the most remarkableTalmudists of his time, Rabbi Menashe Ilyer. Ilyer spent most of hislife in the townlets of Smorgoni and Ilya (whence his surname), in thegovernment of Vilna, and died of the cholera, in 1831. While keepingstrictly within the bounds of rabbinical orthodoxy, whose adeptsrespected him for his enormous erudition and strict piety, Menasheassiduously endeavored to widen their range of thought and render themmore amenable to moderate freedom of research and a more sober outlookon life. But his path was strewn with thorns. When on one occasion heexpounded before his pupils the conclusion, which he had reached after aprofound scientific investigation, that the text of the Mishnah had inmany cases been wrongly interpreted by the Gemara, [1] he was taken totask by a conference of Lithuanian rabbis and barely escapedexcommunication. 

[Footnote 1: The Mishnah is a code of laws edited about 200 C. E. ByRabbi Judah ha-Nasi. The Gemara consists largely of the comments of thetalmudic authorities, who lived after that date, on the text of thiscode. ]

Having conceived a liking for mathematics, astronomy, and philosophy, Menashe decided to go to Berlin to devote himself to these studies, buton his way to the German capital, while temporarily sojourning inKoenigsberg, he was halted by his countrymen, who visited Prussia onbusiness, and was cowed by all kinds of threats into returning home. Bypersistent private study, this native of a Russian out-of-the-waytownlet managed to acquire a fair amount of general culture, which, withall its limitations, yielded a rich literary harvest. In 1807 he madehis _début_ with the treatise _Pesher Dabar_ ("The Solution of theProblem"), [1] in which he gave vent to his grief over the fact that thespiritual leaders of the Jewish people kept aloof from concrete realityand living knowledge. While the book was passing through the press inVilna, Lithuanian fanatics threatened the author with severe reprisals. Their threats failed to intimidate him. When the book appeared, manyrabbis threw it into the flames, and made every possible effort toarrest its circulation, with the result that the voice of the "heretic"was stifled. 

[Footnote 1: Literally, "The Interpretation of a Thing, " from Eccl. 8. 1. ]

Ten years later, while residing temporarily in Volhynia, the hot-bed ofhasidism, Menashe began to print his religio-philosophic treatise _AlfeMenassheh_ ("The Teachings of Manasseh"). [1] But the first proof-sheetssufficed to impress the printer with the "heretical" character of thebook, and he threw them together with the whole manuscript into thefire. The hapless author managed with difficulty to restore the text ofhis "executed" work, and published it at Vilna in 1822. Here therabbinical censorship pounced upon him. The book had not yet left thepress, when the rabbi of Vilna, Saul Katzenellenbogen, learned that inone passage the writer deduced from a verse in Deuteronomy (17. 9) theright of the "judges" or spiritual leaders of each generation to modifymany religious laws and customs in accordance with the requirements ofthe time. The rabbi gave our author fair warning that, unless thisheretical argument was withdrawn, he would have the book burned publiclyin the synagogue yard. Menashe was forced to submit, and, contrary tohis conviction, weakened his heterodox argument by a number ofcircumlocutions. 

[Footnote 1: With a clever allusion to the Hebrew text of Deut. 33. 17. ]

These persecutions, however, did not smother the fire of protest in thebreast of the excommunicated rural philosopher. In the last years of hislife he published two pamphlets, [1] in which he severely lashed theshortcomings of Jewish life, the early marriages, the one-sided schooltraining, the repugnance to living knowledge and physical labor. However, the champions of orthodoxy took good care to prevent thesebooks from reaching the masses. Exhausted by his fruitless struggle, Menashe died, unappreciated and almost unnoticed by his contemporaries. 

[Footnote 1: One of these, entitled _Samme de-Hayye_ ("Elixir of Life"), was written in Yiddish, being designed by the author for the lowerclasses. ]

2. THE STAGNATION OF HASIDISM

A critical attitude toward the existing order of things could onoccasions assert itself in the environment of Rabbinism, where the mind, though forced into the mould of scholasticism, was yet working at highspeed. But such "heretical" thinking was utterly inconceivable in thedominant circles of Hasidism, where the intellect was rocked to sleep bymystical lullabies and fascinating stories of the miraculous exploits ofthe Tzsaddiks. The era of political and civil disfranchisement was atime of luxuriant growth for Hasidism, not in its creative, but ratherin its stationary, not to say stagnant, phase. 

The old struggle between Hasidism and Rabbinism had long been foughtout, and the Tzaddiks rested on their laurels as teachers andmiracle-workers. The Tzaddik dynasties were now firmly entrenched. InWhite Russia the sceptre lay in the hands of the Shneorsohn dynasty, thesuccessors of the "Old Rabbi, " Shneor Zalman, the progenitor of theNorthern Hasidim. [1] The son of the "Old Rabbi, " Baer, nicknamed "theMiddle Rabbi" (1813-1828), and the latter's son-in-law Mendel Lubavicher[2] (1828-1866) succeeded one another on the hasidic "throne" duringthis period, with a change in their place of residence. Under RabbiZalman the townlets of Lozno and Ladi served as "capitals"; under hissuccessors, they were Ladi and Lubavichi. The three localities are allsituated on the border-line of the governments of Vitebsk and Moghilev, in which the Hasidim of the _Habad_ persuasion [3] formed either amajority, as was the case in the former government, or a substantialminority, as was the case in the latter. 

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 372. ]

[Footnote 2: From the townlet Lubavichi. See later in the text. ]

[Footnote 3: Compare Vol. I, p. 234, n. 2. ]

Rabbi Baer, the son and successor of the "Old Rabbi, " did not inheritthe creative genius of his father. He published many books, made upmostly of his Sabbath discourses, but they lack originality. His methodis that of the talmudic _pilpul_, [1] transplanted upon the soil ofCabala and Hasidism, or it consists in expatiating upon the ideascontained in the _Tanyo_. [2] The last years of Rabbi Baer were darkenedby the White Russian catastrophes, the expulsion from the villages in1823, and the ominous turn in the ritual murder trial of Velizh. On hisdeath-bed he spoke to those around him about the burning topic of theday, the conscription ukase of 1827. 

[Footnote 1: i. E. , Dialectics. Comp. Vol. I, p. 122. ]

[Footnote 2: The title of the philosophic treatise of Rabbi ShneorZalman. See Vol. I, p. 372, n. 1. ]

His successor Rabbi Mendel Lubavicher proved an energetic organizer ofthe hasidic masses. He was highly esteemed not only as a learnedTalmudist--he wrote rabbinical _novellae and response--and as a preacherof Hasidism, but also as a man of great practical wisdom, whose advicewas sought by thousands of people in family matters no less than incommunal and commercial affairs. This did not present him from being adecided opponent of the new enlightenment. In the course of Lilienthal'seducational propaganda in 1843, Rabbi Mendel was summoned by theGovernment to participate in the deliberations of the RabbinicalCommittee at St. Petersburg. There he found himself in a tragicsituation. He was compelled to give his sanction to the Crown schools, although he firmly believed that they were subversive of Judaism, notonly because they were originated by Russian officials, but also becausethey were intended to impart secular knowledge. The hasidic legendnarrates that the Tzaddik pleaded before the Committee passionately, andoften with tears in his eyes, not only to retain in the new schools thetraditional methods of Bible and Talmud instruction, but also to makeroom in their curriculum for the teaching of the Cabala. Nevertheless, Rabbi Mendel was compelled to endorse against his will the "godless"plan of a school reform, and a little later to prefix his approbation toa Russian edition of Mendelssohn's German Bible translation. Hisattitude toward contemporary pedagogic methods may be gauged from theepistle addressed by him in 1848 to Leon Mandelstamm, Lilienthal'ssuccessor in the task of organizing the Jewish Crown schools. In thisepistle Rabbi Mendel categorically rejects all innovations in thetraining of the young. In reply to a question concerning the edition ofan abbreviated Bible text for children, he trenchantly quotes the famousmedieval aphorism:

 The Pentateuch was written by Moses at the dictation of God. Hence every word in it is sacred. There is no difference whatsoever between the verse "And Timna was the concubine" (Gen. 36. 12) and "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut 6. 4). [1]

[Footnote 1: See Maimonides' exposition of the dogma of the divineorigin of the Torah in his Mishnah Commentary, _Sanhedrin_, chapter X. ]

Withal, the leaders of the Northern Hasidim were, comparativelyspeaking, "men of the world, " and were ready here and there to makeconcessions to the demands of the age. Quite different were the Tzaddiksof the South-west. They were horrified by the mere thought of suchconcessions. They were surrounded by immense throngs of Hasidim, unenlightened, ecstatic, worshipping saints during their lifetime. 

The most honored among these hasidic dynasties was that of Chernobyl. [1] It was founded in the Ukraina toward the end of the eighteenthcentury by an itinerant preacher, or Maggid, called Nahum. [2] His sonMordecai, known under the endearing name "Rabbi Motele" (died in 1837), attracted to Chernobyl enormous numbers of pilgrims who brought withthem ransom money, or _pidyons_. [3] Mordecai's "Empire" fell asunderafter his death. His eight sons divided among themselves the wholeterritory of the Kiev and Volhynia province. 

[Footnote 1: A townlet in the government of Kiev. ]

[Footnote 2: See Vol. I, p. 382. ]

[Footnote 3: The term is used in the Bible to denote a sum of moneywhich "redeems" or "ransoms" a man from death, as in the case of aperson guilty of manslaughter (Ex. 22. 30) or that of the first-born son(Ex. 13. 13; 34. 20). The Hasidim designate by this term thecontributions made to the Tzaddik, in the belief that such contributionshave the power of averting from the contributor impending death ormisfortune. ]

Aside from the original center in Chernobyl, seats of Tzaddiks wereestablished in the townlets of Korostyshev, Cherkassy, Makarov, Turisk, Talno, Skvir and Rakhmistrovka. This resulted in a disgraceful rivalryamong the brothers, and still more so among their hasidic adherents. Every Hasid was convinced that reverence was due only to his own"Rebbe, " [1] and he brushed aside the claims of the other Tzaddiks. Whenever the adherents of the various Tzaddiks met, they invariablyengaged in passionate "party" quarrels, which on occasions, especiallyafter the customary hasidic drinking bouts, ended in physical violence. 

[Footnote 1: Popular pronunciation of the word "rabbi, " A hasidicTzaddik is designated as "Rebbe, " in distinction from the rabbi proper, or the _Rav_ (in Russia generally pronounced _Rov_), who discharges therabbinical functions within the community. ]

The whole Chernobyl dynasty found a dangerous rival in the person of theTzaddik Israel Ruzhiner (of Ruzhin), the great-grandson of Rabbi Baer, the apostle of Hasidism, known as the "Mezhiricher Maggid. " [1] RabbiIsrael settled in Ruzhin, a townlet in the government of Kiev, about1815, and rapidly gained fame as a saint and miracle-worker. Hismagnificent "court" at Ruzhin was always crowded with throngs ofHasidim. Their onrush was checked by special "gentlemen in waiting, " theso-called _gabba'im, _ who were very fastidious in admitting the peopleinto the presence of the Tzaddik--dependent upon the size of theproffered gifts. Israel drove out in a gorgeous carriage, surrounded bya guard of honor. The gubernatorial administration of Kiev, presidedover by the ferocious Governor-General Bibikov, received intimations tothe effect "that the Tzaddik of Ruzhin wielded almost the power of aTzar" among his adherents, who did not stir with out his advice. Thepolice began to watch the Tzaddik, and at length found an occasion for a"frame-up. "

[Footnote 1: On Rabbi Baer see Vol. I, p. 229 et seq. ]

When, in 1838, the Kahal of Ushitza, in the government of Podolia, wasimplicated in the murder of an informer, [1] Rabbi Israel of Ruzhin wasarrested on the charge of abetting the murder. The hasidic "Tzar"languished in prison for twenty-two months. He was finally set free andplaced under police surveillance. But he soon escaped to Austria, andsettled in 1841 in the Bukovina, in the townlet of Sadagora, nearChernovitz, where he established his new "court. " Many Hasidim in Russianow made their pilgrimage abroad to their beloved Tzaddik; in addition, new partisans were won among the hasidic masses of Galicia and theBukovina. Rabbi Israel died in 1850, but the "Sadagora dynasty" branchedout rapidly, and proved a serious handicap to modern progress during thestormy epoch of emancipation which followed in Austria soon afterwards. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 84 et seq. ]

Another hot-bed of the Tzaddik cult was Podolia, the cradle of Hasidism. In the old residence of Besht, [1] in Medzhibozh, the sceptre was heldby Rabbi Joshua Heshel Apter, who succeeded Besht's grandson, RabbiBorukh of Tulchyn. [2] For a number of years, between 1810 and 1830, theaged Joshua Heshel was revered as the nestor of Tzaddikism, the haughtyIsrael of Ruzhin being the only one who refused to acknowledge hissupremacy. Heshel's successor was Rabbi Moyshe Savranski, whoestablished a regular hasidic "court, " after the pattern of Chernobyland Ruzhin. 

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 222 et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: See Vol. I, p. 384. ]

The only Tzaddik to whom it was not given to be the founder of a dynastywas the somewhat eccentric Rabbi Nahman of Bratzlav, [1] a great-grandsonof Besht. After his death, the Bratzlav Hasidim, who followed the leadof his disciple Rabbi Nathan, suffered cruel persecutions at the handsof the other hasidic factions. The "Bratzlavers" adopted the custom ofvisiting once a year, during the High Holidays, the grave of theirfounder in the city of Uman, in the government of Kiev, and subsequentlyerected a house of prayer near his tomb. During these pilgrimages theywere often the target of the local Hasidim who reviled and oftenmaltreated them. The "Bratzlavers" were the Cinderella among theHasidim, lacking the powerful patronage of a living Tzaddik. Theirheavenly patron, Rabbi Nahman, could not hold his own against his livingrivals, the earthly Tzaddiks--all too earthly perhaps, in spite of theirsaintliness. 

[Footnote 1: A town in Podolia. See Vol. I, p. 382 et seq. ]

The Tzaddik cult was equally diffused in the Kingdom of Poland. Theplace of Rabbi Israel of Kozhenitz and Rabbi Jacob-Isaac of Lublin, whotogether marshalled the hasidic forces during the time of the Varsovianduchy, was taken by founders and representatives of new Tzaddikdynasties. The most popular among these were the dynasty of Kotzk, [1]established by Rabbi Mendel Kotzker (1827-1859), and that of GooraKalvaria, [2] or Gher, [3] founded by Rabbi Isaac Meier Alter [4] (about1830-1866). The former reigned supreme in the provinces, the latter inthe capital of Poland, in Warsaw, which down to this day has remainedloyal to the Gher dynasty. 

[Footnote 1: A town not far from Warsaw. Comp. Vol. I, p. 303, n. 1. ]

[Footnote 2: In Polish, _Góra Kalwarya_, a town on the left bank of theVistula, not far from Warsaw. ]

[Footnote 3: This form of the name is used by the Jews. ]

[Footnote 4: Called popularly in Poland _Reb Itche Meier_, a name stillfrequently found among the Jews of Warsaw, who to a large extent areadherents of the "Gher dynasty. "]

The Polish "Rebbes" [1] resembled by the character of their activity thetype of the Northern, or _Habad_, Tzaddiks rather than those of theUkraina. They did not keep luxurious "courts, " did not hanker sogreedily after donations, and laid greater emphasis on talmudicscholarship. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 120, n. 1. ]

Hasidism produced not only leaders but also martyrs, victims of theRussian police regime. About the time when the Tzaddik of Ruzhin fellunder suspicion, the Russian Government began to watch the Jewishprinting-press in the Volhynian townlet of Slavuta. The owners of thepress were two brothers, Samuel-Abba and Phinehas Shapiro, grandsons ofBesht's companion, Rabbi Phinehas of Koretz. The two brothers weredenounced to the authorities as persons issuing dangerous mystical booksfrom their press, without the permission of the censor. Thisdenunciation was linked up with a criminal case, the discovery in thehouse of prayer, which was attached to the printing-press, of the bodyof one of the compositors who, it was alleged, had intended to lay barethe activities of the "criminal" press before the Government. After aprotracted imprisonment of the two Slavuta printers in Kiev, their casewas submitted to Nicholas I. Who sentenced them to _Spiessruten_ [1] anddeportation to Siberia. During the procedure of running the gauntlet, while passing through the lines of whipping soldiers, one of thebrothers had his cap knocked off his head. Unconcerned by the hail oflashes from which he was bleeding, he stopped to pick up his cap so asto avoid going bare-headed, [2] and then resumed his march between thetwo rows of executioners. The unfortunate brothers were released fromtheir Siberian exile during the reign of Alexander II. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 85, n. 1. ]

[Footnote 2: According to an ancient Jewish notion, which is currentthroughout the Orient, baring the head is a sign of frivolity anddisrespect towards God. ]

Hasidic life exhibited no doubt many examples of lofty idealism andmoral purity. But hand in hand with it went an impenetrable spiritualgloom, boundless credulity, a passion for deifying men of a mediocre andeven inferior type, and the unwholesome hypnotizing influence of theTzaddiks. Spiritual self-intoxication was accompanied by physical. Thehasidic rank and file, particularly in the South-west, began to developan ugly passion for alcohol. Originally tolerated as a means ofproducing cheerfulness and religious ecstasy, drinking gradually becamethe standing feature of every hasidic gathering. It was in vogue at thecourt of the Tzaddik during the rush of pilgrims; it was indulged inafter prayers in the hasidic "Shtiblach, " [1] or houses of prayer, andwas accompanied by dancing and by the ecstatic narration of themiraculous exploits of the "Rebbe. " [2] Many Hasidim lost themselvescompletely in this idle revelry and neglected their business affairs andtheir starving families, looking forward in their blind fatalism to theblessings which were to be showered upon them through the intercessionof the Tzaddik. 

[Footnote 1: The word, which is a diminutive of German _Stube_, "room, "denotes, like the word _Klaus_, the room, or set of rooms, in which theHasidim assemble for prayer, study, and recreation. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p, 120, n. 1. ]

It would be manifestly unjust to view the hasidic indulgence in alcoholin the same light as the senseless drunkenness of the Russian peasant, transforming man into a beast. The Hasid drank, and in moderate doses atthat, "for the soul, " "to banish the grief which blunteth the heart, " toarouse religious exultation and enliven his social intercourse with hisfellow believers. Yet the consequences were equally sad. For the habitresulted in drowsiness of thought, idleness and economic ruin, insensibility to the outside world and to the social movements of theage, as well as in stolid opposition to cultural progress in general. Itmust be borne in mind that during the era of external oppression andmilitary inquisition the reactionary force of Hasidism acted as the onlyantidote against the reactionary force from the outside. Hasidism andTzaddikism were, so to speak, a sleeping draught which dulled the painof the blows dealt out to the unfortunate Jewish populace by the RussianGovernment. But in the long run the popular organism was injuriouslyaffected by this mystic opium. The poison rendered its consumersinsensible to every progressive movement, and planted them firmly at theextreme pole of obscurantism, at a time when the Russian ghettoresounded with the first appeals calling its inmates toward the light, toward the regeneration and the uplift of inner Jewish life. 

3. THE RUSSIAN MENDELSSOHN (ISAAC BAER LEVINSOHN)

It was in the hot-bed of the most fanatical species of Hasidism that thefirst blossoms of Haskalah [1] timidly raised their heads. Isaac BaerLevinsohn, from Kremenetz in Podolia (1788-1860), had associated in hisyounger days with the champions of enlightenment in adjacent Galicia, such as Joseph Perl, [2] Nahman Krochmal, [3] and their followers. Whenhe came back to his native land, it was with the firm resolve to devotehis energies to the task of civilizing the secluded masses of RussianJewry. In lonesome quietude, carefully guarding his designs from theoutside world which was exclusively hasidic, he worked at his book_Te'udah, be-Israel_ ("Instruction in Israel"), which after manydifficulties he managed to publish in Vilna in 1828. In this book ourauthor endeavored, without trespassing the boundaries of orthodoxreligious tradition, to demonstrate the following elementary truths byciting examples from Jewish history and sayings of great Jewishauthorities:

[Footnote 1: A Hebrew term meaning "enlightenment. " It is a translationof the German _Aufklaerung_, and was first applied to the endeavors madein the time of Moses Mendelssohn (died 1886) to introduce Europeanculture among the Jews of the ghetto. ]

[Footnote 2: Died 1839. He became famous through his anti-hasidic parody_Megalle Temirin_, "Revealing Hidden Things, " written in the form ofletters in imitation of the hasidic style. Peri's book has beenfrequently compared with the medieval _Epistolae obscurorum vivorum_, which are ascribed to Ulrich von Hutten (d. 1523). See P. 127. ]

[Footnote 3: Died 1840. Famous as the author of _More Nebuke ha-Zeman_, "Guide of the Perplexed of (Our) Time, " a profound treatise, dealingwith Jewish theological and historical problems. ]

 1. The Jew is obliged to study the Bible as well as Hebrew grammar and to interpret the biblical text in accordance with the plain grammatical sense. 

 2. The Jewish religion does not condemn the knowledge of foreign languages and literatures, especially of the language of the country, such knowledge being required both in the personal interest of the individual Jew and in the common interest of the Jewish people. 

 3. The study of secular sciences is not attended by any danger for Judaism, men of the type of Maimonides having remained loyal Jews, in spite of their extensive general culture. 

 4. It is necessary from the economic point of view to strengthen productive labor, such as handicrafts and agriculture, at the expense of commerce and brokerage, also to discourage early marriages between persons who are unprovided for and have no definite occupation. 

These commonplaces sounded to that generation like epoch-makingrevelations. They were condemned as rank heresies by the all-powerfulobscurantists and hailed as a gospel of the approaching renaissance bythat handful of progressives who dreamt of a new Jewish life and, cowedby the fear of persecution, hid these thoughts deep down in theirbreasts. 

A similar fear compelled Levinsohn to exercise the utmost reserve andcaution in criticizing the existing order of things. The sameconsideration forced him to shield himself behind a pseudonym inpublishing his anti-hasidic satire _Dibre Tzaddikim_, "The Words of theTzaddiks, " [1] (Vienna, 1830), a rather feeble imitation of _MegalleTemirin_, the Hebrew counterpart of the "Epistles of Obscure Men, " byJoseph Perl. [2] His principal work, entitled _Bet Yehudah_, "The Houseof Judah, " a semi-philosophic, semi-publicistic review of the history ofJudaism, remained for a long time in manuscript. Levinsohn was unable topublish it for the reason that even the printing-press of Vilna, theonly one to issue publications of a non-religious character, was afraidof bringing out a book which had failed to receive the approbation ofthe local rabbis. Several years later, in 1839, the volume finally cameout, clothed in the form of a reply to inquiries addressed to the authorby a high Russian official. 

[Footnote 1: Literally, "The Words of the Righteous, " with reference toEx. 23. 8:]

[Footnote 2: See the preceding page, n. 1. ]

From the point of view of Jewish learning, _Bet Yehudah_ can claim butscanty merits. It lacks that depth of philosophic-historic insight whichdistinguishes so brilliantly the "Guide of the Perplexed of Our Time" ofthe Galician thinker Krochmal. [1] The writer's principal task is toprove from history his rather trite doctrine that Judaism had at no timeshunned secular culture and philosophy. 

[Footnote 1: See the preceding page, n. 2. ]

For the rest, the author fights shy of the difficult problems ofreligious philosophy, and is always on the lookout for compromises. Evenwith reference to the Cabala, with which Levinsohn has but littlesympathy, he says timidly: "It is not for us to judge these loftymatters" (Chapter 135). Fear of the orthodox environment compels him toobserve almost complete silence with reference to Hasidism, although, inhis private correspondence and in his anonymous writings he denounces itseverely. Levinsohn concludes his historic review of Judaism with aeulogy upon the Russian Government for its kindness toward the Jews (Ch. 151) and with the following plan of reform suggested to it for execution(Ch. 146):

 To open elementary schools for the teaching of Hebrew and the tenets of the Jewish religion as well as of Russian and arithmetic, and to establish institutions of higher rabbinical learning in the larger cities; to Institute the office of Chief Rabbi, with a supreme council under him, which should be in charge of Jewish spiritual and communal affairs in Russia; to allot to a third of the Russian-Jewish population parcels of land for agricultural purposes; to prohibit luxury in dress and furniture in which even the impecunious classes are prone to indulge. 

Levinsohn was not satisfied to propagate his ideas by purely literarymeans. He anticipated meagre results from a literary propaganda amongthe broad Jewish masses, in which the mere reading of such "licentious"books was considered a criminal offence. He had greater faith in hisability to carry out the regeneration of Jewish life with the powerfulhelp of the Government. As a matter of fact, Levinsohn had long beforethis begun to knock at the doors of the Russian Government offices. Farback in 1823 he had presented to the heir-apparent ConstantinePavlovich [1] a memorandum concerning Jewish sects and a project lookingto the establishment of a system of Jewish schools and seminaries. Moreover, before publishing his first work _Te'udah_, he had submittedthe manuscript to Shishkov, the reactionary Minister of PublicInstruction, applying for a Government subsidy towards the publicationof a work which demonstrates the usefulness of enlightenment andagriculture, "instills love for the Tzar as well as for the people withwhich we share our life, and recounts the innumerable favors which theyhave bestowed upon us. "

[Footnote 1: Being the eldest brother of Alexander I. , Constantine wasthe legitimate heir to the Russian throne. He resigned in favor of hisyounger brother Nicholas. See above, p. 13, n. 2. ]

These words were penned on December 2, 1827, three months after thepromulgation of the baneful conscription ukase ordering the compulsoryenlistment of under-aged cantonists! The request was complied with. Ayear later the humble Volhynian littérateur received by imperial commandan "award" of 1000 rubles ($500) "for a work having for its object themoral transformation of the Jews. " This "award" came when the volume hadalready appeared in print, in the terrible year 1828 which was marked bythe first conscription of Jewish recruits, the ominous turn in theritual murder trial of Velizh and the constant tightening of the knot ofdisabilities. 

But these events failed to cure the political _naiveté_ of Levinsohn. In1831 he laid before Lieven, the new Minister of Public Instruction, amemorandum advocating the necessity of modifications in Jewish religiouslife. Again in 1833 he came forward with the dangerous proposal to closeall Jewish printing-presses, except those situated in towns in whichthere was a censorship. The project was accompanied by a "list ofancient and modern Hebrew books, indicating those that may be considereduseful and those that are harmful"--the hasidic works were declared tobelong to the latter category. Levinsohn's project was partlyinstrumental in prompting the grievous law of 1836, which raised a cryof despair in the Pale of Settlement, ordering a revision of the entireHebrew literature by Russian censors. [1]

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 42 et seq. ]

Levinsohn's action would have been ignoble had it not been naive. Therecluse of Kremenetz, passionately devoted to his people but wanting inpolitical foresight, was calling Russian officialdom to aid in his fightagainst the bigotry of the Jewish masses, in the childish convictionthat the Russian authorities had the welfare of the Jews truly at heart, and that compulsory measures would do away with the hostility of theJewish populace toward enlightenment. He failed to perceive, as did alsosome of his like-minded contemporaries, that the culture which theRussian Government of his time was trying to foist upon the Jews wasonly apt to accentuate their distrust, that, so long as they were thetarget of persecution, the Jews could not possibly accept the gift ofenlightenment from the hands of those who lured them to the baptismalfont, pushed their children on the path of religious treason, and wereruthless in breaking and disfiguring their whole mode of life. 

In his literary works Levinsohn was fond of emphasizing his relationswith high Government officials. This probably saved him from a greatdeal of unpleasantness on the part of the fanatic Hasidim, but it alsohad the effect of increasing his unpopularity among the orthodox. Theonly merit the latter were willing to concede to Levinsohn was that of anapologist who defended Judaism against the attacks of non-Jews. Duringthe epidemic of ritual murder trials, the rabbis of Lithuania andVolhynia addressed a request to Levinsohn to write a book against thishorrid libel. At their suggestion he published his work _Efes Damim_, "No Blood!" (Vilna, 1837), [1] in the form of a dialogue between a Jewishsage and a Greek-Orthodox patriarch in Jerusalem. 

[Footnote 1: With a clever allusion to the geographic name Ephes-dammim, I Sam. 17. 1. ]

Somewhat later Levinsohn wrote other apologetic treatises, defending theTalmud against the attacks contained in the book _Netibot 'Olam_ [1]published in 1839 by the London missionary M'Caul. Levinsohn's greatapologetic work _Zerubbabel_, which appeared several years after hisdeath, was equally dedicated to the defence of the Talmud. It has, moreover, considerable scientific merit, being one of the first researchworks in the domain of talmudic theology. A number of other publicationsby Levinsohn deal with Hebrew philology and lexicography. All theseefforts support Levinsohn's claim to the title of Founder of a modernJewish Science in Russia, though his scholarly achievements cannot beclassed with those of his German and Galician fellow-writers, such asRapoport, Zunz, Jost and Geiger. 

[Footnote 1: "Old Paths, " with reference to Jer. 6. 16. ]

Levinsohn stood entirely aloof from the propaganda of bureaucraticenlightenment which was carried on by Lilienthal in the name of Uvarov. The Volhynian hermit was completely overshadowed by the energetic youngGerman. Even when Lilienthal, after realizing that a union betweenJewish culture and Russian officialdom was altogether unnatural, haddisappeared from the stage, Levinsohn still persisted in cultivating hisrelations with the Government. But by that time the bureaucrats of St. Petersburg had no more use for the Jewish friends of enlightenment. Broken in health, chained to his bed for half a lifetime, without meansof subsistence, lonely amidst a hostile orthodox environment, Levinsohntime and again addressed to St. Petersburg humiliating appeals formonetary assistance, occasionally receiving small pittances, which werebooked under the heading "Relief in Distress, " accepted subventions fromvarious Jewish Mæcenases, and remained a pauper till the end of hislife. The pioneer of modern culture among Russian Jews, the founder ofNeo-Hebraic literature, spent his life in the midst of a realm ofdarkness, shunned like an outcast, appreciated by a mere handful ofsympathizers. It was only after his death that he was crowned withlaurels, when the intellectuals of Russian Jewry were beginning to pressforward in close formation. 

4. THE RISE OF NEO-HEBRAIC CULTURE

The Volhynian soil proved unfavorable for the seeds of enlightenment. The Haskalah pioneers were looked upon as dangerous enemies in thishot-bed of Tzaddikism. They were held in disgrace and were often thevictims of cruel persecutions, from which some saved themselves byconversion. A more favorable soil for cultural endeavors was found inthe extreme south of the Pale of Settlement as well as in its northernsection: Odessa, the youthful capital of New Russia, and Vilna, the oldcapital of Lithuania, both became centers of the Haskalah movement. 

As far as Odessa was concerned, the seeds of enlightenment had beencarried hither from neighboring Galicia by the Jews of Brody, who formeda wealthy merchant colony in that city. As early as 1826 Odessa saw theopening of the first Jewish school for secular education, which wasmanaged at first by Sittenfeld and later on by the well-known publicworker Bezalel Stern. Among the teachers of the new school was SimhaPinsker, who subsequently became the historian of Karaism. This school, the only educational establishment of its kind during that period, served in Odessa as a center for the "Friends of Enlightenment. " Being anew city, unfettered by traditions, and at the same time a largesea-port, with a checkered international population, Odessa outran otherJewish centers in the process of modernization, though it must beconfessed that it never went beyond the externalities of civilization. As far as the period under discussion is concerned, the Jewish center ofthe South can claim no share in the production of new Jewish values. 

While yielding to Odessa in point of external civilization, Vilnasurpassed the capital of the South by her store of mental energy. Thecircle of the Vilna Maskilim, which came into being during the fourthdecade of the nineteenth century, gave rise to the two founders of theNeo-Hebraic literary style: the prose writer Mordecai Aaron Ginzburg(1796-1846) and the poet Abraham Baer Lebensohn (1794-1878). 

Ginzburg, born in the townlet Salant, in the Zhmud region, [1] lived forsome time in Courland, and finally settled in Vilna. He managed tofamiliarize himself with German literature, and was so fascinated by itthat he started his literary career by translating and adapting Germanworks into Hebrew. His translation of Campe's "Discovery of America" andPolitz' Universal History, as well as his own history of theFranco-Russian War of 1812, compiled from various sources, were, as faras Russia is concerned, the first specimens of secular literature inpure Hebrew, which boldly claimed their place side by side with rabbinicand hasidic writings. In that juvenile stage of the Hebrew renaissance, when the mere treatment of language and style was considered anachievement, even the appearance of such elementary books was hailed asepoch-making. 

[Footnote 1: Zhmud, or Samogitia, is part of the present government ofKovno. Compare Vol. I, p. 293, n. 1. ]

The profoundest influence on the formation of the Neo-Hebraic style mustbe ascribed to two other works by the same author, _Kiriai Sefer_, [1]an epistolary manual containing specimens of personal, commercial, andother forms of correspondence (Vilna, 1835, and many later editions), and _Debir_, [2] a miscellaneous collection of essays, consisting forthe most part of translations and compilations (Vilna, 1844). Ginzburg'spremature death in 1846 was mourned by the Vilna Maskilim as the loss ofa leader in the struggle for the Neo-Hebraic renaissance, and they gaveexpression to these sentiments in verse and prose. Ginzburg'sautobiography _(Abi-'ezer, _ 1863) and his letters _(Debir, _ Vol. II. , 1861) portray the milieu in which our author grew up and developed. 

[Footnote 1: See next note. ]

[Footnote 2: Both titles are derived from the message in Josh. 15. 15, according to which _Debir_, a city in the territory of the tribe ofJudah, was originally called _Kiriat Sefer_, "Book City. "]

Abraham Baer Lebensohn, [1] a native of Vilna, awakened the dormantHebrew lyre by the sonorous rhymes of his "Songs in the Sacred Tongue"(_Shire Sefat Kodesh_, Vol. I. , Leipsic, 1842). In this volume solemnodes celebrating events of all kinds alternate with lyrical poems of aphilosophical content. The unaccustomed ear of the Jew of that periodwas struck by these powerful sounds of rhymed biblical speech whichexhibited greater elegance and harmony than the Mosaïd of Wessely, theJewish Klopstock. [2] His compositions, which are marked by thoughtrather than by feeling, suited to perfection the taste of thecontemporary Jewish reader, who was ever on the lookout for"intellectuality, " even where poetry was concerned. Philosophic andmoralizing lyrics are a characteristic feature of Lebensohn's pen. Thegeneral human sorrow, common to all individuals, stirs him more deeplythan national grief. His only composition of a nationalistic character, "The Wailing of the Daughter of Judah, " seems strangely out of harmonywith the accompanying odes which celebrate the coronation of Nicholas I. And similar patriotic occasions, although the "Wailing" is shrewdlyprefaced by a note, evidently meant for the censor, to the effect thatthe poem refers to the Middle Ages. At any rate, the principal merit ofthe "Songs in the Sacred Tongue" is not to be sought in their poetry butrather in their style, for it was this style which became the basis ofNeo-Hebraic poetic diction, perfected more and more by the poets of thesucceeding generations. 

[Footnote 1: He assumed the pen-name "Adam, " the initials of Abraham Dob(Hebrew equivalent for Baer) Mikhailishker (from the town ofMikhailishok, in the government of Vilna, where he resided for a numberof years). See later, p. 226. ]

[Footnote 2: The author refers to Naphtali Hirz Wessely (d. 1805), anassociate of Mendelssohn in his cultural endeavors. He wrote _ShireTif'eret_, "Songs of Glory, " an epic in five parts dealing with theExodus. The poem was patterned after the epic _Der Messias_ of hisfamous German contemporary Gottlieb Friedrich Klopstock, who, in turn, was influenced by Milton. ]

Ginzburg and Lebensohn were the central pillars of the Vilna Maskilimcircle, which also included men of the type of Samuel Joseph Fünn, thehistorian, Mattathiah Strashun, the Talmudist, the censor Tugendhold, the bibliographer Ben-jacob, N. Rosenthal, in a word, the "radicals" ofthat era--for the mere striving for the restoration of biblical Hebrewand for elementary secular education was looked upon as bold radicalism. The same circle made an attempt to create a scientific periodical afterthe pattern of similar publications in Galicia and Germany, In 1841 and1843 two issues of the magazine _Pirhe Tzafon_, "Flowers of the North, "appeared in Vilna, under Fünn's editorship. The volumes containedscientific and publicistic articles as well as poems, contributed by thefeeble literary talents which were then active in the Hebrew literaryand educational revival in Russia--all of them efforts of not very highmerit. But even these poor hot-house flowers were fated to be nipped inthe Northern chill. The ruthless Russian censorship scented in theunassuming magazine of the Vilna Maskilim a criminal attempt to publisha Hebrew periodical. Such an undertaking required an official licensefrom the central Government in St. Petersburg, and the latter was not inthe habit of granting licenses for such purposes. 

In Vilna, as in Odessa, the coterie of local Maskilim formed themainstay of Lilienthal, the apostle of enlightenment, in, his strugglewith the orthodox. In the year 1840, prior to Lilienthal's arrival, whenthe first intimation of Uvarov's plans reached the city of Vilna, thelocal Maskilim responded to the call of the Government in a circularletter, in which the following four cardinal reforms were emphasized:

 1. The transformation of the Rabbinate through the establishment of rabbinical seminaries, the appointment of graduates from German universities as rabbis, and the formation of consistories after the pattern of Western Europe. 

 2. The reform of school education through the opening of secular schools after the model of Odessa and Riga and the training of new teachers from among the Maskilim. 

 3. The struggle with the fiends of obscurantism, who stifle every endeavor for popular enlightenment. 

 4. The improvement of Jewish economic life by intensifying agricultural colonization, the establishment of technical and arts and crafts schools, and similar measures. 

Several years later the authors of this circular had reason to shareLilienthal's disillusionment over the "benevolent intentions" of theGovernment. This, however, was not strong enough to uproot the originalsin of the Haskalah: its constant readiness to lean for support upon"enlightened absolutism. " The despotism of the orthodox and theintolerance of the unenlightened masses forced the handful of Maskilimto fall back upon those who in the eyes of the Jewish populace were thesource of its sorrow and tears. There was a profound tragedy in thisincongruity. 

The culture movement in Russia of the second quarter of the nineteenthcentury corresponds in its complexion to the early stage of theMendelssohnian enlightenment in Germany, the period of the_Me'assefim_. [1] But there were also essential differences between thetwo. The beginning of German enlightenment was accompanied by a strongdrift toward assimilation which led to the elimination of the nationallanguage from literature. In Russia the initial period of Haskalah wasnot marked by any sudden social and cultural upheavals. 

[Footnote 1: So named after the Hebrew periodical _ha-Me'assef_ "TheCollector, " which was founded in Berlin in 1784. Compare Vol. I, p. 386, n. 3. ]

On the contrary, it laid the foundations for a national literaryrenaissance which in the following period was destined to become animportant social factor. 

5. THE JEWS AND THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE

As for the Russian people, an impenetrable wall continued as theretoforeto keep it apart from the Jewish population. To the inhabitants of thetwo Russian capitals and of the interior of the Empire the Pale ofSettlement seemed as distant as China, while among the Russians livingwithin the Pale the sparks of former historic conflagrations, theprejudices of the ages and the unenlightened notions of days gone bywere still glimmering beneath the ashes. The ignorance of some and thevicious prejudices of others could not very well manifest themselves inperiodical literature, for the simple reason that in pre-reformatoryRussia, throtled by the hand of the censorship, none was in existence. Only in Russian fiction one might see the shadow of the Jew movingacross. In the imagination of the great Russian poet Pushkin this shadowwavered between the "despised Jew" of the street (in the "Black Shawl, "1820) and the figure of the venerable "old man reading the Bible underthe shelter of the night" (in the "Beginning of a Novel, " 1832). On theother hand, in Gogol's "Taras Bulba" (1835-1842) the Jew bears thewell-defined features of an inhuman fiend. In the delineation of thehideous figure of "Zhyd Yankel, " a mercenary, soulless, dastardlycreature, Gogol, the descendant of the haidamacks, [1] gave vent to hisinherited hatred of the Jew, the victim of Khmelnitzki [2] and thehaidamacks. In these dismal historic tragedies, in the figures of theJewish martyrs of old Ukraina, Gogol can only discern "miserable, terror-stricken creatures. " Thus one of the principal founders ofRussian fiction set up in its very center the repelling scarecrow of aJew, an abomination of desolation, which poured the poison of hatredinto the hearts of the Russian readers and determined to a certainextent the literary types of later writers. 

[Footnote 1: Name of the Ukrainian rebels who rose in the seventeenthcentury against the tyranny of their Polish masters. Compare Vol. I, p. 182, n. 3. ]

[Footnote 2: Compare Vol. I, p. 144 et seq. ]

In the back-yards of Russian literature, which were then most of allpatronized by the reading public, the literary slanderer ThaddeusBulgarin delineated in his novel "Ivan Vyzhigin" (1829) the type of aLithuanian Jew by the name of Movsha (Moses), who appears as theembodiment of all mortal sins. The product of an untalented and taintedpen, Bulgarin's novel was soon forgotten. Yet it contributed its sharetoward instilling Jew-hatred into the minds of the Russian people. 

CHAPTER XVII

THE LAST YEARS OF NICHOLAS I. 

1. THE "ASSORTMENT" OF THE JEWS

The beginning of the "Second Emancipation" of 1848 in Western Europesynchronized with the last phase of the era of oppression in Russia. That phase, representing the concluding seven years of pre-reformatoryRussia, was a dark patch in the life of the country at large, doublydark in the life of the Jews. The power of absolutism, banished by theMarch revolution from the European West, asserted itself withintensified fury in the land of the North, which had about that timeearned the unenviable reputation of the "gendarme of Europe. " Thrownback on its last stronghold, absolutism concentrated its energy upon thesuppression of all kinds of revolutionary movements. In default of sucha movement in Russia itself, this energy broke through the frontier lineand found an outlet in the punitive expedition sent to support theAustrians in the pacification of mutinous Hungary. The triumphantpasswords of political freedom which were given out on the other side ofthe Western frontier only intensified the reactionary rage on this side. Since it was impossible to punish action--for under the vigilant eye ofthe terrible "Third Section" [1] revolutionary endeavors were a matterof impossibility--word and thought were subject to punishment. Censorship ran riot in the subdued literature of Russia, tearing out bythe roots anything that did not fit into the mould of the bureaucraticway of thinking. The quiet precincts of the Russian _intelligenzia_, who, in the retirement of their homes, ventured to dream of a betterpolitical and social order, were invaded by political detectives whosnatched thence numerous victims for the scaffold, the galleys, andconscription. Such were the contrivances employed during the last yearsof pre-reformatory Russia to hold together the old order of things inthe land of officialdom and serfdom, in that Russia which the poetKhomyakov, though patriot and Slavophile, branded thus:

[Footnote 1: Compare above, p. 21, n. 1. ]

 Blackened in court with falsehood's blackness, And stained by the yoke of slavery, Full of godless flattery, of vicious lying, And ev'ry possible knavery. 

But the full weight of "the yoke of slavery" and "falsehood'sblackness, " by which pre-reformatory Russia was marked, fell upon theshoulders of the most hapless section of Russian subjects, the Jews. Thetragic gloom of the end of Nicholas' reign finds its only parallel inJewish annals in the beginning of the same reign. The would-be "reforms"proposed in the interval, in the beginning of the forties, did notdeceive the popular instinct. The Jews of the Pale saw not only the handwhich was holding forth the charter of enlightenment but also the otherhand which hid a stone in the form of new cruel restrictions. Soon theGovernment threw off the mask of enlightenment, and set out to realizeits reserve program, that of "correcting" the Jews by police methods. 

It will be remembered that the principal item in this program was "theassortment of the Jews, " i. E. , the segregation from among them of allpersons without a certain status as to property or without definiteoccupations, for the purpose of proceeding against them as criminalmembers of society. As far back as 1846 the Government forewarned theJews of the imminent "bloody operation over a whole class, " againstwhich Governor-General Vorontzov had vainly protested. [1] All Jews wereordered to register at the earliest possible moment among the guilds andestates assigned to them, "with the understanding that in case thismeasure should fail, the Government would of itself carry out theassortment, " to wit: "it will set apart the Jews who are not engaged inproductive labor, and will subject them, as burdensome to society, tovarious restrictions. " The threat fell flat, for it was rather too muchto expect that fully a half of the Jewish population, doomed by civildisabilities and general economic conditions to a life of want anddistress, could obtain at a stroke the necessary "property status" or"definite occupations. "

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 64 et seq. ]

Accordingly, on November 23, 1851, the Tzar gave his sanction to the"Temporary Rules Concerning the Assortment of the Jews. " All Jews weredivided into five categories: merchants, agriculturists, artisans, settled burghers, and unsettled burghers. The first three categorieswere to be made up of those who were enrolled among the correspondingguilds and estates. "Settled burghers" were to be those engaged in"burgher trade" [1] with business licenses, also the clergy and thelearned class. The remaining huge mass of the proletariat was placed inthe category of "unsettled burghers, " who were liable to increasedmilitary conscription and to harsher legal restrictions as compared withthe first four tolerated classes of Jews. This hapless proletariat, either out of work or only occasionally at work, was to bear a doublemeasure of oppression and persecution, and was to be branded as despisedpariahs. 

[Footnote 1: i. E. , petty trade, as distinguished from the morecomprehensive business carried on by the merchants who were enrolled inthe mercantile guilds. ]

By April 1, 1852, the Jews belonging to the four tolerated categorieswere required to produce their certificates of enrolment before thelocal authorities. Those who had failed to do so were to be entered inthe fifth category, the criminal class of "unsettled burghers. " Withinthe brief space allotted to them the Jews found themselves unable toobtain the necessary documents, and, thanks to the representations ofthe governors-general of the Western governments, the term was extendedtill the autumn of 1852, but even then the "assortment" had not yet beenaccomplished. The Government was fully prepared to launch a series ofDraconian laws against the "parasites, " including police inspection andcompulsory labor. But while engaged in these charitable projects, thelaw-givers were taken aback by the Crimean War, which, with itsdisastrous consequences for Russia, diverted their attention from theirwar against the Jews. Yet for a successive number of years the lawconcerning the "assortment, " or _razryaden_, as it was popularly styledby the Jews, hung like the sword of Damocles over the heads of hundredsof thousands of Jews, and the anxiety of the suffering masses was pouredout in sad popular ditties:

 _Ach, a tzore, a gzeire mit die razryaden!_ [1]

[Footnote 1: "Alas! What misfortune and persecution there is in theassortment!"]

2. COMPULSORY ASSIMILATION

As for the measures of compulsory assimilation long ago foreshadowed bythe Government, such as the substitution of the Russian or German styleof dress for the traditional Jewish attire, the long coats of the men, they were without any effect on Jewish life, and merely resulted inconfusion and consternation. A curt imperial ukase issued on May 1, 1850, prohibited "all over (the Empire) the use of a distinct Jewishform of dress, beginning with January 1, 1851, " though thegovernors-general were given the right of permitting aged Jews to wearout their old garments on the payment of a definite tax. The prohibitionextended to the earlocks, or _peies_, of the men. 

A year later, in April, 1851, the Government made a further step inadvance and proceeded to deal with the female attire. "His ImperialMajesty was graciously pleased to command that Jewish women be forbiddento shave their heads upon entering into marriage. " [1] In October, 1852, this ukase was supplemented by the regulation that a married Jewessguilty of shaving her head was liable to a fine of five rubles ($2. 50), and the rabbi abetting the crime was to be prosecuted. Since neither theJews nor the Jewesses were willing to submit to imperial orders, theformer from habit, the latter from religious scruples, the provincialauthorities entered upon a regular warfare against these "rebels. " Boththe governors-general and the governors subordinate to them displayedextraordinary enthusiasm in this direction. The officials trackedwith utmost zeal not only the women culprits but also their accomplicesthe rabbis who attended the wedding ceremony, even including the barberswho were called in to shave the heads of the Jewish ladies. Jewish womenwere examined at the police stations to find out whether they still woretheir own hair beneath their kerchiefs or wigs. Frequently the strugglemanifested itself in tragic-comic and even repulsive forms. In someplaces the police adopted the practice of cutting the _peies_ orshortening the long coats of the Jews by force. 

[Footnote 1: In accordance with orthodox Jewish practice, married womenare not allowed to expose their own hair. Apart from the wearing of awig, or _Sheitel_, it was also customary for women to cut or shave theirhair before their wedding and cover their heads with a kerchief. ]

The opposition to the authorities was particularly vigorous in theKingdom of Poland where the rank and file of Hasidim were ready tosuffer martyrdom for any Jewish custom, however obsolete. The fight wasdrawn out for a long time and even reached into the following reign, butthe victory remained with the obstreperous masses. Though at a laterperiod, as the result of general cultural tendencies, the traditionalJewish costume made way in certain sections of Jewry for the Europeanform of dress, it was not in obedience to police measures, but in spiteof them. Compulsory assimilation was as little successful now as hadbeen compulsory isolation in the Middle Ages. The medieval rulers hadimposed upon the Jews a distinct form of garment and a "yellow badge" tokeep them apart from the Christians. Nicholas I. Employed forcible meansto make the Jews by their style of dress appear similar to theChristians. The violence resorted to in both cases, though different inform, sprang from the same motive. 

3. NEW CONSCRIPTION HORRORS

There was yet one domain in which the squeezing and pressing power ofTzardom could fully employ its destructive energy. We refer to militaryconscription. This genuine creation of the imperial brain became moreand more intolerable, serving in Jewish life as a penal and correctionalagency, with its "capture" of old and young, its inquisitorial régime ofcantonists, its deportation for a quarter of a century and longer intofar-off regions. Even the Russian peasants were stricken with terror atthe thought of Nicholas' conscription, which in the reminiscences of theportrayers of that period is pictured as life-long deportation, and theyfrequently shirked military duty by fleeing from the land-owners andhiding themselves in the woods. How much more terrible must thenconscription have been for the Jew, whose family was robbed both of ayoung father and a tender son. No means was left unused to evade thisatrocious obligation. The reports of the governors refer to the"immeasurable difficulties in carrying out the conscription among theJews. "

 Apart from innumerable cases of self-mutilation--to quote the words of one of these reports written in 1850--the disappearance, without exception, of all able-bodied Jews has become so general that in some communities, outside of those unfit for military service because of age or physical defects, not a single person can be found during conscription who might be drafted into the army. Some flee abroad, whilst others hide in adjacent governments. 

Those in hiding were hunted down like wild beasts. Their life, as acontemporary witness testifies, was worse than that of galley slaves, for the slightest indiscretion brought ruin upon them. Many resorted toself-mutilation to render themselves unfit for military service. Theychopped off their fingers or toes, damaged their eyesight, andperpetrated every possible form of maiming to evade a military servicewhich was in effect penal servitude. "The most tender-hearted mother, "to quote a contemporary, "would place the finger of her beloved sonunder the kitchen knife of a home-bred quack surgeon. "

This evasion resulted in immense shortages which pressed heavily uponthe Jewish communities, since the latter were held collectivelyresponsible for supplying the full quota of recruits. The reports aboutthe unsatisfactory conscription results among the Jews filled theGovernment in St. Petersburg with rage. The persistent reluctance ofhuman beings to be parted almost for life from those near and dear tothem, or to see their little ones carried off to an early grave or tothe baptismal font, was regarded as a manifestation of criminalself-will. Accordingly, the former measures of "cutting short" and"curbing" this self-will were improved upon by new ones. In December, 1850, the Tzar gave orders that for every missing Jewish recruit in agiven community three men of the minimum age of twenty from the samecommunity and one more recruit for every two thousand rubles ($1000) oftax arrears should be impressed into service. A year later the followingatrocious measures were issued for the purpose "of cutting short theconcealment of Jews from military service": the fugitives were to becaptured, flogged, and drafted into the army over and above the requiredquota of recruits. The communities in which they were hidden were to befined. The relatives of a recruit who failed to present himself inproper time were to be taken in his stead, even if these relativeshappened to be heads of families. The official representatives of thecommunities were equally liable to being sent into the army if foundconvicted of any inaccuracy in carrying out the conscription. 

A reign of terror followed in the Jewish communities upon thepromulgation of these laws. The Kahal elders--it will be remembered thatthey continued to exist after the abrogation of the Kahals, acting asthe fiscal agents of the Government [1]--now faced a terriblealternative: to become, in the words of a contemporary, "eithermurderers of martyrs, " i. E. , either to capture and send into the armyany youth or boy, without discrimination, or themselves to don the grayuniform and be impressed into military services as "penal" recruits. Inconsequence, a fiendish hunt after human beings was set afoot in thePale of Settlement. Adults were seized and, regardless of their beingthe only mainstay of their families, were taken captive, and children ofeight were captured and presented to the recruiting authorities as beingof the obligatory age of twelve. But despite all this hunting, manycommunities were not able to furnish their quota of soldiers, and thenumber of "penal" recruits from among the Kahal elders was veryconsiderable. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 60. ]

Weeping and moaning resounded in the neighborhood of the recruitingstations in the Jewish towns where parents and relatives took leave fromtheir dear ones who were doomed to a perpetual barrack life. And yet thefury of the Government was not satisfied. In 1853 new "temporary rules"were issued, "by way of experiment, " whereby not only communities butalso individuals among Jews were granted the right of offering as theirsubstitutes any fellow-Jew from another city than his own who was caughtwithout a passport. Any Jew who happened to absent himself from hisplace of residence without a passport could be seized and drafted intoservice as a substitute for a regular recruit due from the family of thecaptor. The "captive, " regardless of age, was made a soldier, and thecaptor was given a receipt for one recruit. 

A new ferocious hunt began. The official "captors" employed by theKahals were no longer the only ones to prowl after living prey. Thechase was now taken up by every private individual who wished to find asubstitute for a member of his family, or who simply wanted to turn apenny by selling his recruiting receipt. Hordes of Jewish bandits sprangup who infested the roads and the inns, and by trickery or force madethe travellers part with their passports and then dragged them to therecruiting stations as "captives" to be sent into the army. Never beforehad the Jewish masses, yielding to pressure from above, sunk to suchdepths of degradation. The Jew became a beast of prey to his fellow-Jew. Jews were afraid of budging an inch from their native cities. Everypasser-by was suspected of being a captor or a bandit. The recruitinginquisition of Nicholas inflicted upon the Jews the utmost limit ofmartyrdom. It set Jew against Jew, called forth "a war of all againstall, " threw the tortured and the torturers into one heap, and sulliedthe Jewish soul. 

All this took place while the Crimean War was going on. The Russianarmy, on the altar of which so many human sacrifices had been offered inthe course of thirty years, marched to save "the honor of Russia, " intruth, to save the old régime. Squadron upon squadron issued from theinner recesses of Russia, and marched towards the battlefields of theSouth, marched to the slaughter, into the mouths of the cannons of theEnglish and French, who knew how to conquer without penal conscriptionsand without inflicting tortures upon tender-aged cantonists. The"gendarme of Europe, " who, armed to his teeth, had contemptuouslythreatened to "finish the enemy with his soldier caps, " could not holdout against the army of the "rotten West. " Hundreds of thousands ofRussian soldiers fell beneath the walls of Sevastopol, upon the heightsof Inkerman. Thousands of Jewish soldiers were laid among them in"brotherly graves. " The Jews, enslaved by pre-reformatory Russia, diedfor a fatherland which treated them as pariahs, which had bestowed uponthem a monstrous conscription, the unexampled institutions ofcantonists, penal recruits, and "captives. " However, it soon becameclear that those who had fallen under the walls of Sevastopol had sealedby their death not the honor but the dishonor of the old régime of bloodand iron. Beneath the rotting corpse of an obsolete statecraft, builtupon serfdom and maintained by soldiery and police, the germ of a newand better Russia began to stir. 

4. THE RITUAL MURDER TRIAL OF SARATOV

One more detail was lacking to complete the dismal picture and to bringout the full symmetry between the end of Nicholas' reign and its ominousbeginning: a medieval ritual murder trial after the pattern of theVelizh case. And a trial of this nature did not fail to come. InDecember, 1852, and in January, 1853, two Russian boys from among thelower classes disappeared in the city of Saratov, in central Russia. Their bodies were found two or three months later in the Volga, coveredwith wounds and bearing the traces of circumcision. The lattercircumstance led the coroners to believe that the crime had beenperpetrated by Jews. Saratov, a city situated outside the Pale ofSettlement, harbored at that time a small Jewish settlement consistingof some forty soldiers of the local garrison and several civilian Jewishtradesmen and artisans who lived in the prohibited Volga town by thegrace of the police. There were also a few converts. 

The vigilant eyes of the coroners were riveted on this settlement. Anofficial by the name of Durnovo, who had been dispatched from St. Petersburg to take charge of the case, began at once to direct theinquiry into the channel of a ritual murder case. Needless to say therewere soon found material witnesses from among the ignorant or criminalclass who were under the hypnotic influence of the ritual murder myth. Aprivate, called Bogdanov, who had been convicted of vagrancy, and anintoxicated gubernatorial official by the name of Krueger testified thatthey were present at the time when the Jews squeezed out the blood fromthe bodies of the murdered boys. They also mentioned by name theprincipal perpetrators of the murder, the "circumcision expert" in thelocal Jewish settlement, a soldier called Shlieferman, and a furriernamed Yankel Yushkevicher, a devout Jew. The incriminated Jews werethrown into prison, but, despite excruciating cross-examinations, theyand the other defendants indignantly denied not only their complicity inthe murder but also the ritual murder accusation as a whole. 

The investigation became more and more involved, drawing into its net aconstantly growing number of persons, until in July, 1854, a special"Judicial Commission" was appointed by order of Nicholas I. For thepurpose of disclosing not only the particular crime committed at Saratovbut also "of investigating the dogmas of the religious fanaticism of theJews. " The latter task, being of a theoretic nature, was entrusted, in1855, to a special commission under the auspices of the Ministry of theInterior. Among the theologians and Hebraists who were members of thatCommission was also the baptized professor Daniel Chwolson who hadscientifically disproved the ritual legend. In 1856, after a protractedinquiry of two years, the judicial commission, having failed to discoverevidence against the accused, decided to set them at liberty, but "toleave them under strong suspicion. "

In the meantime, Alexander II. Had ascended the throne of the Tzars, andthe dawn of Russian renascence began to disperse the nightmares of thepast era. Yet so deeply ingrained were the old prejudices in manybureaucratic minds that when the conclusion reached by the judicialcommission was submitted to the Senate the votes were divided. The casewas transferred to the Council of State, and there the high dignitariesmanaged to effect a compromise between their medieval prejudices andtheir involuntary concessions to the spirit of the age. They refused toenter into a discussion of "the still unsolved question as to the use ofChristian blood by the Jews, " but they "unhesitatingly recognized theexistence of the crime itself, " which had been perpetrated atSaratov--this in spite of the fact that the only ground on which thecrime was ascribed to alleged fanatical practices and laid at the doorof the Jews were the traces of circumcision on the dead bodies. Ignoringthis inner contradiction and setting aside the weighty objections of theliberal Minister of Justice Zamyatin, the Council of State brought in averdict of guilty against the impeached Jews, the soldier Shliefermanand the two Yushkevichers, senior and junior, sentencing them to penalservitude. 

The sentence was confirmed by Alexander II. In May, 1860. Therepresentatives of the St. Petersburg community, Baron Joseph Günzburgand others, petitioned the Tzar to postpone the verdict until thescholarly commission of experts should have rendered its decision withregard to the compatibility of ritual murder with the teachings ofJudaism. But the president of the Council of State, Count Orlov, presented the matter to the Tzar in a different light, asserting thatall that the Jews intended by their petition was "to keep off for anindefinite period the decision on a case in which their coreligionistsare involved. " He, therefore, insisted on the immediate execution of thesentence, and the Tzar yielded. 

After eight long years of incarceration, in the course of which two ofthe impeached Jews committed suicide, the principal "perpetrators" werefound to be physical wrecks and no longer able to discharge their penalservitude. The innocent sufferer, old Yushkevicher, languished in prisonfor seven more years, and was finally liberated in 1867 by order ofAlexander II. , who had been petitioned by Adolph Crémieux, the presidentof the Alliance Israélite Universelle, to pardon the unhappy man. Inthis way the heritage of the dark past protruded into the increasingbrightness of the new Russia, which in the beginning of the sixties waspassing through the era of "Great Reforms. "

CHAPTER XVIII

THE ERA OF REFORMS UNDER ALEXANDER II. 

1. THE ABOLITION OF JUVENILE CONSCRIPTION

When after the Crimean War, which had exposed the rottenness of the oldorder of things, a fresh current of air swept through the atmosphere ofRussia, and the liberation of the peasantry and other great reforms werecoming to fruition, the Jewish problem, too, was in line of being placedin the forefront of these reforms. For, after having done away with theinstitution of serfdom, the State was consistently bound to liberate itsthree million of Jewish serfs who had been ruthlessly oppressed andpersecuted during the old régime. 

Unfortunately the Jewish question, which was nothing more nor less thanthe question of equal citizenship for the Jews, was not placed in theline of the great reforms, but was pushed to the rear and solvedfragmentarily--on the instalment plan, as it were--and within narrowlycircumscribed limits. Like all the other officially inspired reforms ofthat period, which proceeded up to a certain point and halted before theprohibited zone of constitutional and political liberties, so, too, thesolution of the Jewish problem was not allowed to pass beyond theborder-line. For the crossing of that line would have rendered the wholequestion null and void by the simple recognition of the equality of allcitizens. The regenerated Russia of Alexander II. , stubborn in itsrefusal of political freedom and civil equality, could only choose thepath of half-measures. Nevertheless, the transition from thepre-reformatory order of things to the new state of affairs signified aradical departure both in the life of Russia in general and in Jewishlife in particular. It did so not because the new conditions wereperfect, but because the old ones were so inexpressibly ugly andunbearable, and the mere loosening of the chains of servitude was hailedas a pledge of complete liberation. 

Far more intense than in the political life of Russia was the crisis inits social life. While a chilling wind was still blowing from the wintryheights of Russian officialdom, while a grim censorship was stillholding down the flight of the printed word, the released social energywas whirling and swirling in all classes of Russian society, sometimesbreaking the fetters of police restraint. The outbursts of young Russiaran far ahead of the slow progress of the reforms inspired from above. It blazed the path for political freedom which the West of Europe hadlong traversed, and which was to prove in Russia tortuous and thorny. 

The phase of Jewish life which claimed the first thought of AlexanderII. 's Government was the military conscription. Prior to the conclusionof the Crimean War, the Committee on Jewish Affairs [1] called theTzar's attention to the necessity of modifying the method of Jewishconscription, with its fiendish contrivances of seizing juvenilecantonists and enlisting "penal" and "captive" recruits. Neverthelessthe removal of this crying evil was postponed for a year, until thepromulgation of the Coronation Manifesto [2] of August 26, 1856, when itwas granted as an act of grace. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 49. ]

[Footnote 2: On the meaning of Manifesto see later, p. 246, n. 1. ]

 Prompted by the desire--the Manifesto reads--of making it easier for the Jews to discharge their military duty and of averting the inconveniences attached thereto, we command as follows:

 1. Recruits from among the Jews are to be drafted in the same way as from among the other estates, primarily from among those unsettled and not engaged in productive labor. [1] Only in default of able-bodied men among these, the shortage is to be made up from among the category of Jews who by reason of their engaging in productive labor are recognized as useful. 

 2. The drafting of recruits from among other estates and of those under age is to be repealed. 

 3. In regard to the making up of the shortage of recruits, the general laws are to be applied, and the exaction of recruits from Jewish communities as a penalty for arrears is to be repealed. 

 4. The temporary rules, enacted by way of experiment in 1853, granting Jewish communities and Jewish individuals the right of presenting as recruits in their own stead coreligionists seized without passports [2] are to be repealed. 

[Footnote 1: See on these designations pp. 64 and 142. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 148 et seq. ]

The abolition of juvenile conscription followed automatically upon theannulment, by virtue of the same Coronation Manifesto, of the generalRussian institution of "cantonists" and "soldier children, " who were nowordered to be returned to their parents and relatives. Only in the caseof the Jews a rider was attached to the effect that those Jewishchildren who had embraced Christianity during their term of militaryservice should not be allowed to go back to their parents and relatives, if the latter remained in their old faith, and should be placedexclusively in Christian families. 

The Coronation Manifesto of 1856 marks the end of the recruitinginquisition, which had lasted for nearly thirty years, adding a uniquepage to the annals of Jewish martyrdom. In the matter of conscription, at least, the Jews were, in a certain measure, granted equal rights. Theoperation of the general statute concerning military service wasextended to them, with a few limitations which were the heritage of thepast. The old plan of the "assortment of the Jews" is reflected in theclause of the Manifesto, providing for increased conscription from among"those unsettled and not engaged in productive labor, " i. E. , of the massof the proletariat, as distinct from the more or less well-to-doclasses. Nor was the old historic crime made good: the Jewish cantonistswho had been forcibly converted to the Greek-Orthodox faith were notallowed to return to their kindred. As heretofore, baptism remained a_conditio sine qua non_ for the advancement of a Jewish soldier, andonly in 1861 was permission given to promote a Jewish private to therank of a sergeant for general merit, without special distinction on thebattlefield which had been formerly required. Beyond this rank no Jewcould hope to advance. 

2. "HOMEOPATHIC" EMANCIPATION AND THE POLICY OF "FUSION"

Following upon the removal of the "black stain" of conscription came thequestion of lightening the "yoke of slavery, " that heavy burden ofrightlessness which pressed so grievously upon the outcasts of theJewish Pale. Already in March, 1856, Count Kiselev, a semi-liberalofficial and formerly the president of the "Jewish Committee" which hadbeen appointed in 1840 [1] and which was composed of the heads of thevarious ministries, submitted a memorandum to Alexander II. In which hetook occasion to point out that "the attainment of the goal indicated inthe imperial ukase of 1840, that of bringing about the fusion of theJews with the general population, is hampered by various provisionallyenacted restrictions which, when taken in conjunction with the generallaws, contain contradictions and engender confusion. "

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 49 et seq. ]

The result was an imperial order, dated March 31, 1856, "to revise allexisting regulations affecting the Jews so as to bring them into harmonywith the general policy of fusing this people with the originalinhabitants, as far as the moral status of the Jews may render itpossible. " The same ministers who had taken part in the labors of theJewish Committee were instructed to draft a plan looking to themodification of the laws affecting the Jews and to submit theirsuggestions to the Tzar. 

In this way the inception of the new reign was marked by acharacteristic slogan: the fusion of the Jews with the Russian people, to be promoted by alleviations in their legal status. The way leading tothis "fusion" was, in the judgment of Russian officialdom, blocked bythe historic unity of the Jewish nation, a unity which in governmentalphraseology was styled "Jewish separatism" and interpreted as the effectof the inferior "moral status" of the Jews. At the same time it wasimplied that Jews with better "morals, " i. E. , those who have shown aleaning toward Russification, might be accorded special legal advantagesover their retrograde coreligionists. 

From that moment the bureaucratic circles of St. Petersburg becameobsessed with the idea of picking out special groups from among theJewish population, distinguished by financial or educationalqualifications, for the purpose of bestowing upon them certain rightsand privileges. It was the old coin--Nicholas' idea of the "assortment"of the Jews--with a new legend stamped upon it. Formerly it had beenintended to penalize the "useless" or "unsettled burghers" byintensifying their rightlessness; now this plan gave way to the policyof rewarding the "useful" elements by enlarging their rights or reducingtheir rightlessness. The objectionable principle upon which this wholesystem was founded, the division of a people into categories offavorites and outcasts, remained in full force. There was only adifference in degree: the threat of legal restrictions for thedisobedient was replaced by holding out promises of legal alleviationsfor the obedient. 

A small group of influential Jewish merchants in St. Petersburg, whichstood in close relations to the highest official spheres, the purveyorand banker Baron Joseph Yozel Günzburg [1] and others, seized eagerlyupon this idea which bade fair to shower privileges upon the well-to-doclasses. In June, 1856, this group addressed a petition to AlexanderII. , complaining about the disabilities which weighed so heavily uponall Jews, "from the artisan to the first guild merchant, from theprivate soldier to the Master of Arts, and forced them down to the levelof a degraded, suspected, untolerated tribe. " At the same time theyassured the Tzar that, were the Government to give a certain amount ofencouragement to the Jews, the latter would gladly meet it half-way andhelp in the realization of its policy to draw the Jews nearer to theoriginal inhabitants and turn them in the direction of productive labor. 

[Footnote 1: Popularly known by his middle name as _Yozel_. ]

 Were--the petitioners declare--the new generation which has been brought up in the spirit and under the control of the Government, were the higher mercantile class which for many years has diffused life, activity, and wealth in the land, were the conscientious artisans who earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, to receive from the Government, as a mark of distinction, larger rights than those who have done nothing to attest their well-meaningness, usefulness, and industry, then the whole Jewish people, seeing that these few favored ones are the object of the Government's righteousness and benevolence and models of what it desires the Jews to become, would joyfully hasten to attain the goal marked out by the Government. Our present petition, therefore, is to the effect that our gracious sovereign may bestow his kindness upon us, and, by distinguishing the grain from the chaff, may be pleased to accord a few moderate privileges to the most educated among us, to wit:

 1. "Equal rights with the other (Russian) subjects or with the Karaite Jews [1] to the educated and well-deserving Jews who possess the title of Honorary Citizens, to the merchants affiliated for a number of years with the first or second guild and distinguished by their business integrity, to the soldiers who have served irreproachably in the army. "

 2. The right of residence outside the Pale of Settlement "to the best among the artisans" who possess laudatory certificates from the trade-unions. The privileges thus accorded to "the best among us" will help to realize the consummation of the Government "that the sharply marked traits which distinguish the Jews from the native Russians should be levelled, and that the Jews should in their way of thinking and acting become akin to the latter. " Once placed outside their secluded "Pale, " the Jews "will succeed in adopting from the genuine Russians the praise-worthy qualities, by which they are distinguished, and the striving for culture and useful endeavor will become universal. "

[Footnote 1: On the emancipation of the Karaites see Vol. I, p. 318. ]

The petition reflects the humiliating attitude of men who were standingon the boundary line between slavery and freedom, whose cast of mind hadbeen formed under the régime of oppression and caprice. Pointing to theexample of the West where the bestowal of equal rights had contributedto the success of Jewish assimilation, the St. Petersburg petitionerswere not even courageous enough to demand equal rights as the price ofassimilation, and professed, perhaps from diplomatic considerations, tocontent themselves with miserable crumbs of rights and privileges for"the best among us. " They failed to realize the meanness of theirsuggestion to divide a nation into best and worst, into those worthy ofa human existence and those unworthy of it. 

3. THE EXTENSION OF THE RIGHT OF RESIDENCE

After some wavering, the Government decided to adopt the method of"picking" the best. The intention of the authorities was to apply thegradual relaxation of Jewish rightlessness not to groups ofrestrictions, but to groups of persons. The Government entered upon thescheme of abolishing or alleviating certain restrictions not for thewhole Jewish population but merely for a few "useful" sections withinit. Three such sections were marked off from the rest: merchants of thefirst guild, university graduates, and incorporated artisans. 

The resuscitated "Committee for the Amelioration of the Jews" [1]displayed an intense activity during that period (1856-1863). For fullytwo years (1857-1859) the question of granting the right of permanentresidence in the interior governments to merchants of the first guildoccupied the attention of that Committee and of the Council of State. The Committee had originally proposed to restrict this privilege byimposing a series of exceedingly onerous conditions. Thus, the merchantsintending to settle in the Russian interior were to be required to havebelonged to the first guild within the Pale for ten years previously, and they were to be allowed to leave the Pale only after securing ineach case a permit from the Ministers of the Interior and of Finance. But the Council of State found that, circumscribed in this manner, theprivilege would benefit only a negligible fraction of the Jewishmerchant class--there were altogether one hundred and eight Jewishfirst-guild merchants within the Pale--and, therefore, considered itnecessary to reduce the requirements for settling in the interior. 

[Footnote 1: Compare above, p. 49. ]

A long succession of meetings of this august body was taken up with theperplexing problem how to attract big Jewish capital into the centralgovernments and at the same time safeguard the latter against theexcessive influx of Jews, who, for the sake of settling there, wouldregister in the first guild and, under the disguise of relatives, wouldbring with them, as one of the members of the Council put it, "the wholetribe of Israel. " After protracted discussions, a resolution was adoptedwhich was in substance as follows:

 The Jewish merchants who have belonged to the first guild for not less than two years prior to the issuance of the present law shall be permitted to settle permanently in the interior governments, accompanied by their families and a limited number of servants and clerks. These merchants shall be entitled to live and trade on equal terms with the Russian merchants, with the proviso that, after the settlement, they shall continue their membership in the first guild as well as their payment of the appertaining membership dues for no less than ten years, failing which they shall be sent back into the Pale. Big Jewish merchants and bankers from abroad, "noted for their social position, " shall be allowed to trade in Russia under a special permit to be secured in each case from the Ministers of the Interior and of Finance. 

The resolution of the Council of State was sanctioned by the Tzar onMarch 16, 1859, and thus became law. 

In this manner the way was opened for big Jewish capital to enter thetwo Russian capitals and the tabooed interior. The advent of the bigcapitalists was followed by the influx of their less fortunate brethren, who, driven by material want from the Pale, were forced to seek newdomiciles, and in the shape of first guild dues paid for many years aheavy toll for their right of residence and commerce. The position ofthese merchants offers numerous points of contact with the status of the"tolerated" Jewish merchants in Vienna and Lower Austria prior to 1848. 

Toleration having been granted to the Jews with a proper financialstatus, the Government proceeded to extend the same treatment to personswith educational qualifications. The latter class was the subject ofprotracted debates in the Jewish Committee as well as in the Ministriesand in the Council of State. As early as in 1857 the Minister of PublicInstruction Norov had submitted a memorandum to the Jewish Committee inwhich he argued that "religious fanaticism and prejudice among the Jews"could only be exterminated by inducing the Jewish youth to enter thegeneral educational establishments, "which end can only be obtained byenlarging their civil rights and by offering them material advantages. "Accordingly, Norov suggested that the right of residence in the wholeRussian Empire should be granted to the graduates of the higher andsecondary educational institutions. [1] Those Jews who should havefailed to attend school were to be restricted in their right of enteringthe mercantile guilds. The Jewish Committee refused to limit the rightsof those who did not attend the general schools, and proposed, instead, as a bait for the Jews who shunned secular education, to confer specialprivileges in the discharge of military service upon those Jews who hadattended the _gymnazia_ [2] or even the Russian district schools, [3] orthe Jewish Crown schools, [4] more exactly, to grant them the right ofbuying themselves off from conscription by the payment of one hundred totwo hundred rubles (1859). But the Military Department vetoed thisproposal on the ground that education would thus bestow privileges uponJews which were denied even to Christians. The suggestion, relating tomilitary privileges was therefore abandoned, and the promotion ofeducation among Jews reduced itself to an extension of the right ofresidence. 

[Footnote 1: The latter category comprises primarily the _gymnazia_ (seenext note) in which the classic languages are taught, and the so-called_real gymnazia_ in which emphasis is laid on science. The highereducational institutions, or the institutions of higher learning, arethe universities and the professional schools, on which see next page, n. 4. ]

[Footnote 2: The name applies on the European continent to secondaryschools. A Russian _gymnazia_ (and similarly a German _gymnazium_) hasan eight years' course. Its curriculum corresponds roughly to a combinedhigh school and college course in America. ]

[Footnote 3: _i. E. _, schools found in the capitals of districts (orcounties), preparatory to the _gymnazia. _]

[Footnote 4: See above, p. 58 and below, p. 174. ]

In this connection the Jewish Committee warmly debated the question asto whether the right of residence outside the Pale should be accorded tograduates of the higher and secondary educational institutions, or onlyto those of the higher. The Ministers of the Interior and PublicInstruction (Lanskoy and Kovalevski) advocated the former more liberalinterpretation. But the majority of the Committee members, acting "inthe interests of a graduated emancipation, " rejected the idea ofbestowing the universal right of residence upon the graduates of_gymnazia_, and _lyceums_ and even upon those of universities and otherinstitutions of higher learning, [1] with the exception of those who hadreceived a learned degree, Doctor, Magister, or Candidate. [2] TheCommittee was willing, on the other hand, to permit the possessors of alearned degree not only to settle in the interior but also to enter thecivil service. The Jewish university graduate was thus expected tosubmit a scholarly paper or even a doctor dissertation for two purposes, for procuring the right of residence in some Siberian locality and forthe right of serving the State. Particular "circumspection" wasrecommended by the Committee with reference to Jewish medical men: aJewish physician, without the degree of M. D. , was not to be permitted topass beyond the Pale. 

[Footnote 1: Such as technological, veterinary, dental, and otherprofessional schools, which are independent of the universities. ]

[Footnote 2: _Magister_ in Russia corresponds roughly to the same titlein England and America. It is inferior to the doctor degree and precedesit. _Candidate_ is a title, now mostly abolished, given to the bestuniversity students who have completed their course and have presented ascholarly paper, without having passed the full examination. ]

In this shape the question was submitted to the Council of State in1861. Here opinions were evenly divided. Twenty members advocated thenecessity of "bestowing" the right of residence not only on graduates ofuniversities but also of _gymnazia_, advancing the argument that even inthe case of a Jewish _gymnazist_ [1] "it is in all likelihood to bepresumed that the gross superstitions and prejudices which hinder theassociation of the Jews with the original population of the Empire willbe, if not entirely eradicated, at least considerably weakened, and afurther sojourn among Christians will contribute toward the ultimateextermination of these sinister prejudices which stand in the way ofevery moral improvement. "

[Footnote 1: _i. E. _, the pupil of a _gymnazium_. ]

Such was the opinion of the "liberal" half of the Council of State. Theconservative half argued differently. Only those Jews deserve the rightof residence who have received "an education such as may serve as apledge of their having renounced the errors of fanaticism. "The wisemeasures adopted" as a precaution against the influx of Jews into theinterior governments" would lose their efficacy, "were permission tosettle all over Russia to be granted suddenly to all Jews who have for ashort term attended a _gymnazium_ in the Western and South-westernregion, for no other purpose, to be sure, than that of pursuing on alarger scale their illicit trades and other harmful occupations. " Henceonly Jews with a "reliable education, " i. E. , the graduates of highereducational institutions, who have obtained a learned degree, should bepermitted to pass the boundary of the Pale. 

Alexander II. Endorsed the opinion of the conservative members of theCouncil of State. The law, promulgated on November 37, 1861, reads asfollows:

 Jews possessing certificates of the learned degree of Doctor of Medicine and Surgery, or Doctor of Medicine, and likewise of Doctor, Magister, or Candidate of other university faculties, are admitted to serve In all Government offices, without their being confined to the Pale established for the residence of Jews. They are also permitted to settle permanently in all the provinces of the Empire for the pursuit of commerce and Industry. 

In addition, the law specifies that, apart from the members of theirfamilies, these Jews shall be permitted to keep, as a maximum, "twodomestic servants from among their coreligionists. "

The promulgation of this law brought about a curious state of affairs, the upshot of the genuinely Russian homoeopathic system of emancipation, A handful of Jews who had obtained learned degrees from universitieswere permitted not only to reside in the interior of t e Empire, butwere also admitted here and there to Government service, in the capacityof civil and military physicians. Yet both of these rights were deniedto all other persons with the same university education, "Physicians andActive Students, " [1] who had not obtained learned degrees. On oneoccasion the Minister of Public Instruction put before the Council ofState the following legal puzzle: A Jewish student, while attending theuniversity of the Russian capital, enjoys the right of residence there. But when he has successfully finished his course and has obtained thecustomary certificate, without the learned degree, he forfeits thisright and must return to the Pale. 

[Footnote 1: Both titles are given at the conclusion of the prescribeduniversity course; the former to medical students, the latter tostudents of other faculties. ]

Yet the Government in its stubbornness refused to make concessions, andwhen it was forced to make them, it did so rather in its own interestthan in that of the Jews. Owing to the scarcity of medical help in thearmy and in the interior, ukases issued in 1865 and 1867 declared Jewishphysicians, even without the title of Doctor of Medicine, to beadmissible to the medical corps and later on to civil service in allplaces of the Empire, except the capitals St. Petersburg and Moscow. Nevertheless, the extension of the plain right of domicile, withoutadmission to civil service, remained for a long time dependent on alearned degree. It was only after two decades of hesitation that the lawof January 19, 1879, conferred the right of universal residence on _all_categories of persons with a higher education, regardless of the natureof the diploma, and also including pharmacists, dentists, _feldshers_, [1] and midwives. 

[Footnote 1: From the German _Feldscherer_, a sort of combination ofleech, first-aid, and barber, who frequently gave medical advice. ]

The privileges bestowed upon the big merchants and "titled"intellectuals affected but a few small groups of the Jewish population. The authorities now turned their attention to the mass of the people, and, in accordance with its rules of political homoeopathy, commenced topick from it a handful of persons for better treatment. The question ofadmitting Jewish artisans into the Russian interior occupied theGovernment for a long time. In 1856 Lanskoy, the Minister of theInterior, entered into an official correspondence concerning this matterwith the governors-general and governors of the Western provinces. Mostof the replies were favorable to the idea of conferring upon Jewishartisans the right of universal residence. Of the three governors-generalwhose opinion had been invited the governor-general of Vilna was theonly one who thought that the present situation needed no change. Hiscolleague of Kiev, Count Vasilchikov, was, on the contrary, of theopinion that it would be a rational measure to transfer the surplus ofJewish artisans who were cooped up within the Pale and had beenpauperized by excessive competition to the interior governments wherethere was a scarcity of skilled labor. [1]

[Footnote 1: The official statistics of that time (about the year 1860)brought out the fact that the number of Jews in the fifteen governmentsof the Pale of Settlement, exclusive of the Kingdom of Poland, butInclusive of the Baltic region, amounted to 1, 430, 800, forming 8% of thetotal population of that territory. The number of artisans in the"Jewish" governments was far greater than in the Russian interior. Thusin the government of Kiev there were to be found 2. 06 artisans to everythousand inhabitants, against 0. 8 in the near-by government of Kursk, i. E. , 2% times more. In reality, the number of Jews in the Westernregion, without the Kingdom of Poland, exceeded considerably 1 andone-half millions, there being no regular registration at that time. ]

A surprisingly liberal pronouncement came from, the governor-general ofNew Russia, Count Stroganov. In the world of Russian officialdomprofessing the dogma of "gradation" and "caution" in the question ofJewish rights he was the only one who had the courage to raise his voiceon behalf of complete Jewish emancipation. He wrote:

 The existence in our times of restrictions in the rights of the Jews as compared with the Christian population in any shape or form is neither in accord with the spirit and tendency of the age nor with the policy of the Government looking towards the amalgamation of the Jews with the original population of the Empire. 

The count therefore concluded that it was necessary "to permit the Jewsto live in all the places of the Empire and engage without anyrestrictions and on equal terms with all Russian subjects in such craftsand industries as they themselves may choose, in accordance with theirhabits and abilities. " It is scarcely necessary to add that the boldvoice of the Russian dignitary, who in a lucid interval spoke up in amanner reminiscent of the civilized West, was not listened to by thebureaucrats of St. Petersburg. Nevertheless, as far as the specificquestion of Jewish artisans was concerned, the favorable replies werebound to have a decisive effect. 

However, red-tape sluggishness managed to retard the decision forseveral years. In 1863 the question was referred back to the JewishCommittee, only a short time before the dissolution of that body, whichfor a quarter of a century had perpetrated every conceivable experimentover the "amelioration of the Jews. " Thence the matter was transferredto the Committee of Ministers and finally to the Council of State. 

In the ministerial body, Valuyev, Minister of the Interior, favored theidea of granting the right of settling outside the Pale to Jewishartisans and mechanics, dependent on certain conditions, "by practisingcaution and endeavoring to avert the rapid influx into the midst of thepopulation of the interior governments of an element hitherto foreign toit. " In reply to Baron Korff, who had advocated the admission of theJewish artisans beyond the Pale not only with their families but alsowith Jewish domestics, Valuyev argued that this privilege "will enableJewish business men of all kinds to reside in the interior governments, under the guise of employes of their coreligionists. " "The Jews, "according to Valuyev, "will endeavor to transfer their activity to afield economically more favorable to them, and it goes without sayingthat they will not fail to seize the first best opportunity ofexploiting the places of the Empire hitherto inaccessible to them. " TheCouncil of State passed the law in the formulation of the Ministry ofthe Interior, adding the necessary precautions against the entirelylegitimate endeavor of Jewish business men "to transfer their activityto a field economically more favorable to them. "

After nine years of preparation, on June 28, 1865, Alexander II. Finallygave his sanction to the law permitting Jewish artisans, mechanics anddistillers, including apprentices, to reside all over the Empire. Bothin the wording of the law and in its subsequent application theprivilege was hedged about by numerous safeguards. Thus, the artisan whowished to settle outside the Pale had to produce not only a certificatefrom his trade-union testifying to his professional ability but also atestimony from the police that he was not under trial. At statedintervals he had to procure a passport from his native town in the Pale, since outside the Pale his status was that of a temporary resident. Inhis new place of residence he was permitted to deal only in the wares ofhis own workmanship. If he happened to be out of work, he was to be sentback to the Pale. 

While opening a valve in the suffocating Pale, the Government took goodcare to prevent the artificially pent-up Jewish energy from rushingthrough it. However, heaving cooped up for so long, the Jews began topress through the opening. In the wake of the artisans, who, on accountof the indicated restrictions of the law or because of the lack oftravelling expenses, emigrated in comparatively small numbers, followedthe commercial proletariat, using the criminal disguise of artisans, inorder to transfer their energies to a "field economically more favorableto them. " The position of these people was tragic. The fictitiousartisans became the tributaries of the local police, depending entirelyon its favor or disfavor. The detection of such "criminals" outside thePale was followed by their expulsion and the confiscation of theirmerchandise. 

As a matter of fact, the Russian Government did everything in its powerto stem the influx of Jews into the interior. Only with the greatestreluctance did it widen the range of the "privileged" Jewish groups. TheTzar himself, held in the throes of the old Muscovite tradition, frequently put his veto upon the proposals to enlarge the area of Jewishresidence. A striking illustration of this attitude may be found in thecase of the retired Jewish soldiers, who, after discharging theirgalley-like army service of a quarter of a century, were expelled fromthe places where they had been stationed and sent back into the Pale. Tothe report submitted in 1858 by the Jewish Committee, pointing out thenecessity of granting the right of universal residence to thesesoldiers, the Tzar attached the resolution: "I decidedly refuse to grantit. " When petitions to the same effect became more insistent, all he didwas to permit in 1860, "by way of exemption, " a group of retiredsoldiers who had served in St. Petersburg in the body-guard to remain inthe capital. Ultimately, however, he was obliged to yield, and in 1867he revoked the law prohibiting retired Jewish soldiers to live outsidethe Pale. Thus after long wavering the right of domicile was finallybestowed upon the so-called "Nicholas soldiers" and their offspring--arather niggardly reward for having served the fatherland under theterrible hardships of the old form of conscription. 

4. FURTHER ALLEVIATIONS AND ATTEMPTS AT RUSSIFICATION

Nevertheless, the liberal spirit of the age did its work slowly butsurely, and partial legal alleviations were granted by the Government orwrested from it by the force of circumstances. The barriers which hadbeen erected for the Jews within the Pale itself were done away with. Thus the right of residence was extended to the cities of Nicholayev andSevastopol, which, though geographically situated within the Pale, hadbeen legally placed outside of it. The obstructions in the way oftemporary visits to the holy city of Kiev were mitigated. Thedisgraceful old-time privilege of several cities, such as Zhitomir andVilna, entitling them to exclude the Jews from certain streets, [1] wasrevoked. Moreover, by the law of 1862, the Jews were permitted toacquire land in the rural districts on those manorial estates in whichafter the liberation of the peasants the binding relation of thepeasants to the landed proprietors had been completely discontinued. Unfortunately, what the Jews thus gained through the liberation of thepeasants, they lost to a large extent soon afterwards through the Polishinsurrection of 1863, forfeiting the right of acquiring immovableproperty outside the cities in the greater part of the Pale. For in1864, after quelling the Polish insurrection, the Government undertookto Russify the Western region, and both Poles and Jews were strictlybarred from acquiring estates in the nine governments forming thejurisdiction of the governors-general of Vilna and Kiev. 

[Footnote 1: On the medieval privilege _de non tolerandis Judaeis_ seeVol. I, pp. 85 and 95. ]

The two other great reforms, that of rural self-government and thejudiciary, were not stained by the ignominious label _kromye Yevreyev_, "excepting the Jews, " so characteristic of Russian legislation. The"Statute concerning Zemstvo Organizations, " [1] issued in 1864, makes noexceptions for Jews, and those among them with the necessary agrarian orcommercial qualifications are granted the right of active and passivesuffrage within the scheme of provincial self-government. In fact, inthe Southern governments the Jews began soon afterwards to participatein the rural assemblies, and were occasionally appointed to ruraloffices. Nor did the liberally conceived Judicial Regulations of 1864[2] contain any important discriminations against Jews. Within a shorttime Jewish lawyers attained to prominence as members of the Russianbar, although their admission to the bench was limited to a few isolatedcases. 

[Footnote 1: A system of local self-government carried on by means ofelective assemblies and its executive organs. There is an assembly foreach district (or county) and another for each government. ]

[Footnote 2: Among other reforms they instituted the Russian bar as aseparate organization. ]

Little by little, another dismal spectre of the past, the missionaryactivity of the Government, began to fade away. In the beginning ofAlexander's reign, the conversion of Jews was still encouraged by thegrant of monetary assistance to converts. The law of 1859 extended thesestipends to persons embracing any other Christian persuasion outside ofGreek Orthodoxy. But in 1864 the Government came to the conclusion thatit was not worth its while to reward deserters and began a new policy bydiscontinuing its allowances to converts serving in the army. A littlelater it repealed the law providing for a mitigation of sentence forcriminal offenders who embrace Christianity during the inquiry or trial. [1]

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 45. ]

In encouraging "the fusion of the Jews with the original population, "the Government of Alexander II. Had in mind civil and cultural fusionrather than religious assimilation, which even the inquisitorialcontrivances of Nicholas' conscription scheme had failed to accomplish. But as far as the cultural fusion or, for short, the Russification ofthe Jews was concerned, the Government even now occasionally indulged inpractices which were borrowed from the antiquated system of enlightenedabsolutism. 

The official enlightenment, which had been introduced during theforties, was slow in taking root. The year 1848 was the first scholasticyear in the two enlightenment nurseries, the rabbinical schools of Vilnaand Zhitomir. Beginning with that year a number of elementary Crownschools for Jewish children were opened in various cities of the Pale. The cruel persecutions of the outgoing regime affected the developmentof the schools in a twofold manner. On the one hand, the Jewishpopulation could not help turning away with disgust from the gift ofenlightenment which its persecutors held out to it. On the other hand, the horrors of conscription induced many a Jewish youth, to seek refugein the new rabbinical schools which saved their inmates from thesoldier's uniform. Many a parent who regarded both the barracks and theCrown schools as training grounds for converts preferred to send hischildren to the latter, where, at least, they were spared the martyrdomof the barracks. The pupils of the rabbinical schools came from thepoorest classes, those that carried on their shoulders the whole weightof conscription. True, the distrustful attitude towards the officialschools was gradually weakening as the new Government of Alexander II. Was passing from the former policy of oppression to that of reforms. Byand by, the compulsory attendance at these schools became a voluntaryone, prompted by the desire for general culture or for a specialtraining as rabbi or teacher. Nevertheless the expectation of theRussian Government under Nicholas I. That the new schools would take theplace of the time-honored educational Jewish institutions, the heder andyeshibah, remained unfulfilled. Only an insignificant percentage ofJewish children went to the Crown schools, and even these children didso only after having received their training at the heder or yeshibah. 

Realizing this, the Government decided to combat the traditional schoolas the rival of the new. Immediately upon his accession to the throne, Alexander confirmed the following resolution adopted by the JewishCommittee on May 3, 1855: "After the lapse of twenty years no one shallbe appointed rabbi or teacher of Jewish subjects, except graduates ofthe rabbinical schools [1] or of the general educational establishmentsof a higher or secondary grade. "

[Footnote 1: i. E. , the Government training schools for rabbis providedby the ukase of 1844. See the preceding page. ]

Having fixed a term of twenty years for abolishing the institution ofmelammeds and religious leaders, the product of thousands of years ofdevelopment, the Government frequently brandished this Damocles swordover their heads. In 1856 a strict supervision was established overheders and melammeds. A year later the Jewish communities wereinstructed to elect henceforward as "official rabbis" [1] only graduatesof the rabbinical Crown schools or of secular educationalestablishments, and, in default of such, to invite educated Jews fromGermany. But all these regulations proved of no avail, and in 1859 a newukase became necessary, which loosened the official grip over theheders, but made it at the same time obligatory upon the children ofJewish merchants to attend the general Russian schools or the JewishCrown schools. 

[Footnote 1: Crown (In Russian _kazyonny_) rabbis in Russia are thosethat discharge the civil functions connected with their office, indistinction from the "spiritual" or ecclesiastic rabbis who are incharge of the purely religious affairs of the community. This divisionhas survived in Russia until to-day. ]

The enforcement of school attendance would scarcely have produced thedesired effect--the orthodox managed somehow to give the slip to"Russian learning"--were it not for the fact that under the influence ofthe inner cultural transformation of Russian Jewry the general Russianschool became during that period more and more popular among theadvanced classes of the Jewish population, and gymnazium and universitytook their place alongside of heder and yeshibah. Yet the hundreds ofpupils in the new schools faded into insignificance when compared withthe hundreds of thousands who were educated exclusively in the oldschools. The fatal year 1875, the last of the twenty years of respitegranted to the melammeds for their self-annihilation, arrived. But thehuge melammed army was not willing to pass out of Jewish life, in whichthey exercised a definite function, with no substitute to take itsplace. The Government was forced to yield. After several briefpostponements the melammeds were left in peace, and by an ukase issuedin 1879 the idea of abolishing the heders was dropped. 

Towards the end of this period the Government abandoned altogether itsattempts to reform the Jewish schools, and decided to liquidate itsformer activity in this direction. By an ukase issued in 1873 the tworabbinical schools and all Jewish Crown schools were closed. On theruins of the vast educational network, originally projected for thetransformation of Judaism, only about a hundred "elementary schools" andtwo modest "Teachers Institutes, " [1] which were to supply teachers forthese schools, were established by the Government. The authorities werenow inclined to look upon the general Russian schools as the mosteffective agencies of "fusion, " and put their greatest trust in theelemental process of Russification which had begun to sweep over theupper layers of Jewry. 

[Footnote 1: In Vilna and Zhitomir. The latter was closed in 1885. Theformer is still in existence. ]

5. THE JEWS AND THE POLISH INSURRECTION OF 1863

While the official world of St. Petersburg was obsessed with the idea ofthe Russification of Jewry, in Warsaw the tendency of Polonization, asapplied to the Jews of the Western region, cropped up in the wake of therevolutionary Polish movement in the beginning of the sixties. At theinception of Alexander's reign the Russian Government set out toequalize the legal status of the Jews in the Kingdom of Poland with thatof the Empire, and to abolish the surviving special restrictions, suchas the prohibition of residing in certain towns, or in certain parts oftowns, disabilities in acquiring property, and others. But the highestPolish administration in Warsaw was obstructing in every possible waythe liberal attempts of the Russian Government. Prior to theinsurrection of 1863, the attitude of Polish society towards the Jewswas one of habitual animosity, and this notwithstanding the fact that bythat time Warsaw harbored already a group of Jewish intellectuals whowere eager to assimilate with the Poles and were imbued with Polishpatriotism. When, in 1859, the _Warsaw Gazette_ published ananti-Semitic article in which the Jews were branded as foreigners, thePolish-Jewish patriots, including the banker Kronenberg, a convert, werestung to the quick, and they came forward with violent protests. Thisled to passionate debates in the Polish press, generally unfriendly tothe Jews. The radical Polish organs, published abroad by politicalexiles, took occasion to denounce bitterly the anti-Semitic trend ofPolish society. The veteran historian Lelevel, who had not yet forgottenPoland's historic injustice of 1831, [1] issued a pamphlet in Brussels, calling upon the Poles to live in harmony with the race with which ithad existed side by side for eight hundred years. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 105. ]

Lelevel's kindly words would scarcely have brought the anti-Semites toreason, had not the Poles at that moment embarked upon an enterprise forthe success of which they sorely needed the sympathy and co-operation oftheir Jewish neighbors. The revolutionary movement which engulfedRussian Poland in 1860-1863 required the utmost exertion of effort onthe part of the entire population, in which the half-million Jews playedno small part. All of a sudden Polish society opened its arms to thosewhom it had but recently branded as foreigners, and out of the ranks ofWarsaw Jewry came a hearty response, expressing itself not only inpatriotic manifestations but also in sacrifices and achievements for thesake of the common fatherland. 

At the head of the Warsaw community during this stormy period stood aman who combined Polish patriotism with rabbinic orthodoxy. Formerlyrabbi in Cracow, Berush [1] Meisels had as far back as 1848 been sent asdeputy to the parliament at Kremsier, [2] and stood in the forefront ofthe Polish patriots of Galicia. In 1856 he accepted the post of rabbi inWarsaw. When the revolutionary movement had broken out, Meiselsendeavored to instruct his flock in the spirit of Polish patriotism. Revered by the Jewish masses for his piety, and by the intellectuals forhis political trend of mind, this spiritual leader of Polish Jewryplayed in the revolutionary Polish movement a role equal in importanceto that of the leading ecclesiastics of Poland. The harmoniousco-operation of the orthodox Chief Rabbi Meisels, the reform preacherMarcus Jastrow, [3] and the lay representatives of the community lentunity and organization to the part played by the Jews in preparing therebellion. 

[Footnote 1: A variant of the name _Baer_. ]

[Footnote 2: A town in Moravia, where, after the rising of 1848, theAustrian parliament met provisionally till March, 1849. ]

[Footnote 3: After the suppression of the Polish insurrection, Jastrowwent to the United States, and became a leading rabbi in Philadelphia. He died in 1903. ]

The Jews of Warsaw participated in all street manifestations andpolitical processions which took place during the year 1860-1861. Amongthose pierced by Cossack bullets during the manifestation of February27, 1861, were several Jews. The indignation which this shooting down ofdefenceless people aroused in Warsaw is generally regarded as theimmediate cause of the mutiny. Rabbi Meisels was a member of thedeputation which went to Viceroy Gorchakov to demand satisfaction forthe blood that had been spilled. In the demonstrative funeral processionwhich followed the coffins of the victims the Jewish clergy, headed byMeisels, marched alongside of the Catholic priesthood. Many Jewsattended the memorial services in the Catholic churches at which fierypatriotic speeches were delivered. Similar demonstrations of mourningwere held in the synagogues. An appeal sent out broadcast by the circleof patriotic Jewish Poles reminded the Jews of the anti-Jewish hatred ofthe Russian bureaucracy, and called upon them "to clasp joyfully thebrotherly hand held forth by them (the Poles), to place themselves underthe banner of the nation whose ministers of religion have in allchurches spoken of us in words of love and brotherhood. "

The whole year 1861 stood, at least as far as the Polish capital wasconcerned, under the sign of Polish-Jewish "brotherhood. " At thesynagogue service held in memory of the historian Lelevel Jastrowpreached a patriotic sermon. On the day of the Jewish New Year prayerswere offered up in the synagogues for the success of the Polish cause, accompanied by the singing of the national Polish hymn _Boze cosPolske_. [1] When, as a protest against the invasion of the churches bythe Russian soldiery, the Catholic clergy closed all churches in Warsaw, the rabbis and communal elders followed suit, and ordered the closing ofthe synagogues. This action aroused the ire of Lieders, the new viceroy. Rabbi Meisels, the preachers Jastrow and Kramshtyk as well as thepresident of the "Congregational Board" were placed under arrest. Theprisoners were kept in the citadel of Warsaw for three months, but werethen released. 

[Footnote 1: Pronounce, _Bozhe, tzosh Polske_, "O Lord, Thou that hastfor so many ages guarded Poland with the shining shield of Thyprotection!"--the first words of the hymn. ]

In the meantime Marquis Vyelepolski, acting as mediator between theRussian Government and the Polish people, had prepared his plan ofreforms as a means of warding off the mutiny. Among these reforms, whichaimed at the partial restoration of Polish autonomy and the improvementof the status of the peasantry, was included a law providing for the"legal equality of the Jews. " Wielding considerable influence, first asdirector of the Polish Commission of Ecclesiastical Affairs and PublicInstruction, and later as the head of the whole civil administration ofthe Kingdom, Vyelepolski was able to secure St. Petersburg's assent tohis project. On May 24, 1862, Alexander II. Signed an ukase revoking thesuspensory decree of 180 1808, [1] which had entailed numerous disabilitiesfor the Jews incompatible with the new tendencies in the political andagrarian life of the Kingdom. This ukase conferred the following rightsupon the Jews:

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 299. ]

 1. To acquire immovable property on all manorial estates on which the peasants had passed from the state of serfs into that of tenants. 

 2. To settle freely in the formerly prohibited cities and city districts, [1] not excluding those situated within the twenty-one verst zone along the Prussian and Austrian frontier. [2]

 3. To appear as witnesses in court on an equal footing with Christians in all legal proceedings and to take an oath in a new, less humiliating form. 

[Footnote 1: See above, pp. 172 and 178. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 95. ]

Bestowing these privileges upon the Polish Jews in the hope of bringingabout their amalgamation with the local Christian population, the Tzarforbids in the same ukase the further use of Hebrew and Yiddish in allcivil affairs and legal documents, such as contracts, wills, obligations, also in commercial ledgers and even in businesscorrespondence. In conclusion, the ukase directs the AdministrativeCouncil of the Kingdom of Poland to revise and eventually to repeal allthe other laws which hamper the Jews in their pursuit of crafts andindustries by imposing special taxes upon them. 

This ukase of Alexander II. , though revoking only part of the insultingrestrictions in the elementary civil rights of the Jews, was given thehigh-sounding title of an "Act of Emancipation. " The secluded hasidicmass of Poland was glad to accept the legal alleviations offered to it, without thinking of any linguistic or other kind of assimilation. On theother hand, the assimilated Jewish _intelligentzia_, which had joinedthe ranks of the Polish insurgents, was dreaming of completeemancipation, and confidently hoped to attain it upon the successfultermination of the revolutionary enterprise. 

In the meantime the revolution was assuming ever larger proportions. Theyear 1863 arrived. The demonstrations on the streets of Warsaw weresucceeded by bloody skirmishes between the Polish insurgents and theRussian troops in the woods of Poland and Lithuania. The Jews took noactive part in this phase of the rebellion. As far as Poland proper wasconcerned, their participation was limited to the secret revolutionarypropaganda. In Lithuania again neither the Jewish masses nor the newlyarisen class of intellectuals sympathized with the Polish cause. In thatpart of the country the systematic Jew-baiting of the Polish pans, ornoble landowners, was still fresh in the minds, and the Jews, moreover, were pinning all their faith to the emancipation to be bestowed by St. Petersburg. The will o' the wisp of Russification had already begun tolure the Jewish professional class. In many Lithuanian localities theJews who failed to show their sympathy with the Polish revolutionariesran the risk of being dealt with severely. Here and there, as had beenthe case in 1831, the rebels were as good as their word, and hanged orshot the Jews suspected of pro-Russian sympathies. 

The reserved attitude of the Lithuanian Jews throughout the mutinyproved their salvation after the suppression of the rebellion, when theferocious Muravyov, the governor-general of Vilna, took up his bloodywork of retribution. As for the Kingdom of Poland, neither therevolution nor its suppression entailed any serious consequences forthem. True, the fraternization of the Warsaw Jews with the Poles duringthe revolutionary years weakened for a little while the hereditaryJew-hatred of the Polish people, and helped to intensify the fever ofPolonization which had seized the Jewish upper classes. But indirectlythe effects of the Polish rebellion were detrimental to the Jews of therest of the Empire. The insurrection was not only followed by a generalwave of political reaction, but it also gave strong impetus to thepolicy of Russification which was now applied with particular vigor tothe Western provinces, and was damaging to the Jews both from the civiland the cultural point of view. 

CHAPTER XIX

THE REACTION UNDER ALEXANDER II. 

1. CHANGE OF ATTITUDE TOWARD THE JEWISH PROBLEM

The decided drift toward political reaction in the second part ofAlexander's reign affected also the specific Jewish problem, which thehomoeopathic reforms, designed to "ameliorate" a fraction of the Jewishpeople, had tried to solve in vain. The general reaction showed itselfin the fact that, after having carried out the first great reforms, suchas the liberation of the peasantry, the introduction of ruralself-government and the reorganization of the administration of the law, the Government considered the task of Russian regeneration to becompleted, and stubbornly refused, to use the expression current at thetime, "to crown the edifice" by the one great political reform, thegrant of a constitution and political liberty. This refusal widened thebreach between the Government and the progressive element of the Russianpeople, whose hopes were riveted on the ultimate goal of politicalreorganization. The striving for liberty, driven under ground by policeand censorship, assumed among the Russian youth the character of arevolutionary movement. And when the murderous hand of the "ThirdSection" [1] descended heavily upon the champions of liberty, theyouthful revolutionaries retorted with political terrorism whichdarkened the last days of Alexander II. And led to his assassination. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 21, n. 1. ]

The complete emancipation of the Jews was out of place in thisatmosphere of growing official reaction. The same bureaucracy whichhalted the march of the "great reforms" for the country at large was notinclined to allow even minor reforms when affecting the Jews only. Eventhe former desire for a "graded" and partial amelioration of theposition of the Jews had vanished. Instead, the center of the stage wasagain occupied by the old red-tape activities, by discussions about theJewish question--endless no less than fruitless--in the recesses ofbureaucratic committees and sub-committees, by oracular animadversionsof governors and governors-general upon the conduct of the Jews, and soon. Theory-mongering of the reactionary variety was again at a premium. Once more the authorities debated the question whether the Jews were tobe regarded as useful or harmful to the State, instead of putting thediametrically opposite question of simple justice: whether the Statewhich is called upon to serve the Jews as part of the civic organism ofRussia is useful to them to an extent which may be lawfully claimed bythem. 

Under Nicholas I. The Government chancelleries had been busy inventingnew remedies against the "separatism" of the Jews and their "harmfulpursuits. " During the first liberal years of Alexander's reign commerceceased to be branded as "a harmful pursuit. " Yet as soon as the Jewishmerchants, stimulated by the partial extension of their right ofresidence and occupation, displayed a wider economic activity and becamesuccessful competitors of the "original" Russian business men, they weremet with shouts of protest demanding that this Jewish "exploitation" beeffectively "curbed. "

In this connection it must be pointed out that the economic advancementof the Jews was not altogether due to the privileges accorded to them bythe Russian legislation, but was rather the effect of general economicconditions. The great progress in industrial life during "the era ofreforms, " more particularly the expansion of railroad enterprises duringthe sixties and seventies, opened up a wide field for the energies ofJewish capitalists. Moreover, the abolition, in 1861, of the old systemof farming out the sale of liquor transferred a part of the big Jewishcapital from the liquor traffic into railroad building. The Jewish"excise farmers" [1] were converted into railroad men, as shareholders, supply merchants, or contractors. A new Jewish plutocracy came intobeing, and its growth excited jealousy and fear among the Russianmercantile class. The Government, filled with enthusiasm for thecultivation of large industries, was not as yet prepared to discriminateagainst the Jews whenever big capital was concerned. But it lent anattentive ear to the "original" Russian merchants whenever theycomplained about Jewish competition in petty trade, on which the lowerJewish classes depended for their livelihood. The Government, which hadnot yet emancipated itself from the habit of "assorting" its citizensand dividing them into a protected and a tolerated class, set out toelaborate measures for "curbing" the Jews belonging to the lattercategory. 

[Footnote 1: i. E. , those that leased from the Government the collectionof excise on liquor. They were designated as _aktzizniks_, from_aktziz_, the Russian word for "excise. "]

The question which confronted the Government next was this: to whatextent have the hopes for a fusion of the Jews with the originalpopulation been justified by the events? Here, too, the reply wasunsatisfactory. The naive expectation that a few gratuities offered tothe Jews in the shape of privileges would fill them with the eagerdesire to "fuse" with the Russians did not come true. Strong as was thetrend towards Russification in the new Jewish _intelligenzia_ of thesixties, the broad masses of Jewry knew nothing of such a tendency. Theauthorities became suspicious: what if these crafty Hebrews should foolus again and refuse to pay for the donated rights by fusing with theChristians? Russian officialdom received new food for reflection whichwas to last it for years, nay, for decades. 

2. THE INFORMER JACOB BRAFMAN

Several occurrences were instrumental in determining the Government toembark upon a new policy, that of investigating assiduously the innerlife of the Jews. At the end of the sixties a man appeared in Vilna whooffered his services to the authorities as a detective and spy among theJews. Jacob Brafman, a native of the government of Minsk, had desertedhis race and religion in the last years of Nicholas' conscription, hoping thereby to escape the nets of the vigilant Kahal "captors" whowished to draft him into the army. Embittered against the Kahal agentswho had become mere police tools, Brafman desired to wreak vengeanceupon the Kahal as a whole, nay, upon the very idea of a Jewish communalorganization. 

When the "fusion, " or assimilation, of the Jews became the watchword ofthe highest official circles, the astute convert found that he couldmake his way by exposing the influences which in his opinion checked theendeavors of the Government. A memorandum presented by him to AlexanderII. , when the latter was passing through Minsk in 1858, opened to himthe doors of the Holy Synod. He was appointed instructor of Hebrew at aGreek-Orthodox seminary and entrusted with the task of finding ways toremove the difficulties placed by the Jews in the path of theircoreligionists intending to go over to Christianity. His mission tofacilitate apostasy among the Jews proved a failure, and his services asdetective were not yet appreciated during the liberal years ofAlexander's reign. 

However, with the reactionary turn in Russian politics, in the middle ofthe sixties, these services were once more in demand. Brafman hastenedto the hot-bed of reactionary chauvinism, the city of Vilna, which wasfirmly held in the iron grip of Muravyov, [1] and there began "to exposethe separatism of the inner life of the Jews" before the highestadministration of the province. He contended that the Kahal, thoughofficially abolished in 1844, [2] continued in reality to exist and tomaintain a widely ramified judiciary (_Bet Din_), that it constituted asecret, uncanny sort of organization which wielded despotic power overthe communities by employing such weapons as the _herem_(excommunication) and _hazakah_ (the Jewish legal practice of securingproperty rights), [3] that it incited the Jewish masses against theState, the Government, and the Christian religion, and fostered in thesemasses fanaticism and dangerous national separatism. In the opinion ofBrafman, the only way to eradicate this "secret Jewish government, " wasto destroy the last vestiges of Jewish communal autonomy by closing allreligious and charitable societies and fraternities. The Jewishcommunity itself ought to share the same fate, and the Jews forming partof it should be included among the Christian estates in the cities andvillages. In a word, Judaism as a communal organization should pass outof existence altogether. 

[Footnote 1: Michael Muravyov (see above, p. 183) was appointed in 1863military governor of the governments of Vilna, Kovno, Grodno, Vitebsk, Minsk, and Moghilev, which he endeavored to Russify with relentlesscruelty. He died in 1866. ]

[Footnote 2: See p. 58 et seq. ]

[Footnote 3: More exactly, the acquisition of property by continued andundisturbed possession for a period of time. This right of acquisitionwas formerly granted by the Kahal on the payment of a certain tax; seeVol. I, p. 190. ]

The heads of the Russian administration in Lithuania listened eagerly tothe sinister revelations of the new Pfefferkorn. [1] In 1866Governor-General Kauffmann appointed a commission, which also included afew Jewish experts, to look into the material compiled by Brafman. Thismaterial consisted of the minutes of the Kahal of Minsk from the firsthalf of the nineteenth century, recording the entirely legitimateenactments which the communal administration had passed by virtue of theautonomous rights granted to it by the Government. Brafman published hismaterial in a series of articles in the official organ of the province, the _Vilenski Vyestnik_, "The Vilna Herald"; the articles were laterrepublished in a separate volume, under the title _Kniga Kahala_, "TheBook of the Kahal. " [2] The data collected by Brafman were embellishedwith the customary anti-Semitic quotations from talmudic and rabbinicliterature, and put in such a light that the Government was placed onthe horns of a dilemma: either to destroy with one stroke the entireJewish communal organization and all the cultural agencies attached toit, or to run the risk of seeing Russia captured by the "UniversalKahal. " It may be added that the _Alliance Israélite Universelle_, whichhad shortly before been founded in Paris for the purpose of assistingJews in various countries, figured in Brafman's indictment as aconstituent society of the universal Jewish Kahal organization. 

[Footnote 1: A medieval convert (died ab. 1521) who wrote againstJudaism, especially the Talmud. ]

[Footnote 2: The first edition appeared in 1869, the second in 1871. ]

The "Book of the Kahal" was printed at public expense and sent out toall Government offices to serve as a guide for Russian officials andenable them to fight the "Inner enemy. " It was in vain that Brafman'signorance of rabbinic lore and his entire distortion of the role playedby the Kahal in days gone-by was exposed by Jewish writers in articlesand monographs; it was in vain that the Jewish members of the commissionappointed by the governor-general of Vilna protested against thebarbarous proposals of the informer. The authorities of St. Petersburgseized upon Brafman's discoveries as incontrovertible evidence of theexistence of Jewish separatism and as a justification for the method of"cautiousness" which they saw fit to apply to the solution of the Jewishproblem. 

3. THE FIGHT AGAINST JEWISH "SEPARATISM"

Another incident which took place about the same time served in the eyesof the leading Government circles as an additional illustration ofJewish separatism. In 1870 Alexander II. Was on a visit to the Kingdomof Poland, and there beheld the sight of dense masses of Hasidim withtheir long earlocks and flowing coats. The Tzar, repelled by thisspectacle, enjoined upon the Polish governors strictly to enforce intheir domains the old Russian law prohibiting the Jewish form ofdress. [1] Thereupon the administration of the Kingdom threw itself withspecial zest upon the important task of eradicating "the ugly costumesand earlocks" of the Hasidim. 

[Footnote 1: See above p. 144. ]

Shortly afterwards the question of Jewish separatism was the subject ofdiscussion before the Council of State. Under the unmistakable influenceof the recent revelations of Brafman, the Council of State arrived atthe conclusion that "the prohibition of external differences in dress isyet far from leading to the goal pursued by the Government, _viz_. , todestroy the exclusiveness of the Jews and the almost hostile attitude ofthe Jewish communities towards Christians, these communities forming inour land a secluded religious and civil caste or, one might say, a statein a state. " Hence the Council proposed to entrust a special commissionwith the task "of considering ways and means to weaken as far aspossible the communal cohesion among the Jews" (December, 1870). As aresult, a commission of the kind suggested by the Council wasestablished in 1871, consisting of the representatives of the variousministries and presided over by the Assistant-Minister of the Interior, Lobanov-Rostovski. The Commission received the name "Commission for theAmelioration of the Condition of the Jews. " [1]

[Footnote 1: Compare above, pp. 161 and 169. ]

While the Government was again engaged in one of its numerousexperiments over the problem of Jewish separatism, an event, unusual inthose days, took place: the Odessa pogrom [1] of 1871. In this granaryof the South, which owed its flourishing commerce to Jews and Greeks, anunfriendly feeling had sprung up between these two nationalities, whichcompeted with one another in the corn trade and in the grocery business. This competition, though of great benefit to the consumers, was a thornin the flesh of the Greek merchants. Time and again the Greeks wouldscare the Jews during the Christian Passover by their barbarous customof discharging pistols in front of their church, which was situated inthe heart of the Jewish district. But in 1871, with the approach of theChristian Passover, the Greeks proceeded to organize a regular pogrom. 

[Footnote 1: _Pogrom_, with the accent on the last syllable, signifies_ruin_, _devastation_, and was originally applied to the ravages of aninvading army. ]

To arouse the mob the Greeks spread the rumor that the Jews had stolen across from the church fence and had thrown stones at the churchbuilding. The pogrom began on Palm Sunday (March 28). The Jews weremaltreated, and their houses and shops were sacked and looted. Havingstarted in the immediate vicinity of the church, the riot spread to theneighboring streets and finally engulfed the whole city. For three dayshordes of Greeks and Russians gave free vent to their mob instincts, demolishing, burning, and robbing Jewish property, desecratingsynagogues and beating Jews to senselessness in all parts of the city, undisturbed by the presence of police and troops who did nothing to stopthe atrocities. The appeal of representative Odessa Jews toGovernor-General Kotzebue was met by the retort that the Jews themselveswere to blame, "having started first, " and that the necessary measuresfor restoring order had been adopted. The latter assertion proved to befalse, for on the following day the pogrom was renewed with even greatervigor. 

Only on the fourth day, when thousands of houses and shops had alreadybeen destroyed, and the rioters, intoxicated with their success, threatened to start a regular massacre, the authorities decided to stepin and to "pacify" the riff-raff by a rather quaint method. Soldierswere posted on the market place with wagon-loads of rods, and therioters, caught red-handed, were given a public whipping on the spot. The "fatherly" punishment inflicted by the local authorities upon their"naughty" children sufficed to put a stop to the pogrom. 

As for the central Government in St. Petersburg, the only thing itwanted to know was whether the pogrom had any connection with the secretrevolutionary propaganda which, beginning with the Jews, might next setthe mob against the nobility and Russian bourgeoisie. Since the officialinquiry failed to reveal any political motives behind the Odessa riots, the St. Petersburg authorities were set at ease, and were only too gladto take the word of the satraps of the Pale who reported that theanti-Jewish movement had started as "a crude protest of the massesagainst the failure to solve the Jewish question"--_viz_. , to solve itin a reactionary spirit--and as a manifestation, of the popularresentment against Jewish exploitation. 

The old charge of separatism against the Jews thus found a companion ina new accusation: their economic "exploitation" of the Christianpopulation of the Pale. The Committee appointed at the recommendation ofthe Council of State was enjoined to conduct a strict inquiry into boththese "charges. " Concretely the work of the Committee reduced itself toa consideration of two questions, one relating to the Kahal, or "theamelioration of the spiritual life of the Jews, " and the other referringto the feasibility of thinning out the Pale of Settlement with the endin view of weakening the economic competition of the Jews. 

The material bearing on these questions included, apart from Brafman's"standard work, " a "Memorandum concerning the more importantAdministrative Problems in the South-west, " which had been submitted in1871 by the governor-general of Kiev, Dondukov-Korsakov, to the Tzar. The author of the memorandum voices his conviction that "the principalendeavors of the Government must be concentrated upon the Jewishquestion. " The Jews are becoming a great economic power in theSouth-western provinces. They purchase or mortgage estates, and obtaincontrol of the factories and mills as well as of the grain, timber, andliquor trade, thereby arousing the bitter resentment of the Christianpopulation, particularly in the rural districts. [1] Moreover, the Jewishmasses, refusing to follow the lead of the handful of Russified Jewishintellectuals, live entirely apart and remain in the throes of talmudicfanaticism and hasidie obscurantism. They "possess completeself-government in their Kahals, their own system of finance in thebasket tax, their separate charitable institutions, " their owntraditional school in the heders, of which there are in the South-westno less than six thousand. In addition, the Jews possess aninternational organization, the "World Kahal, " represented by the_Alliance Israélite "Universelle_ in Paris, whose president, AdolphCrémieux, had had the audacity to protest to the Russian Governmentagainst acts of violence perpetrated upon the Jews. For all thesereasons the governor-general is of the opinion that "the revision of thewhole legislation affecting the Jews has become an imperativenecessity. "

[Footnote 1: According to the official figures, quoted in thememorandum, the number of Jews in the three South-western governments, i. E. , Volhynia, Podolia, and the Kiev province, amounted to 721, 080. Ofthese, 14 per cent lived in rural districts and 86 per cent in citiesand towns. They owned 27 sugar refineries out of 105; 619 distilleriesout of 712; 5700 mills out of 6353; and so forth. The production of theindustrial establishments in the hands of the Jews reached the sum ofseventy million rubles. ]

A similar tone was adopted in the other official documents which cameinto the hands of the "Committee for the Amelioration of the Conditionof the Jews. " The communications of the governors and the reports of themembers of the Committee were all animated by the same spirit, thespirit that spoke through Brafman's "Book of the Kahal. " This was butnatural. The officials, to whom this book had been sent by the centralGovernment "for guidance, " drew from it their whole political wisdom inthings Jewish, and in their replies endeavored to fall in with theinstructions of the Council of State, conveyed to them by the Committee, _viz_. , "to consider ways and means to weaken the communal cohesionamong the Jews. "

In the Kingdom of Poland the governors complained similarly in theirreports that the Jews of the province, though accorded equal rights byVyelepolski, [1] had not complied with the conditions attached to thatact, to wit, "to abandon the use of their own language and script, inexchange for the favors bestowed upon them. " Outside of a handful ofassimilated "Poles of the Mosaic Persuasion, " who were imbued withPolish chauvinism, [2] the hasidic rank and file was permeated byextreme separatism, fostered by "the Kahal through its various agencies, the Congregational Boards, the rabbinate, the heders, and a host ofspecial institutions. "

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 181. ]

[Footnote 2: And hence objectionable from the Russian point of view. ]

These and similar communications formed the groundwork of the reports, or more correctly, the bills of indictment in which the members of theCommittee charged the Jews with the terrible crime of constituting "areligio-political caste, " in other words, a nationality. Following thelead of Brafman, the members of the Committee laid particular emphasis intheir reports on the obnoxiousness of the Talmud and the danger ofJewish separatism. Needless to say, the conclusions offered by them wereof the kind anticipated in the instructions of the Council of State: thenecessity of wiping out the last vestiges of Jewish self-government, such as the Jewish community, the school, the mutual relief societies, in a word, everything that tends to foster "the communal cohesion amongthe Jews. "

The barbarism of these proposals was covered by the fig-leaf ofenlightenment. When the benighted Jewish masses will have fused with thehighly cultured populance of Russia. In other words, when the Jews willhave ceased to be Jews, then will the Jewish question find its solution. In the meantime, however, the Jews are to be curbed by the bridle ofdisabilities. The referee of the Committee on the question of the Paleof Settlement, Grigoryev, frankly stated: "What is important in thisquestion is not whether the Jews will fare better when granted the rightof residence all over the Empire, but rather the effect of this measureon the economic well-being of an enormous part of the Russian people. "From this point of view the referee finds that it would be dangerous tolet the Jews pass beyond the Pale, since "the plague, which has thus farbeen restricted to the Western provinces, will then spread over thewhole Empire. "

For a long time the Committee was at a deadlock, held down bybureaucratic reaction. It was only toward the end of its existence thatthe voice from another world, the posthumous voice of dead and buriedliberalism, resounded in its midst. In 1880 the Committee was presentedwith a memorandum by two of its members, Nekhludov and Karpov, in whichthe bold attempt was made to champion the heretic point of view ofcomplete Jewish emancipation. The language of the memorandum was onewhich the Russian Government had not heard for a long time. 

In the name of "morality and justice" the authors of the memorandum callupon the Government to abandon its grossly utilitarian attitude towardsthe Jews who are to be denied civil rights so long as they do not proveuseful to the "original" population. They expose the selfish motiveunderlying the bits of emancipation which had been doled out to the Jewsduring the preceding spell of liberalism: the desire, not to help theJews, but to exploit their services. First-guild merchants, physicians, lawyers, artisans were admitted into the interior for the sole purposeof developing business in those places and filling the palpable shortagein artisans and professional men. "As soon as this or that category ofJews was found to be serviceable to the Russian people, it was relieved, and relieved only in part, from the pressure of exceptional laws, andreceived into the dominant population of the Empire. " But the millionsof plain Jews, abandoned by the upper classes, have continued tolanguish in the suffocating Pale. [1] The Jewish population is denied theelementary rights guaranteeing liberty of pursuit, freedom of movementand land ownership, such as only a criminal may be deprived of by averdict of the courts. As it is, discontent is rife among thesedisinherited masses. "The rising generation of Jews has already begun toparticipate in the revolutionary movement to which they had hithertobeen strangers. " The system of oppression must be set aside. All theJewish defects, their separatism and one-sided economic activity, aremerely the fruits of this oppression. Where the law has no confidence inthe population, there inevitably the population has no confidence in thelaw, and it naturally becomes an enemy of the existing order of things, "Human reason does not admit of any considerations which might justifythe placing of many millions of the Jewish population, on a level withcriminal offenders. " The first step in the direction of completeemancipation ought to be the immediate grant of the right of domicileall over the Empire. 

[Footnote 1: The narrow utilitarianism of the governmental policy in theJewish question may also be illustrated by the official attitude towardsthe promotion of agriculture among the Jews. Under Alexander I. AndNicholas I. Jewish agricultural colonization in the South of Russia wasencouraged by the grant of special privileges, though the Jewishsettlers were subjected to the stern tutelage of bureaucraticinspectors. But under Alexander II. , when Southern Russia was no longerin need of artificial colonization, the Government discontinued itspolicy of promoting Jewish colonization, and an ukase issued in 1866stopped the settlement of Jews in agricultural colonies altogether. Alittle later the Jewish colonies in the South-west were deprived of alarge part of their lands, which were distributed among the peasants. ]

These bold words which turned the Jews from defendants into plaintiffsran counter to the fundamental task of the Committee, which, accordingto the original instructions received by it, was expected to draft itsplans in a spirit of reaction. At any rate, these words were uttered toolate. A new era was approaching which in solving the Jewish questionresorted to methods such as would have horrified even the conservativestatesmen of the seventies: the era of pogroms and cruel disabilities. 

4. THE DRIFT TOWARD OPPRESSION

During the last decade of Alexander's reign, the machinery of Jewishlegislation was working at a slow rate, pending the full "revision" ofJewish rights. Yet the steps of the approaching reaction could well bediscerned. Thus in 1870, during the discussion of the draft of the newMunicipal Statute by a special committee of the Ministry of theInterior, which included as "experts" the burgomasters of the mostimportant Russian cities, the question arose whether the formerlimitation of the number of Jewish aldermen in the municipal councils toone-third of the whole number of aldermen [1] should be upheld or not. The cities involved were those of the Pale where the Jews formed themajority of the population, and the committee was searching for ways andmeans to weaken "the excessive influence" of this majority upon the cityadministration and to subordinate it to the Christian minority. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 41. ]

One solitary member, Novoselski, the burgomaster of Odessa, advocatedthe repeal of the old restriction, with the one proviso that the Jewishaldermen should be required to possess certain educationalqualifications, inasmuch as educated Jews were "not quite as harmful" asuneducated ones. 

A minority of the members of the Committee favored the limitation of thenumber of Jewish aldermen to one-half, but the majority staunchlydefended the old norm, which was one-third. The representatives of themajority, in particular Count Cherkaski, the burgomaster of Moscow, argued that the Jews constituted not only a religious but also anational entity, that they were still widely removed from assimilationor Russification, that education, far from transforming the Jews intoRussians, made them only more successful in the struggle for existence, that it was inadvisable for this reason "to subject the whole Russianelement (of the population) to the risk of falling under the dominationof Judaism. "

The curious principle of municipal justice by virtue of which themajority of house owners and tax-payers were to be ruled by therepresentatives of the minority carried the day. The new MunicipalStatute sanctioned the norm of one-third for "non-Christians, " andreaffirmed the ineligibility of Jews to the post of burgomaster. 

The law of 1874, establishing general military service and abolishingthe former method of conscription, proved the first legal enactmentwhich imposed upon the Jews equal obligations with theirfellow-citizens, prior to bestowing upon them equal rights. To be sure, the new regulation brought considerable relief to the Jews, inasmuch asthe heavy burden of military duty which had formerly been borne entirelyby the poor burgher class, [1] was now distributed over all estates, while the burden itself was lightened by the reduction of the term ofservice. Moreover, the former collective responsibility of the communityfor the supply of recruits, which had given rise to the institution of"captors" and many other evils, was replaced by the personalresponsibility of every individual conscript. All this, however, was notsufficient to change suddenly the attitude of the Jewish populacetowards military service. 

[Footnote 1: On the "burghers" see Vol. I, p. 308, n. 2. Concerning themilitary duty imposed on them see above, p. 23. ]

The formerly privileged merchantile class could not reconcile itselfeasily to the idea of sending their children to the army. The horrors ofthe old conscription were still fresh in their minds, and even in itsnew setting military service was still suggestive of the hideous horrorsof the past. Those who but yesterday had been dragged like criminals tothe recruiting stations could not well be expected to change theirsentiments over night and appear there of their own free will. Theresult was that a considerable number of Jews of military age (21)failed to obey the summons of the first conscription. Immediately thecry went up that the Jews evaded their military duty, and that theChristians were forced to make up the shortage. The official pens in St. Petersburg and in the provincial chancelleries became busy scribbling. The Ministry of War demanded the adoption of Draconian measures to stopthis "evasion, " As a result, the whole Jewish youth of conscription agewas registered in 1875. At the recruiting stations the age of the youngJews was determined by their external appearance, without regard totheir birth certificates. Finally, in the course of 1876-1878, a numberof special provisions were enacted, by way of exception from the generalmilitary statute, for the purpose "of insuring the regular discharge oftheir military duty by the Jews. "

According to the new legal provisions, the Jews who had been rejected asunfit for military service were to be replaced by other Jews and underno circumstances by Christians. For this purpose, the Jewish conscriptswere to be segregated from the Christians after the drawing of lots, thefirst stage in the recruiting process. [1] Moreover, in the case of Jewsa lower stature and a narrower chest were required than in that ofnon-Jews. In the case of a shortage of "unprivileged" recruits, permission was given to draft not only Jews enjoying, by their familystatus, the third and second class privileges, but also those of thefirst class, i. E. , to deprive Jewish parents of their only sons. [2]

[Footnote 1: Since the number of men of military age greatly exceeds therequired number of recruits, the Russian law provides that lots be drawnby the conscripts to determine the order in which they are to presentthemselves for examination to the recruiting officers. When the quota iscompleted, the remaining conscripts, i. E. , those who, having drawn ahigh number, have not yet been examined, are declared exempt frommilitary service. ]

[Footnote 2: "According to Russian law, the following three categoriesof recruits are exempt from military service: 1) the only sons; 2) theonly wage-earning sons, though there be other sons in the family; 3)those who have an elder brother or brothers in the army. The firstcategory is exempt under all circumstances; the last two on conditionthat the required number of recruits be secured out of the"unprivileged" conscripts. Only in the case of the Jews is the firstcategory drawn upon in the case of a shortage. ]

In this manner the Government sought to "insure" with ruthless vigor thedischarge of this most onerous duty on the part of the Jews, withoutmaking any attempt to insure at the same time the rights of thispopulation of three millions which was made to spill its blood for thefatherland. In the Russo-Turkish War of 1877, many Jewish soldiersfought for Russia, and a goodly number of them were killed or wounded onthe battlefield. Yet in the Russian military headquarters--the post ofcommander-in-chief was occupied by the crown prince, the future TzarAlexander III. --no attention was paid to the thousands of Jewishvictims, but rather to the fact that the "Jewish" firm of armypurveyors, Greger, Horvitz & Kohan [1] was found to have had a share inthe commissariat scandals. When at the Congress of Berlin in 1878 aresolution was introduced calling upon the Governments of Roumania, Servia, and Bulgaria to accord equal rights to the Jews in theirrespective dominions, and was warmly supported by all plenipotentiaries, such as Waddington, Beaconsfield, Bismarck, and others, the only one tooppose the emancipation of the Jews on principle was the Russianchancellor Gorchakov, In his desire to save the prestige of Russia, which herself had failed to grant equal rights to the Jews, thechancellor could not refrain from an anti Semitic sally, remarkingduring the debate that "one ought not to confound the Jews of Berlin, Paris, London, and Vienna, who cannot be denied civil and politicalrights, with the Jews of Servia, Roumania, and several Russianprovinces, where they are a regular scourge to the native population. "

[Footnote 1: Greger was a Greek, and Horvitz a converted Jew. See later, p. 244. ]

Altogether the growth of anti-Semitism in the Government circles and incertain layers of Russian society, towards the close of the seventies, became clearly pronounced. The laurels of Brafman, whose "exposure" ofJudaism had netted him many personal benefits and profitable connectionsin the world of officialdom, were apt to stimulate all sorts ofadventurers. In 1876 a new "exposer" of Judaism appeared on the scene, aman with a stained past, Hippolyte Lutostanski. He was originally aRoman Catholic priest in the government of Kovno. Having been unfrockedby the Catholic Consistory "on account of incredible acts of lawlessnessand immoral conduct, " including libel, embezzlement, rape committed upona Jewess, and similar heroic exploits, he joined the Greek-Orthodoxchurch, entered the famous Troitza Monastery near Moscow as a monk, andwas admitted as a student to the Ecclesiastical Academy of the samecity. 

As a subject for his dissertation for the degree of Candidate [1] theignorant monk chose a sensational topic: "Concerning the Use ofChristian Blood by the Jews. " It was an unlettered and scurrilouspamphlet, in which the author, without indicating his sources, incorporated the contents of an official memorandum on the ritual murderlegend from the time of Nicholas I. , supplementing it by distortedquotations from talmudie and rabbinic literature, without the slightestknowledge of that literature or the Hebrew language. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 165, n. 1. ]

The monastic adventurer, finding himself in financial straits, broughthis manuscript to Rabbi Minor of Moscow, declaring his willingness toforego the publication of his brochure, which no doubt would cause greatharm to the Jews, for a consideration of 500 rubles ($250). Hisblackmail offer was rejected Lutostanski thereupon published his hideousbook in 1876, and travelled with it to St. Petersburg where he managedto present it to the crown prince, subsequently Alexander III. , and tosecure from him a grateful acknowledgement. The book also found theapproval of the Chief of Gendarmerie, [1] who acquired a large number ofcopies and distributed them among the secret police all over Russia. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 21, n. 1. ]

Encouraged by his success, Lutostanski issued a few years later, in1879, another libellous work in two volumes, under the title "The Talmudand the Jews, " which exhibits the same crudeness in style and content ashis previous achievement--a typical specimen of a degraded back-yardliterature. The editor of the Hebrew journal _ha-Melitz_, AlexanderZederbaum, demonstrated clearly that Lutostanski had forged hisquotations, and summoned him to a public disputation, which offer waswisely declined. 

Nevertheless, the agitation of this shameless impostor had aconsiderable effect on the highest official spheres in which an everstronger drift toward anti-Semitism was clearly noticeable. In 1878 thisanti-Semitic trend gave rise to a new ritual murder trial. The discoveryin the government of Kutais, in the Caucasus, of the body of a littleGruzinian girl, named Sarra Modebadze, who had disappeared on the eve ofPassover, was deemed a sufficient reason by the judicial authorities toenter a charge of murder against ten local Jews, although the ritualcharacter of the murder was not put forward openly in the indictment. The case was tried before the District Court of Kutais, and the counselfor the defence succeeded by their brilliant speeches not only todemolish completely the whole structure of incriminating evidence butalso to deal a death-blow to the sinister ritual legend. The case endedin 1879 with the acquittal of all the accused. 

Withal, the "ritual" agitation left a nasty sediment in the Russianpress. When in 1879 the famous Orientalist Daniel Chwolson, a convert toChristianity and professor at the Greek-Orthodox Ecclesiastical Seminaryof St. Petersburg, who had written a learned apologetic treatise"Concerning the Medieval Accusations against the Jews, " published arefutation of the ritual myth under the title "Do the Jews use ChristianBlood?, " he was attacked in the _Novoye Vremya_ by the liberal historianKostomarov who attempted to disprove the conclusions of the defender ofJudaism. The paper itself, hitherto liberal in its tendency, changedfront about that time, and, steering its course by the prevailing moodsin the leading Government circles, launched a systematic campaignagainst the Jews. The anti-Semitic bacilli were floating in the socialatmosphere of Russia and preparing the way for the pogrom epidemic ofthe following decade. 

CHAPTER XX

THE INNER LIFE OF RUSSIAN JEWRY DURINGTHE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II. 

1. THE RUSSIFICATION OF THE JEWISH INTELLIGENZIA

In the inner, cultural life of Russian Jewry a radical break took placeduring this period. True, the change did not affect the rank and file ofRussian Jewry, being rather confined to its upper layers, to Jewish"society, " or the so-called _intelligenzia. _ But as far as the lattercircles are concerned, the rapidity and intensity of their spiritualtransformation may well be compared with the stormy eve of Jewishemancipation in Germany. This wild rush for spiritual regeneration wasout of all proportion to the snail-like tardiness and piecemealcharacter of civil emancipation in Russia. However, the modern historyof Western Europe has shown more than once that such pre-emancipationperiods, including those that evidently prove abortive, offer the mostfavorable conditions for all kinds of mental and cultural revolutions. Liberty as a hope invariably arouses greater enthusiasm forself-rejuvenation, than liberty as a fact, when the romanticism of theunknown has vanished. 

Hurled into the abyss of despair by the last events of Nicholas' régime, the Russian Jews suddenly received what may be called an earnest ofcivil emancipation. The Jewish "Pale" knew but vaguely what was takingplace in the recesses of the St. Petersburg chancelleries during thedecade of reforms, but that a striking change in the attitude of theGovernment had taken place was seen and felt by all. Freedom had beengranted to the victims of the military inquisition, the cantonists. Thegates of the Russian interior had been opened to Jews possessing certainqualifications with regard to property, education, or labor. Theeducated Jews, in particular, were smiled upon benevolently "fromabove": they were regarded by the Government as a factor making forassimilation and as a connecting link with the lower Jewish classes. Thevernal sun of Russian liberty, which flooded with its rays the sociallife of the whole country, just then emerging from serfdom, shone alsofor the hapless Jewish people, and filled their hearts with cheer andhope. The blasts of the reveille which had been sounded in the bestcircles of Russian society by such humanitarians as Pirogov, [1] andsuch champions of liberty as Hertzen, [2] Chernyshevski, [3] andDobrolubov, [4] were carried through the air into the huge Jewish ghettoof Russia. True, the Jewish question received, during the decade ofreforms, but scanty attention in the Russian press, but the little thatwas said about it was permeated by a friendly spirit. The former habitof making sport of the Zhyd was energetically repudiated. 

[Footnote 1: Nicholas Pirogov (1810-1881), famous as pedagogue andadministrator. He was a staunch friend of the Jews, and wasdeeply interested in their cultural aspirations. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 24, n. 1. ]

[Footnote 3: Famous publicist and author, died 1889. ]

[Footnote 4: A famous literary critic, died 1861. ]

This change of attitude may well be illustrated by the followingincident. In 1858 the magazine _Illustratzia_ ("Illustration") of St. Petersburg published an anti-Semitic article on "the Zhyds of theRussian West. " The article was answered by two cultured Jews, Chatzkinand Horvitz, in the influential periodicals _Russki Vyestnik_ ("TheRussian Herald") and _Atyeney_ ("Athenaeum"). In reply to thisrefutation, the _Illustratzia_ showered a torrent of abuse upon the twoauthors who were contemptuously styled "Reb Chatzkin" and "Reb Horvitz, "and whose pro-Jewish attitude was explained by motives of avarice. Theaction of the anti-Semitic journal aroused a storm of indignation in theliterary circles of both capitals. The conduct of the _Illustratzia_ wascondemned in a public protest which bore the signatures of 140 writers, including some of the most illustrious names in the Russian literaryworld. The protest declared that "in the persons of Horvitz and Chatzkinan insult has been offered to the entire (Russian) people, to allRussian literature, " which has no right to let "naked slander" passunder the disguise of polemics. 

Though the protesting writers were wholly actuated by thedesire to protect the moral purity of Russian literature anddid not at all touch upon the Jewish question, the Jewishpublic workers were nevertheless enchanted by this declarationof literary Russia, and were deeply gratified by the impliedassumption that the Jews of Russia formed part of the Russian people. 

Several sympathetic articles in influential periodicals, advocating thenecessity of Jewish emancipation, seemed to complete the happiness ofthe progressive section of Russian Jewry. Even the Slavophile publicistIvan Aksakov, who subsequently joined the ranks of Jew-baiters, recognized at that time, in 1862, the need of a certain measure ofemancipation for the Jews. The only thing that worried him was thedanger that the admission of the Jews to the Russian civil service "inall departments, " might result "in filling with Jews" the Senate andCouncil of State, not excluding the possibility of a Jew occupying thepost of Procurator-General of the Holy Synod. Unshakable in hisfriendship for the Jews was the physician and humanitarian N. Pirogov, [1] who, in his capacity of superintendent of the Odessa SchoolDistrict, was largely instrumental in encouraging the Jewish youth intheir pursuit of general culture and in creating a Russian Jewish press. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 207, n. 1. ]

The most efficient factor of cultural regeneration was the secularschool, both the general Russian and the Jewish Crown school. A flood ofyoung men, lured by the rosy prospects of a free human existence in themidst of a free Russian people, rushed from the farthermost nooks andcorners of the Pale into the _gymnazia_ and universities whose doorswere kept wide open for the Jews. Many children of the ghetto rapidlyenlisted under the banner of the Russian youth, and became intoxicatedwith the luxuriant growth of Russian literature which carried to themthe intellectual gifts of the contemporary European writers. The mastersof thought in that generation, Chernyshevski, Dobrolubov, Pisaryev, Buckle, Darwin, Spencer, became also the idols of the Jewish youth. Theheads which had but recently been bending over the Talmud folios in thestuffy atmosphere of the heders and yeshibahs were now crammed with theideas of positivism, evolution, and socialism. Sharp and sudden was thetransition from rabbinic scholasticism and soporific hasidic mysticismto this new world of ideas, flooded with the light of science, to thesenew revelations announcing the glad tidings of the freedom of thought, of the demolition of all traditional fetters, of the annihilation of allreligious and national barriers, of the brotherhood of all mankind. TheJewish youth began to shatter the old idols, disregarding the outcry ofthe masses that had bowed down before them. A tragic war ensued between"fathers and children, " [1] a war of annihilation, for the belligerentparties were extreme obscurantism and fanaticism, on the one hand, andthe negation of all historic forms of Judaism, both religious andnational, on the other. 

[Footnote 1: The title of a famous novel by Turgenieff, written in 1862, depicting the break between the old and the new generation. ]

In the middle between these two extremes stood the men of thetransitional period, the adepts of Haskalah, those "lovers ofenlightenment" who had in younger years suffered for their convictionsat the hands of fanatics and now came forward to make peace betweenreligion and culture. Encouraged by the success of the new ideas, theMaskilim became more aggressive in their struggle with obscurantism. They ventured to expose the Tzaddiks who scattered the seeds ofsuperstition, to ridicule the ignorance and credulity of the masses, andoccasionally went so far as to complain of the burdensome ceremonialdiscipline, hinting at the need of moderate religious reforms. Theirprincipal task, however, was the cultivation of the Neo-Hebraic literarystyle and the rejuvenation of the content of that literature. They werewilling to pursue the road of the emancipated Jewry of Western Europe, but only to a certain limit, refusing to cut themselves adrift from thenational language or the religious and national ideals. 

On the other hand, that section of the young generation which had passedthrough a Russian school refused to recognize any such barriers, andrushed with elemental force on the road of self-annihilation. _Russification_ became the war cry of these Jewish circles, as it hadlong been the watchword of the Government. The one side was anxious toRussify, the other was equally anxious to be Russified, and the naturalresult was an _entente cordiale_ between the new Jewish _intelligenzia_and the Government. 

The ideal of Russification was marked by different stages, beginningwith the harmless acquisition of the Russian language, and culminatingin a complete identification with Russian culture and Russian nationalideals, involving the renunciation of the religious and nationaltraditions of Judaism. The advocates of moderate Russification did notforesee that the latter was bound, by the force of circumstances, toassume a radical form, while the champions of extreme Russification sawno harm for Jewry in following the example of complete assimilation setby Western Europe. To the former all that Russification implied was theremoval of the obnoxious excrescences of Judaism but not the demolitionof the national organism itself. Progressive Jewry was rightly incensedagainst the obsolete forms of Jewish life which obstructed all healthydevelopment; against the fierce superstition of the hasidic environment, against the charlatanism of degenerating Tzaddikism, against theimpenetrable religious fanaticism which was throttling the nobleststrivings of the Jewish mind. But this struggle for freedom of thoughtshould have been fought out within the confines of Judaism, by means ofa thorough-going cultural self-improvement, and not on the soil ofassimilation, nor in alliance with the powers that be, which were aimingnot at the rejuvenation but at the obliteration of Judaism, in accordancewith the official program of "fusion. "

At any rate, the league between the new Jewish _intelligenzia_ and theGovernment was an undeniable fact. The "Crown rabbis" [1] and schoolteachers from among the graduates of the rabbinical schools of Vilna andZhitomir played the rôle of Government agents who were apt to resort topolice force in their fight against orthodoxy. Feeling secure beneaththe protecting wings of the Russian authorities, they often went out oftheir way to hurt the susceptibilities of the masses by theirostentatious disregard of the Jewish religious ceremonies. When thecommunities refused to appoint rabbis of this class, the latter obtainedtheir posts either by direct appointment from the Government or bybringing the pressure of the provincial administration to bear upon theelectors. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 176, n. 1. ]

Needless to say, the "enlightenment" propagated by these Governmentunderlings did not win the confidence of the orthodox masses whoremembered vividly how official enlightenment was disseminated by theGovernment of Nicholas I. During the era of juvenile conscription. 

The new Jewish _intelligenzia_ showed utter indifference to thesentiments of the Jewish masses, and did not hesitate to induce theGovernment to interfere in the affairs of inner Jewish life. Thus by aregulation issued in 1864 all hasidic books were subjected to a mostrigorous censorship, and Jewish printing-presses were placed under amore vigilant supervision than theretofore. The Tzaddiks were barredfrom visiting their parishes for the purpose of "working miracles" and"collecting tribute, " a measure which only served to surround thehasidic chieftains with a halo of martyrdom and resulted in thepilgrimage of vast numbers of Hasidim to the "holy places, " the"capitals" of the Tzaddiks. All this only went to intensify the distrustof the masses toward the college-bred, officially hall-marked Jewishintellectuals and to lower their moral prestige, to the detriment of thecause of enlightenment of which they professed to be the missionaries. 

A peculiar variety of assimilationist tendencies sprang up among theupper class of Jews in the Kingdom of Poland, more especially in Warsaw. It was a most repellent variety of assimilation, exhibiting moreflunkeyism than pursuit of culture. The "Poles of the MosaicPersuasion, " as these assimilationists styled themselves, had long beenbegging for admission into Polish society, though rudely repulsed by it. During the insurrection of 1861-1863, when they were graciously receivedas useful allies, they were indefatigable in parading their Polishpatriotism. In the Polish Jewish weekly, _Jutrzenka_, [1] "The Dawn, " theorgan of these assimilationists, the trite West-European theory, whichlooks upon Judaism as a religious sect and not as a national community, was repeated _ad nauseam_. One of the most prominent contributors tothat journal, Ludwig Gumplovich, the author of a monograph on thehistory of the Jews in Poland, who subsequently made a name for himselfas a sociologist, and, after his conversion to Christianity, received aprofessorship at an Austrian university, opened his series of articleson Polish-Jewish history with the following observation: "The fact thatthe Jews had a history was their misfortune in Europe. . . . For theirhistory inevitably presupposes an isolated life severed from that of theother nations. It is just this which constitutes the misfortune alludedto. "

[Footnote 1: Pronounce _Yutzhenka_. ]

After the insurrection, the Polonization of the Jewish populationassumed menacing proportions. The upper layer of Polish Jewry consistedexclusively of "Poles of the Mosaic Persuasion" who rejected allelements of Jewish culture, while the broad masses, following blindlythe mandates of their Tzaddiks, rejected fanatically even the mostindispensable elements of European civilization. Riven between suchmonstrous extremes, Polish Jewry was unable to attain even to asemblance of normal development. 

2. THE SOCIETY FOR THE DIFFUSION OF ENLIGHTENMENT

Though intensely engaged in this cultural movement, Russian Jewry didnot yet command sufficient resources for carrying on a well-ordered andwell-systematized activity. The only modern Jewish organization of thatperiod was the "Society for the Diffusion of Enlightenment amongst theJews, " which had been founded in 1867 by a small coterie of Jewishfinanciers and intellectuals of St. Petersburg. It would seem that theJewish colony of the Russian metropolis, consisting of big merchants anduniversity graduates, who, by virtue of the laws of 1859 and 1861, enjoyed the right of residence outside the Pale, did not yet contain asufficient number of competent public workers. For during the firstdecade of the Society its Executive Committee included, apart from itsJewish founders--Baron Günzburg, Leon Rosenthal, Rabbi Neuman--, twoapostates, Professor Daniel Chwolson and the court physician, I. Berthenson. 

The purpose of the Society was explained by one of thefounders, Leon Rosenthal, in the following unsophisticated manner:

 We constantly hear men in high positions, with whom we come in contact, complain about the separatism and fanaticism of the Jews and about their aloofness from everything Russian, and we have received assurances on all hands that, with, the removal of these peculiarities, the condition of our brethren in Russia will be improved, and we shall all become full-fledged citizens of this country. Actuated by this motive, we have organized a league of educated men for the purpose of eradicating our above-mentioned shortcomings by disseminating among the Jews the knowledge of the Russian language and other useful subjects. 

What the Society evidently aimed at was to place itself at the head ofthe Russian-Jewish _intelligenzia_, which had undertaken to act asnegotiators between the Government and the Jews in the cause ofRussification. In reality, the mission of the Society was carried outwithin exceedingly narrow limits. "Education for the sake ofEmancipation" became the watchword of the Society. It promoted highereducation by granting monetary assistance to Jewish students, but it didnothing either for the upbuilding of a normal Jewish school or for theimprovement of the heders and yeshibahs. The dissemination of theknowledge of "useful subjects" reduced itself to the grant of a fewsubsidies to Jewish writers for translating a few books on history andnatural science into Hebrew. 

Even more circumscribed and utilitarian was the point of view adopted bythe Odessa branch of the Society. This branch, founded in 1867, adoptedas its slogan "the enlightenment of the Jews through the Russianlanguage and _in the Russian spirit_. " The Russification of the Jews wasto be promoted by translating the Bible and the prayer-book into theRussian language, "which must become the national tongue of the Jews. "However, the headlong rush for assimilation was soon halted by thesinister spectacle of the Odessa pogrom of 1871. The moving spirits ofthe local branch could not help, to use the language of its president, "losing heart and becoming rather doubtful as to whether the goalpursued by them is in reality a good one, seeing that all the endeavorsof our brethren to draw nearer to the Russians are of no avail so longas the Russian masses remain in their present unenlightened conditionand harbor hostile sentiments towards the Jews. " The pogrom put atemporary stop to the activity of the Odessa branch. 

As for the central Committee in St. Petersburg, its experience was notless disappointing. For, despite all the endeavors of the Society toadapt itself to the official point of view, it was regarded withsuspicion by the powers that be, having been included by the informerBrafman among the constituent organizations of the dreadful andmysterious "Jewish Kahal. " The Russian assimilators, now branded asseparatists, found themselves in a tragic conflict. Moreover, the workof the Society in promoting general culture among the Jews was graduallylosing its _raison d'être_, since, without any effort on its part, theJews began to flock to the _gymnazia_ and universities. The formerpractical stimulus to general culture--the acquisition of a diploma forthe sake of equal rights--was intensified by the promulgation of themilitary statute of 1874 which conferred a number of privileges in thedischarge of military duty on those possessing a higher education. Theseprivileges induced many parents, particularly among the merchant classwhich was then drafted into the army for the first time, to send theirchildren to the middle and higher educational institutions. As a result, the role of the Society in the dissemination of enlightenment reduceditself to a mere dispensation of charity, and the great crisis of theeighties found this organization standing irresolute at the cross-roads. 

3. THE JEWISH PRESS

In the absence of a comprehensive net-work of social agencies, thedriving force in this cultural upheaval came from the periodical Jewishpress. The creation of several press organs in Hebrew and Russian in thebeginning of the sixties was a sign of the times. Though different intheir linguistic medium, the two groups of publications were equallyengaged in the task of the regeneration of Judaism, each adapting itselfto its particular circle of readers. The Hebrew periodicals, and partlyalso those in Yiddish which addressed themselves to the masses, preached_Haskalah_ in the narrower sense. They advocated the necessity of aRussian elementary education and of secular culture in general; theyemphasized the uselessness of the traditional Jewish school training, and exposed superstition and obscurantism. The Russian publications, again, which were intended for the Jewish and the Russian_intelligenzia_, pursued in the main a political goal, the fight forequal rights and the defence of Judaism against its numerous detractors. 

In both groups one can discern the gradual ripening of the social Jewishconsciousness, the advance from elementary and often naive notions tomore complex ideas. The two Hebrew weeklies founded in 1860, _ha-Karmel_, "The Carmel, " in Vilna, and _ha-Melitz_, "The Interpreter, "in Odessa, the former edited by Fünn and the latter by Zederbaum, [1]were at first adapted to the mental level of grown-up children, expatiating upon the benefits of secular education and the "favors" ofthe Government consequent upon it. _Ha-Karmel_ expired in 1870, whileyet in its infancy, though it continued to appear at irregular intervalsin the form of booklets dealing with scientific and literary subjects. _Ha-Melitz_ was more successful. It soon grew to be a live andcourageous organ which hurled its shafts at Hasidism and Tzaddikism, andoccasionally even ventured to raise its hand against rabbinical Judaism. The Yiddish weekly _Kol Mebasser_, [2] which was published during1862-1871 as a supplement to _ha-Melitz_ and spoke directly to themasses in their own language, attacked the dark sides of the old orderof things in publicistic essays and humoristic stories. 

[Footnote 1: Before that time, the only weekly in Hebrew was_ha-Maggid_, "The Herald, " a paper of no particular literarydistinction, published since 1856 in the Prussian border-town Lyck, though addressing itself primarily to the Jews of Russia. ]

[Footnote 2: "A voice Announcing Good Tidings. "]

Another step forward was the publication of the Hebrew monthly_ha-Shahar_, "The Dawn, " which was founded by Perez Smolenskin in 1869. This periodical, which appeared in Vienna but was read principally inRussia, pursued a two-fold aim: to fight against the fanaticism of thebenighted masses, on the one hand, and combat the indifference toJudaism of the intellectuals, on the other. _Ha-Shahar_ exerted atremendous influence upon the mental development of the young generationwhich had been trained in the heders and yeshibahs. Here they found aresponse to the thoughts that agitated them; here they learned to thinklogically and critically and to distinguish between the essentialelements in Judaism and its mere accretions. _Ha-Shahar_ was the staffof life for the generation of that period of transition, which stood onthe border-line dividing the old Judaism from the new. 

The various stages in the Russification of the Jewish _intelligenzia_are marked by the changing tendencies of the Jewish periodical press inthe Russian language. In point of literary form, it approached theEuropean models more closely than the contemporary Hebrew press. Thecontributors to the three Russian-Jewish weeklies, all of them issued inOdessa, [1] had the advantage of having before them patterns of WesternEurope. Jewish publicists of the type of Riesser and Philippson [2]served as living examples. They had blazed the way for Jewishjournalism, and had shown it how to fight for civil emancipation, toward off anti-Semitic attacks, and strive at the same time for theadvancement of inner Jewish life. 

[Footnote 1: _Razswyet_, "The Dawn, " 1860, _Sion_, "Zion, " 1861, _Dyen_, "The Day, " 1869-1871. ]

[Footnote 2: Gabriel Riesser (died 1863), the famous champion of Jewishemancipation in Germany, established the periodical _Der Jude_ in 1832. Ludwig Philippson (died 1889) founded in 1837 _Die Allgemeine Zeitungdes Judentums_, which still appears in Berlin. ]

However, as soon as the Russian Riessers applied themselves to theirtask, they met with insurmountable difficulties. When the _Razswyet_, which was edited by Osip (Joseph) Rabinovich, attempted to lay bare theinner wounds of Jewish life, it encountered the concerted opposition ofall prominent Jews, who were of the opinion that an organ employing thelanguage of the country should not, on tactical grounds, busy itselfwith self-revelations, but should rather limit itself to the fight forequal rights. The latter function again was hampered by the "otherside, " the Russian censorship. Despite the moderate tone adopted by the_Razswyet_ in its articles on Jewish emancipation, the Russiancensorship found them incompatible with the interests of the State. Onecircular sent out by the Government went even so far as to prohibit "toto discuss the question of granting the Jews equal rights with those ofthe other (Russian) subjects. " On one occasion the editor of the_Razswyet_, _, in appealing to the authorities of St. Petersburg againstthe prohibition of a certain article by the Odessa censor, had toresort to the sham argument that the incriminated article referredmerely to the necessity of granting the Jews equality in the rightof residence but not in other rights. But even this stratagem failedof its object. After a year of bitter struggle against the interferenceof the censor and against financial difficulties--the number of Russianreaders among Jews was still very small at that time--the _Razswyet_passed out of existence. 

Its successor _Sion_ ("Zion"), edited by Solovaychik and Leon Pinsker, who subsequently bec me the exponent of pre-Herzlian Zionism, [1]attempted a different policy: to prove the case of the Jews byarraigning the anti-Semites and acquainting the Russian public with thehistory of Judaism. _Sion_, too, like its predecessors, had to give upthe fight in less than a year. 

[Footnote 1: See later, p. 330 et seq. ]

After an interval of seven years a new attempt was made in the samecity. The _Dyen_ ("The Day") [1] was able to muster a larger number ofcontributors from among the increased ranks of the "titled"_intelligenzia_ than its predecessors. The new periodical was bolder inunfurling the banner of emancipation, but it also went much further thanits predecessors in its championship of Russification and assimilation. The motto of the _Dyen_ was "complete fusion of the interests of theJewish population with those of the other citizens. " The editors lookedupon the Jewish problem "not as a national but as a social and economic"issue, which in their opinion could be solved simply by bestowing uponthis "section of the Russian people" the same rights which were enjoyedby the rest. The Odessa pogrom of 1871 might have taught the writers ofthe _Dyen_ to judge more soberly the prospects of "a fusion ofinterests, " had not a meddlesome censorship forced this periodical todiscontinue its publication after a short time. 

[Footnote 1: The name was meant to symbolize the approaching day offreedom. It was a weekly publication. ]

The next few years were a period of silence in the Russian-Jewishpress. [1] The rank and file of the Russian Jewish intellectuals, whoformed the backbone of the reading public of this press, becameindifferent to it. Living up conscientiously to the principle of a"fusion of interests, " they failed to recognize the special interests oftheir own people, whose only duty they thought was to be Russified, i. E. , obliterated and put out of existence. The better elements amongthe _intelligenzia_, however, looked with consternation upon thisgrowing indifference to everything Jewish among the college-bred Jewishyouth. As a result, a new attempt was made toward the very end of thisperiod to restore the Russian-Jewish press. Three weeklies, the _RusskiYevrey_ ("The Russian Jew"), the _Razswyet_ ("The Dawn"), and later onthe _Voskhod_ ("The Sunrise"), were started in St. Petersburg, allendeavoring to gain the hearts of the Russian Jewish _intelligenzia_. Inthe midst of this work they were overwhelmed by the terrific cataclysmof 1881, which decided the further destinies of Jewish journalism inRussia. 

[Footnote 1: We disregard the colorless _Vyestnik Russkikh "Yevreyev"_("The Herald of Russian Jews"), published by Zederbaum in the beginningof the seventies in St. Petersburg, and the volumes of the _YevreyskayaBibliotyeka_ ("The Jewish Library"), issued at irregular intervals byAdolph Landau. ]

4. THE JEWS AND THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT

The Russian school and literature pushed the Jewish college youth headover heels into the intellectual currents of progressive Russiansociety. Naturally enough a portion of the Jewish youth was also drawninto the revolutionary movement of the seventies, a movement which, inspite of the theoretic "materialism" of its adepts, was of anessentially idealistic tendency. In joining the ranks of therevolutionaries, the young Jews were less actuated by resentment againstthe continued, though somewhat mitigated, rightlessness of their ownpeople than by discontent with the general political reaction in Russia, that discontent which found expression in the movement of "Populism, " [1]of "Going to the People, " [2] and similar currents then in vogue. Jewishstudents, attending the rabbinical and teachers' institutes of theGovernment, or autodidacts from among former heder and yeshibah pupils, also began to "go to the people"--the Russian people, to be sure, notthe Jewish. They carried on a revolutionary propaganda, both by directand indirect means, among the Russian peasants and workingmen, known tothem only from books. It was taken for granted at that time that therealization of the ideals of Russian democracy would carry with it thesolution of the Jewish as well as of all other sectional problems ofRussian life, so that these problems might for the moment be safely setaside. 

[Footnote 1: In Russian, _narodnichestvo_, from _narod_, "People, " ademocratic movement In favor of the down-trodden masses, particularlythe Russian peasantry. ]

[Footnote 2: Under the influence of the democratic movement manyRussians of higher birth and culture settled among the peasantry, towhich they dedicated their lives. The name of Leo Tolstoi readilysuggests itself in this connection. ]

As far as the Jewish youth was concerned, the whole movement was doublyacademic, for the only points of contact of that youth with youngerRussia was not living reality but the book, problems of the intellect, the search for new ways, the attempt to work out a _Weltanschauung_. Thefundamental article of faith of the Jewish socialists wascosmopolitanism, and they failed to discern in Russian "Populism" theunderlying elements of a Russian national movement. Jewry was notbelieved to be a nation, and as a religious entity it was looked upon asa relic of the past, which was doomed to disappearance. 

One attempt of coupling socialism with Judaism ought not to be passedover in silence. In the beginning of the seventies there existed inVilna a Jewish revolutionary circle made up principally of the pupils ofthe rabbinical school and of the teachers' institute of the same city. In 1875, the police tracked the members of the circle. Some werearrested, others escaped. One of the refugees, A. Lieberman, managed toreach London where he associated with the circle of Lavrov and theeditors of the revolutionary journal _Vperyod_ ("Forwards"). 

In the following year, Lieberman founded in London the "League of JewishSocialists" for the purpose of carrying on a propaganda among the Jewishmasses. It was a small society of students and workingmen which busieditself with arranging lectures and debates, and penning Hebrew appealson the need of organizing the proletariat. The society was soondissolved, and Lieberman emigrated to Vienna, where, under the name ofFreeman, he started in 1877 a socialistic magazine in Hebrew under thename _ha-Emet_ ("The Truth"). The first two issues of _ha-Emet_ wereadmitted into Russia, but the third was confiscated by the censor. Themagazine had to be discontinued. It yielded its place to a paper called_Asefat Hakamim_ ("The Assembly of Wise Men"), published in Koenigsbergin 1878 by M. Winchevski as a supplement to the paper _ha-Kol_ ("TheVoice"), which was issued there by Rodkinson. Soon this whole species ofsocialistic literature was put out of existence. In 1879, Lieberman inVienna and his comrades in Berlin and Koenigsberg were arrested andexpelled from the borders of Austria and Prussia. They emigrated toEngland and America, and lost touch with Russia. 

In Russia itself the Jewish revolutionaries were heart and soul devotedto the cause. The children of the ghetto displayed considerable heroismand self-sacrifice in the revolutionary upheaval of the seventies. Jewsfigured in all important political trials and public manifestations;they languished in the gaols, and suffered as exiles in Siberia. Butthis idealistic fight for general freedom lacked a Jewish note, theendeavor to free their own nation which lived in greater thraldom thanany other. And no one at that time ever dreamt that after all thesesacrifices the Jews of Russia would be visited by still greatermisfortunes, by pogroms and increased disabilities. 

5. THE NEO-HEBRAIC RENAISSANCE

With all deflections from the course of normal development, such as areunavoidable in times of violent mental disturbances, the main line ofthe whole cultural movement, the resultant of the various forces withinit, was headed towards the healthy progress of Judaism. The mostsubstantial product of this movement was the Neo-Hebraic literaryrenaissance which had already appeared in faint outlines on the sombrebackground of external oppression and internal obscurantism during thepreceding period. The Haskalah, formerly anathematized, was now able tounfold all its creative powers. What in the time of Isaac Baer Levinsohnhad been accomplished stealthily by a few isolated conspirators ofenlightenment in some petty society in Vilna or in some out-of-the-waytown like Kamenetz-Podolsk was now done in the full light of the day. Instead of a few stray writers, the harbingers of the new literature, there now appeared this literature itself, new both in form and content. The restoration of the Hebrew language to its biblical purity and theremoval of the linguistic excrescences of the later rabbinic idiombecame for some writers an end in itself, for others a weapon in thefight for enlightenment. _Melitzah_, a conventionalized style, which, moving strictly within the confines of the biblical diction, endeavoredto adapt the form of an ancient language to the content of a modernlife, became the fashion of the day. 

In point of content rejuvenated Hebrew literature was of necessityelementary. Mental restlessness and naiveness of thought were notconducive to the development of that "science of Judaism" which hadattained to such luxurious growth in Germany. The Hebrew writers ofRussia during that period had no means of propagating their ideas, except through the medium of poetry, fiction, or journalism. The resultsof historic research were squeezed into the mould of a poem or novel, orit furnished the material for a press article, in which the Jewish pastwas considered from the point of view of the present. Objectivescientific investigation could find no place, and the little that wasaccomplished in that direction did not bear the character of a livingaccount of the past, but was rather in the nature of crudearchaeological material. At the same time, as the crest of the socialprogress was rising, the border-line between poetry and fiction, on theone hand, and topical journalism, on the other, was graduallyobliterated. The poet or novelist was often turned into a fighter, whoattacked the old order of things and defended the new. 

Even before the first blush of dawn, when every one in Russia was yetgroaning under the strokes of an autocratic tyranny, which thepresentiment of its speedy end had driven into madness, the bewitchingstrains of the new Hebrew lyre resounded through Lithuania. They camefrom Micah Joseph Lebensohn, the son of "Adam" Lebensohn, author ofhigh-flown Hebrew odes [1]--a contemplative Jewish youth, suffering fromtuberculosis and _Weltschmerz_. He began his poetic career in 1840 by aHebrew adaptation of the second book of Virgil's _Aeneid_ [2] but soonturned to Jewish _motifs_. In the musical rhymes of the "Songs of theDaughter of Zion" (_Shire bat Zion_, Vilna, 1851), the author pouredforth the anguish of his suffering soul, which was torn between faithand science, weighed down by the oppression from without and stirred toits depth by the tragedy of his homeless nation. [3] A cruel disease cutshort the poet's life in 1852, at the age of twenty-four. A smallcollection of lyrical poems, published after his death under the title_Kinnor bat Zion_ ("The Harp of the Daughter of Zion"), exhibited evenmore brilliantly the wealth of creative energy which was hidden in thesoul of this prematurely cut-off youth, who on the brink of the gravesang so touchingly of love, beauty, and the pure joys of life. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 134 et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: It was made from the German translation of Schiller]

[Footnote 3: See the poems "Solomon and Koheleth, " "Jael and Sisera, "and "Judah ha-Levi. "]

A year after the death of our poet, in 1853, there appeared in the samecapital of Lithuania the historic novel _Ahabat Zion_ ("Love of Zion"). Its author, Abraham Mapu of Kovno (1808-1867), was a poor melammed whohad by his own endeavors and without the help of a teacher raisedhimself to the level of a modern Hebrew pedagogue. He lived in twoworlds, in the valley of tears, such as the ghetto presented during thereign of Nicholas, and in the radiant recollections of the far-offbiblical past. The inspired dreamer, while strolling on the banks of theNiemen, among the hills which skirt the city of Kovno, was picturing tohimself the luminous dawn of the Jewish nation. He published theseradiant descriptions of ancient Judaea in the dismal year of the"captured recruits. " [1] The youths of the ghetto, who had been poringover talmudic folios, fell eagerly upon this little book which breathedthe perfumes of Sharon and Carmel. They read it in secret--to read anovel openly was not a safe thing in those days--, and their heartsexpanded with rapture over the enchanting idyls of the time of KingHezekiah, the portrayal of tumultuous Jerusalem and peaceful Beth-lehem. They sighed over the fate of the lovers Amnon and Tamar, and in theirflight of imagination were carried far away from painful reality. Thenaive literary construction of the plot was of no consequence to thereader who tasted a novel for the first time in his life. The _naïveté_of the plot was in keeping with the naive, artificially reproducedlanguage of the prophet Isaiah and the biblical annals, whichintensified the illusion of antiquity. 

[Footnote 1: See on this expression above, p. 148 et seq. ]

Several years after the publication of his "Love of Zion, " when socialcurrents had begun to stir Russian Jewry, Mapu began his five volumenovel of contemporary life, under the title _'Ayit Tzabua'_, "TheSpeckled Bird, " or "The Hypocrite" (1857-1869). In his naive diction, which is curiously out of harmony with the complex plot in sensationalFrench style, the author pictures the life of an obscure Lithuaniantownlet: the Kahal bosses who hide their misdeeds beneath the cloak ofpiety; the fanatical rabbis, the Tartuffes of the Pale of Settlement, who persecute the champions of enlightenment. As an offset against theseshadows of the past, Mapu lovingly paints the barely visible shoots ofthe new life, the _Maskil_, who strives to reconcile religion andscience, the misty figure of the Jewish youth who goes to the Russianschool in the hope of serving his people, the profiles of the RussianJewish intellectuals, and the captains of industry from among the risingJewish plutocracy. 

Toward the end of his life Mapu returned to the historical novel, and inthe "Transgression of Samaria" (_Ashmat Shomron_, 1865) he attempted todraw a picture of ancient Hebrew life during the declining years of theNorthern Kingdom. But this novel, appearing as it did at the height ofthe cultural movement, failed to produce the powerful effect of his_Ahabat Zion_, although its charming biblical diction enraptured thelovers of _Melitzah_. [1]

[Footnote 1: An imitation of the biblical Hebrew diction. Compare p. 225. ]

The noise of the new Jewish life, with its constantly growingproblems, invaded the precincts of literature, and even the poets wereimpelled to take sides in the burning questions of the day. The mostimportant poet of that era, Judah Leib Gordon (1830-1892), who began bycomposing biblical epics and moralistic fables, soon entered the fieldof "intellectual poetry, " and became the champion of enlightenment and atrenchant critic of old-fashioned Jewish life. As far back as 1863, while active as a teacher at a Crown school [1] in Lithuania, hecomposed his "Marseillaise of Enlightenment" (_Hakitzah 'ammi_, "Awake, My People"). In it he sang of the sun shedding its rays over the "Landof Eden, " where the neck of the enslaved was freed from the yoke andwhere the modern Jew was welcomed with a brotherly embrace. The poetcalls upon his people to join the ranks of their fellow-countrymen, thehosts of cultured Russian citizens who speak the language of the land, and offers his Jewish contemporaries the brief formula: "Be a man on thestreet and a Jew in the house, " [2] i. E. , be a Russian in public and aJew in private life. 

[Footnote 1: See on the Crown schools pp. 74 and 77. ]

[Footnote 2: _Heye adam be-tzeteka, wihudi be-oholeka. _]

Gordon himself defined his function in the work of Jewish regenerationto be that of exposing the inner ills of the people, of fightingrabbinical orthodoxy and the tyranny of ceremonialism. This carpingtendency, which implies a condemnation of the whole historic structureof Judaism, manifested itself as early as 1868 in his "Songs of Judah"(_Shire Yehudah_), in strophes radiant with the beauty of their Hebrewdiction:

 To live by soulless rites hast thou been taught, To swim against life, and the lifeless letter to keep; To be dead upon earth, and in heaven alive, To dream while awake, and to speak while asleep. 

During the seventies, Gordon joined the ranks of the official agents ofenlightenment. He removed to St. Petersburg, and became secretary of theSociety for the Diffusion of Enlightenment. The new Hebrew periodical_ha-Shahar_ [1] published several of his "contemporary epics" in whichhe vented his wrath against petrified Rabbinism. He portrays the miseryof a Jewish woman who is condemned to enter married life at the biddingof the marriage-broker, without love and without happiness, or hedescribes the tragedy of another woman whose future is wrecked by a "Dotover the _i_. " [2] He lashes furiously the orthodox spiders, the officialleaders of the community, who catch the young pioneers of enlightenmentin the meshes of Kabal authority, backed by police force. Climbinghigher upon the ladder of history, the poet registers his protestagainst the predominance of the spiritual over the worldly element inthe whole evolution of Judaism. He assails the prophet Jeremiah who inbeleaguered Jerusalem preaches submission to the Babylonians and strictobedience to the Law: the prophet, dressed up in the garb of acontemporary orthodox rabbi, was to be exhibited as a terrifyingincarnation of the soulless formula "Law above Life. " [3]

[Footnote 1: See p. 218. ]

[Footnote 2: The title of a famous poem by Gordon, _Kotzo shel Yod_, literally "the tittle of the Yod" the smallest letter in the Hebrewalphabet. The poem in question pictures the tragedy of a woman whoremained unhappy the rest of her life because the Hebrew bill of divorcewhich she had obtained from her husband was declared void on account ofa trifling error in spelling. ]

[Footnote 3: The author alludes to Gordon's poem "_Tzidkiyyahu be-bethapekuddot_" ("Zedekiah in Prison"), in which the defeated andblinded Judean ruler (see Jer. 52. 11) bitterly complains of theevil effects of the prophetic doctrine. ]

The implication is obvious: the power of orthodoxy must be broken andJewish life must be secularized. But while unmasking the old, Gordoncould not fail to perceive the sore spots in the new, "enlightened"generation. He saw the flight of the educated youth from the Jewishcamp, its ever-growing estrangement from the national tongue in whichthe poet uttered his songs, and a cry of anguish burst from his lips:"For Whom Do I Labor?" [1] It seemed to him that the rising generation, detached from the fountain-head of Jewish culture, would no more be ableto read the "Songs of Zion, " and that the poet's rhymes were limited intheir appeal to the last handful of the worshippers of the Hebrew Muse:

[Footnote 1: Title of a poem by Gordon, _Lemi ani 'amel!_]

 Who knows, but I am the last singer of Zion, And you are the last who my songs understand. 

These lines were penned on the threshold of the new era of the eighties. The exponent of Jewish self-criticism lived to see not only the horrorsof the pogroms but also the misty dawn of the national movement, and hecould comfort himself with the conviction that he was destined to be thesinger for more than one generation. 

The question "For whom do I labor?" was approached and solved in adifferent way by another writer, whose genius expanded with theincreasing years of his long life. During the first years of hisactivity, Shalom Jacob Abramovich (born in 1836) tried his strength invarious fields. He wrote Hebrew essays on literary criticism (_MishpatShalom_ [1] 1859), adapted books on natural science written in modernlanguages (_Toldot ha-teba'_, "Natural History, " 1862, ff. ), composed asocial _Tendenzroman_ under the title "Fathers and Children" (_Ha-abotwe-ha-banim_, 1868 [2]); but all this left him dissatisfied. Ponderingover the question "For whom do I labor?, " he came to the conclusion thathis labors belonged to the people at large, to the down-trodden masses, instead of being limited to the educated classes who understood thenational tongue. A profound observer of Jewish conditions in the Pale, he realized that the concrete life of the masses should be portrayed intheir living daily speech, in the Yiddish vernacular, which was treatedwith contempt by nearly all the Maskilim of that period. 

[Footnote 1: "The Judgment of Shalom, " with reference to the author'sfirst name and with a clever allusion to the Hebrew text of Zech. 8. 16. ]

[Footnote 2: Written under the influence of Turgenyev's famous novelwhich bears the same title. See above, p. 210, n. 1. ]

Accordingly, Abramovich began to write in the dialect of the people, under the assumed pen-name of _Mendele Mokher Sforim_ (Mendele theBookseller). Choosing his subjects from the life of the lower classes, he portrayed the pariahs of Jewish society and their oppressors (_Doskleine Menshele_, "A Humble Man"), the life of Jewish beggars andvagrants (_Fishke der Krummer_, "Fishke the Cripple"), and the immensecobweb which had been spun around the destitute masses by thecontractors of the meat tax and their accomplices, the allegedbenefactors of the community (_Die Taxe, oder die Bande Stodt BaleToyvos_, "The Meat Tax, or the Gang of Town Benefactors"). His trenchantsatire on the "tax" hit the mark, and the author had reason to fear theire of those who were hurt to the quick by his literary shafts. He hadto leave the town of Berdychev in which he resided at the time, andremoved to Zhitomir. 

Here he wrote in 1873 one of his ripest works, "The Mare, or Preventionof Cruelty to Animals" (_Die Klache_). In his allegorical narrative hedepicts a homeless mare, the personification of the Jewish masses, whichis pursued by the "bosses of the town" who do not allow her to graze onthe common pasture-lands with the "town cattle, " and who set streetloafers and dogs at her heels. "The Society for the Prevention ofCruelty to Animals" (the Government) cannot make up its mind whether themare should be granted equal rights with the native horses, or should beleft unprotected, and the matter is submitted to a special commission. In the meantime, certain horsemen from among the "communal benefactors"jump upon the back of the unfortunate mare, beat and torment herwell-nigh to death, and drive her for their pleasure, until shecollapses. 

Leaving the field of polemical allegory, Abramovich published thehumorous description of the "Travels of Benjamin the Third" (_Masse'otBenyamin ha-Shelishi_, 1878), [1] portraying a Jewish Don Quixote andSancho Panza, who make an oversea journey to the mythical riverSambation--on the way from Berdychev to Kiev. A subtle observation ofexisting conditions combined with a profound analysis of the problems ofJewish life, artistic power matched with publicistic skill--such are thesalient features of the first phase of Abramovich's literary activity. 

[Footnote 1: A famous Jewish traveller by the name of Benjamin lived inthe twelfth century. Another modern Jewish traveller by the name ofJoseph Israel, who died in 1864, adopted the name Benjamin II. Abramovich humorously designates his fictitious travelling hero asBenjamin III. ]

In the following period, beginning with the eighties, his literarycreations exhibit greater artistic harmony in their content. As far astheir linguistic garb is concerned, they combine the Yiddish vernacularwith the Hebrew national tongue, which are employed side by side by ourauthor as the vehicles of his thought, and reach at his hands an equallyhigh state of perfection. 

6. THE HARBINGER OF JEWISH NATIONALISM (PEREZSMOLENSKIN)

The artistic portrayer of life was, however, a rare exception in theliterature of the Haskalah. Riven by social and cultural strife, theperiod of enlightenment called rather for theories than for art, and thenovelist no less than the publicist was called upon to supply the want. This theoretic element was paramount in the novels of Perez Smolenskin. (1842-1885), the editor of the popular Hebrew magazine _ha-Shahar_. [1]The pupil of a White Russian yeshibah, he afterwards drifted intofrivolous Odessa and still later to Vienna, suffering painfully from theshock of the contrast. Personally he had emerged unscathed from thisconflict of ideas. But round about him he witnessed "the dead bodies ofenlightenment, which are just as numerous as the victims of ignorance. "He saw the Jewish youth fleeing from its people and forgetting itsnational language. He saw Reform Judaism of Western Europe which hadretained nothing of Jewish culture except the modernizedsuperficialities of the synagogue. Repelled by this spectacle, Smolenskin decided from the very beginning to fight on two fronts:against the fanatics of orthodoxy in the name of European progress, andagainst the champions of assimilation in the name of national Jewishculture, and more particularly of the Hebrew language. "You say, "Smolenskin exclaims, addressing himself to the assimilators, "let us belike the other nations. Well and good. Let us, indeed, be like the othernations: cultured men and women, free from superstition, loyal citizensof the country. But let us also remember, as the other nations do, thatwe have no right to be ashamed of our origin, that it is our duty tohold dear our national language and our national dignity. "

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 218. ]

In his first great novel "A Rover on Life's Paths" (_Ha-to-'eh bedarkeha-hayyim_, 1869-1876), Smolenskin carries his hero through all thestages of cultural development, leading from an obscure White Russianhamlet to the centers of European civilization in London and Paris. Butat the end of his "rovings" the hero ultimately attains to a synthesisof Jewish nationalism and European progress, and ends by sacrificing hislife while defending his brethren during the Odessa pogrom of 1871. Theother _Tendenz_-novels of Smolenskin reflect the same double-frontedstruggle: against the stagnation of the orthodox, particularly theHasidim, and against the disloyalty of the "enlightened. "

Smolenskin's theory of Judaism is formulated in two publicistic works:"The Eternal People" (_'Am 'olam_, [1] 1872) and "There is a Time toPlant" (_'Et la-ta'at_ [2], 1875-1877). As a counterbalance to theartificial religious reforms of the West, he sets up the far-reachingprinciple of Jewish evolution, of a gradual amalgamation of the nationaland humanitarian element within Judaism. The Messianic dogma, which theJews of the West had completely abandoned because of its allegedincompatibility with Jewish citizenship in the Diaspora, is warmlydefended by Smolenskin as one of the symbols of national unity. In thevery center of his system stands the cult of Hebrew as a nationallanguage, "without which there is no Judaism. " In order the moresuccessfully to demolish the idea of assimilation, Smolenskin bombardsits substructure, the theory of enlightenment as formulated by MosesMendelssohn, with its definition of the Jews as a religious community, and not as a nation, though in his polemical ardor he often goes toofar, and does occasional violence to historic truth. 

[Footnote 1: From Isa. 44. 7. ]

[Footnote 2: From Eccles. 3. 2. ]

In both works one may discern, though in vague outlines only, the theoryof a "spiritual nation. " [1] However, Smolenskin did not succeed indeveloping and consolidating his theory. The pogroms of 1881 and thebeginning of the Jewish exodus from Russia upset his equilibrium oncemore. He laid aside the question of the national development of Jewry inthe Diaspora, and became an enthusiastic preacher of the restoration ofthe Jewish people in Palestine. In the midst of this propaganda the lifeof the talented publicist was cut short by a premature death. 

[Footnote 1: The conception of a "spiritual nation" as applied toJudaism has been formulated and expounded by the author of the presentvolume in a number of works. See his "Jewish History" (JewishPublication Society, 1903) p. 29 et seq. , and the translator's essay"Dubnow's Theory of Jewish Nationalism" (reprinted from theMaccabaean, 1905). More about this theory will be found in Vol. III. ]

The same conviction was finally reached, after a prolonged innerstruggle, by Moses Leib Lilienblum (1843-1910), who might well be calleda "martyr of enlightenment. " However, during the period underconsideration he moved entirely within the boundaries of the Haskalah, of which he was a most radical exponent. Persecuted for his harmlessliberalism by the fanatics of his native town of Vilkomir, [1]Lilienblum began to ponder over the question of Jewish religiousreforms. In advocating the reform of Judaism, he was not actuated, aswere so many in Western Europe, by the desire of adapting Judaism to thenon-Jewish environment, but rather by the profound and painfulconviction that dominant Rabbinism in its medieval phase did notrepresent the true essence of Judaism. Reform of Judaism, as interpretedby Lilienblum, does not mean a revolution, but an evolution of Judaism. Just as the Talmud had once reformed Judaism in accordance with therequirements of its time, so must Judaism be reformed by us inaccordance with the demands of our own times. When the youthful writerembodied these views in a series of articles, published in the_ha-Melitz_ under the title _Orhot ha-Talmud_ ("The Ways of the Talmud, "1868-1869), his orthodox townsmen were so thoroughly aroused that hisfurther stay in Vilkomir was not free from danger, and he was compelledto remove to Odessa. Here he published in 1870 his rhymed satire _Kehalrefa'im_, [2] in which the dark shadows of a Jewish town, the Kahalelders, the rabbis, the Tzaddiks, and other worthies, move weirdly aboutin the gloom of the nether-world. 

[Footnote 1: In the government of Kovno. ]

[Footnote 2: "The Congregation of the Dead, " with allusion to Prov. 21. 16. ]

In Odessa Lilienblum joined the ranks of the Russified college youth, and became imbued with the radical ideas of Chernyshevski and Pisaryev, gaining the reputation of a "nihilist. " His theory of Jewish reform, superannuated by his new materialistic world view, was thrown aside, anda gaping void opened in the soul of the writer. This frame of mind isreflected in Lilienblum's self-revelation, "The Sins of Youth" (_Hattotne'urim_, 1876), this agonizing cry of one of the many victims of themental cataclysm of the sixties. The book made a tremendous impression, for the mental tortures depicted in it were typical of the whole age oftransition. However, the final note of the confession, the shriek of awasted soul, which, having overthrown the old idols, has failed to finda new God, did not express the general trend of that period, which wasfar from despair. 

As for our author, his tempestuous soul was soon set at rest. The eventswhich filled the minds of progressive Jewry with agitation, the horrorsof the pogroms and the political oppression of the beginning of theeighties, brought peace to the aching heart of Lilienblum. He found thesolution of the Jewish problems in the "Love of Zion, " of which hebecame the philosophic exponent. At a later stage he became an ardentchampion of political Zionism. 

7. JEWISH LITERATURE IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

The left wing of "enlightenment" was represented during this period byJewish literature in the Russian language, which had several noteworthyexponents. It is interesting to observe that, whereas all the prominentwriters in Hebrew were children of profoundly nationalistic Lithuania, those that wrote in Russian, with the sole exception of Levanda, werenatives of South Russia, where the two extremes, stagnant Hasidism andradical Russification, fought for supremacy. The founder of this branchof Jewish literature was Osip (Joseph) Rabinovich (1817-1869), aSoutherner, a native of Poltava and a resident of Odessa. [1] Alongsideof journalistic articles he wrote protracted novels. His touching"Pictures of the Past, " his stories "The Penal Recruit" and "TheInherited Candlestick" (1859-1860) called up before the generationliving at the dawn of the new era of reforms the shadows of the passingnight: the tortures of Nicholas' conscription and the degrading forms ofJewish rightlessness. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p, 219. ]

The fight against this rightlessness was the goal of hisjournalistic activity which, prior to the publication of the _Razswyet_, he had carried on in the columns of the liberal Russian press. Theproblems of inner Jewish life had but little attraction for him. LikeRiesser, he looked upon civil emancipation as a panacea for all Jewishailments. He was snatched away by death before he could be cured of thisillusion. 

Rabinovich's work was continued by a talented youth, the journalist Ilya(Elias) Orshanski of Yekaterinoslav (1846-1875), who was the maincontributor to the _Dyen_ of Odessa and to the _YevreyskayaBibliotyeka_. [1] To fight for Jewish rights, not to offer humbleapologies, to demand emancipation, not to beg for it, this attitudelends a charm of its own to Orshanski's writings. His brilliant analysisof "Russian Legislation concerning the Jews" [2] offers a completeanatomy of Jewish disfranchisement in Russia, beginning with CatherineII. And ending with Alexander II. 

[Footnote 1: Compare above, p. 220 et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: The title of his work on the same subject which appeared inSt. Petersburg in 1877. ]

Nevertheless, being a child of his age, he preached its formula. While apassionate Jew at heart, he championed the cause of Russification, though not in the extreme form of spiritual self-effacement. The Odessapogrom of 1871 staggered his impressionable soul. He was tossing aboutrestlessly, seeking an outlet for his resentment, but everywhere heknocked his head against the barriers of censorship and police. Had hebeen granted longer life, he might, like Smolenskin, have chosen theroad of a nationalistic-progressive synthesis, but the white plaguecarried him off in his twenty-ninth year. 

The literary work of Lev (Leon) Levanda (1835-1888) was of a morecomplicated character. A graduate of one of the official rabbinicalschools, he was first active as teacher in a Jewish Crown school inMinsk, and afterwards occupied the post of a "learned Jew" [1] underMuravyov, the governor-general of Vilna. He thus moved in the hot-bed of"official enlightenment" and in the headquarters of the policy ofRussification as represented by Muravyov, a circumstance which left itsimpress upon all the products of his pen. In his first novel, "TheGrocery Store" (1860), of little merit from the artistic point of view, he still appears as the naive bard of that shallow "enlightenment, " thechampion of which is sufficiently characterized by wearing a Europeancostume, calling himself by a well-sounding German or Russian name (inthe novel under discussion the hero goes by the name of Arnold), cultivating friendly relations with noble-minded Christians and making alove match unassisted by the marriage-broker. 

[Footnote 1: In Russian, _Uchony Yevrey_, an expert in Jewish matters, attached, according to the Russian law of 1844, to the superintendentsof school districts and to the governors-general within the Pale. ]

During this stage of his career, Levanda was convinced that "no educatedJew could help being a cosmopolitan. " But a little later hiscosmopolitanism displayed a distinct propensity toward Russification. Inhis novel "A Hot Time" (1871-1872), Levanda renounces his former Polishsympathies, and, through the mouth of his hero Sarin, preaches thegospel of the approaching cultural fusion between the Jews and theRussians which is to mark a new epoch in the history of the Jewishpeople. Old-fashioned Jewish life is cleverly ridiculed in his "Sketchesof the Past" ("The Earlocks of my Mellammed, " "Schoolophobia, " etc. , 1870-1875). His peace of mind was not even disturbed by themanifestation, towards the end of the sixties, of the anti-Semiticreaction in those very official circles in which the "learned Jew" movedand in which Brafman was looked up to as an authority in mattersappertaining to Judaism. [1] But the catastrophe of 1881 dealt astaggering blow to Levanda's soul, and forced him to overthrow hisformer idol of assimilation. With his mind not yet fully settled on thenew theory of nationalism, he joined the Palestine movement towards theend of his life, and went down to his grave with a clouded soul. 

[Footnote 1: Levanda sat side by side with this renegade and informer inthe Commission on the Jewish Question which had been appointed by thegovernor-general of Vilna. (See p. 189. )]

One who stuck fast in his denial of Judaism was Grigory Bogrov(1825-1885). The descendant of a family of rabbis in Poltava, he passed"from darkness to light" by way of the curious educational institutionof Nicholas' brand, the office of an excise farmer in which he wasemployed for a number of years. The enlightened _Aktziznik_ [1] becameconscious of his literary talent late in life. His protracted "Memoirsof a Jew, " largely made up of autobiographic material, were published ina Russian magazine as late as 1871-1873. [2] They contain an acrimoniousdescription of Jewish life in the time of Nicholas I. No Jewish artisthad ever yet dipped his brush in colors so dismal and had displayed soferocious a hatred as did Bogrov in painting the old Jewish mode of lifewithin the Pale, with its poverty and darkness, its hunters and victims, its demoralized Kahal rule of the days of conscription. Bogrov's accountof his childhood and youth is not relieved by a single cheerfulreminiscence, except that of a young _Russian_ girl. The wholepatriarchal life of a Jewish townlet of that period is transformed intoa sort of inferno teeming with criminals or idiots. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 186, n. 1. ]

[Footnote 2: Shortly afterwards the "Memoirs" were supplemented byanother autobiographic novel, "The Captured Recruit. "]

To the mind of Bogrov, only two ways promised an escape from this hell:the way of cosmopolitanism and rationalism, opening up into humanity atlarge, or the way leading into the midst of the Russian nation. Bogrovhimself stood irresolute on this fateful border-line. In 1878 he wroteto Levanda that as "an emancipated cosmopolitan he would long ago havecrossed over to the opposite shore, " where "other sympathies and idealssmiled upon him, " were he not kept within the Jewish fold "by fourmillion people innocently suffering from systematic persecutions. "

Bogrov's hatred of the persecutors of the Jewish people was poured forthin his historic novel "A Jewish Manuscript" (1876), the plot of which isbased on events of the time of Khmelnitzki. [1] But even here, whiledescribing, as he himself puts it, the history of the struggle betweenthe spider and the fly, he finds in the life of the fly nothing worthyof sympathy except its sufferings. In 1879 Bogrov began a new novel, "The Scum of the Age, " picturing the life of the modern Jewish youth whowere engulfed in the Russian revolutionary propaganda. But the handwhich knew how to portray the horrors of the old conscription waspowerless to reproduce, except in very crude outlines, the world ofpolitical passions which was foreign to the author, and the novelremained unfinished. 

[Footnote 1: See on that period Vol. I, p. 144 et seq. ]

The reaction of the eighties produced no change in Bogrov's attitude. Hebreathed his last in a distant Russian village, and was buried in aRussian cemetery, having embraced Christianity shortly before his death, as a result of a sad concatenation of family circumstances. 

Before the young generation which entered upon active life in theeighties lay the broken tablets of Russian Jewish literature. Newtablets were needed, partly to restore the commandments of the precedingperiod of enlightenment, partly to correct its mistakes. 

CHAPTER XXI

THE ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER III. AND THE INAUGURATION OF POGROMS

1. THE TRIUMPH OF AUTOCRACY

On March 1, 1881, Alexander II. Met his death on one of the principalthoroughfares of St. Petersburg, smitten by dynamite bombs hurled at himby a group of terrorists. The Tzar, who had freed the Russian peasantryfrom personal slavery, paid with his life for refusing to free theRussian people from political slavery and police tyranny. The redterrorism of the revolutionaries was the counterpart of the whiteterrorism of the Russian authorities, who for many years had suppressedthe faintest striving for liberty, and had sent to gaol and prison, ordeported to Siberia, the champions of a constitutional form ofgovernment and the spokesmen of social reforms. Forced by thepersecutions of the police to hide beneath the surface, therevolutionary societies of underground Russia found themselves compelledto resort to methods of terrorism. This terrorism found its expressionduring the last years of Alexander II. In various attempts on the lifeof that ruler, and culminated in the catastrophe of March 1. 

Among the members of these revolutionary societies were also somerepresentatives from among the young Jewish _intelligenzia. _ They werein large part college students, who had been carried away by the idealsof their Russian comrades. But few of them were counted among the activeterrorists. The group which prepared the murder of the Tzar comprisedbut one Jewish member, a woman by the name of Hesia Helfman, who, moreover, played but a secondary role in the conspiracy, by keeping asecret residence for toe revolutionaries. Nevertheless, in the officialcircles, which were anxious to justify their oppression of the Jews, itbecame customary to refer to the "important role" played by the Jews inthe Russian revolution. 

It was with preconceived notions of this kind that Alexander III. Ascended the throne of Russia, a sovereign with unlimited power but witha very limited political horizon. Being a Russian of the old-fashionedtype and a zealous champion of the Greek-Orthodox Church, he shared theanti-Jewish prejudices of his environment. Already as crown prince heordered that a monetary reward be given to the notorious Lutostanski, who had presented him with his libellous pamphlet "Concerning the Use ofChristian Blood by the Jews. " [1] During the Russo-Turkish war of 1877, when as heir-apparent he was in command of one of the Balkan armies, heallowed himself to be persuaded that the abuses in the Russiancommissariat were due to the "Jewish" purveyors who supplied the army. [2] This was all that was known about Judaism in the circles from whichthe ruler of five million Jews derived his information. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 203. ]

[Footnote 2: The business firm in question was that of Greger, Horvitz, and Kohan, of whom the first was a Greek, and the second a convertedJew. See above, p. 202, n. 1. ]

In March and April, 1881, the destinies of Russia were being decided atsecret conferences, which were held between the Tzar and the highestdignitaries of state in the palace of the quiet little town of Gatchina, whither Alexander III. Had withdrawn after the death of his father. Twoparties and two programs were struggling for mastery at theseconferences. The party of the liberal Minister Loris-Melikov, championing a program of moderate reforms, pleaded primarily for theestablishment of an advisory commission to be composed of the deputiesdeputies of the rural and urban administrations for the purpose ofconsidering all legal projects prior to their submission tothe Council of State. This plan of a paltry popular representation, which had obtained the approval of Alexander II. During the lastdays of his life, assumed in the eyes of the reactionary party theproportions of a dangerous "constitution, " and was execratedby it as an encroachment upon the sacred prerogatives of autocracy. The head of this party was the procurator-general of the Holy Synod, Constantine Petrovich Pobyedonostzev, a former professor atthe University of Moscow, who had been Alexander III. 's tutor in thepolitical sciences when the latter was crown prince. As theexponent of an ecclesiastical police state, Pobyedonostzev contendedthat enlightenment and political freedom were harmful to Russia, that the people must be held in a state of patriarchal submission tothe authority of the Church and of the temporal powers, and that theGreek-Orthodox masses must be shielded against the influence ofalien religions and races, which should accordingly occupy in theRussian monarchy a position subordinate to that of the dominantnation. The ideas of this fanatic reactionary, who was dubbed "TheGrand Inquisitor" and whose name was popularly changed into_Byedonostzev_ [1] carried the day at the Gatchina conferences. Thedeliberations culminated in the decision to refrain from making anyconcessions to the revolutionary element by granting reforms, howeverhowever modest in character, and to maintain at all cost the regime of apolice state as a counterbalance to the idea of a legal stateprevalent in the "rotten West. "

[Footnote 1: _Byedonostzev_ means in Russian "Misfortune-bearer, " a playon the name _Pobyedonostzev_ which signifies "Victory-bearer. "]

Accordingly, the imperial manifesto [1] promulgated on April 29, 1881, proclaimed to the people that "the Voice of God hath commanded us totake up vigorously the reins of government, inspiring us with the beliefin the strength and truth of autocratic power, which we are called uponto establish and safeguard. " The manifesto "calls upon all faithfulsubjects to eradicate the hideous sedition and to establish faith andmorality. " The methods whereby faith and morality were to be establishedwere soon made known, in the "Police Constitution" which was bestowedupon Russia in August, 1881, under the name of "The Statute concerningEnforced Public Safety. "

[Footnote 1: A manifesto is a pronouncement issued by the Tzar on solemnoccasions, such as accession to the throne, events in the imperialfamily, declaration of war, conclusion of peace, etc. , accompanied, as arule, by acts of grace, such as conferring privileges, granting pardons, and so on. Compare also above, p. 115. ]

This statute confers upon the Russian satraps of the capitals (St. Petersburg and Moscow) and of many provincial centers--thegovernors-general and the governors--the power of issuing specialenactments and thereby setting aside the normal laws as well as ofplacing under arrest and deporting to Siberia, without the due processof law, all citizens suspected of "political unsafety. " This travesty ofa _habeas corpus_ Act, insuring the inviolability of police andgendarmerie, and practically involving the suspension of the currentlegislation in a large part of the monarchy, has ever since beenannually renewed by special imperial enactments, and has remained inforce until our own days. The genuine "Police Constitution" of 1881 hassurvived the civil sham Constitution of 1905, figuring as a symbol oflegalized lawlessness. 

2. THE INITIATION OF THE POGROM POLICY

The catastrophe of March 1 had the natural effect of pushing not onlythe Government but also a large part of the Russian people, who had beenscared by the spectre of anarchy, in the direction of reactionarypolitics. This retrograde tendency was bound to affect the Jewishquestion. The bacillus of Judaeophobia [1] became astir in thepolitically immature minds which had been unhinged by the acts ofterrorism. The influential press organs, which maintained more or lessclose relations with the leading Government spheres, adopted more andmore a hostile attitude towards the Jews. The metropolitan newspaper_Novoye Vremya_ ("The New Time") [2] which at that time embarked uponits infamous career as the semi-official organ of the Russian reaction, and a number of provincial newspapers subsidized by the Governmentsuddenly began to speak of the Jews in a tone which suggested that theywere in the possession of some terrible secret. 

[Footnote 1: The term used in Russia for anti-Semitism. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 205. ]

Almost on the day following the attempt on the life of the Tzar, thepapers of this ilk began to insinuate that the Jews had a hand init, and shortly thereafter the South-Russian press published alarmingrumors about proposed organized attacks upon the Jews of that region. These rumors were based on facts. A sinister agitation was rife amongthe lowest elements of the Russian population, while invisible handsfrom above seemed to push it on toward the commission of a giganticcrime. In the same month of March, mysterious emissaries from St. Petersburg made their appearance in the large cities of South Russia, such as Yelisavetgrad (Elizabethgrad), Kiev, and Odessa, and enteredinto secret negotiations with the highest police officials concerning apossible "outburst of popular indignation against the Jews" which theyexpected to take place as part of the economic conflict, intimating theundesirability of obstructing the will of the Russian populace by policeforce. Figures of Great-Russian tradesmen and laborers, or _Katzaps, _ asthe Great Russians are designated in the Little-Russian South, began tomake their appearance in the railroad cars and at the railroad stations, and spoke to the common people of the summary punishment soon to beinflicted upon the Jews or read to them anti-Semitic newspaper articles. They further assured them that an imperial ukase had been issued, calling upon the Christians to attack the Jews during the days of theapproaching Greek-Orthodox Easter. 

Although many years have passed since these events, it has not yet beenpossible to determine the particular agency which carried on this pogromagitation among the Russian masses. Nor has it been possible to find outto what extent the secret society of high officials, which had beenformed in March, 1881, under the name of "The Sacred League, " with theobject of defending the person of the Tzar and engaging in a terroristicstruggle with the "enemies of the public order, " [1] was implicated inthe movement. But the fact itself that, the pogroms were carefullyprepared and engineered is beyond doubt: it may be inferred from thecircumstance that they broke out almost simultaneously in many places ofthe Russian South, and that everywhere they followed the same routine, characterized by the well-organized "activity" of the mob and thedeliberate inactivity of the authorities. 

[Footnote 1: The League existed until the autumn of 1882. Among itsmembers were Pobyedonostzev and the anti-Jewish Minister Ignatyev. ]

The first outbreak of the storm took place in Yelisavetgrad(Elizabethgrad), a large city in New Russia, [1] with a Jewishpopulation of fifteen thousand souls. On the eve of the Greek-OrthodoxEaster, the local Christians, meeting on the streets and in the stores, spoke to one another of the fact that "the Zhyds are about to bebeaten. " The Jews became alarmed. The police, prepared to maintainpublic order during the first days of the Passover, called out a smalldetachment of soldiers. In consequence, the first days of the festivalpassed quietly, and on the fourth day, [2] on April 15, the troops wereremoved from the streets. 

[Footnote 1: On the term New Russia see p. 40, n. 3. ]

[Footnote 2: The Greek-Orthodox Passover lasts officially three days, but an additional day is celebrated by the populace. ]

At that moment the pogrom began. The organizers of the riots sent adrunken Russian into a saloon kept by a Jew, where he began to makehimself obnoxious. When the saloon-keeper pushed the trouble maker outinto the street, the crowd, which was waiting outside, began to shout:"The Zhyds are beating our people, " and threw themselves upon the Jewswho happened to pass by. 

This evidently was the prearranged signal for the pogrom. The Jewishstores in the market-place were attacked and demolished, and the goodslooted or destroyed. At first, the police, assisted by the troops, managed somehow to disperse the rioters. But on the second day thepogrom was renewed with greater energy and better leadership, amidst thesuspicious inactivity both of the military and police authorities. Thefollowing description of the events is taken from the records of theofficial investigation which were not meant for publication and aretherefore free from the bureaucratic prevarications characteristic ofRussian public documents:

 During the night from the 15th to the 16th of April, an attack was made upon Jewish houses, primarily upon liquor stores, on the outskirts of the town, on which occasion one Jew was killed. About seven o'clock in the morning, on April 16, the excesses were renewed, spreading with extraordinary violence all over the city. Clerks, saloon and hotel waiters, artisans, drivers, flunkeys, day laborers in the employ of the Government, and soldiers on furlough--all of these joined the movement. The city presented an extraordinary sight: streets covered with feathers and obstructed with broken furniture which had been thrown out of the residences; houses with broken doors and windows; a raging mob, running about yelling and whistling in all directions and continuing its work of destruction without let or hindrance, and, as a finishing touch to this picture, complete indifference displayed by the local non-Jewish inhabitants to the havoc wrought before their eyes. The troops which had been summoned to restore order were without definite instructions, and, at each attack of the mob on another house, would wait for orders of the military or police authorities, without knowing what to do. As a result of this attitude of the military, the turbulent mob, which was demolishing the houses and stores of the Jews before the eyes of the troops, without being checked by them, was bound to arrive at the conclusion that the excesses in which it indulged were not an illegal undertaking but rather a work which had the approval of the Government. Toward evening the disorders increased in intensity, owing to the arrival of a large number of peasants from the adjacent villages, who were anxious to secure part of the Jewish loot. There was no one to check these crowds; the troops and police were helpless. They had all lost heart, and were convinced that it was Impossible to suppress the disorders with the means at hand. At eight o'clock at night a rain came down accompanied by a cold wind which helped in a large measure to disperse the crowd. At eleven o'clock fresh troops arrived on the spot. On the morning of April 17 a new battalion of infantry came, and from that day on public order was no longer violated in Yelisavetgrad. 

The news of the "victory" so easily won over the Jews of Yelisavetgradaroused the dormant pogrom energy in the unenlightened Russian masses. In the latter part of April riots took place in many villages of theYelisavetgrad district and in several towns and townlets in theadjoining government of Kherson. In the villages, the work ofdestruction was limited to the inns kept by Jews--many peasantsbelieving that they were acting in accordance with imperial orders. Inthe towns and townlets, all Jewish houses and stores were demolished andtheir goods looted. In the town of Ananyev, in the government ofKherson, the people were incited by a resident named Lashchenko, whoassured his townsmen that the central Government had given orders tomassacre the Jews because they had murdered the Tzar, and that theseorders were purposely kept back by the local administration. Theinstigator was seized by the police, but was wrested from it by thecrowd which thereupon threw itself upon the Jews. The riots resulted insome two hundred ruined houses and stores in the outskirts of the town, where the Jewish proletariat was cooped up. The central part of thetown, where the more well-to-do Jews had their residences, was guardedby the police and by a military detachment, and therefore remainedintact. 

3. THE POGROM AT KIEV

The movement gained constantly in momentum, and the instincts of the mobbecame more and more unbridled. The "Mother of Russian cities, " ancientKiev, where at the dawn of Russian history the Jews, together with theKhazars, had been the banner-bearers of civilization, became the sceneof the lawless fury of savage hordes. Here the pogrom was carefullyprepared by a secret organization which spread the rumor that the newTzar had given orders to exterminate the Jews, who had murdered hisfather, and that the civil and military authorities would renderassistance to the people, whilst those who would fail to comply with thewill of the Tzar would meet with punishment. The local authorities, withGovernor-General Drenteln at their head, who was a reactionary and afierce Jew-hater, were aware not only of the imminence of the pogrom, but also of the day selected for it, Sunday, April 26. 

As early as April 23 a street fight took place which was accompanied byassaults on Jewish passers-by--a prelude to the pogrom. On the daybefore the fateful Sunday, the Jews were warned by the police not toleave their houses, nor to open their stores on the morrow. The Jewswere nonplussed. They failed to understand why in the capital of thegovernor-general, with its numerous troops, which, at a hint from theircommander, were able to nip in the bud disorders of any kind, peacefulcitizens should be told to hide themselves from an impending attack, instead of taking measures to forestall the attack itself. Nevertheless, the advice of the police was heeded, and on the fateful day no Jews wereto be found on the streets. This, however, did not prevent the numerousbands of rioters from assembling on the streets and embarking upon theircriminal activities. The pogrom started in Podol, a part of the towndensely populated by Jews. The following is the description of aneye-witness:

 At twelve o'clock at noon, the air saddenly resounded with, wild shouts, whistling, jeering, hooting, and laughing. An immense crowd of young boys, artisans, and laborers was on the march. The whole city was obstructed by the "bare-footed brigade. " [1] The destruction of Jewish houses began. Window-panes, and doors began to fly about, and shortly thereafter the mob, having gained access to the houses and stores, began to throw upon the streets absolutely everything that fell into their hands. Clouds of feathers began to whirl in the air. The din of broken window-panes and frames, the crying, shouting, and despair on the one hand, and the terrible yelling and jeering on the other, completed the picture which reminded many of those who had participated in the last Russo-Turkish war of the manner in which the Bashi-buzuks [2] had attacked Bulgarian villages. Soon afterwards the mob threw itself upon the Jewish synagogue, which, despite its strong bars, locks and shutters, was wrecked in a moment. One should have seen the fury with which the riff-raff fell upon the [Torah] scrolls, of which there were many in the synagogue. The scrolls were torn to shreds, trampled in the dirt, and destroyed with incredible passion. The streets were soon crammed with the trophies of destruction. Everywhere fragments of dishes, furniture, household utensils, and other articles lay scattered about. Barely two hours after the beginning of the pogrom, the majority of the "bare-footed brigade" were transformed into well-dressed gentlemen, many of them having grown excessively stout in the meantime. The reason for this sudden change was simple enough. Those that had looted the stores of ready-made clothes put on three or four suits, and, not yet satisfied, took under their arms all they could lay their hands on. Others drove off in vehicles, carrying with them bags filled with loot. . . . The Christian population saved itself from the ruinous operations of the crowd by placing holy ikons in their windows and painting crosses on the gates of their houses. 

[Footnote 1: The Russian nickname for a crowd of tramps. ]

[Footnote 2: Name of the Turkish irregular troops noted for theirferocity. ]

While the pogrom was going on, troops were marching up and down on thestreets of the Podol district, Cossaks were riding about on theirhorses, and patrols on foot and horse-back were moving to and fro. 

 Here and there army officers would pass through, among them generals and high civil officials. The cavalry would hasten to a place whence the noise came. Having arrived there, it would surround the mob and order it to disperse, but the mob would only move to another place. Thus, the work of destruction proceeded undisturbed until three o'clock in the morning. Drums were beaten, words of command were shouted, the crowd was encircled by the troops and ordered to disperse, while the mob continued its attacks with ever-increasing fury and savagery. 

While some of the robber bands were "busy" in Podol, others were activein the principal thoroughfares of the city. In each case, the savage anddrunken mob--"not a single sober person could be found among them, " isthe testimony of an eye-witness--did its hideous work in the presence ofsoldiers and policemen, who in a few instances drove off the rioters, but, more often, accompanied them from place to place, forming, as itwere, an honorary escort. Occasionally, Governor-General Drentelnhimself would appear on the streets, surrounded by a magnificentmilitary suite, including the governor and chief of police. Theserepresentatives of State authority "admonished the people, " and thelatter, "preserving a funereal silence, drew back, " only to resume theircriminal task after the departure of the authorities. 

In some places there were neither troops nor police on the spot, and therioters were able to give full vent to their beastly instincts. Demiovka, a suburb of Kiev, was invaded by a horde of rioters during thenight. They first destroyed the saloons, filling themselves withalcohol, and then proceeded to lay fire to the Jewish houses. Under thecover of night indescribable horrors were perpetrated, numerous Jewswere beaten to death or thrown into the flames, and many women wereviolated. A private investigation carried on subsequently brought outmore than twenty cases of rape committed on Jewish girls and marriedwomen. Only two of the sufferers confessed their misfortune to thepublic prosecutor. The others admitted their disgrace in private orconcealed it altogether, for fear of ruining their reputation. 

It was only on April 27--when the pogrom broke out afresh--that theauthorities resolved to put a stop to it. Wherever a disorderly bandmade its appearance, it was immediately surrounded by soldiers andCossaks and driven off with the butt ends of their rifles. Here andthere it became necessary to shoot at these human beasts, and some ofthem were wounded or killed. The rapidity with which the pogrom wassuppressed on the second day showed incontrovertibly that if theauthorities had only been so minded the excesses might have beensuppressed on the first day and the crime nipped in the bud. Theindifference of the authorities was responsible for the demolition ofabout a thousand Jewish houses and business places, involving a monetaryloss of several millions of rubles, not to speak of the scores of killedand wounded Jews and a goodly number of violated women. In the officialreports these orgies of destruction were politely designated as"disorders, " and _The Imperial Messenger_ limited its account of thehorrors perpetrated at Kiev to the following truth-perverting dispatch:

 On April 26, disorders broke out in Kiev which were directed against the Jews. Several Jews received blows, and their stores and warehouses were plundered. On the morning of the following day the disorders were checked with the help of the troops, and five hundred men from among the rioters were arrested. 

The later laconic reports are nearer to the facts. They set the figureof arrested rioters at no less than fourteen hundred, and make mentionof a number of persons who had been wounded during the suppression ofthe excesses, including one gymnazium and one university student. Yeteven these later dispatches contain no reference to Jewish victims. 

4. FURTHER OUTBREAKS IN SOUTH RUSSIA

The barbarism displayed in the metropolis of the south-west communicateditself with the force of an infectious disease to the whole region. During the following days, from April to May, some fifty villages and anumber of townlets in the government of Kiev and the adjacentgovernments of Volhynia and Podolia were swept by the pogrom epidemic. The Jewish population of the town of Smyela [1] and the surroundingvillages, amounting to some ten thousand souls, experienced, on asmaller scale, all the horrors perpetrated at Kiev. It was not until thesecond day, May 4, that the troops proceeded to put an end to theviolence and pillage which had been going on in the town and whichresulted in a number of killed and wounded. In a near-by village aJewish woman of thirty was attacked and tortured to death, while theseven year old son of another woman, who had saved herself by flight, was killed in beastly fashion for his refusal to make the sign of thecross. 

[Footnote 1: In the government of Kiev. ]

In many cases the pogroms had been instigated by the newly arrivedGreat-Russian "bare-footed brigade" who having accomplished their"work, " vanished without a trace. 

A similar horde of tramps arrived at the railway station of Berdychev. But in this populous Jewish center they were met at the station by alarge Jewish guard who, armed with clubs, did not allow the visiting"performers" to leave the railway cars, with the result that they had toturn back. This rare instance of self-defence was only made possible bythe indulgence of the local police commissioner, or _Ispravnik_, who, for a large consideration, blinked at the endeavor of the Jews to defendthemselves against the rioters. In other places, similar attempts atself-defence were frustrated by the police; occasionally they madethings worse. Such was the case in the town of Konotop, in thegovernment of Chernigov, where, as a result of the self-defence of theJews, the mob passed from plunder to murder. In the villages theignorant peasants scrupulously discharged their "pogrom duty, " in theconviction that it had been imposed upon them by the Tzar. In onevillage in the government of Chernigov, the following characteristicepisode took place. The peasants of the village had assembled for theirwork of destruction. When the rural chief, or Elder, [1] called upon thepeasants to disperse, the latter demanded a written guarantee that theywould not be held to account for their failure to comply with theimperial "orders" to beat the Jews. This guarantee was given to them. However, the sceptical rustics were not yet convinced, and, to makeassurance doubly sure, destroyed six Jewish houses. In various villagesthe priests found it exceedingly difficult to convince the peasants thatno "order" had been issued to attack the Jews. 

[Footnote 1: The president of the village assembly. ]

The series of spring pogroms was capped by a three days' riot in thecapital of the South, in Odessa (May 3-5), which harbored a Jewishpopulation of 100, 000. In view of the immense riff-raff, which isgenerally found in a port of entry of this size, the excesses of the mobmight have assumed terrifying dimensions, had not the authoritiesremembered that the task entrusted to them was not exactly that offorming an honorary escort for the rioters, as had actually been thecase in Kiev. The police and military forces of Odessa attacked therioting hordes which had spread all over the city, and, in most cases, succeeded in driving them off. The Jewish self-defence, organized andled by Jewish students of the University of Odessa, managed in anumber of cases to beat off the bloodthirsty crowds from the gates ofJewish homes. However, when the police began to make arrests among thestreet mob, they drew no line between the defenders and the assailants, with the result that among the eight hundred arrested persons therewere one hundred and fifty Jews, who were locked up on the charge ofcarrying fire-arms. In point of fact, the "arms" of the Jewsconsisted of clubs and iron rods, with the exception of a very fewwho were provided with pistols. Those arrested were loaded on threebarges which were towed out to sea, and for several days were keptin that swimming jail. 

The Odessa pogrom, which had resulted in the destruction of several citydistricts populated by poor Jews, did not satisfy the appetites of thesavage crowd, whose imagination had been fired by stories of the"successes" attained at Kiev. The mob threatened the Jews with a newriot and even with a massacre. The panic resulting from this threatinduced many Jews to flee to more peaceful places, or to leave Russiaaltogether. The same lack of completeness marked the pogroms which tookplace simultaneously in several other cities within the jurisdiction ofthe governor-general of New Russia. In the beginning of May thedestructive energy characterizing the first pogrom period began to ebb. A lull ensued in the "military operations" of the Russian barbarianswhich continued until the month of July of the same year. 

CHAPTER XXII

THE ANTI-JEWISH POLICIES OF IGNATYEV

1. THE VACILLATING ATTITUDE OF THE AUTHORITIES

In the beginning of May, 1881, the well-known diplomatist NicholasPavlovich Ignatyev was called by the Tzar to the post of Minister of theInterior. At one time ambassador in Constantinople and at all times amilitant Pan-Slavist, Ignatyev introduced the system of diplomaticintrigues into the inner politics of Russia, earning thereby theunenviable nickname of "Father of Lies. "

A programmatic circular, issued by him on May 6, declared that theprincipal task of the Government consisted in the "extirpation ofsedition, " i. E. , in carrying on a struggle not only against therevolutionary movement but also against the spirit of liberalism ingeneral. In this connection, Ignatyev took occasion to characterize theanti-Jewish excesses in the following typical sentences:

 The movement against the Jews which has come to light during the last few days in the South is a sad example, showing how men, otherwise devoted to Throne and Fatherland, yet yielding to the instigations of ill-minded agitators who fan the evil passions of the popular masses, give way to self-will and mob rule and, without being aware of it, act in accordance with the designs of the anarchists. Such violation of the public order must not only be put down vigorously, but must also be carefully forestalled, for it is the first duty of the Government to safeguard the population against all violence and savage mob rule. 

These lines reflect the theory concerning the origin of the pogroms, which was originally held in the highest Government spheres of St. Petersburg. This theory assumed that the anti-Jewish campaign had beenentirely engineered by revolutionary agitators and that the latter hadmade deliberate endeavors to focus the resentment of the popular massesupon the Jews, as a pre-eminently mercantile class, for the purpose ofsubsequently widening the anti-Jewish campaign into a movement directedagainst the Russian mercantile class, land-owners and capitalists ingeneral. [1] Be this as it may, there can be no question that theGovernment was actually afraid lest the revolutionary propaganda attachitself to the agitation of those "devoted to Throne and Fatherland" forthe purpose of giving the movement a more general scope, "in accordancewith the d signs of the anarchists. " As a matter of fact, even outsideof Government circles, the apprehension was voiced that the anti-Jewishmovement would of itself, without any external stimulus, assume the formof a mob movement, directed not only against the well-to-do classes butalso against the Government officials. On May 4, 1881, Baron HoraceGünzburg, a leading representative of the Jewish community of St. Petersburg, waited upon Grand Duke Vladimir, a brother of the Tzar, whoexpressed the opinion that the anti-Jewish "disorders, as has now beenascertained by the Government, are not to be exclusively traced to theresentment against the Jews, but are rather due to the endeavor todisturb the peace in general. "

[Footnote 1: John W. Poster, United States Minister to Russia, inreporting to the Secretary of State, on May 24, 1881, about the recentexcesses, which "are more worthy of the dark ages than of the presentcentury, " makes a similar observation: "It is asserted also that theNihilist societies have profited by the situation to incite andencourage the peasants and lower classes of the towns and cities inorder to increase the embarrassments of the Government, but the chargeis probably conjectural and not based on very tangible facts. " See_House of Representatives, 51st Congress, 1st Session. ExecutiveDocument No. 470, p. 53_]

A week after this visit, the deputies of Russian Jewry had occasion tohear the same opinion expressed by the Tzar himself. The Jewishdeputation, consisting of Baron Günzburg, the banker Sack, the lawyersPassover and Bank, and the learned Hebraist Berlin, was awaiting thisaudience with, considerable trepidation, anticipating an authoritativeimperial verdict regarding the catastrophe that had befallen the Jews. On May 11, the audience took place in the palace at Gatchina. BaronGünzburg voiced the sentiments of "boundless gratitude for the measuresadopted to safeguard the Jewish population at this sad moment, " andadded: "One more imperial word, and the disturbances will disappear. " Inreply to the euphemistic utterances concerning "the measures adopted, "the Tzar stated in the same tone that all Russian subjects were equalbefore him, and expressed the assurance "that in the criminal disordersin the South of Russia the Jews merely serve as a pretext, and that itis the work of anarchists. "

This pacifying portion of the Tzar's answer was published in the press. What the public was not allowed to learn was the other portion of theanswer, in which the Tzar gave utterance to the view that the source ofthe hatred against the Jews lay in their economic "domination" and"exploitation" of the Russian population. In reply to the arguments ofthe talented lawyer Passover and the other deputies, the Tzar declared:"State all this in a special memorandum. "

Such a memorandum was subsequently prepared. But it was not submitted tothe Tzar. For only a few months later the official attitude towards theJewish question took a turn for the worse. The Government decided toabandon its former view on the Jewish pogroms and to adopt, instead, thetheory of Jewish "exploitation, " using it as a means of justifying notonly the pogroms which had already been perpetrated upon the Jews butalso the repressive measures which were being contemplated against them. Under these circumstances, Ignatyev did not see his way clear to allowthe memorandum in defence of Jewry to receive the attention of the Tzar. 

It is not impossible that the pacifying portion of the imperial replywhich had been given at the audience of May 11 was also prompted by thedesire to appease the public opinion of Western Europe, for at that timeEuropean opinion still carried some weight with the bureaucratic circlesof Russia. Several days before the audience at Gatchina, [1] the EnglishParliament discussed the question of Jewish persecutions in Russia. Inthe House of Commons the Jewish members, Baron Henry de Worms and SirH. D. Wolff, calling attention to the case of an English Jew who had beenexpelled from St. Petersburg, interpellated the Under-Secretary of Statefor Foreign Affairs, Sir Charles Dilke, "whether Her Majesty'sGovernment have made any representations to the Government at St. Petersburg, with regard to the atrocious outrages committed on theJewish population in Southern Russia, " Dilke replied that the EnglishGovernment was not sure whether such a protest "would be likely to beefficacious. " [2]

[Footnote 1: On May 16 and 19=May 4 and 7, according to the RussianCalendar. ]

[Footnote 2: The Russian original has been amended in a few places inaccordance with the report of the parliamentary proceedings published inthe _Jewish Chronicle_ of May 20, 1881. ]

A similar reply was given by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lord Granville, to a joint deputation of the Anglo-Jewish Associationand the Board of Deputies, two leading Anglo-Jewish bodies, which waitedupon him on May 13, [1] two days after the Gatchina audience. Afterexpressing his warm sympathy with the objects of the deputation, theSecretary pointed out the inexpediency of any interference on the partof England at a moment when the Russian Government itself was adoptingmeasures against the pogroms, referring to "the cordial reception latelygiven by the emperor to a deputation of Jews"

[Footnote 1: May 25, according to the European Calendar. From the issueof the _Jewish Chronicle_ of May 27, 1881, p. 12b, it would appear thatthe deputation was received on Tuesday, May 24. ]

Subsequent events soon made it clear that the Government, represented byIgnatyev, was far from harboring any sympathy for the victims of thepogroms. The public did not fail to notice the fact that the RussianGovernment, which was in the habit of rendering financial help to thepopulation in the case of elemental catastrophes, such as conflagrationsor inundations, had refrained from granting the slightest monetaryassistance to the Jewish sufferers from the pogroms. Apart from itsmaterial usefulness, such assistance would have had an enormous moraleffect, inasmuch as it would have stood forth in the public eye as anofficial condemnation of the violent acts perpetrated against theJews--particularly if the Tzar himself had made a large donation forthat purpose, as he was wont to do in other cases of this kind. As itwas, the authorities not only neglected to take such a step, but theyeven went so far as to forbid the Jews of St. Petersburg to start apublic collection for the relief of the pogrom victims. Nay, thegovernor-general of Odessa refused to accept a large sum of moneyoffered to him by well-to-do Jews for the benefit of the sufferers. 

Nor was this the worst. The local authorities did everything in theirpower to manifest their solidarity with the enemies of Judaism. Thestreet pogroms were followed by administrative pogroms _sui generis_. Already in the month of May, the police of Kiev began to track all theJews residing "illegally" in that city [1] and to expel these "criminals"by the thousands. Similar wholesale expulsions took place in Moscow, Oryol, and other places outside the Pale of Settlement. Thesepersecutions constituted evidently an object-lesson in religioustoleration, and the Russian masses which had but recently shown to whatextent they respected the inviolability of Jewish life and property tookthe lesson to heart. 

[Footnote 1: It will be remembered that the right of residence in Kievwas restricted in the case of the Jews to a few categories: first-guildmerchants, graduates from institutions of higher learning, andartisans. ]

One hope was still left to the Jews. The law courts, at least, being theorgans of the public conscience of Russia, were bound to condemnseverely the sinister pogrom heroes. But this hope, too, provedillusory. In the majority of cases the judges treated act of openpillage and of violence committed against life and limb as petty streetbrawls, as "disturbances of the public peace, " and imposed upon theirperpetrators ridiculously slight penalties, such as three months'imprisonment--penalties, moreover, which were simultaneously inflictedupon the Jews who, as in the case of Odessa, had resorted toself-defence. When the terrible Kiev pogrom was tried in the localMilitary Circuit Court, the public prosecutor Strelnikov, a well-knownreactionary who subsequently met his fate at the hands of therevolutionaries, delivered himself on May 18 of a speech which wasrather an indictment against the Jews than against the rioters. Heargued that these disorders had been called forth entirely by the"exploitation of the Jews, " who had seized the principal economicpositions in the province, and he conducted his cross-examination of theJewish witnesses in the same hostile spirit. When one of the witnessesretorted that the aggravation of the economic struggle was due to theartificial congestion of the Jews in the pent-up Pale of Settlement, theprosecutor shouted: "If the Eastern frontier is closed to the Jews, theWestern frontier is open to them; why don't they take advantage of it?"This summons to leave the country, doubly revolting in the mouth of aguardian of the law, addressed to those who under the influence of thepogrom panic had already made up their minds to flee from the land ofslavery, produced a staggering effect upon the Jewish public. The lastray of hope, the hope for legal justice, vanished. The courts of law hadbecome a weapon in the hands of the anti-Jewish leaders. 

2. THE POGROM PANIC AND THE BEGINNING OF THE EXODUS

The feeling of safety, which had been restored by the published portionof the imperial reply at the audience of May 11, was rapidlyevaporating. The Jews were again filled with alarm, while theinstigators of the pogroms took courage and decided that the time hadarrived to finish their interrupted street performance. The early daysof July marked the inauguration of the second series of riots, theso-called summer pogroms. 

The new conflagration started in the city of Pereyaslav, in thegovernment of Poltava, which had not yet discarded its anti-JewishCossack traditions. [1] Pereyaslav at that time harbored many fugitivesfrom Kiev, who had escaped from the spring pogroms in that city. Theincrease in the Jewish population of Pereyaslav was evidentlydispleasing to the local Christian inhabitants. Four hundred and twentyChristian burghers of Pereyaslav, avowed believers in the Gospels whichenjoin Christians to love those that suffer, passed a resolution callingfor the expulsion of the Jews from their city, and, in anticipation ofthis legalized violence, they decided to teach the Jews a "lesson" ontheir own responsibility. On June 30 and July 1, Pereyaslav was thescene of a pogrom, marked by all the paraphernalia of the Russianritual, though unaccompanied this time by human sacrifices. The epilogueto the pogrom was marked by an originality of its own. A committeeconsisting of representatives of the municipal administration, fourChristians and three Jews, was appointed to inquire into the causes ofthe disorders. This committee was presented by the local Christianburghers with a set of demands, some of which were in substance asfollows:

[Footnote 1: Comp. Vol. I, p. 145. ]

 That the Jewish aldermen of the Town Council, as well as the Jewish members of the other municipal bodies, shall voluntarily resign from these honorary posts, "as men deprived of civic honesty" [1]; that the Jewish women shall not dress themselves in silk, velvet, and gold; that the Jews shall refrain from keeping Christian domestics, who are "corrupted" in the Jewish homes religiously and morally; that all Jewish strangers, who have sought refuge in Pereyaslav, shall be immediately banished; that the Jews shall be forbidden to buy provisions in the surrounding villages for reselling them; also, to carry on business on Sundays and Russian festivals, to keep saloons, and so on. 

[Footnote 1: This insolent demand of the unenlightened Russian burghersmet with the following dignified rebuttal from the Jewishoffice-holders: "What bitter mockery! The Jews are accused of a lack ofhonesty by the representatives of those very people who, with clubs andhatchets in their hands, fell in murderous hordes upon their peacefulneighbors and plundered their property. " The replies to the otherdemands of the burghers were coached in similar terms. ]

Thus, in addition to being ruined, the Jews were presented with anultimatum, implying the threat of further "military operations. "

As in previous cases, the example of the city of Pereysslav was followedby the townlets and villages in the surrounding region. The unrulinessof the crowd, which had been trained to destroy and plunder withimpunity, knew no bounds. In the neighboring town of Borispol a crowd ofrioters, stimulated by alcohol, threatened to pass from pillage tomurder. When checked by the police and Cossacks, they threw themselveswith fury upon these untoward defenders of the Jewish population, andbegan to maltreat them, until a few rifle shots put them to flight. 

The same was the case in Nyezhin, [1] where a pogrom was enacted on July20 and 22. After several vain attempts to stop the riots, the militarywas forced to shoot at the infuriated crowd, killing and wounding someof them. This was followed by the cry: "Christian blood is flowing--beatthe Jews!"--and the pogrom was renewed with redoubled vigor. It wasstopped only on the third day. 

[Footnote 1: In the government of Chernigov. ]

The energy of the July pogroms had evidently spent itself in these lastferocious attempts. The murderous hordes realized that the police andmilitary were fully in earnest, and this was enough to sober them fromtheir pogrom intoxication. Towards the end of July, the epidemic ofvandalism came to a stop, though it was followed in many cities by alarge number of conflagrations. The cowardly rioters, deprived of theopportunity of plundering the Jews with impunity, began to set fire toJewish neighborhoods. This was particularly the case in thenorth-western provinces, in Lithuania and White Russia, where theauthorities had from the very beginning set their faces firmly againstall organized violence. 

The series of pogroms perpetrated during the spring and summer of thatyear had inflicted its sufferings on more than one hundred localitiespopulated by Jews, primarily in the South of Russia. Yet the miseryengendered by the panic, by the horrible apprehension of unbridledviolence, was far more extensive, for the entire Jewish population ofRussia proved its victim. Just as in the bygone Middle Ages wheneverJewish suffering had reached a sad climax, so now too the persecutednation found itself face to face with the problem of emigration. And asif history had been anxious to link up the end of the nineteenth centurywith that of the fifteenth, the Jewish afflictions in Russia found anecho in that very country, which in 1492 had herself banished the Jewsfrom her borders: the Spanish Government announced its readiness toreceive and shelter the fugitives from Russia. Ancient Catholic Spainheld forth a welcoming hand to the victims of modern Greek-OrthodoxSpain. However, the Spanish offer was immediately recognized as havingbut little practical value. In the forefront of Jewish interest stoodthe question as to the land toward which the emigration movement shouldbe directed: toward the United States of America, which held out theprospect of bread and liberty, or toward Palestine, which offered ashelter to the wounded national soul. 

While the Jewish writers were busy debating the question, life itselfdecided the direction of the emigration movement. Nearly all fugitivesfrom the South of Russia had left for America by way of the WesternEuropean centers. The movement proceeded with elemental force, andentirely unorganized, with the result that in the autumn of that yearsome ten thousand destitute Jewish wanderers found themselves huddledtogether at the first halting-place, the city of Brody, which issituated on the Russo-Austrian frontier. They had been attracted hitherby the rumor that the agents of the French _Alliance IsraéliteUniversette_ would supply them with the necessary means for continuingtheir journey across the Atlantic. The central committee of the_Alliance_, caught unprepared for such a huge emigration, was at itswit's end. It sent out appeals, warning the Jews against wholesaleemigration to America by way of Brody, but it was powerless to stem thetide. When the representatives of the French _Alliance_, the well-knownCharles Netter and others, arrived in Brody, they beheld a terriblespectacle. The streets of the city were filled with thousands of Jewsand Jewesses, who were exhausted from material want, with hungrychildren in their arms. "From early morning until late at night, theFrench delegates were surrounded by a crowd clamoring for help. Theirway was obstructed by mothers who threw their little ones under theirfeet, begging to rescue them from starvation. "

The delegates did all they could, but the number of fugitives wasconstantly swelling, while the process of dispatching them to Americawent on at a snail's pace. The exodus of the Jews from Russia was duenot only to the pogroms and the panic resulting from them, but also tothe new blows which were falling upon them from all sides, dealt out bythe liberal hand of Ignatyev. 

3. THE GUBERNATORIAL COMMISSIONS

After wavering for some time, the anti-Semitic Government of Ignatyevfinally made up its mind as to the attitude it was henceforth to adopttowards the Jewish problem. Taken aback at the beginning of the pogrommovement, the leading spheres of Russia were first inclined to ascribeit to the effects of the revolutionary propaganda, but they afterwardscame to the conclusion that, in the interest of the reactionary policiespursued by them and as a means of justifying the disgraceful anti-Jewishexcesses before the eyes of Europe, it was more convenient to throw theblame upon the Jews themselves. With this end in view, a new theory wasput forward by the Russian Government, the quasi-economic doctrine of"the exploitation of the original population by the Jews. " This doctrineconsisted of two parts, which, properly speaking, were mutuallyexclusive:

 _First_, the Jews, as a pre-eminently mercantile class, engage in "unproductive" labor, and thereby "exploit" the productive classes of the Christian population, the peasantry in particular. 

 _Second_, the Jews, having "captured" commerce and industry--here the large participation of the Jews in industrial life, represented by handicrafts and manufactures, is tacitly admitted--compete with the Christian urban estates, in other words, interfere with them in their own "exploitation" of the population. 

The first part of this strange theory is based upon, primitive economicnotions, such as are in vogue during periods of transition, when naturaleconomic production gives way to capitalism, and when all complicatedforms of mediation are regarded as unproductive and harmful. The thoughtexpressed in the second part of the thesis is implied in the make-up ofa police state, which looks upon the occupation of certain economicpositions by a given national group as an illegitimate "capture" andregards it as its function to check this competition for the solepurpose of insuring the success of the dominant nationality. 

The Russian Government was disturbed neither by the primitive characterof this theory nor by the resort to brutal police force implied init--the idea of supporting the "exploitation" practised by the Russiansat the expense of that carried on by the Jews; nor was it abashed by itsinner logical contradictions. What the Government needed was some meanswhereby it could throw off the responsibility for the pogroms and proveto the world that they were a "popular judgment, " the vengeance wreakedupon the Jews either by the peasants, the victims of exploitation, or bythe Russian burghers, the unsuccessful candidates for the rôle ofexploiters. This point of view was reflected in the report of CountKutaysov, who had been sent by the Tzar to South Russia to inquire intothe causes of the "disorders. " [1]

[Footnote 1: It may be added that Kutaysov recognized that the Russianmasses were equally the victims of the commercial exploitation of theRussian "bosses, " but was at a loss to find a reason for the pogromsperpetrated in the Jewish agricultural colonies, i. E. , against thosewho, according to this theory, were themselves the victims ofexploitation. ]

Ignatyev seized upon this flimsy theory, and embodied it in a moreelaborate form in his report to the Tzar of August 22. In this report heendeavored to prove the futility of the policy hitherto pursued by theRussian Government which "for the last twenty years [during the reign ofAlexander II. ] had made efforts to bring about the fusion of the Jewswith the remaining population and had nearly equalized the rights of theJews with those of the original inhabitants. " In the opinion of theMinister, the recent pogroms had shown that "the injurious influence" ofthe Jews could not be suppressed by such liberal measures. 

 The principal source of this movement [the pogroms], which is so incompatible with the temper of the Russian people, lies--according to Ignatyev--in circumstances which are of an exclusively economic nature. For the last twenty years the Jews have gradually managed to capture not only commerce and industry but they have also succeeded in acquiring, by means of purchase and lease, a large amount of landed property. Owing to their clannishness and solidarity, they have, with few exceptions, directed their efforts not towards the increase of the productive forces [of the country] but towards the exploitation of the original inhabitants, primarily of the poorest classes of the population, with the result that they have called forth a protest from this population, manifesting itself in deplorable forms--In violence. . . . Having taken energetic means to suppress the previous disorders and mob rule and to shield the Jews against violence, the Government recognizes that it is justified in adopting, without delay, no less energetic measures to remove the present abnormal relations that exist between the original inhabitants and the Jews, and to shield the Russian population against this harmful Jewish activity, which, according to local information, was responsible for the disturbances. 

Alexander III. Hastened to express his agreement with these views of hisMinister, who assured him that the Government had taken "energeticmeasures" to suppress the pogroms--which was only true in two or threerecent cases. At the same time he authorized Ignatyev to adopt"energetic measures" of genuine Russian manufacture against those whohad but recently been ruined by these pogroms. 

The imperial ukase published on August 22, 1831, dwells on "the abnormalrelations subsisting between the original population of severalgovernments and the Jews. " To meet this situation it provides that inthose governments which harbor a considerable Jewish population specialcommissions should be appointed consisting of representatives of thelocal estates and communes, to be presided over by the governors. Thesecommissions were charged with the task of finding out "which aspects ofthe economic activity of the Jews in general have exerted _an injuriousinfluence_ upon the life of the original population, and what measures, both legislative and administrative, should be adopted" for the purposeof weakening that influence. In this way, the ukase, in calling for theappointment of the commissions, indicated at once the goal towards whichtheir activity was to be directed: to determine the "injuriousinfluence" of the Jews upon Russian economic life. 

The same thought was expressed even more directly by Ignatyev, who inhis circular to the governors-general, dated August 25, reproduced hisreport to the Tzar, and firmly established the dogma of "the harmfulconsequences of the economic activity of the Jews for the Christianpopulation, their racial separatism, and religious fanaticism. "

We are thus made the witnesses of a singular spectacle: the ruined andplundered Jewish population, which had a right to impeach the Governmentfor having failed, to protect it from violence, was itself put on trial. The judges in this legal action were none other than the agents of theruling powers--the governors, some of whom had been guilty of connivanceat the pogroms--on the one hand, and, on the other hand, therepresentatives of the Christian estates, urban and rural, who weremostly the appointees of these governors. In addition, every commissionwas allotted two Jewish representatives, who were to act in the capacityof experts but without voting power; they were placed in the position ofdefendants, and were made to listen to continuous accusations againstthe Jews, which the; were constantly forced to deny. Altogether therewere sixteen such commissions: one in each of the fifteen governments ofthe Pale of Settlement--exclusive of the Kingdom of Poland--and one inthe government of Kharkov. The commissions were granted a term of twomonths within which to complete their labors and present the results tothe Minister. 

The sessions of all these "gubernatorial commissions" [1] took placesimultaneously during the months of September and October. 

[Footnote 1: In Russian, _Gubernskiya Kommissit_, literally, "GovernmentCommissions, " using "Government" in the sense of "Province. "]

The prisoner at the bar was the Jewish people which was tried on thecharges contained in the official bill of indictment--the imperial ukaseas supplemented and interpreted in the ministerial circular. Awell-informed contemporary gives the following description of thesesessions in an official memorandum:

 The first session of each commission began with the reading of the ministerial circular of August 25. The reading invariably produced a strong effect in two different directions: on the members from among the peasantry and on those from among the Jews. The former became convinced of the hostile attitude of the Government towards the Jewish population and of their leniency towards the instigators of the disorders, which, according to an assertion made in Ignatyev's circular, were due exclusively to the Jewish exploitation of the original inhabitants. Needless to say, the peasants did not fail to communicate this conviction, which was strengthened at the subsequent sessions by the failure to put any restraint upon the wholesale attacks on the Jews on the part of the anti-Semitic members, to their rural communes. 

 As for the Jewish members (of the commissions), the effect of the ministerial circular upon them was staggering. In their own persons they beheld the three millions of Russian Jewry placed at the prisoner's bar: one section of the population put on trial before another. And who were the judges? Not the representatives of the people, duly elected by all the estates of the population, such as the rural assemblies, but the agents of the administration, bureaucratic office-holders, who were more or less subordinate to the Government. The court proceedings themselves were carried on in secret, without a sufficient number of counsel for the defendants who in reality were convicted beforehand. The attitude adopted by the presiding governors, the speeches delivered by the anti-Semitic members, who were In an overwhelming majority, and characterized by attacks, derisive remarks, and subtle affronts, subjected the Jewish members to moral torture and made them lose all hope that they could be of any assistance in attempting a dispassionate, impartial, and comprehensive consideration of the question. In the majority of the commissions, their voice was suppressed and silenced. In these circumstances the Jewish members were forced, as a last resort, to defend the interests of their coreligionists in writing, by submitting memoranda and separate opinions. However, the instances were rare in which these memoranda and protests were dignified by being read during the sessions. 

This being the case, it is not to be wondered at that the commissionsbrought in their "verdicts" in the spirit of the indictment framed bythe authorities. The anti-Semitic officials exhibited their "learning"in ignorant criticisms of the "spirit of Judaism, " of the Talmud and thenational separatism of the Jews, and they proposed to extirpate allthese influences by means of cultural repression, such as thedestruction of the autonomy of the Jewish communities, the closing up ofall special Jewish schools, and the placing of all phases of the innerlife of the Jews under Government control. The representatives of theRussian burghers and peasants, many of whom had but recently co-operatedor, at least, sympathized with the perpetrators of the pogroms, endeavored to prove the economic "injuriousness" of the Jews, anddemanded that they should be restricted in their urban and ruralpursuits, as well as in their right of residence outside the cities. Notwithstanding the prevailing spirit, five commissions voiced theopinion, which, from the point of view of the Russian Government, seemedrank heresy, that it was necessary to grant the Jews the right ofdomicile all over the empire so as to relieve the excessive congestionof the Jewish population in the Pale of Settlement. 

4. THE SPREAD OF ANTI-SEMITISM

While the gubernatorial commissions--gubernatorial in the literal senseof the word, because entirely dominated by the governors--were holdingtheir sessions, the satraps-in-chief of the Pale of Settlement, thegovernors-general, were busy sending their expressions of opinion to St. Petersburg. The governor-general of Kiev, Drenteln, who himself wasliable to prosecution for allowing a two days' pogrom in his ownresidential city, condemned the entire Jewish people in emphatic terms, and demanded the adoption of measures calculated "to shield theChristian population against so arrogant a tribe as the Jews, who refuseon religions grounds to have close contact with the Christians. " It wasnecessary, in his opinion, to resort to legal repression in order tocounteract "the intellectual superiority of the Jews, " which enablesthem to emerge victorious in the straggle for existence. 

Similar condemnations of Judaism came from the governors-general ofOdessa, Vilna, and Kharkov, although they disagreed as to the dimensionswhich this repression should assume. Totleben, the master of the Vilnaprovince, who had refused to countenance the perpetration of pogroms inLithuania, nevertheless agreed that the Jews should henceforth beforbidden to settle in the villages, though he was generous enough toadd that he found it somewhat inconvenient "to rob the whole Jewishnation of the possibility of earning a livelihood by its labor. " Theimpression prevailed that militant Judaeophobia was determined todeprive the Jews even of the right of securing a piece of bread. 

The Government was well aware beforehand that the labors of thegubernatorial commissions would yield results satisfactory to it. It, therefore, found it unnecessary to wait for their reports andresolutions, and proceeded to establish in St. Petersburg, on October19, "a Central Committee for the Revision of the Jewish Question. " Thecommittee was attached to the Ministry of the Interior, and consisted ofseveral officials, under the chairmanship of Assistant-MinisterGotovtzev. The officials were soon busy framing "temporary measures" inthe spirit of their patron Ignatyev, and, as the resolutions of thegubernatorial commissions were coming in, they were endeavoring tostrengthen the foundations for the projected enactment. In January, 1882, the machinery for the manufacture of Jewish disabilities was infull swing. 

This organized campaign of the enemies of Judaism, who were preparingadministrative pogroms as a sequel to the street pogroms, met with noorganized resistance on the part of Russian Jewry. The small conferenceof Jewish notables in St. Petersburg, which met in September in secretsession, presented a sorry spectacle. The guests from the provinces, whohad been invited by Baron Günzburg, engaged in discussions about theproblem of emigration, the struggle with the anti-Semitic press, andsimilar questions. After being presented to Ignatyev, who assured themin diplomatic fashion of the "benevolent intentions of the Government, "they returned to their homes, without having achieved anything. 

The only social factor in Jewish life was the press, particularly thethree periodicals published in Russian, the _Razsvyet_ ("the Dawn"), the_Russki Yevrey_ ("the Russian Jew"), and the _Voskhod_ ("theSunrise"), [1] but even they revealed the lack of a well-defined policy. 

[Footnote 1: See on these papers, p. 219 et seq. ]

The political movements in Russian Jewry were yet in an embryonic stage, and their rise and development were reserved for a later period. True, the Russian-Jewish press applied itself assiduously to the task ofdefending the rights of the Jews, but its voice remained unheard inthose circles of Russia in which the poisonous waters of Judaeophobiagushed forth in a broad current from the columns of the semi-official_Novoye Vremya_, the pan-Slavic _Russ_, and many of their anti-Semiticcontemporaries. 

While the summer pogroms were in full swing, the _Novoye Vremya_, reflecting the views of the official spheres, seriously formulated theJewish question in the paraphrase of Hamlet: "to beat or not to beat. "Its conclusion was that it was necessary to "beat" the Jews, but, inview of the fact that Russia was a monarchical state with conservativetendencies, this function ought not to be discharged by the people butby the Government, which by its method of legal repression could beatthe Jews much more effectively than the crowds on the streets. 

The editor of the Moscow newspaper _Russ_, Ivan Aksakov, [1] attacked theRussian liberal press for expressing its sympathy with the Jewish pogromvictims, contending that the Russian people demolished the Jewish housesunder the effect of a "righteous indignation, " though he failed toexplain why that indignation also took the form of plundering andstealing Jewish property, or violating Jewish women. Throwing into oneheap the arguments of the medieval Church and those of modern Germananti-Semitism, Aksakov maintained that Judaism was opposed to "Christiancivilization, " and that the Jewish people were striving for "worlddomination" which they hoped to attain through their financial power. 

[Footnote 1: Compare above, p. 208. ]

The bacillus of German anti-Semitism had penetrated even into thecircles of the Russian radical _intelligenzia_. Among the "Populists, "[1] who were wont to idealize the Russian peasantry, it became thefashion to look upon the Jew as an economic exploiter, with thisdistinction, however, that they bracketed him with the host of Russianexploiters from among the bourgeois class. This resulted in a mostunfortunate misunderstanding. A faction of South Russian revolutionariesfrom among the party known as "The People's Freedom" [2] conceived theidea that the same peasants and laborers who had attacked the Jews asthe representatives of the non-Russian bourgeoisie might easily bedirected against the representatives of the ruling classes in general. During the spring and summer pogroms, several attempts were made bymysterious persons, through written appeals and oral propaganda, to turnthe pogrom movement also against the Russian nobles and officials. [3]Towards the end of August, 1881, the Executive Committee of "ThePeople's Freedom" issued an appeal in which it voiced the thought thatthe Tzar had enslaved the free Ukrainian people and had distributed thelands rightfully belonging to the peasants among the pans [4] andofficials, who extended their protection to the Jews and shared theprofits with them. Therefore, the people should march against the Jews, the landlords, and the Tzar. "Assist us, therefore, " the appealcontinues, "arise, laborers, avenge yourselves on the landlords, plunderthe Jews, and slay the officials!"

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 222. ]

[Footnote 2: In Russian, _Narodnaya Vola_. It was organized in 1879, andwas responsible for the assassination of Alexander II. ]

[Footnote 3: These endeavors were evidently the reason why the RussianGovernment was originally inclined to ascribe the anti-Jewish movementto revolutionary tactics. ]

[Footnote 4: The Polish noble landowners. See Vol. I, p. 93, n. 2. ]

True, the appeal was the work of only a part of the RevolutionaryExecutive Committee, which at that time had its headquarters in Moscow. It failed to obtain the approval of the other members of the Committeeand of the party as a whole, and, being a document that might compromisethe revolutionary movement, was withdrawn and destroyed after a numberof copies had been circulated. Nevertheless, the champions of "ThePeople's Freedom" continued for some time to justify theoretically theutilization of the anti-Jewish movement for the aims of the generalsocial revolution. Only at a later stage did this section of therevolutionary party realize that these tactics were not only mistakenbut also criminal. For events soon made it clear that the anti-Jewishmovement served as an unfailing device in the hands of the blackreactionaries to divert the popular wrath from the source of allevil--the rule of despotism--and direct it towards the most unfortunatevictims of that despotism. 

5. THE POGROM AT WARSAW

When the July pogroms were over, it seemed as if the pogrom epidemic haddied out, and no one expected that it would soon break out afresh. Thegreater was the surprise when, in December, 1881, the news spread that apogrom, lasting three days, had taken, place in the capital of theKingdom of Poland, in Warsaw. Least of all was this pogrom expected inWarsaw itself, where the relations between the Poles and the Jews werenot yet marked by the animosity they assumed subsequently. But theorganizers of the pogrom who received their orders from above managed toadapt themselves to local conditions, and the unexpected came to pass. On the Catholic Christmas day, when the Church of the Holy Cross in thecenter of the town was crowded with worshippers, somebody suddenlyshouted "Fire!" The people rushed to the doors, and in the terriblepanic that ensued twenty-nine persons were crushed to death, and manyothers were maimed. The alarm proved a false one. There was no trace ofa fire in the church, and nobody doubted but that the alarm had beengiven by pick-pockets--there were a goodly number of them in Warsaw--whohad resorted to this well-known trick to rob the public during thepanic. But right there, among the crowd which was assembled in front ofthe church, gazing in horror at the bodies of the victims, some unknownpersons spread the rumor--which, it may be parenthetically remarked, proved subsequently unfounded--that two Jewish pickpockets had beencaught in the church. 

At that moment whistles were suddenly heard--nobody knew whence theycame--which served as the signal for a pogrom. The street mob began toassault the Jews who happened to pass by, and then started, according tothe established procedure, to attack the Jewish stores, saloons, andresidences in the streets adjoining the church. The hordes were underthe command of thieves, well known to the police, and of some unknownstrangers who from time to time gave signals by whistling, and directedthe mob into this or that street. As in all other cases in which thedanger did not threaten the authorities directly, there were but fewpolicemen and soldiers on hand--which circumstance stimulated therioters in their further activity. 

On the following day the rioters were "busy" on many other streets, bothin the center of the town and in its outskirts, except for the streetswhich were densely populated by Jews, where they were afraid of meetingwith serious resistance. [1]

[Footnote 1: In some places the Jews defended themselves energetically, and in the ensuing fight there were wounded on both sides. ]

The police and the troops arrested many rioters, and carried them off tothe police stations. But for some unknown reason they did not summonenough courage to disperse the crowd, so that the mob frequently engagedin its criminal work in the very presence of the guardians of publicsafety. 

In accordance with the well-known pogrom routine, the authoritiesremembered only on the third day that it was time to suppress the riots, the "lesson" being over. On December 15, the governor-general of Warsaw, Albedinski, issued an order dividing the town into four districts andplacing every district under the command of a regimental chief. Troopswere stationed in the streets and ordered to check all crowds, with theresult that on the same day the disorders were stopped. 

This, however, came too late. For in the meantime some fifteen hundredJewish residences, business places, and houses of prayer had beendemolished and pillaged, and twenty-four Jews had been wounded, whilethe monetary loss amounted to several million rubles. Over threethousand rioters were arrested--among them a large number of under-agedyouths. On the whole, the rioters were recruited from the dregs of thePolish population, but there were also found among them a number ofunknown persons that spoke Russian. The _Novoye Vremya_, in commentingupon the pogrom, made special reference to the friendly attitude of thePolish hooligans to the Russians in general and to the officers andsoldiers in particular--a rather suspicious attitude, considering theinveterate hatred of the Poles towards the Russians, especially towardsthe military and official class. Here and there the soldiers themselvesgot drunk in the demolished saloons, and took part in looting Jewishproperty. 

The Polish patriots from among the higher classes were shocked by thisattempt to engineer a barbarous Russian pogrom in Warsaw. In an appealwhich the representatives of the Polish intellectuals addressed to thepeople not later than on the second day of the pogrom they protestedemphatically against the hideous scenes which had been disgracing thecapital of Poland. The archbishop of Warsaw acted similarly, and theCatholic priests frequently marched through the streets with crosses intheir hands, admonishing the crowds to disperse. It is interesting tonote that, while the pogrom was going on, the governor-general of Warsawrefused to comply with the request of a number of Poles, who applied forpermission to organize a civil guard, pledging themselves to restoreorder in the city in one day. It would seem as if the official pogromritual did not allow of the slightest modification. The disorders had toproceed in accordance with the established routine, so as not to violatethe humane commandment: "Two days shalt thou plunder, and on the thirdday shalt thou rest. " Evidently some one had an interest in having thecapital of Poland repeat the experiment of Kiev and Odessa, and inseeing to it that the "cultured Poles" should not fall behind theRussian barbarians in order to convince Europe that the pogrom was notexclusively a Russian manufacture. 

As a matter of fact, the opposite result was attained. The revoltingevents at Warsaw, which completed the pogrom cycle of 1881, made a muchstronger impression upon Europe and America than all the precedingpogroms, for the reason that Warsaw stood in close commercial relationswith the West, and the havoc wrought there had an immediate effect uponthe European market. 

CHAPTER XXIII

NEW MEASURES OF OPPRESSION AND PUBLICPROTESTS

1. THE DESPAIR OF RUSSIAN JEWRY

The civil New Year of 1882 found the Jews of Russia in a depressed stateof mind: they were under the fresh impression of the excesses at Warsawand were harassed by rumors of new measures of oppression. Thesufferings of the Jewish people, far from stilling the anti-Jewish furyof the Government, had merely helped to fan it. "You are maltreated, _ergo_ you are guilty"--such was the logic of the ruling spheres ofRussia. The official historian of that period is honest enough toconfess that "the enforced role of a defender of the Jews against theRussian population [by suppressing the riots] weighed heavily upon thethe Government. " Upon reading the report of the governor-general ofWarsaw for the year 1882, in which reference was made to thesuppression of the anti-Jewish excesses by military force, AlexanderIII. Appended the following marginal note: "This is the sad thing inall these Jewish disorders. "

Those among Russian Jewry who could look further ahead were not slow inrealizing the consequences which were bound to result from this hostileattitude of the ruling classes. Those of a less sensitive frame of mindfound it necessary to inquire of the Government itself concerning theJewish future, and received unequivocal replies. Thus, in January, 1882, Dr. Orshanski, a brother of the well-known publicist, [1] approachedCount Ignatyev on the subject, and was authorized to publish thefollowing statement:

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 238 et seq. ]

 The Western frontier is open for the Jews. The Jews have already taken ample advantage of this right, and their emigration has in no way been hampered. [1] As regards your question concerning the transplantation of Jews into the Russian interior, the Government will, of course, avoid everything that may further complicate the relations between the Jews and the original population. For this reason, though keeping the Pale of Jewish Settlement intact, I have already suggested to the Jewish Committee [attached to the Ministry] [2] to indicate those localities which, being thinly populated and in need of colonization, might admit of the settlement of the Jewish element . . . Without injury to the original population. 

[Footnote 1: According to an old Russian law which had come intodisuse, departure from the country without a special Governmentpermit is punishable as a criminal offence. ]

[Footnote 2: See p. 277. ]

This reply of the all-powerful Minister, which was published as aspecial supplement to the Jewish weekly _Razsvyet_, increased the panicamong the Jews of Russia. The Jews were publicly told that theGovernment wished to get rid of them, and that the only "right" theywere to be granted was the right to depart; that no enlargement of thePale of Settlement could possibly be hoped for, and that only as anextreme necessity would the Government allow groups of Jews to colonizethe uninhabitable steppes of central Asia or the swamps of Siberia. Well-informed people were in possession of much more seriousinformation: they knew that the Jewish Committee attached to theMinistry of the Interior was preparing a monstrous plan of reducing theterritory of the Pale of Settlement itself by expelling the Jews fromthe villages and driving them into the over-crowded cities. 

The soul of the Jewish people was filled with sorrow, and yet there wasno way of protesting publicly in the land of political slavery. The Jewshad to resort to the old medieval form of a national protest by pouringforth their feelings in the synagogue. Many Jewish communities seemed tohave come to an understanding to appoint the 18th of January as a day ofmourning to be observed by fasting and by holding religious services inthe synagogues. This public mourning ceremony proved particularlyimpressive in St. Petersburg. On the appointed day the whole Jewishpopulation of the Russian capital, with its numerous Jewishprofessionals, assembled in the principal synagogue and in the otherhouses of prayer, reciting the hymns of perpetual Jewish martyrdom, the_Selihot_. In the principal synagogue the rabbi delivered a discoursedealing with the Jewish persecutions. 

 When the preacher--an eye-witness narrates--began to picture in a broken voice the present position of Jewry, one long moan, coming, as it were, from one breast, suddenly burst forth and filled the synagogue. Everybody wept, the old, the young, the long-robed paupers, the elegant dandies dressed in latest fashion, the men in Government service, the physicians, the students, not to speak of the women. For two or three minutes did these heart-rending moans resound--this cry of common sorrow which had issued from the Jewish heart. The rabbi was unable to continue. He stood upon the pulpit, covered his face with his hands, and wept like a child. 

Similar political demonstrations in the presence of the Almighty wereheld during those days in many other cities. In some places the Jewsobserved a three days' fast. Everywhere the college youth, otherwiseestranged from Judaism, took part in the national mourning, full of thepresentiment that it, too, was destined to endure decades of sorrows andtears. 

2. THE VOICE OF ENGLAND AND AMERICA

The political protest, which could not be uttered in Russia, was soon tobe heard in England. During the very days on which the Russian Jews wereweeping in their synagogues, their English coreligionists, inconjunction with prominent English political leaders, organizedindignation meetings to protest against the horrors of RussianJudaeophobia. Already at an earlier date, shortly after the pogrom ofWarsaw, the London _Times_ had published a series of articles under theheading "The Persecutions of the Jews in Russia, " containing aheartrending description of the pogroms of 1881 and an account of theanti-Semitic policy of the Russian rulers. [1] The articles produced asensation. Reprinted in the form of a special publication, which in ashort time went through three editions, they spread far beyond theconfines of England. Numerous voices were soon to be heard demandingdiplomatic intercession in favor of the oppressed Jews and calling forthe organization of material relief for the victims of the pogroms. 

[Footnote 1: The author of these articles was Joseph Jacobs whoafterwards settled in New York, where he died in 1916. ]

Russian diplomacy was greatly disconcerted by the growth of thisanti-Russian agitation in a country, whose Government, headed at thattime by Gladstone, endeavored to maintain friendly relations withRussia. The organ of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the_Journal de St. Petersbourg_, published two articles, attempting torefute the most revolting facts contained in the articles of the _Times_;it denied that there had been cases of rape, and asserted that "murderswere exceedingly rare. " [1] The official organ further stated that "theGovernment has already begun, to consider new legislative measuresconcerning the Jews, " without mentioning, however, that these "measures"were of a repressive character. The mouthpiece of Russian diplomacyasked In an irritated tone whether the pro-Jewish agitators wished "tosow discord between the Russian and the English people" and spoil thefriendly relations between these two Powers which Gladstone's Governmenthad established, reversing the contrary policy of Beaconsfield. 

[Footnote 1: It is true that the account in the _Times_ contained a fewexaggerations as far as the number of victims and the dimensions of thecatastrophe in general are concerned, but the picture as a whole wasentirely in keeping with the facts, and the cases of murder and rape, as, for instance, in Kiev, were, on the whole, stated correctly. ]

However, these diplomatic polemics were unable to restrain the Englishpolitical leaders from proceeding with the arrangements for theprojected demonstrations. After a whole series of protest meetings invarious cities of England, a large mass meeting was called at theMansion House in London, [1] under the chairmanship of the Lord Mayor. The élite of England was represented at the meeting, including Membersof Parliament, dignitaries of the Church, the titled aristocracy, andmen of learning, A number of prominent persons who were unable to bepresent sent letters expressing their warm sympathy with the aims of thegathering; among them were Tennyson, Sir John Lubbock, and others. 

[Footnote 1: On February 1, 1882. ]

The first speaker, the Earl of Shaftesbury, pointed out that the Englishpeople did not wish to meddle in the inner affairs of Russia, butdesired to influence it by "moral weapons, " in the name of the principleof the "solidarity of nations. " The official denials of the atrocitieshe brushed aside with the remark that, if but a tenth part of thereports were true, "it is sufficient to draw down the indignation of theworld. " It was necessary, in the opinion of Shaftesbury, to appealdirectly to the Tzar and ask him "to be a Cyrus to the Jews, and not anAntiochus Epiphanes. "

The Bishop of London, speaking in the absence of the Archbishop ofCanterbury, the Primate of the Anglican Church, reminded his audiencethat only several years previously England had been horrified by theoutrages perpetrated by the Turkish Bashi-buzuks[1] upon the Bulgars, who were then defended by Russia, and it had now a right to protestagainst Christian Russia as it had formerly done against MohammedanTurkey. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 253, n. 2. ]

The most powerful speech was delivered by Cardinal Manning, the greatCatholic divine. He pointed to the fact that the Russian Jews were notonly the object of temporary pogroms but that they constantly groanedunder the yoke of a degrading legislation which says to the Jew: "Youmay not pass beyond that boundary; you must not go within eighteen milesof that frontier; you must not dwell in that town; you must live only inthat province. " He caused laughter in the audience by quoting fromIgnatyev's famous circular concerning the appointment of thegubernatorial commissions, in which, commenting upon the terribleatrocities recently perpetrated upon the _Jews_, the Minister lamented"the sad condition of the _Christian_ inhabitants of the southernprovinces. " Cardinal Manning concluded his eloquent address with thefollowing words marked by a lofty, prophetic strain:

 There is a book which is common to the race of Israel and to us Christians. That book is the bond between us, and in that book I read that the people of Israel are the eldest people upon the earth. Russia and Austria and England are of yesterday, compared with the imperishable people, which, with an inextinguishable life and immutable traditions, and faith in God and in the laws of God, scattered, as it is, all over the world, passed through the fires unscathed, trampled into the dust, and yet never combining with the dust into which it is trampled, lives still, a witness and a warning to us. [1]

[Footnote 1: In reproducing the quotations I have followed in themain the account of the Mansion House Meeting contained in thepamphlet published In New York under the title _Proceedings ofMeetings held February 1, 1882, at New York and London, to ExpressSympathy with the Oppressed Jews in Russia_. The account of the_Jewish Chronicle of_ February 8, 1882, offers a number ofvariations. ]

After several more speeches by Canon Farrar, Professor Bryce, [1] andothers, the following resolutions were adopted:

[Footnote 1: James Bryce, the famous writer and statesman, subsequentlyBritish ambassador at Washington. ]

 1. That, in the opinion of this meeting, the persecution and the outrages which the Jews in many parts of the Russian dominions have for several months past suffered are an offence to Christian civilization, and to be deeply deplored. 

 2. That this meeting, while disclaiming any right or desire to interfere in the internal affairs of another country, and desiring that the most amicable relations between England and Russia should be preserved, feels it a duty to express its opinion that the laws of Russia relating to Jews tend to degrade them in the eyes of the Christian population, and expose Russian Jewish subjects to the outbreaks of fanatical ignorance. 

 3. That the Lord Mayor be requested to forward a copy of these resolutions to the Right Honourable W. B. Gladstone and the Right Honourable Earl Granville, in the hope that Her Majesty's Government may be able, when an opportunity arises, to exercise a friendly influence with the Russian Government in accordance with the spirit of the preceding resolutions. 

Finally a resolution was adopted to open a relief fund for the sufferersof the pogroms and for improving the condition of Russian Jewry byemigration as well as by other means. The committee chosen by themeeting for this purpose included the Lord Mayor, the Archbishop ofCanterbury, Cardinal Manning, the Bishop of London, Nathaniel deRothschild, and others. 

A few days after the Mansion House Meeting the English Governmentresponded to the resolutions adopted on that occasion. The followingdispatch, dated London, February 9, appeared in the Russian papers:

 In the House of Commons, Gladstone, replying to an interpellation of Sir John Simon, stated that reports concerning the persecutions of the Jews in Russia had been received from the English consuls, and could not but inspire sentiments of the utmost pain and horror. But the matter being an internal affair of another country, it could not become the object of official correspondence or inquiry on the part of England. All that could be done was to make casual and unofficial representations. All other actions touching the question of the relations of the Russian Government to the Jews were more likely to harm than to help the Jewish population. [1]

[Footnote 1: On this occasion Gladstone merely repeated the words ofthe Russian official communication which had been published on theeye of the Mansion House Meeting in the hope of scaring theorganizers of the protest: "The Russian Government, which has alwaysmost scrupulously refrained from interfering in the inner affairs ofother countries, is correspondingly unable to allow a similarviolation of international practice by others. Any attempt on thepart of another Government to intercede on behalf of the Jewishpeople can only have the result of calling forth the resentment ofthe lower classes and thereby affect unfavorably the condition ofthe Russian Jews. " In addition to this threat, the _ImperialMessenger_ endeavored to prove that the measures adopted by theGovernment against the pogroms "were not weak, " as may be seen fromthe large number of those arrested by the police after thedisorders, which amounted to 3675 in the South and to 3151 inWarsaw. ]

Another telegram sent from London on February 14 contained the followingcommunication:

 In the House of Commons, Gladstone, replying to Baron Worms, stated that no humane purposes would be achieved by parliamentary debates about the Jews of Russia, Such debates were rather likely to arouse the hostility of a certain portion of the Russian population against the Jews and that therefore no day would be appointed for the debate, as requested by Worms. [1]

[Footnote 1: Compare the _Jewish Chronicle_ of February 17, 1882. ]

In this way matters were smoothed over, to the great satisfaction ofRussian diplomacy. The public and Government of England confinedthemselves to expressing their feelings of "disgust" at the treatment ofthe Jews in Russia, but no immediate representations to St. Petersburgwere attempted by Gladstone's Cabinet. For the same reason the EnglishPrime Minister refused to forward to its destination a petitionaddressed to the Russian Government by the Jews of England, with BaronRothschild at their head. Count Ignatyev had no cause for worry. Themisunderstanding with the friendly Government had been removed, and thefiery protests at the English meetings interfered but little with hispeace of mind. He pursued his course, unabashed by the "disgust" whichit aroused in the whole civilized world. 

The voice of protest against the Russian barbarities which resoundedthroughout England was seconded in far-off America. Long before theaccession of Alexander III. The Government of the United States hadrepeated occasion to make representations to the Russian Government withreference to its treatment of the Jews. These representations wereprompted by the fact that American citizens of the Jewish faith weresubjected during their stay in Russia to the same disabilities anddiscriminations which the Russian Government imposed upon its own Jews. [1] Yet, actuated by broader humanitarian considerations, the UnitedStates Government became interested in the general question of theposition of Russian Jewry, and invited reports from its representativesat St. Petersburg on the subject. [2] On April 14, 1880, the Secretaryof State, William M. Evarts, responding to a petition of the Union ofAmerican Hebrew Congregations, who had complained about "theextraordinary hardships" which the Jews of Russia were made to suffer atthat time, directed the United States Minister at St. Petersburg, JohnW. Foster, to bear in mind "the liberal sentiments of this Government"and to express its views "in a manner which will subserve the interestsof religious freedom. " [3] Acting upon these instructions, Foster tookoccasion to discuss the Jewish question in his conversations withleading Russian officials about which he reported fully to hisGovernment. [4]

[Footnote 1: See the correspondence between the United States and Russiacollected in _House of Representatives, 51st Congress, 1st Session. Executive Document_ No. 470, dated October 1, 1890. ]

[Footnote 2: A "memorandum on the legal position of the Hebrews inRussia" was transmitted by the American legation to the Secretary ofState on September 29, 1872 (_loc. Cit_. Pp. 9-13). An abstract from aRussian memorandum on the Jewish right of residence was forwarded in thesame manner on March 15, 1875 (_loc. Cit_. , pp. 25-28). The circular ofTolstoi against the pogroms (see later in the text, p. 314) isreproduced in full, _loc. Cit_. , p. 68 et seg. ]

[Footnote 3: _loc. Cit. _, p. 33. ]

[Footnote 4: An account of Foster's conversation on the problem ofRussian Jewry with de Giers, the Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Loris-Melikov, the Minister of the Interior, and "the Minister ofWorship" is found in his dispatch of December 30, 1880, _loc. Cit. _, p. 43 et seq. ]

On May 22 of the same year a resolution was passed by the House ofRepresentatives requesting the President to lay before it all availableinformation relating to the cases of expulsion of American citizens ofthe Jewish faith from Russia, and at the same time "to communicate tothis House all correspondence in reference to the proscription of Jewsby the Russian Government. " [1]

[Footnote 1: Compare _Congressional Record_, Vol. 13, part 7, _Appendix, _ p. 651. The same request for information was repeated by theHouse of Representatives on January SO, 1882 (_loc. Cit. _. , Vol. 13, p. 738; see also p. 645). In reply to the latter resolution PresidentArthur submitted, under date of May 22, 1882, all the diplomatic paperson the subject which were printed as _Executive Document_ No. 192. Thesepapers were reprinted on October 1, 1890, as part of _ExecutiveDocument_ No. 470, under President Harrison]

The pogroms of 1881, and the indignation they aroused among the Americanpeople induced the United States Government to adopt a more energeticform of protest. In his dispatch to the United States Minister at St. Petersburg, dated April 15, 1882, the new Secretary of State, FredericT. Frelinghuysen, takes account of the prevailing sentiment in thecountry in these words: "The prejudice of race and creed having in ourday given way to the claims of our common humanity, the people of theUnited States have heard with great regret the stories of the sufferingsof the Jews in Russia. " He therefore notifies the Minister "that thefeeling of friendship which the United States entertains for Russiaprompts this Government to express the hope that the Imperial Governmentwill find means to cause the persecution of these unfortunate beings tocease. " [1]

[Footnote 1: _Executive Document_ No. 470, p. 65. ]

A more emphatic note of protest was sounded in the House ofRepresentatives by Samuel S. Cox, of New York, who, in his lengthyspeech delivered on July 31, 1882, scathingly denounced the repressivemethods practiced by the Russian Government against the Jews, and, moreparticularly, the outrages which had been perpetrated upon them duringthe preceding year. [1] He makes the former directly responsible for thelatter. In his opinion the pogroms were not merely a spontaneous andsudden outburst of the Eussian populace against the Jews, but rather theslow result of the disabilities and discriminations which are imposedupon the Jews by the Russian Government and are bound to degrade them inthe eyes of their fellow-citizens:

[Footnote 3: _Congressional Record_, Vol. 13, part 7, _Appendix, _ p. 651et seq. The speech is accompanied by an elaborate tabulated statement ofthe pogroms and a map of the area in which they had taken place. ]

 Is it said that the Russian peasantry, and not the Government, are responsible, I answer: If the peasantry of Russia are too ignorant or debased to understand the nature of this cruel persecution, they have warrant for their conduct in the customs and laws of Russia to which I have referred. These discriminate against the Jews. They have reference to their isolation, their separation from Russian protection, their expulsion from certain parts of the Empire, and their religion. When a peasant observes such forceful movements and authoritative discriminations in a Government against a race, it arouses his ignorance, and inflames his fanatical zealotry. Adding this to the jealousy of the Jews as middlemen and business-men, and you may account for, but not justify, these horrors. The Hebraic-Russian question has been summed up in a few words: "Extermination of two and one-half millions of mankind because they are--Jews!" [1]

[Footnote 1: loc. _cit_. , p. 653. ]

After giving an elaborate account of the horrors which had taken placein Russia during 1881, he wound up his speech with the followingeloquent appeal:

 This people is one of the survivors, with Egypt, China and India, of the infancy of mankind. It is at the mercy of the cruel despot of the North. With a lineage unrivalled for purity, a religious sentiment and ethics drawn out of the glory and greatness of Mount Sinai . . . With an eternal influence from its law-givers, prophets, and psalmists never vouchsafed to any language, race or creed, It outlives the philosophies and myths of Greece and the grandeur and power of Rome. It is this race, broken-hearted and scattered, to which the Czar of all the Russias adds the enormities of his rule upon the victims of the ignorance and slander of the ages. The birthright of this race is thus despoiled; and, Sir, have we no word of protest? Struggling against adversities which no other people have encountered, do they not yet survive--the wine from the crushed grape? [1]

[Footnote 1: _loc. Cit_. , p. 656. ]

The resolution introduced by him on that occasion was to the followingeffect:

 Whereas the Government of the United States should exercise its influence with the Government of Russia to stay the spirit of persecution as directed against the Jews, and protect the citizens of the United States resident in Russia, and seek redress for injuries already inflicted, as well as to secure by wise and enlightened administration the Hebrew subjects of Russia and the Hebrew citizens of the United States resident in Russia against the recurrence of wrongs; Therefore

 Resolved, That the President of the United States, if not incompatible with the public service, report to this House any further correspondence in relation to the Jews in Russia not already communicated to this House. " [1] [Footnote 1: _Congressional Record_, Vol. 13, p. 6691. ]

The resolution, which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, was finally passed by the House on February 23, 1883. 

The sentiments of the broad masses of the American people had foundutterance somewhat earlier at a big protest meeting which was held inFebruary, 1882, in the city of New York, where the first refugees fromRussia had begun to arrive. [1] A resolution was adopted protesting"against the spirit of medieval persecution thus revived in Russia" andcalling upon the Government of the United States to make energeticrepresentations to St. Petersburg. One of the speakers at the New Yorkmeeting, Judge Noah Davis, said, amidst the enthusiastic applause of theaudience:

[Footnote 1: The meeting was held on Wednesday, February 1, 1882, on thesame day as the Mansion House Meeting in London. The chair was occupiedby the Mayor, William R. Grace. See the _American Hebrew_ of February 3, 1882, p. 138 et seq. ]

 Let them come! I would to Heaven it were in our power to take the whole three million Jews of Russia. The valley of the Mississippi alone could throw her strong arms around, and draw them all to her opulent bosom, and bless them with homes of comfort, prosperity, and happiness. Thousands of them are praying to come. The throne of Jehovah is besieged with prayers for the powers of escape, and if they cannot live in peace under Russian laws without being subject to these awful persecutions, let us aid them in coming to us. [1]

[Footnote 1: See _Proceedings of Meetings held February 1, 1882, atNew York and London, to Express Sympathy with the Oppressed Jews inRussia_. New York, p. 20 et seq. ]

These words of the speaker, uttered in a moment of oratoricalexultation, voiced the secret wish cherished by many enthusiasts of theRussian ghetto. 

3. THE PROBLEM OF EMIGRATION AND THE POGROM AT BALTA

In Russia itself a large number of emigration societies came into beingabout the same time, which had for their object the transfer of RussianJews to the United States, the land of the free. The organizers of thesesocieties evidently relied on some miraculous assistance from theoutside, such as the _Alliance Israélite_ of Paris and similar Jewishbodies in Europe and America. Under the immediate effect of Ignatyev'sstatement to Dr. Orshanski in which the Russian Minister referred to the"Western frontier" as the only escape for the Jews, the Russian-Jewishpress was flooded with reports from hundreds of cities, particularly inthe South of Russia, telling of the formation, of emigrant groups. "Ourpoor classes have only one hope left to them, that of leaving thecountry. 'Emigration, America, ' are the slogans of our brethren"--thisphrase occurs at that time with stereotyped frequency in all the reportsfrom the provinces. 

Many Russian-Jewish intellectuals dreamed of establishing Jewishagricultural and farming colonies in the United States, where somebatches of emigrants who had left during the year 1881 had alreadymanaged to settle on the land. A part of the Jewish youth was carriedaway by the idea of settling in Palestine, and conducted a vigorouspropaganda on behalf of this national idea among the refugees from themodern Egypt. There was urgent need of uniting these emigrationsocieties scattered all over the Pale of Settlement and of establishingcentral emigration committees to regulate the movement which had grippedthe people with elemental force. 

Unfortunately, there was no unity of purpose among the Jewish leaders inRussia. The intellectuals who stood nearer to the people, such as thewell-known oculist, Professor Mandelstamm, who enjoyed great popularityin Kiev, and others like him, as well as a section of the Jewish press, particularly the _Bazsvyet_, insisted continually on the necessity oforganizing the emigration movement, which they regarded as the mostimportant task confronting Russian Jewry at that time. The Jewisholigarchy in St. Petersburg, on the other hand, was afraid lest such anundertaking might expose it to the charge of "disloyalty" and of a lackof Russian patriotism. Others again, whose sentiments were voiced by theRussian-Jewish periodical _Voskhod_ and who were of a more radical turnof mind, looked upon the attempt to encourage a wholesale emigration ofJews as a concession to the Government of Ignatyev and as an indirectabandonment of the struggle for emancipation in Russia itself. 

In the spring of 1882, the question of organizing the emigrationmovement had become so pressing that it was decided to convene aconference of provincial Jewish leaders in St. Petersburg to considerthe problem. Before the delegates had time to arrive in the capital, thesky of South Russia was once more lit up by a terrible flare. Balta, alarge Jewish center in Podolia, where a Jewish emigration society hadhad sprung into being shortly before the catastrophe, became the sceneof a frightful pogrom. 

It was shortly before the Russian Passover, the high season of pogroms, when the Russian public was startled by a strange announcement publishedtowards the end of March in the _Imperial Messenger_ to the effect thatfrom now on it would accurately report all cases of "Jewish disorders"in accordance with the official information received from the governors. The announcement clearly implied that the Government knew beforehand ofthe imminence of new pogroms. Even the conservative _Moscow News_commented on the injudicious statement of the official organ in emphaticand sarcastic terms:

 The _Imperial Messenger_ is comforting the public by the announcement that it would in due time and at due length report all cases of excesses perpetrated upon the Jews. One might think that these are every-day occurrences forming part of the natural course of events which demand nothing else than timely communication to the public. Is there indeed no means to put a stop to this crying scandal?

Events soon made it clear that there was no desire to put a stop to this"scandal, " as the Moscow paper politely termed the exploits of theRussian robber bands. The local authorities of Balta were forewarned intime of the approaching pogroms. Beginning with the middle of March thepeople in Balta and the surrounding country were discussing them openly. When the Jews of that town made their apprehensions known to the localpolice commissioner, they received from him an evasive reply. In view ofthe fact that the Jewish population of Balta was three times as large asthe Christian, it would not have been difficult for the Jews to organizesome sort of self-defence. But they knew that such an organization wasstrictly forbidden by the Government, and, realizing the consequences, they had to confine themselves to a secret agreement entered into by afew families to stand up for one another in the hour of distress. On thesecond day of the Russian Easter, corresponding to the seventh day ofthe Jewish festival, on March 29, the pogrom began, surpassing by thesavagery of the mob and the criminal conduct of the authorities all thebacchanalia of 1881. A contemporary observer, basing his statements onthe results of a special investigation, gives the following account ofthe events at Balta:

 At the beginning of the pogrom, the Jews got together and forced a band of rioters to draw back and seek shelter in the building of the fire department. But when the police and soldiers appeared on the scene, the rioters decided to leave their place of refuge. Instead of driving off the disorderly band, the police and soldiers began to beat the Jews with their rifle butts and swords. This served as a signal to start the pogrom. At that moment, somebody sounded an alarm bell, and, in response, the mob began to flock together. Fearing the numerical superiority of the Jews in that part of the town, the crowd passed across the bridge to the so-called Turkish side, where there were fewer Jews. The crowd was accompanied by the military commander, the police commissioner, the burgomaster, and a part of the local battalion, which fact, however, did not prevent the mob, while passing the Cathedral street, from demolishing a Jewish store and breaking the windows in the house of another Jew, a member of the town-council. After the mob had crossed over to the Turkish side, the authorities drew up military cordons on all the three bridges leading from that side to the rest of the town, with the order not to allow any Jews to pass. Needless to say, the order was carried out. At the same time the Christians of the remaining sections of the town and of the village of Alexandrovka were allowed to pass unhindered. Thanks to these arrangements, the Turkish side was sacked in the course of three to four hours, so that by one o'clock in the morning the rioters found nothing left to do. During the night, the police and military authorities arrested twenty-four rioters and a much larger number of Jews. The latter were arrested because they ventured to stay near their homes. The following morning, the Christians were released and allowed to swell the ranks of the pillaging mob, while the Jews were kept in jail until the following day and freed only when the governor arrived. 

 On the following day, March 30, at four o'clock in the morning, a large number of peasants, amounting to about five thousand and armed with clubs, began to arrive in town, having been summoned by the Ispravnik [1] from the adjacent villages. The arrival of the peasants was welcomed by the Jews, who thought that they had been called to come to their aid. But they soon found out their mistake, for the peasants declared that they had come to beat and plunder the Jews. Simultaneously with the arrival of the peasants, large numbers from among the local mob began to assemble around the Cathedral, and at eight o'clock in the morning signals were given to renew the pogrom. At first this was prevented. The officers of the local battalion, who patrolled the city, ordered the soldiers to surround the mob and hold it off for about an hour, during which time the Greek-Orthodox bishop [2] Radzionovski admonished the rioters and tried to make them understand that such doings were contrary to the laws of the Church and the State. But when the police commissioner, the military chief, and Ispravnik arrived before the Cathedral, the military cordon was withdrawn, and the crowd, now let loose, threw itself upon a near-by liquor store, and, after demolishing it and filling itself with alcohol, resumed its work of destruction, with the co-operation of the peasants who had been summoned by the Ispraynik and the assistance of the soldiers and policemen. It was on this occasion that those wild, savage scenes of murder, rapine, and plunder took place, the account of which as published in the newspapers is but the pale shadow of the real facts. . . . The pogrom of Balta was called forth not by the mere inactivity but by the direct activity of the local authorities. 

[Footnote 1: The head of the district (or county) police. The policein the larger towns of the county is subject to the policecommissioner of the town, who is referred to earlier in the text. ]

[Footnote 2: In Russian, _Protoyerey_, a term borrowed from theGreek. It corresponds roughly to the title of bishop. ]

What these "savage scenes" were we do not learn from the newspapers, which were forbidden by the censor to report them, but we know thempartly from unpublished sources and partly from the later courtproceedings. Aside from the demolition of twelve hundred and fiftyhouses and business places and the destruction and pillage of propertyand merchandise--according to a statement of the local rabbi, "allwell-to-do Jews were turned into beggars, and more than fifteen thousandpeople were sent out into the wide world "--a large number of peoplewere killed and maimed, and many women were violated. Forty Jews wereslain or dangerously wounded; one hundred and seventy received slightwounds; many Jews, and particularly Jewesses, became insane from fright. There were more than twenty cases of rape. The seventeen year olddaughter of a poor polisher, Eda Maliss by name, was attacked by a hordeof bestial lads before the eyes of her brother. When the mother of theunfortunate girl ran into the street and called to her aid a policemanwho was standing near-by, the latter followed the woman into the house, and then, instead of helping her, dishonored her on the spot. Thefiendish hordes invaded the home of Baruch Shlakhovski, and began theirbloody work by slaying the master of the house, whereupon his wife anddaughter fled and hid themselves in a near-by orchard. Here a Russianneighbor lured them into his house under the pretext of defending theirhonor against the rioters, but, once in his house, he disgraced thedaughter in the presence of her mother. In many cases the soldiers ofthe local garrison assaulted and beat the Jews who showed themselves onthe streets while the "military operations" of the mob were going on. Inaccordance with the customary pogrom ritual, the human fiends were leftundisturbed for two days, and only on the third day were troops summonedfrom a near-by city to put a stop to the atrocities. 

On the same day the governor of Podolia arrived to make aninvestigation. It was soon learned that the local authorities, thepolice commissioner, the Ispravnik, the military commander, theburgomaster, and the president of the nobility [1] had either directly orindirectly abetted the pogrom. Many rioters, who had been arrested bythe police, were soon released, because they threatened otherwise topoint out to the higher authorities the ringleaders from among the localofficials and the representatives of Russian society. The Jews, again, were constantly terrorized by these scoundrels and cowed by the fear ofmassacres and complete annihilation, in case they dared to expose theirhangmen before the courts. 

[Footnote 1: The nobility of each government forms an organization ofits own. It is headed by a president for the entire government who hasunder his jurisdiction a president for each district (or county). Such acounty president is referred to in the text. ]

The pogrom of Balta found but a feeble echo in the immediateneighborhood--in a few localities of the governments of Podolia andKherson. It seemed as if the energy of destruction and savagery hadspent itself in the exploits at Balta. On the whole, the pogrom campaignconducted in the spring of 1882 covered but an insignificant territorywhen compared with the pogrom enterprise of 1881, thoughsurpassing it considerably in point of quality. The horrors of Baltawere a substantial earnest of the Kishinev atrocities of 1903and the October pogroms of 1905. 

4. THE CONFERENCE OF JEWISH NOTABLES AT ST. PETERSBURG

The horrors of Balta cast their shadow upon the conference of Jewishdelegates which met in St. Petersburg on April 8-11, 1882. Theconference, which had been called by Baron Horace Günzburg, with thepermission of Ignatyev, was made up of some twenty-five delegates fromthe provinces--among them Dr. Mandelstamm of Kiev, Rabbi Isaac ElhananSpecter of Kovno--and fifteen notables from the capital, including BaronGünzburg himself, the railroad magnate Polakov, and Professor Bakst. Thequestion of Jewish emigration was the central issue of the conference, although, in connection with it, the general situation of Russian Jewrycame up for discussion. There was a mixed element of tragedy andtimidity in the deliberations of this miniature congress, at whichneither the voice of the masses nor that of the _intelligentzia_ weregiven a full hearing. On the one hand, the conference listened toheartrending speeches, picturing the intolerable position of the Jews;and one of the delegates, Shmerling from Moghilev, who had justdelivered such a speech, was so overcome that he fainted and died in afew hours. On the other hand, the most influential delegates, particularly those from the capital, were looking about timorously, fearing lest the Government suspect them of a lack of patriotism. Othersagain looked upon emigration as an illicit form of protest, as"sedition, " and they clung to this conviction, even when the conferencehad been told in the name of the Minister of the Interior that it wasexpected to consider the question of "thinning out the Jewish populationin the Pale of Settlement, in view of the fact that the Jews will not beadmitted into the interior governments of Russia. "

At the second meeting of the conference, the rabbi of St. Petersburg, Dr. Drabkin, reported to the delegates about his last conversation withIgnatyev. In reply to the rabbi who had stated that the Jews werewaiting for an imperial word ordering the suppression of the pogroms, and were anticipating the removal of their legal disabilities, theMinister had characterized these assertions as "commonplaces, " and hadadded in an irritated tone: "The Jews themselves are responsible for thepogroms. By joining the Nihilists they thereby deprive the Government ofthe possibility of sheltering them against violence. " The sophistry ofthe Minister was refuted on the spot by his own confession that theBalta pogrom was due to "a false rumor charging the Jews with havingundermined the local Greek-Orthodox church, " in other words, that thecause of the Balta pogrom was not to be traced to any tendencies withinJewry but rather to the agitation of evil-minded Jew-baiters. 

At the same session, the discussion of the emigration question wasside-tracked by a new design of the slippery Minister. The financierSamuel Polakov, who was close to Ignatyev, declared in a spirit of baseflunkeyism that the labors of the conference would prove fruitlessunless they were carried on in accordance with "Governmentinstructions. " On this occasion he informed the conference that in atalk which he had with the Minister the latter had branded theendeavors to stimulate emigration as "an incitement to sedition, " on theground that "emigration does not exist for Russian citizens. " Asked bythe Minister for suggestions as to the best means of relieving thecongestion of the Jews in the Pale, Polakov had replied: "By settlingthem all over Russia. " To this the Minister had retorted that he couldnot allow the settlement of Jews except in Central Asia and in the newlyconquered oasis of Akhal-Tekke, [1] In obedience to these ministerialutterances, the obsequious financier sharply opposed the plan of aJewish emigration to foreign lands, and seriously recommended to theconference to consider the proposal made by Ignatyev. The Minister'ssuggestion was bitterly attacked by Dr. Mandelstamm, who saw in it a newattempt to make sport of the Jews, Even Professor Bakst, who objected toemigration on principle, declared that the proposed scheme of settlingthe Jews amounted in reality to "a deportation to far-off places" andwas tantamount to an official "classification of the Jews as criminals. "

[Footnote 1: In the Trans-Caspian region. It had been occupied byRussian troops shortly before--in 1880. ]

From the project of deportation, which failed to meet with the sympathyof the conference, the delegates proceeded to discuss the burningquestion of pogroms. It was proposed to send a deputation to the Tzar, appealing to him to put a stop to the legislative restrictions, whichwere bound to inspire the Russian population with the belief that theJews were outside the pale of the law. 

In the question of foreign emigration the majority of the conferencevoted against the establishment of emigration committees, on the groundthat the latter might give the impression as if the Jews were desirousof leaving Russia. 

After a debate lasting four days the following resolutions were adopted:

 _First_, to reject completely the thought of organizing emigration, as being subversive of the dignity of the Russian body politic and of the historic rights of the Jews to their present fatherland. 

 _Second_, to point to the necessity of abolishing the present discriminating legislation concerning the Jews, this abolition being the only means to regulate the relationship of the Jewish population to the original inhabitants. 

 _Third_, to bring to the knowledge of the Government the passive attitude of the authorities which had clearly manifested itself during the time of the disorders. 

 _Fourth_, to petition the Government to find means for compensating the Jewish population, which had suffered from the pogroms as a result of inadequate police protection. 

At the same time the conference took occasion to refute the oldaccusation, which had again been brought up in the gubernatorialcommissions, that the Jews still retained their ancient autonomous Kahalorganization, and that the latter was operating secretly and wasfostering Jewish separatism to the detriment of the other elements ofthe population. 

The resolution of the conference on this score read as follows:

 We, the undersigned, the representatives of various centers of Jewish settlement in Russia, rabbis, members of religious organizations and synagogue boards, consider it our sacred duty, calling to witness God Omniscient, to declare publicly, in the presence of the whole of Russia, that there exists neither an open nor a secret Kahal administration among the Russian Jews; that Jewish life is entirely foreign to any organization of this kind and to any of the attributes ascribed to such an organization by evil minded persons. 

The signers of this solemn pronouncement were evidently unaware of thedegrading renunciation of national rights which was implied in thedeclaration that not only had the Jews lost their former comprehensivecommunal organization--this was in accordance with the facts--but that, were such an inner autonomous organization to exist, they would regardit as a criminal offence, subversive of the public order and punishableby the forfeiture of civil rights. 

CHAPTER XXIV

LEGISLATIVE POGROMS

1. THE "TEMPORARY RULES" OF MAY 3, 1882

During the interval between the pogrom of Warsaw and that of Balta theGovernment was preparing for the Jews a series of legislative pogroms. In the recesses of the Russian Government offices, which served as thelaboratories of police barbarism, the authorities were busy forging achain of legal and administrative restrictions in order to "regulate"Jewish life in the spirit of complete civil disfranchisement. TheCentral Committee on Jewish Affairs, attached to the Ministry of theInterior, which was called for short "the Jewish Committee" but mightfar more appropriately have been called "the Anti-Jewish Committee, " wasbasing its labors upon the opinions submitted by the gubernatorialcommissions and rearing on this foundation a monstrous structure ofdisabilities. 

The new project was based upon the following theory: The old Russianlegislation was marked by its hostility to the Jews as a secluded groupof alien faith and race. A departure from this attitude was attemptedduring the reign of Alexander II. , when the rights of certain categoriesof Jews were enlarged, and "a period of toleration was inaugurated. " Butsubsequent experience proved the inexpediency of this tolerant attitudetowards the Jews, as has been demonstrated by the recent manifestation"of an anti-Jewish movement abroad" (German anti-Semitism) and "thepopular protest" in Russia itself, where it assumed the form of pogroms. Since Russia has now chosen the path of a "national policy, " it followsalso in regard to the Jewish question that this country cannot but "turnto its ancient tradition, throw aside the innovations which have proveduseless, and follow vigorously the principles, evolved by the whole pasthistory of the monarchy, according to which the Jews must be regarded asaliens, " and therefore can lay no claim to full toleration. 

This barbarous theory, which brought Russia back to the traditions ofancient Muscovy, was expounded elaborately in the protocol of thesession of the "anti-Jewish Committee, " as a sort of preamble to thelegal project submitted by it. 

While engaged in these labors, the members of the committee received thenews of the pogrom in Warsaw, and were greatly heartened by it. They didnot fail to make an entry in the protocol to the effect that the"disorders" which had taken place in the Kingdom of Poland "where theJews enjoy equal rights" (i. E. , the right of residence) tend to supportthe theory of the "injuriousness" of the Jewish people. Official pensbegan to scribble more rapidly, and within a short time, by the springof 1882, a project was ready, to be inflicted as a severe punishmentupon the Jews for the atrocities perpetrated upon them. The "conqueredfoe, " represented by the Jewish population, was to be dislodged from alarge area within, the Pale of Settlement, overcrowded though the latterhad become, by forbidding the Jews to settle anew outside of the citiesand towns, i. E. , in the country-side. Those already settled there wereeither to be evicted by the verdict of the rural communes[1], or to bedeprived of a livelihood by the prohibition to buy or lease immovableproperty and to trade in liquor. 

[Footnote 1: "To allow the communes to evict the Jews by a verdict, "according to the exact wording of the law. ]

This project was submitted by Ignatyev to the Committee of Ministers, accompanied by the suggestion that the new disabilities be enacted notin due legal procedure (by the Council of State) but in the form of"Temporary Rules" to be sanctioned in an extra-legal way by the Tzar, with the end in view "to do away with the aggravated relations betweenthe Jews and the original population. "

However, even the members of the reactionary Committee of Ministers wereembarrassed by Ignatyev's project. The Committee felt that it wasimpossible to carry out the expropriation of personal and propertyrights on so extensive a scale without the due process of law and thatthe permission to be granted to rural communes of expelling the Jewsfrom the villages was tantamount to leaving the latter to the tendermercies of the benighted Russian masses, which would thus more than everbe strengthened, in their conviction that the Jews might be expelled andassaulted with impunity, so that the relations between the two elementsof the population, instead of improving, would only become moreaggravated. On the other hand, the Committee of Ministers went on recordthat it considered it necessary to adopt rigorous measures against theJews in order that the peasants should not think "that the Tzar's willin ridding them of Jewish exploitation was not put into execution. "

As a result of these contentions, several concessions were made byIgnatyev, and the following compromise was reached: The clause orderingthe expulsion of the hundreds of thousands of Jews already settled inthe villages was eliminated, and the prohibition was restricted to theJews who wished to settle outside of the towns and townlets _anew_. Inturn, the Committee of Ministers yielded to Ignatyev's demand that theproject should be enacted with every possible dispatch, withoutpreliminary submission to the Council of State. 

Such was the genesis of the famous "Temporary Rules" which weresanctioned by the Tzar on May 3, 1882. Shorn of all bureaucraticrhetoric, the new laws may be reduced to the following laconicprovisions:

 _First_, to forbid the Jews henceforth to settle anew outside of the towns and townlets. 

 _Second_, to suspend the completion of instruments of purchase of real property and merchandise in the name of Jews outside of the towns and townlets. 

 _Third_, to forbid the Jews to carry on business on Sundays and Christian holidays. 

The first two "Rules" contained in their harmless wording a cruelpunitive law which dislodged the Jews from nine-tenths of the territoryhitherto accessible to them, and tended to coop up millions of humanbeings within the suffocating confines of the towns and townlets of theWestern region. And yet, notwithstanding its tremendous implications, the law was passed outside the ordinary course of legal procedure--underthe disguise of "Temporary Rules, " which, in spite of their title, havebeen enforced with merciless cruelty for more than a generation. 

2. ABANDONMENT OF THE POGROM POLICY

After imposing a severe and immediately effective penalty upon RussianJewry for having been ruined by the pogroms, the Government suddenlyremembered its duty, and dangled the threat of future penalties beforethe prospective instigators of Jewish disorders. On the same fatefulthird of May, the Tzar sanctioned the decision of the Committee ofMinisters concerning the necessity of declaring solemnly that "theGovernment is firmly resolved to prosecute invariably any attempt atviolence on the person and property of the Jews, who are under theprotection of the general laws. " In accordance with this declaration, asenatorial ukase dated May 10 was sent out to the governors, warningthem that "the heads of the gubernatorial administrations would be heldresponsible for the adoption of timely measures looking to theprevention of the conditions leading to similar disorders and for thesuppression of these disorders at the very outset, and that anynegligence in this regard on the part of the administration and thepolice authorities would result in the dismissal from office of thosefound guilty. " This warning was accompanied by the following confession:

 In view of the fact that sad occurrences in the past have made it evident that the local population, incited by evil-minded persons from covetous or other motives, has taken part in the disorders, it is the duty of the gubernatorial administration to make it clear to the local communes that they are obliged to adopt measures for the purpose . . . Of impressing upon the inhabitants the gross criminal offence implied in willfully perpetrating violent acts against anybody's person and property. 

It would almost seem as if the Government, by promulgating on one andthe same day the "Temporary Rules" against the Jews and the circularagainst the pogroms, wished to intimate to the Russian people that, inasmuch as the Jews were now being exterminated through the agency ofthe law, there was no further need to exterminate them on the streets. The originators of the "Temporary Rules" did not seem to realize thatthe latter were nothing but a variation of those "violent acts againstperson and property, " from which the street mob was warned to refrain, for the loss of the freedom of movement is violence against the person, and the denial of the right of purchasing real estate is violenceagainst property. Even the Russian press, though held at that time inthe grip of censorship, could not help commenting on the fact that theeffect of the official circular against the pogroms had been greatlyweakened, by the simultaneous promulgation of the "Temporary Rules. "

It would seem as if the terrible atrocities at Balta had made thehighest Government spheres realize that the previous policy ofconnivance at the pogroms, which had been practised for a whole year, could not but disgrace Russia in the eyes of the world and underminepublic order in Russia itself. As soon as this was realized, theluckless Minister, who had been the pilot of Russian politics throughoutthat terrible year, was bound to disappear from the scene. On May 30, Count Ignatyev was made to resign, and Count Demetrius Tolstoi wasappointed Minister of the Interior. 

Tolstoi was a grim reactionary and a champion of autocracy and policepower, but he was at the same time an enemy of all manifestations of mobrule which tended to undermine the authority of the State. A few daysafter his appointment the new Minister issued a circular in which hereiterated the recent declaration of his predecessor concerning the"resolve of the Government to prosecute every kind of violence againstthe Jews, " announcing emphatically that "any manifestation of disorderswould unavoidably result in the immediate prosecution of all officialpersons who are in duty bound to concern themselves with the preventionof disorders. "

This energetic pronouncement of the Government had a magic effect. Allprovincial administrators realized that the central Government of St. Petersburg had ceased to trifle with the promoters of the pogroms, andthe pogrom epidemic was at an end. Beginning with June, 1882, thepogroms assumed more and more a sporadic character. Here and theresparks of the old conflagration would flare up again, but only to dieout quickly. In the course of the next twenty years, until the Kishinevmassacre of 1903, no more than about ten pogroms of any consequence maybe enumerated, and these disorders were all isolated movements, with apurely local coloring, and without the earmarks of a common organizationor the force of an epidemic, such as characterized the pogrom campaignsof 1881, or those of 1903-1905. This is an additional proof for thecontention that systematic pogroms in Russia are impossible as long asthe central Government and the local authorities are honestly and firmlyset against them. 

The stringent measures adopted by Tolstoi were soon reflected in thelegal trials arising out of the pogroms. Formerly, the local authoritiesrefrained as a rule from putting the rioters on trial lest theirtestimony might implicate the local administration, and even when actionwas finally brought against them, the culprits mostly escaped withslight penalties, such as imprisonment for a few months. But after thedeclaration of the Government in June the courts adopted a more rigorousattitude towards the rioters. [1] In the summer of 1882, a number ofcases arising out of the pogroms at Balta and in other cities were triedin the courts. The penalties imposed by the courts were frequentlysevere, though fully deserved, such as deportation and confinement athard labor, drafting into penal military companies, etc. In one case, two soldiers, having been convicted of pillage and murder, werecourt-martialled and sentenced to death. When the sentence was submittedfor ratification to Drenteln, governor-general of Kiev, the rabbi ofBalta, acting on behalf of the local Jewish community, betook himself toKiev to support the culprits in their petition for pardon. It wasstrange to listen to this appeal for mercy on behalf of criminals guiltyof violence and murder, coming from the camp of their victims, from thedemolished homes which still resounded with the moans of the wounded andwith the weeping over lost lives and dishonored women. One finds itdifficult to believe that this appeal for mercy was due entirely to animpulse of forgiveness. Associated with it was probably the apprehensionthat the death of the murderers would be avenged by their like-mindedaccomplices who were still at liberty. 

[Footnote 1: This, by the way, was not always the case. The court ofChernigov, which was compelled to bring in a verdict of guilty againstthe perpetrators of the pogrom in the townlet of Karpovitchin the samegovernment, decided to recommend the culprits to the clemency of thesuperior authorities, in view of the dissatisfaction of the people withthe "exploitation" of the Jews. There were many instances of theseanti-Jewish political manifestations in the law-courts. ]

The Jews of Balta were soon to learn that their humility wasill-requited by the highly-placed promoters of the riots. In thebeginning of August, Governor-General Drenteln came to Balta. He wasexceedingly irritated, not only on account of the recent circular ofTolstoi which implied a personal threat against him as one who hadconnived at a number of pogroms within his dominions, but also becauseof the steps taken by the representatives of the Balta Jewish communityat St. Petersburg in the direction of exposing the spiritual fathers ofthe local riots. Having arrived in the sorely stricken city, the head ofthe province, who _ex officio_ should have conveyed his expression ofsympathy to the sufferers, summoned the rabbi and the leaders of theJewish community, and, in the presence of his official staff, treatedthem to a speech full of venomous hatred. He told them that by theiractions the Jews had "armed everybody against themselves, " that theywere universally hated, that "they lived nowhere as happily as inRussia, " and that the deputation they had sent to St. Petersburg for thepurpose of presenting their complaints and "slandering the cityauthorities and representatives as if they had incited the tumultuousmob against the Jews" had been of no avail. In conclusion, he brandedthe petition of the Balta community for a commutation of the deathsentence passed upon the rioters as an act of hypocrisy, addingimpressively that "these persons have been pardoned irrespective of therequests of the Jews. "

The speech of the bureaucratic Jew-baiter, whose proper place was in thedock, side by side with the convicted murderers, produced a terriblepanic in the whole region of Kiev. The militant organ of the Jewishpress, the _Voskhod_, properly remarked:

 After the speech of General-Adjutant Drenteln, our confidence in the impossibility of a repetition of the pogroms has been decidedly shaken. Of what avail can ministerial circulars be when the highest administrators on the spot paralyze their actions in public by the living word?

The apprehensions voiced by the Jewish organ were fortunately unfounded. True, the Minister Tolstoi was not able to punish the criminal harangueof the savage governor-general who had powerful connections at theRussian court. But the firm resolution of the central Government to holdthe heads of the administration to account for their connivance atpogroms had the desired effect. All that the snarling dogs could do wasto bark. 

3. DISABILITIES AND EMIGRATION

The pogrom machinery was thus stopped by a word of command from St. Petersburg. As a counterbalance, the machinery for the manufacture ofJewish disabilities continued in full operation. The "Temporary Rules"of May third established a system of legal persecutions which weredirected against the Jews on the ground of their "economicinjuriousness, " The fact that the Jewish population was in many regardsoutside the operation of the general laws of Russia opened up a widefield for the grossest forms of arbitrariness and lawlessness. At onestroke, all the exits from the overcrowded cities into the villageswithin the Pale of Settlement were tightly closed. All branches ofindustry connected with Jewish land ownership outside the cities werecurtailed and in some places entirely cut off. In many villages theright bestowed on the rural communes of ostracising "vicious members" bya special verdict [1] was used as a weapon to expel those Jews who hadlong been settled there. 

[Footnote 1: The official term applied to the resolutions passed by thevillage communes. Compare p. 310. ]

It will be remembered that Ignatyev had proposed to encourage thepeasants officially in the use of this weapon against the Jews, and thatthe Committee of Ministers had rejected his proposal. There were nowadministrators who did the same thing unofficially. Prompted by selfishmotives, the local _Kulaks_ [1] or "bosses, " from among the Russiantradesmen, acting in conjunction with the rural elders, would convenepeasant assemblies which were treated to liberal doses of alcohol. Theintoxicated, half-illiterate _moujiks_ would sign a "verdict" demandingthe expulsion of the Jews from their village; the verdict would bepromptly confirmed by the governors and would immediately become law. Such expulsions were particularly frequent in the governments under thejurisdiction of Drenteln, governor-general of Kiev, and no one doubtedbut that this ferocious Jew-baiter had passed the word to that effectthroughout his dominions. 

[Footnote 1: Literally "Fists. "]

The economic misery within the Pale drove a number of Jews into theRussian interior, but here they were met by the whip of the law, madedoubly painful by the scorpions of administrative caprice. Wholesaleexpulsions of Jews took place in St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kiev, Kharkov, and other forbidden centers. The effect of these expulsions upon thecommercial life of the country was so disastrous that the big Russianmerchants of Moscow and Kharkov appealed to the Government to relax therestrictions surrounding the visits of Jews to these cities. 

The civil authorities were now joined by the military powers in houndingthe Jews. There were in the Russian army a large number of Jewishphysicians, many of whom had distinguished themselves during thepreceding Russo-Turkish war. The reactionary Government at the helm ofRussian affairs could not tolerate the sight of a Jewish physicianexercising the rights of an army officer which were otherwise utterlyutterly unattainable for a Jewish soldier. Accordingly, the Minister ofWar, Vannovski, issued a rescript dated April 10, 1882, to the followingeffect:

 _First_, to limit the number of Jewish physicians and _feldshers[1]_ in the Military Department to five per cent of the general number of medical men. 

 _Second_, to stop appointing Jews on the medical service in the military districts of Western Russia, and to transfer the surplus over and above five per cent into the Eastern districts. 

 _Third_, to appoint Jewish physicians only in those contingents of the army in which the budget calls for at least two physicians, with the proviso that the second physician must be a Christian. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 167, n. 2. ]

The reason for these provisions was stated in a most offensive form:

 It is necessary to stop the constant growth of the number of physicians of the Mosaic persuasion in the Military Department, in view of their deficient conscientiousness in discharging their duties and their unfavorable influence upon the sanitary service in the army. 

This revolting affront had the effect that many Jewish physicians handedin their resignations immediately. The resignation of one of thesephysicians, the well-known novelist Yaroshevski, was couched in suchemphatic terms, and parried the moral blow directed at the Jewishprofessional men with such dignity that the Minister of War deemed itnecessary to put the author on trial. Among other things, Yaroshevskiwrote:

 So long as the aspersions cast upon the Jewish physicians so pitilessly are not removed, every superfluous minute spent by them in serving this Department will merely add to their disgrace. In the name of their human dignity, they have no right to remain there where they are held in abhorrence. 

Under these circumstances it seemed quite natural that the tendencytoward emigration, which had called forth a number of emigrationsocieties as far back as the beginning of 1882 [1], took an everstronger hold upon the Jewish population of Russia. The disastrousconsequences of the resolution adopted by the conference of notables inSt. Petersburg [2] were now manifest. By rejecting the formation of acentral agency for regulating the emigration, the conference hadabandoned the movement to the blind elemental forces, and a catastrophewas bound to follow. The pogrom at Balta called forth a new outburst ofthe emigration panic, and in the summer of 1882 some twenty thousandJewish refugees were again huddled together in the Galician border-townof Brody. They were without means for continuing their journey toAmerica, having come to Brody in the hope of receiving help from theJewish societies of Western Europe. The relief committees established inthe principal cities of Europe were busily engaged in "evacuating" Brodyof this destitute mass of fugitives. In the course of the summer andautumn this task was successfully accomplished. A large number ofemigrants were dispatched to the United States, and the rest weredispersed over the various centers of Western Europe. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 297 et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 307. ]

Aside from the highway of American emigration went, along a tinyparallel path, the Jewish emigration to Palestine. The Palestinianmovement which had shortly before come into being [1] attracted manyenthusiasts from among the Jewish youth. In the spring of 1882, asociety of Jewish young men, consisting mostly of university students, was formed in Kharkov under the name _Bilu_, from the initial letters oftheir Hebrew motto, _Bet Ya'akob leku we-nelka_"O house of Jacob, comeye, and let us go. " [2] The aim of the society was to establish a modelagricultural settlement in Palestine and to carry on a wide-spreadpropaganda for the idea of colonizing the ancient homeland of the Jews. As a result of this propaganda, several hundred Jews in various parts ofRussia joined the _Bilu_ society. Of these only a few dozen pioneersleft for Palestine --between June and July of 1882. 

[Footnote 1: See later, p. 268. ]

[Footnote 2: From Isa. 2. 5. ]

At first, the leaders of the organization attempted to enter intonegotiations with the Turkish Government, with a view to obtaining fromit a large tract of land for colonizing purposes, but the negotiationsfell through. The handful of pioneers were obliged to work in theagricultural settlements near Jaffa, in _Mikweh Israel_, a foundation ofthe _Alliance Israélite_ in Paris, and in the colony _Rishon le-Zion_, which had been recently established by private initiative. The youthfulidealists had to endure many hardships in an unaccustomed environmentand in a branch of endeavor entirely alien to them. A considerable partof the pioneers were soon forced to give up the struggle and make wayfor the new settlers who were less intelligent perhaps but physicallybetter fitted for their task. The foundations of Palestiniancolonization had been laid, though within exceedingly narrow limits, andthe very idea of the national restoration of the Jewish people inPalestine was then as it was later a much greater social factor inJewish life than the practical colonization of a country which couldonly absorb an insignificant number of laborers. At those moments, whenthe Russian horrors made life unbearable, the eyes of many suffererswere turned Eastward, towards the tiny strip of land on the shores ofthe Mediterranean, where the dream of a new life upon the resuscitatedruins of gray antiquity held out the promise of fulfilment. 

A contemporary writer, in surveying recent events in the Russian valleyof tears, makes the following observations:

 Jewish life during the latter part of 1882 has assumed a monotonously gloomy, oppressively dull aspect True, the streets are no longer full of whirling feathers from torn bedding; the window-panes no longer crash through the streets. The thunder and lightning which were recently filling the air and gladdening the hearts of the Greek-Orthodox people are no more. But have the Jews actually gained by the change from the illegal persecutions [in the form of pogroms] to the legal persecutions of the third of May? Maltreated, plundered, reduced to beggary, put to shame, slandered, and dispirited, the Jews have been cast out of the community of human beings. Their destitution, amounting to beggary, has been firmly established and definitely affixed to them. Gloomy darkness, without a ray of light, has descended upon that bewitched and narrow world in which this unhappy tribe has been languishing so long, gasping for breath in the suffocating atmosphere of poverty and contempt. Will this go on for a long time? Will the light of day break at last?

CHAPTER XXV

INNER UPHEAVALS

1. DISILLUSIONMENT OF THE INTELLIGENZIA ANDTHE NATIONAL REVIVAL

The catastrophe at the beginning of the eighties took the Jews of Russiaunawares, and found them unprepared for spiritual self-defence. Theimpressions of the recent brief "era of reforms" were still fresh intheir minds. They still remembered the initial steps of Alexander II'sGovernment in the direction of the complete civil emancipation ofRussian Jewry, the appeals of the intellectual classes of Russia callingupon the Jews to draw nearer to them, the bright prospects of arejuvenated Russia. The niggardly gifts of the Russian Government werereceived by Russian Jewry with an outburst of gratitude and devotionwhich bordered on flunkeyism. The intellectual young Jews and Jewesseswho had passed through the Russian public schools made franticendeavors, not only towards association but also towards completecultural amalgamation with the Russian people. Assimilation andRussification became the watchwords of the day. The literary ideals ofyoung Russia became the sacred tablets of the Jewish youth. 

But suddenly, lo and behold! that same Russian people, in which theprogressive forces of Jewry were ready to merge their identity, appearedin the shape of a monster, which belched forth hordes upon hordes ofrioters and murderers. The Government had changed front, and adopted apolicy of reaction and fierce Jew-hatred, while the liberal classes ofRussia showed but scant sympathy with the downtrodden and maltreatednation. The voice of the hostile press, the _Novoye Vremya_, the _Russ_, and others, resounded through the air with fall vigor, whereas theliberal press, owing partly--but only partly--to the tightening grip ofthe censor, defended the Jews in a perfunctory manner. Even thepublicists of the radical type, who were principally grouped around theperiodical _Otyechestvennyia Zapiski_ ("Records of the Fatherland"), looked upon the pogroms merely as the brutal manifestation of aneconomic struggle, and viewed the whole complicated Jewish problem, withall its century-long tragic implications, in the light of a subordinatesocial-economic question. 

The only one whose soul was deeply stirred by the sight of the newsufferings of an ancient people was the Russian satirist, Shchedrin-Saltykov, and he poured forth his, sentiments in the summer of1882, after the completion of the first cycle of pogroms, in an articlemarked by a lyric strain, so different from his usual style. [1] ButShchedrin was the only Russian writer of prominence who responded to theJewish sorrow. Turgenyev and Tolstoi held their peace, whereas theliterary celebrities of Western Europe, Victor Hugo, Renau, and manyothers, came forward with passionate protests. The Russian_intelligenzia_ remained cold in the face of the burning tortures ofJewry. The educated classes of Russian Jewry were hurt to the quick bythis chilly attitude, and their former enthusiasm gave way todisillusionment. 

[Footnote 1: The article appeared in the _Otyechestvennyia Zapiski_ inAugust, 1882. The following sentences in that article are worthy ofre-production: "History has never recorded in its pages a question morereplete, with sadness, more foreign to the sentiments of humanity, andmore filled with tortures than the Jewish question. The history ofmankind as a whole is one endless martyrology; yet at the same time itis also a record of endless progress. In the records of martyrology theHebrew tribe occupies the first place; in the annals of progress itstands aside, as if the luminous perspectives of history could neverreach it. There is no more heart-rending tale than the story of thisendless torture of man by man. "

In the same article the Russian satirist draws a clever parallel betweenthe merciless Russian _Kulak_, or "boss, " who ruins the peasantry, andthe pitiful Jewish "exploiter, " the half-starved tradesman, who in turnis exploited by everyone. ]

This disillusionment found its early expression in the lamentations ofrepentant assimilators. One of these assimilators, writing in the firstmonths of the pogroms, makes the following confession:

 The cultured Jewish classes have turned their back upon their history, have forgotten their traditions, and have conceived a contempt for everything which might make them realize that they are the members of the "eternal people. " With no definite ideals, dragging their Judaism behind them as a fugitive galley-slave drags his heavy chain, how could these men justify their belonging to the tribe of "Christ-killers" and "exploiters"?. . . Truly pitiful has become the position of these assimilators, who but yesterday were the champions of national self-effacement. Life demands self-determination. To sit between two stools has now become an impossibility. The logic of events has placed them before the alternative: either to declare themselves openly as renegades, or to take their proper share in the sufferings of their people. 

Another representative of the Jewish _intelligenzia_ writes in thefollowing strain to the editor of a Russian-Jewish periodical:

 When I remember what has been done to us, how we have been taught to love Russia and Russian speech, how we have been induced and compelled to introduce the Russian language and everything Russian, into our families so that our children know no other language but Russian, and how we are now repulsed and persecuted, then our hearts are filled with sickening despair from which there seems to be no escape. This terrible insult gnaws at my vitals. It may be that I am mistaken, but I do honestly believe that even if I succeeded in moving to a happier country where all men are equal, where there are no pogroms by day and "Jewish commissions" by night, I would yet remain sick at heart to the very end of my life--to such an extent do I feel worn out by this accursed year, this universal mental eclipse which has visited our dear fatherland. 

Russian-Jewish literature of that period is full of similarself-revelations of disillusioned intellectuals. However, thisrepentant mood did not always lead to positive results. Someof these intellectuals, having become part and parcel of Russiancultural life, were no longer able to find their way back toJudaism, and they were carried off by the current of assimilation, culminating in baptism. Others stood at the cross-roads, wavering between assimilation and Jewish nationalism. Stillothers were so stunned by the blow they had received thatthey reeled violently backward, and proclaimed as their sloganthe return "home, " in the sense of a complete renunciationof free criticism and of all strivings for inner reforms. 

However, in the healthy part of Russian Jewry this change of mindresulted in turning their ideals definitely in the direction of nationalrejuvenation upon modern foundations. The idea of a struggle fornational rejuvenation in Eussia itself had not yet matured. It appearedas an active force only in the following decade. [1] During the era ofpogroms the salvation of Judaism was primarily associated with the ideaof emigration. The champions of American emigration were prone toidealize this movement, which had in reality sprung from practicalnecessity, and they saw in it, not without justification, the beginningof a new free center of Judaism in the Diaspora. The Hebrew poet JudahLeib Gordon [2] addresses "The Daughter of Jacob [the Jewish people], disgraced by the son of Hamor [the Russian Government]" [3] in thefollowing words:

[Footnote 1: That idea was subsequently championed by the writer of thisvolume. See more about it in Vol. III. ]

[Footnote 2: See p. 228 et seq. ]

[Footnote 3: An allusion to Gen. 34, with a play on the words_Bem-hamor, _ "the son of an ass. "]

 Come, let as go where liberty's light Doth shine upon all with equal might, Where every man, without disgrace, Is free to adhere to his creed and his race, Where thou, too, shalt no longer fear Dishonor from brutes, my sister dear![1]

[Footnote 1: From his Hebrew poem _Ahoti Ruhama_, "My Beloved Sister. "]

The exponents of American emigration were inspired by theprospect of an exodus from the land of slavery into the landof freedom. Many of them looked forward to the establishmentof agricultural and farming settlements in that countryand to the concentration of large Jewish masses in the thinlypopulated States of the Union where they hoped the Jewsmight be granted a considerable amount of self-government. 

Side by side with the striving for a transplantation of Jewish centerscenters within the Diaspora, another idea, which negatives the DiasporaDiaspora altogether and places in its stead the resuscitation of theJewish national center in Palestine, struggled to life amidst thebirth pangs of the pogroms. The first theoretic exponent of thisnew movement, called "Love of Zion, " [1] was M. L. Lilienblum, who in aformer stage of radicalism had preached the need of religiousreforms in Judaism. [2] As far back as in the autumn of the first pogromyear Lilienblum published a series of articles in which he interpretedthe idea of Palestinian colonization, which had but recently sprungto life, in the light of a common national task for the whole ofJewry. Lilienblum endeavored to show that the root of all thehistoric misfortunes of the Jewish people lay in the fact that itwas in all lands an alien element which refuses to assimilate inits entirety with the dominant nation--with the landlord, as itwere. The landlord tolerates his tenant only so long as he finds himconvenient; let the tenant make the slightest attempt at competingwith the landlord, and he will be promptly evicted. During the MiddleAges the Jews were persecuted in the name of religious fanaticism. Now a beginning has been made to persecute them in the name ofnational fanaticism, coupled with economic factors, and this "secondchapter of our history will no doubt contain many a bloody page. "

[Footnote 1: A translation of the Hebrew term _Hibbat Zion_. In Russianit was generally termed _Palestinophilstvo_, i. E. , "Love of Palestine. "]

[Footnote 2: See p. 236 et seq. ]

Jewish suffering can only be removed by removing its cause. We mustcease to be strangers in every land of the globe, and establishourselves in a country where we ourselves may be the landlords. Such acountry can only be our ancient fatherland, Palestine, which belongs tous by the right of history. "We must undertake the colonization ofPalestine on so comprehensive a scale that in the course of one centurythe Jews may be able to leave inhospitable Europe almost entirely andsettle in the land of our forefathers to which we are legally entitled. "

These thoughts, expounded with that simplified logic which will strikecertain types of mind as incontrovertible, were fully attuned to thesentiments of the Jewish masses which were standing with "girded loins, "ready for their exodus from, the new Egypt. The emigration societiesformed in the beginning of 1882 counted in their ranks many advocates ofPalestinian colonization. Bitter literary feuds were waged between the"Americans" and "Palestinians. " A young poet, Simon Frug[1], composedthe following enthusiastic exodus march, which he prefaced by thebiblical verse "Speak unto the children of Israel, that they go forward"(Ex. 14. 15):

[Footnote 1: He became later a celebrated poet in Russian and Yiddish. He died in 1916. ]

 Thine eyes are keen, thy feet are strong, thy staff is firm-- why then, my nation, Dost thou on the road stop and droop, thy gray head lost in contemplation? Look up and see: in numerous bands Thy sons return from all the lands. Forward then march, through a sea of sorrow, Through a chain of tortures, towards the dawn of the morrow! Forward--to the strains of the song of days gone by! For future ages like thunder to us cry: "Arise, my people, from thy grave, And live once more, a nation free and brave!" And in our ears songs of a _new_ life ring, And hymns of triumph the storms to as sing. 

This march voiced the sentiments of those who dreamed of the PromisedLand--whether it be on the shores of the Jordan or on the banks of theMississippi. 

2. PINSKER'S "AUTOEMANCIPATION"

The conception of emigration as a means of national rejuvenation, whichhad sprung to life amidst the "thunder and lightning" of the pogroms, found a thoughtful exponent in the person of Dr. Leon Pinsker, aprominent communal worker in Odessa, who had at one time looked toassimilation as promising a solution of the Jewish problem. In hispamphlet "Autoemancipation" (published in September, 1882), which ismarked by profound thinking, Pinsker vividly describes the mental agonyexperienced by him at the sight of the physical slavery of the Jewry ofRussia and the spiritual slavery of the emancipated Jewry of WesternEurope. To him the Jewish people in the Diaspora is not a living nation, but rather the ghost of a nation, haunting the globe and scaring allliving national organisms. The salvation of Judaism can only be broughtabout by transforming this ghost into a real being, by re-establishingthe Jewish people upon a territory of its own which might be obtainedthrough the common endeavor of Jewry and through international Jewishco-operation in some convenient part of the globe, be it Palestine orAmerica. Such is the way of Jewish autoemancipation, incontradistinction from the civic emancipation, which had been bestowedby the dominant nationalities upon the Jews as an act of grace and whichdoes not safeguard them against anti-Semitism and the humiliatingposition of second-rate citizens. The Jewish people can be restored, if, instead of many places of refuge scattered all over the globe, it willbe concentrated in one politically guaranteed place of refuge. For thispurpose a general Jewish congress ought to be called which should beentrusted with the financial and political issues involved in the plan. The present generation must take the first step towards this nationalrestoration; posterity will do the rest. 

Pinsker's pamphlet, which was written in German and printed abroad [1]with the intention of appealing to the Jews of Western Europe, failed toproduce any effect upon that assimilated section of the Jewish people. In Russia, however, it became the catechism of the "Love of Zion"movement and eventually of Zionism and Territorialism. The theoryexpounded in Pinsker's pamphlet made a strong appeal to the RussianJews, not only on account of its close reasoning but also because itgave powerful utterance to that pessimistic frame of mind which seemedto have seized upon them all. Its weakest point lay in the fact that itrested on a wrong historic premise and on a narrow definition of theterm "nation" in the sense of a territorial and political organism. Pinaker seems to have overlooked that the Jews of the Diaspora, taken asa whole, have not ceased to form a nation, though of a type of its own, and that in modern political history nations of this "cultural"complexion have appeared on the scene more and more frequently. 

[Footnote 1: The first edition appeared in Berlin, in 1882. It bears thesub-title: "An Appeal to his Brethren by a Russian Jew, " It waspublished anonymously. ]

Lacking a definite practical foundation, Pinsker's doctrine could notbut accomodate itself to the Palestinian colonization movement, althoughits insignificant dimensions were entirely out of proportion to thefar-reaching plans conceived by the author of "Autoemancipation. "Lilienblum and Pinsker were joined by the old nationalist Smolenskin andthe former assimilator Levanda. _Ha-Shahar_ and _ha-Melitx_ in Hebrewand the _Razsvyet_ in Russian became the literary vehicles of the newmovement. In opposition to these tendencies, the _Voskhod_ of St. Petersburg[1] reflected the ideas of the progressive Russian-Jewish_intelligenzia_, and defended their old position which was that of civilemancipation and inner Jewish reforms. In the middle between these twoextremes stood the Russian weekly _Russki Yevrey_ ("The Russian Jew"), in St. Petersburg, and the Hebrew weekly _ha-Tzefirah_ ("The Dawn"), inWarsaw, voicing the moderate views of the Haskalah period, with adecided bent towards the nationalistic movement. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 221, It appeared simultaneously as a weekly and amonthly. ]

3. MISCARRIED RELIGIOUS REFORMS

The storm of pogroms not only broke many young twigs on the tree of"enlightenment, " which had attained to full bloom in the precedingperiod, but it also bent others into monstrous shapes. This abnormaldevelopment is particularly characteristic of the idea of religiousreforms in Judaism which sprang to life in the beginning of theeighties. A fortnight before the pogrom at Yelisavetgrad, whichinaugurated another gloomy chapter in the annals of Russian Jewry, thepapers reported that a new Jewish sect had appeared in that city underthe name of "The Spiritual Biblical Brotherhood. " Its members denied allreligious dogmas and ceremonies, and acknowledged only the moraldoctrines of the Bible; they condemned all mercantile pursuits, andendeavored to live by physical labor, primarily by agriculture. 

The founder of this "Brotherhood" was a local teacher and journalist, Jacob Gordin, who stood at that time under the influence of theSouth-Russian Stundists [1] as well as of the socialistic RussianPopulists. [2] The "Spiritual Biblical Brotherhood" was made upaltogether of a score of people. In a newspaper appeal which appearedshortly after the spring pogroms of 1881 the leader of the sect, hidinghis identity under the pen-name of "A Brother-Biblist, " called upon theJews to divest themselves, of those character traits and economicpursuits which excited the hatred of the native population against them:the love of money, the hunt for barter, usury, and petty trading. Thisappeal, which, sounded in unison with the voice of the RussianJew-baiters and appeared at a time when the wounds of the pogrom victimswere not yet healed, aroused profound indignation among the Jews. Shortly afterwards the "Spiritual Biblical Brotherhood" fell asunder. Some of its members joined a like-minded sect in Odessa which had beenfounded there in the beginning of 1883 by a teacher, Jacob Priluker, under the name of "New Israel. "

[Footnote 1: A Russian sect with rationalistic tendencies which aretraceable to Western Protestantism. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 222. ]

The aim of "New Israel" was to facilitate, by means of radical religiousreforms conceived in the spirit of rationalism, the contact between Jewsand Christians and thereby pave the way for civil emancipation. Thetwofold religio-social program of the sect was as follows:

 The sect recognizes only the teachings of Moses; it rejects the Talmud, the dietary laws, the rite of circumcision, and the traditional form of worship; the day of rest is transferred from Saturday to Sunday; the Russian language is declared to be the "native" tongue of the Jews and made obligatory in every-day life; usury and similar distasteful pursuits are forbidden. 

As a reward for all these virtuous endeavors the sect expected from theRussian Government, which it petitioned to that effect, complete civilequality for its members, permission to intermarry with Christians, andthe right to wear a special badge by which they were to be marked offfrom the "Talmudic Jews. " As an expression of gratitude for theanticipated governmental benefits, the members of the sect pledgedthemselves to give their boys and girls who were to be born during thecoming year the names of Alexander or Alexandra, in honor of the RussianTzar. 

The first religious half of the program of "New Israel" might possiblyhave attracted a few adherents. But the second "business-like" part ofit opened the eyes of the public to the true aspirations of these"reformers, " who, in their eagerness for civil equality, were ready tobarter away religion, conscience, and honor, and who did not balk atbetraying such low flunkeyism at a time when the blood of the victims ofthe Balta pogrom had not yet dried. 

Thus it was that the withering influence of reactionary Judaeophobiacompromised and crippled the second attempt at inner reforms in Judaism. Both movements soon passed out of existence, and their founderssubsequently left Russia. Gordin went to America, and, renouncing hissins of youth, became a popular Yiddish playwright. Priluker settled inEngland, and entered the employ of the missionaries who were anxious topropagate Christianity among the Jews. A few years later, during 1884and 1885, "New Israel" cropped up in a new shape, this time in Kishinev, where the puny "Congregation of New Testament Israelites" was founded byI. Rabinovich, having for its aim "the fusion of Judaism withChristianity. " In the house of prayer, in which this "Congregation, "consisting altogether of ten members, worshipped, sermons were alsodelivered by a Protestant clergyman. 

A few years later this new missionary device was also abandoned. Thepestiferous atmosphere which surrounded Russian-Jewish life at that timecould do no more than produce these poisonous growths of "religiousreform. " For the wholesome seeds of such a reform were bound to witherafter the collapse of the ideals which had served as a lode star duringthe period of "enlightenment. "

CHAPTER XXVI

INCREASED JEWISH DISABILITIES

1. THE PAHLEN COMMISSION AND NEW SCHEMES OF OPPRESSION

The "Temporary Rules" of May 3, 1882, had been passed, so to speak, asan extraordinary "war measure, " outside the usual channel of legislativeaction. Yet the Russian Government could not but realize that sooner orlater it would be bound to adopt the customary legal procedure and placethe Jewish question before the highest court of the land, the Council ofState. To meet this eventuality, it was necessary to prepare materialsof a somewhat better quality than had been manufactured by the"gubernatorial commissions" and the "Central Jewish Committee" whichowed their existence to Ignatyev, forming part and parcel of the generalanti-Jewish policy of the discharged Minister. Even prior to thepromulgation of the "Temporary Rules, " the Council of Ministers hadcalled the Tzar's attention to the necessity of appointing a special"High Commission" to deal with the Jewish question and to draft legalmeasures for submission to the Council of State. 

This suggestion was carried out on February 4, 1883, on which day animperial ukase was issued calling for the formation of a "HighCommission for the Revision of the Current Laws concerning the Jews. "The chairmanship of the Commission was first entrusted to Makov, aformer Minister of the Interior, and after his untimely death, to CountPahlen, a former Minister of Justice, who guided the work of theCommission during the five years of its existence--hence its populardesignation as the "Pahlen Commission, " The membership of the Commissionwas made up of six officials representing the various departments of theMinistry of the Interior, and of one official for each of the Ministriesof Finance, Justice, Public Instruction, Crown Domains, and ForeignAffairs, and, lastly, of a few experts who were consulted casually. 

The new bureaucratic body received no definite instructions as to theperiod of time within which it was expected to complete its labors. Itwas evidently given to understand that the work entrusted to it couldwell afford to wait. The first session of the High Commission was heldfully ten months after its official appointment by the Tzar, and itsbusiness proceeded at a snail's pace, surrounded by the mysterious aircharacteristic of Russian officialdom. For several years the HighCommission had to work its way through the sad inheritance of thedefunct "gubernatorial commissions, " represented by mounds of paper withthe most fantastic projects of solving the Jewish question, endeavoringto bring these materials into some kind of system. It also received anumber of memoranda on the Jewish question from outsiders, among themfrom public-minded Jews, who in most cases used Baron Horace Günzburg astheir go-between--memoranda which sought to put the various aspects ofthe question in their right perspective. After four years spent on theexamination of the material, the Commission undertook to formulate itsown conclusions, but, for reasons which will become patent later on, these conclusions were never crystallized in the form of legalprovisions. 

While the High Commission was assiduously engaged in the "revision ofthe current laws concerning the Jews, " in other words, was repeating theSisyphus task abandoned by scores of similar bureaucratic creations inthe past, the Government pursued with unabated vigor its old-time policyof making the life of the Jews unbearable by turning out endlessvarieties of new legal restrictions. These restrictions were generallypassed "outside the law, " i. E. , without their being previously submittedto the Council of State; they were simply brought up as suggestionsbefore the Council of Ministers, and, after adoption by the latter, received legal sanction through ratification by the Tzar. Withoutawaiting the results of the revision of Jewish legislation which it haditself undertaken, the Russian Government embarked enthusiastically uponthe task of forging new chains for the hapless Jewish race. For a numberof years the High Commission was nothing more than a cover to screenthese cruel experiments of the powers at the helm of the state. At thevery time in which the ministerial officials serving on the HighCommission indulged in abstract speculations about the Jewish questionand invented various methods for its solution, the Council of Ministersanticipated this solution in the spirit of rabid anti-Semitism, and wasquick to give it effect in concrete life. 

The wind which was blowing from the heights of Russian bureaucracy wasdecidedly unfavorable to the Jews. The belated coronation of AlexanderIII. , which took place in May, 1883, and, in accordance with Russiantradition, brought, in the form of an imperial manifesto, [1] variousprivileges and alleviations for different sections of the Russianpopulation, left the Jews severely alone. The Tzar lent an attentive earto those zealous governors and governors-general, who in their "mosthumble reports" propounded the new-fangled theory of the "injuriousness"of the Jews; the marginal remarks frequently attached by him to thesereports assumed the force of binding resolutions. [2] In the beginningof 1883, the governor-general of Odessa, Gurko, took occasion in hisreport to the Tzar to comment on the excessive growth of the number ofJewish pupils in the _gymnazia_ [3] and on their "injurious effect" upontheir Christian fellow-pupils. Gurko proposed to fix a limitedpercentage for the admission of Jews to these schools, and the Tzar madethe annotation: "I share this conviction; the matter ought to receiveattention. "

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 246, n. 1]

[Footnote 2: See on the term "Resolution, " Vol. I, p. 253, n. 1. ]

[Footnote 3: See above, p. 161, n. 1. ]

The matter did of course "receive attention. " It was brought up beforethe Committee of Ministers. But the latter was reluctant to pass upon itat once, and thought it wiser to have it prepared and duly submitted forlegislative action at some future time. However, when thegovernor-general of Odessa and the governor of Kharkov, in their reportsfor the following year, expatiated again on the necessity of fixing aschool norm for the Jews, the Tzar made another annotation, in a moreemphatic tone: "It is desirable to decide this question finally. " Thissufficed to impress the Committee of Ministers with the conviction "thatthe growing influx of the non-Christian element into the educationalestablishments exerts, from a moral and religious point of view, a mostinjurious influence upon the Christian children. " The question wassubmitted for consideration to the High Commission under thechairmanship of Count Pahlen. The Minister of Public Instruction wasordered to frame post-haste an enactment embodying the spirit of theimperial resolution. Soon the new fruit of the Russian bureaucraticgenius was ready to be plucked--"the school norm, " which was destined tooccupy a prominent place in the fabric of Russian-Jewish disabilities. 

The center of gravity of the system of oppression lay, as it always did, in the restrictions attaching to the right of domicile and freemovement--restrictions which frequently made life for the Jewsphysically impossible by cutting off their access to the sources of alivelihood. The "Temporary Rules" of the third of May displayed in thisdomain a dazzling variety of legal tortures such as might have excitedthe envy of medieval inquisitors. The "May laws" of 1882 barred the Jewsfrom settling outside the cities "anew, " i. E. In the future, exemptingthose who had settled in the rural districts prior to 1882. Theseold-time Jewish rustics were a thorn in the flesh of the Russiananti-Semites, who hoped for a sudden disappearance of the Jewishpopulation from the Russian country-side. Accordingly, a whole set ofadministrative measures was put in motion, with a view to making thelife of the village Jews unbearable. In another connection [1] we hadoccasion to point out that the Russian authorities as well as theChristian competitors of the Jews made it their business to expel thelatter from the rural localities as "vicious members, " by having thepeasant assemblies render special "verdicts" against them. This methodwas now supplemented by new contrivances to dislodge the Jews. A villageJew who happened to absent himself for a few days or weeks to go to townwas frequently barred by the police from returning to his home, on theground that he was "a new settler. " There are cases of Jewish familieson record which, according to custom, had left the village for the HighHolidays to attend services in an adjacent town or townlet, and which, on their return home, met with considerable difficulties; because theirreturn was interpreted by the police as a "new settlement. " In thedominions of the anti-Jewish satrap Drenteln the administrationconstrued the "Temporary Rules" to mean that Jews were not allowed tomove from one village to another, or even from, one house to anotherwithin the precincts of their native village. [2]

[Footnote 1: See p. 318 et seq. ]

[Footnote 2: Evidence of this is found in the circular of the governorof Chernigov, issued In 1883. ]

Moreover, the police was authorized to expel from the villages all thoseJews who did not possess their own houses upon their own land, on theground that these Jews, in renting new quarters, would have to make anew lease with their owners, and such a lease was forbidden by the Maylaws. [1] These malicious misinterpretations of the law affected some tenthousand Jews in the villages of Chernigov and Poltava. These Jews livedhabitually in rented houses or in houses which were their property butwere built upon ground belonging to peasants, and they were consequentlyliable to expulsion. The cry of these unfortunates, who were threatenedwith eviction in the dead of the winter, was heard not in near-by Kievbut in far-off St. Petersburg. By a senatorial ukase, published inJanuary, 1884, a check was put on these administrative highway methods. The expulsion was stopped, though a considerable number of Jewishfamilies had in the meantime been evicted and ruined. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 312. ]

At the same time other restrictions which were in like manner deducedfrom the "Temporary Rules" were allowed to remain in full force. One ofthese was the prohibition of removing from one village to another, eventhough they were contiguous, so that the rural Jews were practicallyplaced in the position of serfs, being affixed to their places ofresidence. This cruel practice was sanctioned by the law of December 29, 1887. As a contemporary writer puts it, the law implied that when avillage in which a Jew lived was burned down, or when a factory in whichhe worked was closed, he was compelled to remove into one of the townsor townlets, since he was not allowed to search for a shelter and alivelihood in any other rural locality. In accordance with the same law, a Jew had no right to offer shelter to his widowed mother or to hisinfirm parents who lived in another village. Furthermore, a Jew wasbarred from taking over a commercial or industrial establishmentbequeathed to him by his father, if the latter had lived in anothervillage. He was not even allowed to take charge of a house bequeathed tohim by his parents, if they had resided in another village, thoughsituated within the confines of the Pale. 

While this network of disabilities was ruining the Jews, it yielded aplentiful harvest for the police, from the highest to the lowestofficials. "Graft, " the Russian _habeas Corpus_ Act, shielded thepersecuted Jew against the caprice and Violence of the authorities inthe application of the restrictive laws, and Russian officialdom held ontightly to Jewish rightlessness as their own special benefice. Hatred ofthe Jews has at all times gone hand in hand with love of Jewish money. 

2. JEWISH DISABILITIES OUTSIDE THE PALE

Outside the Pale of Settlement the net of disabilities was stretched outeven more widely and was sure to catch the Jew in its meshes. Throughoutthe length and breadth of the Russian Empire, outside of the fifteengovernments of Western Russia and the ten governments of the Kingdom ofPoland, there was scattered a handful of "privileged" Jews who werepermitted to reside beyond the Pale: men with an academic education, first guild merchants who had for a number of years paid their guilddues within the Pale, and handicraftsmen, so long as they confinedthemselves to the pursuit of their craft. The influx of "illegal" Jewsinto this tabooed region was checked by measures of extraordinaryseverity. The example was set by the Russian capital, "the windowtowards Europe, " which had been broken through by Peter the Great. Thecity of St. Petersburg, harboring some 20, 000 privileged Jews who livedthere legally, became the center of attraction for a large number of"illegal" Jews who flocked to the capital with the intention, deemed acriminal offence by the Government, of engaging in some modest businesspursuit, without paying the high guild dues, or of devoting themselvesto science or literature, without the diploma from a higher educationalinstitution in their pockets. The number of these Jews who obtainedtheir right of residence through a legal fiction, by enrollingthemselves as artisans or as employees of the "privileged" Jews, wasvery considerable, and the police expended a vast amount of energy inwaging a fierce struggle against them. The city-governor of St. Petersburg, Gresser, who was notorious for the cruelty of his policerégime, made it his specialty to hunt down the Jews. A contemporarywriter, in reviewing the events of the year 1883, gives the followingdescription of the exploits of the metropolitan police:

 The campaign was started at the very beginning of the year and continued uninterruptedly until the end of it. Early in March the metropolitan police received orders to search most rigorously the Jewish residences and examine the passports. In the police stations special records were instituted for the Jews. St. Petersburg was to be purged of the odious Hebrew tribe. The contrivances employed were no longer novel, and were the same which had been successfully tried in other cities. The Jews were raided in regular fashion. Those that were found with doubtful claims to residence in the capital were, frequently accompanied by their families, immediately dispatched to the proper railroad stations, escorted by policemen. . . . The time for departure was measured by hours. The term of expulsion was generally limited to twenty-four hours, or forty-eight hours, as if it involved the execution of a court-martial sentence. And yet, the majority of the victims of expulsion were people who had lived in St. Petersburg for many years, and had succeeded in establishing homes and business places, which could not be liquidated within twenty-four hours or thereabout. . . . The hurried expulsions from the capital resulted in numerous conversions to Christianity. . . . Amusing stories circulated all over town concerning Jews who had decided to join the Christian Church, and had applied for permission to remain in the capital for one or two weeks--the time required by law for a preliminary training in the truths of the new faith--but whose petition was flatly refused because the police believed that a similar training might also be received within the boundaries of the Pale of Settlement. 

As a matter of fact, fictitious conversions of this kind were but seldomresorted to in the fight against governmental violence. As a rule, theevasion of the "law" was effected by less harmful, perhaps, but no lesshumiliating and even tragic fictions. Many a Jewish newcomer would bringwith him on his arrival in St. Petersburg an artisan's certificate andenrol himself as an apprentice of some "full-fledged" Jewish artisan. But woe betide if the police happened to visit the workshop and fail tofind the fictitious apprentice at work. He was liable to immediateexpulsion, and the owner of the shop was no less exposed to grave risks. Some Jews, in their eagerness to obtain the right of residence, registered as man-servants in the employ of Jewish physicians orlawyers. [1] These would-be servants were frequently summoned to thepolice stations and cross-examined as to the character of their"service. " The answers expected from them were something like: "I cleanmy master's boots, carry behind him his portfolio to court, " etc. Several prominent Jewish writers lived for many years in St. Petersburgon this "flunkeyish" basis--among them the talented young poet SimonFrug, [2] the singer of Jewish sorrow who was fast establishing forhimself a reputation both in Jewish and in Russian literature. 

[Footnote 1: Under the Russian law [see p. 166] Jews possessing auniversity diploma of the first degree were entitled to employ two"domestic servants" from among their coreligionists. ]

[Footnote 2: See p. 330. ]

It can easily be realized how precarious was the position of these men. Any day their passports might be found ornamented by a red policenotation ordering their expulsion from the capital within twenty-fourhours. All Russia was stirred at that time by the sensational story of ayoung Jewess, who had come to St. Petersburg or Moscow to enter thecollege courses for women, and in order to obtain the right of residencefound herself compelled to register fictitiously as a prostitute andtake out "a yellow ticket. " When the police discovered that the youngwoman was engaged in studying, instead of plying her official "trade, "she was banished from the capital. In 1886, England was shocked by theexpulsion from Moscow of the well-known English Member of Parliament, the banker Sir Samuel Montagu (later Lord Swaythling). Despite hisinfluential position, Montagu was ordered out of the Russian capital"within twenty-four hours, " like an itinerant vagrant. 

None of these tragedies, however, was able to produce any effect uponthe ringleaders and henchmen of the Russian inquisition. The energy ofthe authorities spent itself primarily in the fight against the natural, yet, according to the Russian code, "illegal" struggle of the Jews fortheir existence and against the sacred right of man to move aboutfreely. The merciless Russian law, trampling upon this inviolable right, drove human beings from village to town and from one town to another. Inthe hotbed of militant Judaeophobia, in Kiev, raids upon "illegal"Jewish residents were the order of the day. During the year 1886 alonemore than two thousand Jewish families were evicted from the town. [1]Not satisfied with the expulsion of the Jews from the towns prohibitedto them by law, the authorities contrived to swell the number of thesetowns by adding new localities which were part of the Pale and as suchopen to the Jews. In 1887, the large South-Russian cities Rostov-on-theDon and Taganrog were transferred from the Pale of Settlement [2] to thetabooed territory of the Don Army. Those Jews who had lived in thesecities before the promulgation of the law were allowed to remain, butthe new settling of Jews was strictly forbidden. 

[Footnote 1: These intensified persecutions were popularly explained asan act of revenge on the part of the highest administration of theregion, owing to a quarrel which had taken place between a rich Kiev Jewand a Russian dignitary. ]

[Footnote 2: They formed part of the government of Yekaterinoslav. ]

Not satisfied with constantly lessening the area in which, without anyfurther restrictions, the Jewish population was gasping for breath, theGovernment was on the look-out for ways and means to narrow also thesphere of Jewish economic activity. The medieval system of Russiansociety with its division into estates and guilds became an instrumentof Jewish oppression. The authorities openly followed the maxim that theJew was to be robbed of his profession, to the end that it may be turnedover to his Christian rival. Under Alexander II, the Government hadendeavored to promote handicrafts among the Jews as a counterbalanceagainst their commercial pursuits, and had therefore conferred uponJewish artisans the right of residence all over the Empire. The changeof policy under Alexander III is well illustrated by the ukase of 1884closing the Jewish school of handicrafts in Zhitomir which had been inexistence for twenty-three years. The reason for the enactment is statedwith brazen impudence:

 Owing to the fact that the Jews living in the towns and townlets of the south-western region form the majority of handicrafts-men, and thereby hamper the development of handicrafts among the original population of that region, which is exploited by them, the existence of a specific Jewish school of handicrafts seems, in view of the lack of similar schools among the Christians, an additional weapon in the hands of the Jews for the exploitation of the original population of that region. 

Here the pursuit of handicrafts is actually stigmatized as a means of"exploitation. " The true meaning of that terrible word, an invention ofthe Russian Government, is thereby put in a glaring light: the Jew is an"exploiter" so long as he follows any pursuit, however honorable andproductive, in which a Christian might engage in his stead. 

The slightest attempt of the Jew to enlarge his economic activity metwith the relentless punishment of the law. The Jewish artisan, thoughpermitted to live outside the Pale, had only the right to sell theproducts of his own workmanship. When found to sell other merchandisewhich was not manufactured by him he was liable, under Article 1171 ofthe Penal Code, not only to be immediately expelled from his place ofresidence but also to have his goods confiscated. The Christiancompetitors of the Jews, shoulder to shoulder with the police, kept acareful watch over the Jewish artisans and saw to it that a Jewishtailor should not dare to sell a piece of material, a watchmaker--a newfactory-made watch with a chain (being only allowed to repair oldwatches), a baker--a pound of flour or a cup of coffee. The discovery ofsuch a "crime" was followed immediately by cutting short the career ofthe poor artisan, in accordance with the provisions of the law. 

3. RESTRICTIONS IN EDUCATION AND IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION

A salient feature of that gloomy era of counter-reforms was the endeavorof the Government to dislodge the Jews from the liberal professions, and, as a corollary, to bar them from the secondary and higher schoolswhich were the training ground for these professions. What theGovernment had in view was to reduce the number of those "privileged"Jews, who, under the law passed in the time of Alexander II. , had beenrewarded for their completion of a course of studies in an institutionof higher learning by the right of unrestricted residence throughout theEmpire. The authorities now found it to their purpose to hamper thespread of education among the Jews rather than promote it. Thehighly-placed obscurantists contended that the Jewish students exertedan injurious influence upon their Christian comrades from the religiousand moral point of view, while the political police [1] reported that theJewish college men "are quick in joining the ranks of the revolutionaryworkers. " The fear of educated Russian subjects who were not of thedominant faith was natural in a country in which Pobyedonostzev, themoving spirit of inner Russian politics, looked upon popular educationin general as a destructive force, fraught with danger to throne andaltar. There can be but little doubt that the previously-mentionedimperial "resolutions" [2] indicating the necessity of curtailing thenumber of Jews in the Russian educational establishments were inspiredby the "Grand Inquisitor. "

[Footnote 1: The secret police charged with tracking the followers ofliberal and revolutionary tendencies. ]

[Footnote 2: See p. 339_et seq_. ]

Notwithstanding the opposition of the majority of the Pahlen Commission, whose members had not yet entirely discarded the enlightened traditionsof the reign of Alexander II. , the question was decided in accordancewith the wishes of the Tzar. Here, too, as in the case of the "TemporaryRules, " the Government was resolved to enact the new disabilities by thesovereign will of the emperor, without submitting them to the highestlegislative body of the land, the Council of State, for fear thatundesirable debates might arise in that august body concerning theexpediency of putting an embargo on education. On December 5, 1886, theTzar, acting on the suggestion of the Committee of Ministers, directedthe Minister of Public Instruction, Dyelanov, to adopt measures for thelimitation of the admission of Jews to the secondary and highereducational establishments. 

For six long months the Minister, whose official duty was the promotionof education, was wavering between a number of schemes designed torestrict education among the Jews. Suggestions for such restrictionscame from officials of the ministry and from superintendents of schooldistricts. Some proposed to close the schools only to the children ofthe lower classes among the Jews; in which "the unsympathetic traits ofthe Jewish character" were particularly conspicuous. Others recommendeda restrictive percentage for Jews in general, without any classdiscrimination. Still others pleaded for moderation lest excessiverestriction in admission to Russian universities should force the Jewishyouth to go to foreign universities and make them even "more dangerous, "since they were bound to return to Russia with liberal notionsconcerning the political form of government. 

At last, in July, 1887, the Minister of Public Instruction, acting onthe above-mentioned imperial "resolution, " published his two famouscirculars limiting the admission of Jews to the universities and tosecondary schools. The following norm was established: in the Pale ofSettlement the Jews were to be admitted to the schools to the extent often per cent of the Christian school population; outside the Pale thenorm was fixed at five per cent, and in the two capitals, St. Petersburgand Moscow, at three per cent. Although decreed before the verybeginning of the new scholastic year, the percentage norm wasnevertheless immediately applied in the case of the _gymnazia, _ the"Real schools, " [1] and the universities. In the higher professionalinstitutions, such as the technological, veterinarian, and agronomicalschools, the restrictions had been, practised even before thepromulgation of the circular, or were introduced immediately after it. 

[Footnote 1: Or _Real Gymnazia_, see above, p. 163, n, 1. ]

This was the genesis of the educational "percentage norm, " the source ofsorrow and tears for two generation of Russian Jews--both fathers andsons now having run the gauntlet. In the months of July and August ofevery year, thousands of Jewish children were knocking at the doors ofthe _gymnazia_ and universities, but only tens and hundreds obtainedadmission. In the towns of the Pale where the Jews form from thirty toeighty per cent of the total population, the admission, of Jewish pupilsto the _gymnazia_ and "Real schools" was limited to ten per cent, sothat the majority of Jewish children were deprived of a secondaryeducation. 

The position of the _gymnazium_ and "Real school" graduates who wereunable to continue their studies in the institutions of higher learningwas particularly tragic. Many of these unfortunates addressed personalappeals to the Minister of Public Instruction, Dyelanov, who, beinggood-natured, would, despite his reactionary proclivities, frequentlysanction the admission of the petitioners over and above the schoolnorm. But the majority of the young men, barred from the colleges, foundthemselves compelled to go abroad in search of education, and, beinggenerally without means, suffered untold hardships. 

Nevertheless, the cruel restrictions could not suppress the need foreducation in a people with an ancient culture. Those that had failed togain admission to the _gymnazia_ completed the prescribed course ofstudies at home, under the guidance of private tutors or by privatestudy, and afterwards presented themselves for examination for the"maturity certificate" [1] as "externs, " braving all the difficulties ofthis thorny path. Having successfully passed their secondary course, they found again their way barred as soon as they wished to enter theuniversities, and the "martyrs of learning" had no choice left except totake up their pilgrim staff and travel abroad. Year in, year out, twoprocessions of emigrants wended their way from Russia to the West: theone was travelling across the Atlantic, in search of bread and liberty;the other was headed towards Germany, Austria, England, and France, insearch of a higher education. The former were driven from their homes bya peculiar _interdictio ignis et aquae_; the other--by an _interdictioscientiae_. 

[Footnote 1: The name given in Russian (and German) to the diploma of a_gymnazium_. ]

Having closed the avenues of higher education to the bulk of RussianJewry, the Government now went a step further and contrived todispossess even those Jews who had already managed to obtain a highereducation, in spite of all difficulties. It was not satisfied withbarring college-bred Jews from the civil service and an academic career, thus limiting the Jewish physicians and lawyers to private practice; itwas anxious to restrict even this narrow field of activity still open toJews. In view of the fact that the Jewish jurists had no chance to applytheir knowledge in the civil service, and were entirely excluded fromthe bench, they naturally turned to the bar, with the result that theysoon occupied a conspicuous place there, both quantitatively andqualitatively. Their success was a source of annoyance to the Russiananti-Semites, both those who hated the Jews on principle and those whodid so selfishly, being themselves members of the bar. These enemies ofJudaism called the attention of the Government to the large number ofJewish lawyers at the St. Petersburg bar--a circumstance due partly tothe natural gravitation towards the administrative and legal center ofthe country, and partly to the fact that the admission of Jews to thebar met with less obstruction from the judicial authorities in thecapital than in the provinces, where professional jealousy frequentlystood in the way of the Jews. 

The reactionary Minister of Justice, Manasseïn, managed to convince theTzar that it was necessary to check the further admission of Jews to thebar. However, from diplomatic considerations, it was thought wiser tocarry this restriction into effect not under an anti-Jewish flag, butrather as a general measure directed against all members of"non-Christian persuasions. " The restriction was therefore extended toMohammedans and the handful of privileged Karaites, [1] and the religiousintolerance of the new measure was thus thrown into even bolder relief. 

[Footnote 1: See on the Karaites, Vol. I, p. 318. ]

On November, 1889, an imperial ukase decreed as follows:

 That, pending the enactment of a special law dealing with this subject, the admission of public and private attorneys of non-Christian denominations by the competent judicial institutions and bar associations [1] shall not take place, except with the permission of the Minister of Justice, on the recommendation of the presidents of the above-mentioned institutions and associations. 

[Footnote 1: "Public (literally, sworn) attorneys" are lawyers of academicstanding admitted to the bar by the bar associations. "Privateattorneys" are lawyers without educational qualifications whoreceive permission to practise from the "judicial institutions, "i. E. , the law courts. They are not members of the bar. ]

It goes without saying that the Russian Minister of Justice made ampleuse of the right conferred upon him of denying admission to Jews aspublic and private attorneys. While readily sanctioning the admission ofMohammedans and Karaites, the Minister almost invariably refused toconfirm the election of young Jewish barristers, however warmly they mayhave been recommended by the judicial institutions and barassociations. [1] In this way, many a talented Jewish jurist, who mighthave filled a university chair with distinction or might have attainedbrilliant success in the legal profession, was forced out of his pathand deprived of an opportunity to serve his country by his labors andpursue a career for which he had fitted himself at the university. Instead, these derailed professionals went to swell the hosts of thosewho had been wronged and disinherited by the injustice of the law. 

[Footnote 1: During the following five years, until 1895, not a singleJew received the sanction of the Minister. ]

4. DISCRIMINATION IN MILITARY SERVICE

It seemed as if the Government was intent on making a one-sided compactwith Russian Jewry: "We shall deprive you of all the elementary rightsdue to you as men and citizens; we shall rob you of the right ofdomicile and freedom of movement, and of the chance of making alivelihood; we shall expose you to physical and spiritual starvation, and shall cast you out of the community of citizens--yet you dare notswerve an inch from the path of your civic obligations. " A luridillustration of this unique exchange of services was provided by themanner in which military duty was imposed upon the Jews. Russianlegislation had long since contrived to establish revolting restrictionsfor the Jews also in this domain. Jews with physical defects whichrendered Christians unfit for military service, such as a lower statureand narrower chest, were nevertheless taken into the army. In the caseof a shortage of recruits among the Jewish population even only sons, the sole wage-earners of their families or of their widowed mothers, were drafted, whereas the same category of conscripts among Christianswere unconditionally exempt. [1] Moreover, a Jew serving in the armyalways remained a private and could never attain to an officer's rank. 

[Footnote 1: Compare p. 201. ]

As if the Government intended to make sport of the Jewish soldiers, thelatter were deprived of their right of residence in the localitiesoutside the Pale where they had been stationed, and as soon as theirterm of service had expired, were sent back into the territory of theRussian-Jewish ghetto. Thus, even Nicholas I, was out-Nicholased. Thedischarged Jewish soldiers who had served under the old recruiting lawenjoyed, both for themselves and their families, the right of residencethroughout the Empire. [1] The new military statute of 1874 [2] withdrewfrom the retired Jewish soldiers this reward for faithfully performedduty, and in 1885 the Senate sustained the disfranchisement of theseJews who had spent years of their life in the service of theirfatherland. A Jew from Berdychev, Vilna, or Odessa, who had served fiveor six years somewhere in St. Petersburg, Moscow, or Kazan, was forcedto leave these tabooed cities and return home on the very day on whichhe had taken off his soldier's uniform. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 172. ]

[Footnote 2: See p. 199 et seq. ]

Yet, despite this curious encouragement of Jewish patriotism, theGovernment had the audacity to charge the Jews continually with the"evasion of their military duty. " That a tendency towards such evasionwas in vogue among the Jews admits of no doubt. It would have beencontrary to human nature if people who were subject to assaults fromabove and kicks from below, whose right of residence was limited toone-twentieth of the territory of their fatherland, who were robbed ofshelter, air, and bread, and deprived of the hope to place themselves, even by means of military service, on an equal footing with the lowestRussian moujik, should have felt a profound need of sacrificingthemselves for their country, and should not have shirked this heaviestof civil obligations to a larger extent than the privileged Russianpopulation, in which cases of evasion were by no means infrequent. Inreality, however, the complaints about the shortage of Jewish recruitswere vastly exaggerated. Subsequent statistical investigations broughtout the fact that, owing to irregular apportionment, the Governmentdemanded annually from the Jews a larger quota of recruits than wasjustified by their numerical relation to the general population in thePale of Settlement. On an average, the Jews furnished twelve per cent ofthe total number of recruits in the Pale, whereas the Jewish populationof the Pale formed but eleven per cent of the total population. TheGovernment further refused to consider the fact that, owing toinaccurate registration, the conscription lists often carried the namesof persons who had long since died, or who had left the country toemigrate abroad. In fact, the annual emigration of Jews from Russia, theresult of uninterrupted persecutions, reduced the number of young men ofconscription age. But the Russian authorities were of the opinion thatthe Jews who remained behind should serve in the Russian army instead ofthose of their brethren who had become citizens of the free AmericanRepublic. The "evasion of military duty" and the annual shortage of afew hundred recruits, as against the many thousands of those enlisted, was charged as a grave crime against that very people towards which theGovernment on its part failed to fulfil even its most elementaryobligations. Reams of paper were covered with all kinds of officialdevices to "cut short" this evasion of military duty by the Jews. On onebeautiful April morning of 1886, the Government came out with thefollowing enactment:

 The family of a Jew guilty of evading military service is liable to a fine of three hundred rubles ($150). The collection of the fine shall be decreed by the respective recruiting station and carried out by the police. It shall not be substituted by imprisonment in the case of destitute persons liable to that fine. 

In addition, a military reward was promised for the seizure of a Jew whohad failed to present himself to the recruiting authorities. 

By virtue of this barbarous principle of collective responsibility, newhardships were inflicted upon the Jews of Russia. Since the law providedthat the fine for evading military service be imposed upon the _family_of the culprit, the police interpreted that term "liberally, " taking itto include parents, brothers, and near relatives. The followingprocedure gradually came into vogue. In the autumn of every year, theRussian conscription season, the names of the young Jews who havecompleted their twenty-first year are called out at the recruitingstation from a prepared list. When a Jew whose name has been called hasfailed to present himself on the same day, the recruiting authoritiesissue an order on the spot imposing a fine on his family. The policethen appear in the house of his parents to collect the sum of threehundred rubles. In default of cash, they attach the property of thepaupers and have it subsequently sold at public auction. In the case ofthose who possess nothing that can be taken from them the police insiston their giving a signed promise not to leave the town. Their passportsare taken from them, so that, not being able to absent themselves fromtown to earn a living, they are frequently left to starve. If theparents are dead or absent, the brothers and sisters of the culprit, andthen his grandfathers and grandmothers are held answerable with theirproperty. 

Thus, a large number of Jewish families were completely ruined, merelybecause one of their members had emigrated abroad, or, as was frequentlythe case, had surrendered his soul to God in his beloved fatherlanditself, and the relatives had failed to see to it that the dead soul wasstricken from the recruiting lists. Yet, despite all these efforts, there still remained a considerable number of uncollectedfines--"arrears, " as they were officially termed--to the profound regretof the Russian Jew-baiters, who had to look on while the victims wereslipping unpunished from their hands. 

CHAPTER XXVII

RUSSIAN REACTION AND JEWISH EMIGRATION

1. AFTERMATH OF THE POGROM POLICY

In this wise, beginning with the May laws of 1882, the Governmentgradually succeeded in monopolizing all anti-Jewish activities byletting bureaucratic persecutions take the place of street pogroms. However, in 1883 and 1884, the "street" made again occasional attemptsto compete with the Government. On May 10, 1883, on the eve of AlexanderIII. 's coronation, a pogrom took place in the large southern city ofRostov-on-the-Don. About a hundred Jewish residences and business placeswere demolished and plundered. All portable property of the Jews waslooted by the mob, and the rest was destroyed. As was to be expected, "the efforts of the police and troops were unable to stop thedisorders, " and only after completing their day's work the rioters fled, pursued by lashes and shots from the Cossaks. The Russian censorshipstrictly barred all references to the pogroms in the newspapers, forfear of spoiling the solemnity of the coronation days. The press wasonly allowed to hint at "alarming rumors, " the effect of which extendedeven to the stock exchange of Berlin. Not before a year had passed waspermission given to make public mention of the Rostov events. 

There was reason to fear that the pogrom at Rostov was only a prelude toa new series of riots in the South. But more than two months had passed, and all seemed to be quiet. Suddenly, however, on July 20, on theGreek-Orthodox festival dedicated to the memory of the prophet Elijah, the Russian mob made an attack upon the descendants of the ancientprophet at Yekaterinoslav. The memory of the great biblical Nazirite whoabhorred strong drink was appropriately celebrated by his Russianvotaries in Yekaterinoslav who filled themselves with an immensequantity of alcohol and became sufficiently intoxicated to embark upontheir daring exploits as robbers. 

The ringleaders of the pogrom movement were not local residents butitinerant laborers from the Great-Russian governments, who were employedin building a railroad in the neighborhood of the South-Russian city. These laborers, to quote the expression of a contemporary, attended tothe "military part of the undertaking, " whereas the "civil functions"were discharged by the local Russian inhabitants:

 While the laborers and the stronger half of the residents were demolishing the houses and stores and throwing all articles and merchandise upon the street, the women and children grabbed everything that came into their hands and carried them off, by hand or in wagons, to their homes. 

The looting and plundering continued on the second day, July 21, until adetachment of soldiers arrived. The mob, intoxicated with their success, attempted to beat off the soldiers, but naturally suffered defeat. Thesight of a score of killed and wounded had a sobering effect upon thecrowd. The pogrom was stopped, after five hundred Jewish families hadbeen ruined and a Jewish sanctuary had been defiled. In one devastatedsynagogue the human fiends got hold of eleven Torah scrolls, tearing topieces some of them and hideously desecrating other copies of the HolyWrit, inscribed with the commandments, "Thou shalt not murder, " "Thoushalt not steal, " "Thou shalt not commit adultery"--which evidently rancounter to the beliefs of the rioters. 

The example set by Yekaterinoslav, the capital of the government of thesame name, proved to be contagious, for during August and Septemberpogroms took place in several neighboring towns and townlets. Amongthese the pogrom at Novo-Moskovsk on September 4 was particularlyviolent, nearly all Jewish houses in that town having been destroyed bythe mob. 

The year 1884 was marked by a novel feature in the annals of pogroms: ananti-Jewish riot outside the Pale of Jewish Settlement, in the ancientRussian city of Nizhni-Novgorod, which sheltered a small Jewish colonyof some twenty families. While comparatively circumscribed as far as thematerial loss is concerned, the Nizhni-Novgorod pogrom stands out inghastly relief by the number of its human victims. A report, based uponofficial data, which endeavors to tone down the colors, gives thefollowing description of the terrible events:

 The "disorders" [a euphemism for excesses accompanied by murder] began on June 7 about nine o'clock in the evening, due to the instigation of several half-drunk laborers who happened to overhear a Christian mother telling her child, who was playing with a Jewish girl, to stop playing with her, as the Jews might slaughter her. The work of destruction began with the Jewish house of prayer which was crowded with worshippers. It was followed by the demolition of five more houses owned by Jews. In these houses the mob destroyed everything that fell into its hands. The doors and windows were broken and everything inside was thrown into the streets. On this occasion six adults and one boy was killed; five Jews were wounded, two of whom died soon afterwards. 

The governor of Nizhni-Novgorod reported that the disorders could notpossibly have been foreseen. Yet there can be no doubt that the peoplewere to a certain extent prepared for them. The investigations of thepolice and the judicial inquiry both converged to prove that theNizhni-Novgorod excesses were prompted primarily, if not exclusively, bythe desire for plunder. In all demolished houses not a single article ofvalue that could be removed was destroyed, and not only money butanything at all that was fit for use was looted. That the disordersbroke out on the seventh of June was, in the opinion of the governor, entirely accidental, but that they were directed against the Jews wasdue to the fact that the _people had been led to believe that even thethe gravest crimes were practically unpunishable, so long as they werewere committed against the Jews, and not against other nationalities_. 

An additional reason for the pogrom was the reputed wealth of a goodlynumber of the Jewish families of Nizhni-Novgorod. The judicialinvestigation brought out the fact that before attacking the offices ofDaitzelman, a big Moscow merchant, the mob was directed by shouts: "Letus go to Daitzelman; there is a lot to be gotten there. " The murder ofDaitzelman, who was beloved by his Russian laborers, and that of otherJews, was not prompted by revenge, but by mere purposeless savagery. Itis impossible to assume that the mob was moved to action by the rumorwhich had been spread by the ringleaders of the rioting hordesconcerning the kidnapping of a Christian child by the Jews--the more sosince at the very beginning of the excesses the police produced thesupposedly kidnapped child whole and intact, and showed it to the crowd. The pogrom was due primarily to the savagery of brutal and unenlightenedmobs, who found an opportunity to vent their beastly instincts, fortified by the conviction of complete immunity, which is referred toin the report of the governor. 

Even the central Government in St. Petersburg was alarmed by the St. Bartholemew night which had been enacted at Nizhni-Novgorod. At therecommendation of Governor Baranov, the murderers were tried bycourt-martial and suffered heavy punishment. Nevertheless, the samegovernor thought it his duty to appease the Russian popular conscienceby ordering the expulsion of those Jews whom the police had found tolive outside the Pale "without a legal basis. " In this wise, the Russianadministration once more managed to follow up a street pogrom by a legalone, not realizing the fact that the atrocities perpetrated upon theJews by the mob were merely a crude copy of the atrocities perpetratedupon them by the Government, and that the outlawed condition of the Jewsbred the lawlessness and violence of the mob, which was fully aware ofthe anti-Semitic sentiments of the official world. The bloody saturnaliaof Nizhni-Novgorod had, however, the beneficent effect that theGovernment, fearing the spread of the conflagration outside the Pale andeven outside Jewry, took energetic steps to prevent all furtherexcesses. As a matter of fact, the Nizhni-Novgorod pogrom was the lastin the annals of the eighties--with the exception of a few unimportantoccurrences in various localities. For six years "the land was quiet, "and the monopoly of "silent pogroms, " in the shape of the systematicdenial of Jewish rights, remained firmly in the hands of the Government. 

2. THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE PAHLEN COMMISSION

Whilst the Russian bureaucrats who had been ordered by the Tzar to take"active" measures towards solving the Jewish problem abandonedthemselves entirely to a policy of repression, those of theirfellow-bureaucrats who had been commissioned to consider and judge thesame question from a purely theoretic point of view came to theconclusion that the repressive policy pursued by the Government was notonly injurious but even dangerous. Contrary to expectations, the "HighCommission" under the chairmanship of Count Pahlen, consisting of ageddignitaries and members of various ministries, approached the Jewishquestion, at least as far as the majority of the Commission wasconcerned, in a much more serious frame of mind than did the promotersof the "active" anti-Jewish policies, who had no time for contemplationand were driven by the pressure of their reactionary energy to go aheadat all cost. In the course of five years the Pahlen Commission succeededin investigating the Jewish question in all its aspects. It studied anditself prepared a large mass of historic, juridic, as well as economicand statistical material. It probed the labors of Ignatyev'sgubernatorial commissions, quickly ascertaining their biased tendency, and examined the entire history of the preceding legislation concerningthe Jews. It finally came to the conclusion that the whole century-longsystem of restrictive legislation had failed of its purpose, and mustgive way to a system of emancipatory measures, to be carried outgradually and with extreme caution. The majority of the members of theCommission concurred in this opinion, including Count Pahlen, itschairman. In the following we present a few brief extracts from theconclusions formulated by this conservative and bureaucratic commissionin its comprehensive "General Memoir" which was written in the beginningof 1888:

 Can the attitude of the State towards a population of five millions, forming one-twentieth of its subjects--though belonging to a race different from that of the majority--whom that State itself had incorporated, together with the territories populated by them, into the Russian body politic, differ from its attitude towards all its other subjects?. . . . Hence, from the political point of view, the Jew is entitled to equality of citizenship. Without granting him equal rights, we cannot, properly speaking, demand from him equal civic obligations. . . . Repression and disfranchisement, discrimination and persecution have never yet leaded to improve groups of human beings and make them more devoted to their rulers. It is, therefore, not surprising that the Jews, trained in the spirit of a century-long repressive legislation, have remained in the category of those subjects, who are less accurate in the discharge of their civic duty, who shirk their obligations towards the State, and do not fully join Russian life. _No less than six hundred and fifty restrictive laws directed against the Jews may be enumerated in the Russian Code_, and the discriminations and disabilities implied in these laws are such that they have naturally resulted in making until now the life of an enormous majority of the Jews in Russia exceedingly onerous. . . . 

 The prejudice against the Jews is largely nurtured by the dislike which the common people secretly harbor towards them until to-day as non-Christians. . . . The names "Non-Christian" and "Christ-killer" may often be heard from the lips of the Russian common man as abusive terms directed against the Jew. The attitude of our Church and of the law of the State towards the Jewish religion is different. For, while they designate the Jewish religion as a "pseudo-doctrine, " they nevertheless sanction religious toleration on as large a scale as possible [?!], and refrain from carrying on a compulsory and official missionary propaganda. 

 In the course of the last twenty-five years a new accusation has been brought forward against the Jews in Russia and those outside of Russia. The Jews have been found to form a considerable percentage among the champions of anarchistic and revolutionary doctrines, consisting mostly of half-educated youngsters who have drifted away from one shore and have not succeeded in reaching the other. This extremely deplorable fact is used as evidence for the purpose of showing that Judaism itself contains within it a destructive force, and is, therefore, doubly dangerous to State and society. The Jewish progressives and socialists are wont to speak of their mission to reconstruct the world and of their innate love of mankind. . . . These statements need hardly be taken seriously, for present-day Jewry, by the very essence of its nature, professes strictly conservative principles, which to a large extent are egotistic and have for their aim the practical welfare of its adherents. The interpretation of the spirit of Judaism in a directly opposite sense is but an unsuccessful attempt on the part of Jewish anarchists who wish to proclaim themselves as the apostles of a new national mission invented by them. The fact of their forming a large percentage in the camp of those opposed to the Russian civic order may be explained by the artificial manner in which vast numbers of pupils from among the lowest classes of the Jewish population are attracted into the secondary and elementary educational establishments. These pupils are without means of a livelihood, and they lack, moreover, all religious beliefs; they are embittered not only by their personal unfortunate position but also by the pressure of the restrictive laws which weigh heavily upon their fellow-Jews in Russia. 

 The defects which should be truly combated by Government and society are: a) Jewish exclusiveness and separatism; b) the endeavor of the Jews to bring the economic forces of the population, in the midst of which they live, under their influence (i. E. , exploitation). . . . 

 Having established the true dimensions and characteristics of the "Jewish evil, " we are naturally expected to answer a question of an opposite nature: are the Jews to any extent useful to State and society? This question, though very frequently heard, is not quite intelligible, for every subject, who fulfils his obligations, is useful to State and society. It would be strange to put a similar question concerning other nationalities of Eastern origin in Russia, such as the Greeks, Armenians, and Tartars. And yet this question is raised with great frequency in the case of the Jews, for the purpose of proving the need of repressive measures and framing a stronger indictment against the Jewish population. There is no doubt that in certain lines of endeavor the Jews are extremely useful. This was already realized by Catherine, who admitted them to the South-Russian coast in order to introduce commercial activities and bring life into the country, . . . . The peculiar nature of their commerce and credit is useful to the State, because they connect the remotest regions by commercial ties and are satisfied with considerably smaller profits than are the Christian merchants. . . . 

 We must not, first of all, engage in too comprehensive plans of reform and imagine that the Jewish question can be considered in all its aspects and solved at one stroke. . . . Gradation and cautiousness must above all become the guiding principles of the future activity of the legislator. 

 The repressive policy, taken by itself, has been and will always be the first and main source of the clannishness of the Jews and their aloofness from Russian life. . . . The prohibitive laws have not improved the Jews. On the contrary, they have developed in them the spirit of opposition, and have prompted them to devise all the time most dexterous means of evading the law, thereby corrupting the lower executives of the State power. These laws affect the daily doings of every member of the Jewish population, and they extend to such spheres of life and activity in which State control is almost impossible. They touch the domain of private contract law (the prohibition of land leases), the domain of physical liberty and the need of human locomotion (the prohibition to transgress the Pale of Settlement, or to live in villages within fifty versts of the border), the domain of daily pursuits and earnings (the prohibition of several professions), and many others. 

 No law will ever be able to check effectively the legal violations in these hourly acts and common relations of life. It is impossible to attach a policeman or a public prosecutor or a justice of the peace to every Jew. And yet it is perfectly natural that, being restricted in the most elementary rights of a subject--to take as one instance only the right of free movement--every Jew should daily attempt to violate and evade such burdensome regulations. This is perfectly natural and intelligible. . . . 

 About ninety per cent of the whole Jewish population form a mass of people that are entirely unprovided for, and come near being a proletariat--a mass that lives from hand to mouth, amidst poverty, and most oppressive sanitary and general conditions. This very proletariat is occasionally the target of tumultuous popular uprisings. The Jewish mass lives in fear of pogroms and in fear of violence. It looks with envy upon the Jews of the adjacent governments of the Kingdom of Poland, who are almost entirely emancipated, though living under the jurisdiction of the same State. [1] The law itself places the Jews in the category of "alien races, " on the same level with the Samoyeds and pagans. [2] In a word the abnormal condition of the present position of the Jews in Russia is evidenced by the instability and vagueness of their juridic rights. 

[Footnote 1: The law of 1862 conferred upon the Jews of "the Kingdomof Poland, " i. E. , of Russian Poland, the right of unrestrictedresidence throughout the Kingdom, including the villages (see p. 181). This privilege was practically annulled by the enactment ofJune 11, 1891, which severely restricts the property rights of thePolish Jews. ]

[Footnote 2: The Russian Code of Laws classifies the Jews as follows(Volume IX. , Laws of Social Orders, Article 762): "Among the Aliensinhabiting the Russian Empire are the following: 1) The SiberianAliens; 2) The Samoyeds of the Government of Archangel; 3) Thenomadic Aliens of the Government of Stavropol; 4) The Kalmycksleading a nomadic life in the Governments of Astrakhan andStavropol; 5) The Kirgiz of the Inner Ord; 6) The Aliens of theTerritories of Akmolinsk, Semipalatinsk, Semiryechensk, Ural, andTurgay; 7) the alien populations of the Trans-Caspian Territory; 8)The Jews. "]

 Looking at the problem, not at all as Jewish apologetes or sympathizers, but purely from the point of view of civic righteousness and the highest principles of impartiality and justice, we cannot but admit that the Jews have a right to complain about their situation. . . . However unpleasant it might sound to the enemies of Judaism, it is nevertheless an axiom which no one can deny that the whole five million Jewish population of Russia, unattractive though it may appear to certain groups and individuals, is yet an integral part of Russia and that the questions affecting this population are at the same time purely Russian questions. We are not dealing with foreigners, whose admission to Russian citizenship might be conditioned by their usefulness or uselessness to Russia. The Jews of Russia are not foreigners. For more than one hundred years they have formed a part of that same Russian Empire, which has incorporated scores of other tribes many of which count by the millions. . . . 

 The very history of Russian legislation, notwithstanding the fact that this legislation has developed largely under the influence of a most severe outlook on Judaism, teaches us that there is only one way and one solution--to emancipate and unite the Jews with the rest of the population under the protection of the same laws. All this is attested not by theories and doctrines but by the living experience of centuries. . . . Hence the final goal of any legislation concerning the Jews can be no other than its abrogation, a course demanded equally by the needs of the times, the cause of enlightenment, and the progress of the popular masses. 

 The fitness of the Jews for full civil equality, to be attained by degrees and in the course of many long years, will be the final goal of the reforms, and will lead at last to the disentangling of that age-long knot. In saying this, we do not mean to imply that by that time the Jews will have cast off or transformed all those obnoxious qualities which are at present responsible for the fight in which all are engaged against them. But, as in the case of Europe, this fight can only be terminated by according them full emancipation and equal citizenship. To place obstacles in the way of this solution would be nothing more than a fruitless attempt to check the course of development of human society and Russian civil life. Unsympathetic as the Jews may be to the Russian masses, it is impossible not to agree with this axiomatic truth. 

 Turning now to the execution of its task, the High Commission has up to the present been able to carry out but a very small part of the program indicated. It was tied down by that gradation and cautiousness which it considers an indispensable condition for every improvement in the status of the Jews. . . . The principal task of the legislation, as far as it affects the Jews, must consist in uniting them as closely as possible with the general Christian population. It is not advisable to frame a new legislation in the form of a special "Statute" or "Regulation, " since such a course would be fundamentally subversive of the efforts of the Government to remove Jewish exclusiveness. _The system of repressive and discriminating measures must give way to a graduated system of emancipatory and equalizing laws_. The greatest possible _cautiousness_ and _gradation_ are the principles to be observed in the solution of the Jewish question. 

3. THE TRIUMPH OF REACTION

With all their moderate and cautious phraseology, the conclusions of thePahlen Commission, whose members, as hide-bound conservatives, wereforced to reckon with the anti-Semitic trend of the governing circles, implied an annihilating criticism of the repressive policy of that veryGovernment by which the Commission had been appointed. From the loins ofRussian officialdom issued the enemy who opposed it in its manner ofdealing with the Jewish question. 

It must be added, however, that the opinions voiced by the Commission inits memorandum were by no means shared by its entire membership. Forwhile the majority of the Commission were in favor of gradual reforms, the minority advocated the continuation of the old repressive policy. Owing to these internal disagreements, the Commission was slow insubmitting its conclusions to the Government. One more attempt was madeto procrastinate the matter. At the end of 1888 the Commission invited agroup of Jewish "experts, " being desirous, as it were, to listen to thelast words of the prisoner at the bar. The choice fell upon the sameJewish notables of St. Petersburg, who had displayed so little courageat the Jewish conference of 1882. [1] The cross-examination of theseJewish representatives turned on the question of the internal Jewishorganization, the existence of a secret Kahal, the purposes of the"basket tax, " [2] and so on. Needless to say the replies were given inan apologetic spirit. The Jewish "experts" renounced the idea of aself-governing communal Jewish organization, and pleaded merely for alimited communal autonomy under the strict supervision of theGovernment. True, a few of the questions referred besides to the legalposition of the Jews, but this was done more as a matter of form. Everybody knew that the opinion of the majority of the Commission, favoring "cautious and gradual" reforms, did not have the same prospectsof success as the views of the anti-Semitic minority which advocated thecontinuance of the old-time repressive policy. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 304 et seq. In addition to those mentioned, M. Margolis was invited as an expert. ]

[Footnote 2: See above, p. 61, n. 1. ]

Soon the worst apprehensions proved to be true. Count Tolstoi, thereactionary Minister of the Interior, blocked the further progress ofthe plans formulated by the Pahlen Commission which should have beensubmitted in due course to the Council of State. There were persistentrumors to the effect that Alexander III. , being decidedly in favor ofcontinuing the policy of oppression towards the Jews, had "attachedhimself to the opinion of the minority" of the Pahlen Commission. According to another version, the question was actually brought upbefore the Council of State, and there, too, the anti-Semites proved tobe in the minority, but the Tzar threw the weight of his opinion ontheir side. The project of the Commission, being out of harmony with thecurrent Government policies, was disposed of at some secret session ofleading dignitaries. The labor of five years was buried in the officialarchives. 

As for the Jews themselves, they were at no time deceived about theeffects that were likely to attend the work of the High Commission. Theyclearly understood that, if the Government had been genuinely desirousof "revising" the system of Jewish disabilities, it would have stopped, for a time at least, to manufacture new legislative whips and scorpions. The dark polar night of Russian reaction reigned supreme. There seemedto be no end to these orgies of the Russian night owls, thePobyedonostzevs and Tolstois, who were anxious to resuscitate thesavagery of ancient Muscovy, and who kept the people in the grip ofignorance, drunkenness, and political barbarism. Every one in Russiakept his peace and held his breath. The progressive elements of theEmpire were held down tightly by the lid of reaction. The press groanedunder the yoke of a ferocious censorship. The mystic doctrine ofnon-resistance preached by Leo Tolstoi was attuned to the moodprevailing among educated Russians, for, in the words of the Russianpoet, "their hearts, subdued by storms, were filled with silence andlassitude. "

In Jewish life, too, silence reigned supreme. The sharp pangs of thefirst pogrom year were now dulled, and only suppressed moans echoed theuninterrupted "silent pogrom" of oppression. These were years of whichthe Jewish poet, Simon Frug, could sing:

 Round about all is silent and cheerless, Like a lonesome and desert-like plain. If but one were courageous and fearless And would cry out aloud in his pain! Neither storm-wind nor starshine by night, And the days neither cloudy nor bright: O my people, how sad is thy state, How gray and how cheerless thy fate!

But in this silence the national idea was slowly maturing and gaining indepth and in strength. The time had not yet arrived for clearly markedtendencies or well-defined systems of thought. But the temper of theintellectual classes of Russian Jewry was a clear indication that theywere at the cross-roads. The "titled" _inteligenzia_, reared in theRussian schools, who had drifted away from Judaism, was now joined bythat other _intelligenzia_, the product of heder and yeshibah, who hadacquired European culture through the medium of neo-Hebraic literature, and was in closer contact with the masses of the Jewish people. 

True, the Jewish periodical press in the Russian language, which hadarisen towards the end of the seventies, had lost in quantity. The_Razvyet_ had ceased to appear in 1883, and the _Russki Yevrey_ in 1884. The only press organ to remain on the battlefield was the militant_Voskhod_, which was the center for the publicistic, scientific, andpoetic endeavors of the advanced intellectuals of that period. But theloss of the Russian branch of Jewish literature was made up by thegrowth of the Hebrew press. The old Hebrew organs _ha-Melitz_ and_ha-Tzefirah_ took on a new lease of life, and grew from weeklies intodailies. Voluminous annuals with rightful claims to scientific andliterary importance, such as the _ha-Asif_ ("The Harvest") and _KenesetIsrael_ ("The Community of Israel") in Warsaw, and other similarpublications, began to make their appearance in Russia. New literaryforces began to rise from the ground, though only to attain their fullbloom during the following years. Taken as a whole, the ninth decade ofthe nineteenth century may well be designated as a period of transitionfrom the older Haskalah movement to the more modern national revival. 

4. AMERICAN AND PALESTINIAN EMIGRATION

As for the emigration movement, which had begun during the storm andstress of the first pogrom year, this passive but only effective protestagainst the new Egyptian oppression proceeded at a slow pace. The Jewishemigration from Russia to the United States served as a barometer of thepersecutions endured by the Jews in the land of bondage. During thefirst three years of the eighties the new movement showed violentfluctuations. In 1881 there were 8193 emigrants; in 1882, 17, 497; in1883, 6907. During the following three years, from 1884 to 1886, themovement remained practically on the same level, counting 15, 000 to17, 000 emigrants annually. But in the last three years of that decade, it gained considerably in volume, mounting in 1887 to 28, 944, in 1888 to31, 256, and in 1889 to 31, 889. The exodus from Russia was undoubtedlystimulated by the law imposing a fine for evading military service andby the introduction of the educational percentage norm--two restrictionswhich threw into bold relief the disproportionate relation betweenrights and duties in Russian Jewry. In the Empire of the Tzars the Jewswere denied the right of residence and the privilege of a schooleducation, but forced at the same time to serve in the army. In theUnited States they at once received full civil equality and freeschooling without any compulsory military service. 

It goes without saying that the emigrants who had no difficulty inobtaining equality of citizenship were nevertheless compelled, duringtheir first years of residence in the New World, to engage in a severestruggle for their material existence. Among the emigrants who came toAmerica in those early years there were many young intellectuals who hadgiven up their liberal careers in the land of bondage and were nowdreaming of becoming plain agriculturists in the free republic. Theymanaged to obtain a following among the emigrant masses, and founded, inthe face of extraordinary difficulties, and with the help of charitableorganizations, a number of colonies and farms in various parts of theUnited States, in Louisiana, North and South Dakota, New Jersey, andelsewhere. After a few years of vain struggling against material wantand lack of adaptation to local conditions, a large number of thesecolonies were abandoned, and only a few of them have survived untilto-day. 

In the course of time the idealistic pioneer spirit which hadanimated the Russian intellectuals gave way to a sober realismwhich was more in harmony with the conditions of Americanlife. The bulk of the emigrant masses settled in the cities, primarily in New York. They worked in factories or at thetrades, the most important of which was the needle trade;they engaged in business, in peddling, and in farming, and, lastly, in the liberal professions. Many an immigrant passedsuccessively through all these economic stages before obtaininga secure economic position. 

The result of all these wanderings and vicissitudes was awell-established community in the United States of some 200, 000 Jews, who formed the nucleus for the rapidly growing new Jewish center inAmerica. One of the active participants and leaders in this movement, who had in his own life experienced all the hardships connected with it, concludes his account of the emigration to the United States at the endof the eighties with the following words:

 No one who has seen the poor, down-trodden, faint-hearted inhabitant of the infamous Pale, with the Damocles sword of brutal mob rule dangling constantly over his head, shaking like an autumn leaf at the sight of an inspector or even a plain policeman; who has seen this little Jew transformed, under the influence of the struggle for existence and an independent life, into a free American Jew who holds his head proudly, whom no one would dare to offend, and who has become a citizen in the full sense of the word--no one who has seen this wonderful transformation can doubt for a moment the enormous significance of the emigration movement for the 200, 000 Jews that have found shelter in America. 

Idealistic influences rather than realistic factors were at work in thePalestinian colonization movement, which proceeded on a parallel linewith the American emigration, as a small stream sometimes accompanies alarge river. The ideas preached by the first "Lovers of Zion" were butslowly assuming concrete shape. The pioneer colonists in the ancientfatherland met with enormous obstacles in their path: the opposition ofthe Turkish Government which hindered in every possible way the purchaseof land and acquisition of property; the neglected condition of thesoil, the uncivilized state of the neighboring Arabs, the lack offinancial means and of agricultural experience. Despite all thesedrawbacks, the efforts of a few men led to the establishment in the veryfirst year of the movement, in 1882, of the colony Rishon le-Zion, nearJaffa. Subsequently a few more colonies were founded, such as Ekron andGhederah in Judea, Yesod Hama'alah, Rosh-Pinah, Zikhron Jacob inGalilee--the last two founded by Roumanian Jews. Called into life byenthusiasts with inadequate material resources, these colonies wouldhave scarcely been able to survive, had not their plight aroused theinterest of Baron Edmond de Rothschild in Paris. Beginning with 1884, the baron, pursuing purely philanthropic aims, gave his support to thecolonies, spending enormous sums on cultivating in them the higher formsof agriculture, particularly wine-growing. Gradually, the baron becamethe actual owner of a majority of the colonies which were administeredby his appointees, and most of the colonists were reduced to the levelof laborers or tenants who were entirely in the hands of the baron'sadministration. This state of affairs was unquestionably humiliating andalmost too hard to bear for men who had dreamed of a free life in theHoly Land. Yet there can be no doubt that under the conditionsprevailing at the time the continued existence of the colonies was onlymade possible through the liberal assistance which came from theoutside. 

The progress of the Palestinian colonization, slow though it was, provided a concrete basis for the doctrines preached by the "Lovers ofZion" in Russia. The propaganda of these _Hobebe Zion_--the Hebrewequivalent for "Lovers of Zion"--who acknowledged as their leaders thefirst exponents of the territorial restoration of Jewry, Pinsker andLilienblum, led to the organization of a number of societies in variouscities. Towards the end of 1884 the delegates of these societies met ata conference in the Prussian border-town Kattowitz, such a conferencebeing impossible in Russia, in view of the danger of policeinterference. On that occasion a fund was established under the name of_Mazkeret Moshe_, "A Memorial to Moses, " in honor of the Englishphilanthropist Sir Moses Montefiore, whose hundredth birthday wascelebrated in that year. The fund, which formed the main channel for alldonations in favor of the Palestinian colonies, was administered by thetwo _Hobebe Zion_ centers in Odessa and Warsaw. The movement which hadbeen called into life by representatives of the _intelligenzia_succeeded in winning over several champions of rabbinical orthodoxy, among them Samuel Mohilever, the well known rabbi of Bialystok; theiraffiliation with the new party was largely instrumental in weakening theopposition of the orthodox masses which were inclined to look upon thispolitical movement as a rival of the traditional Messianic idea ofJudaism. The lack of governmental sanction hampered the _Hobebe Zion_societies in Russia in their activities, and the funds at their disposalwere barely sufficient for the upkeep of one or two colonies inPalestine. Realizing this, the conference of the "Lovers of Zion" whichmet at Druskeniki [1] in 1887 decided to apply to the Russian Governmentfor the legalization of the _Hobebe Zion_ organization, a consummationwhich was realized a few years later, in 1890. 

[Footnote 1: A watering-place in the government of Grodno. ]

Thus did, during the first decade of the war waged by the Tzars againsttheir Jewish subjects, the tide of Russian-Jewish emigration slowly rolltowards various shores, until a fresh storm in the beginning of the newdecade whipped its waves to unprecedented heights. Whereas in the courseof the eighties the Russian Government wished to give the impression asif it merely "tolerated" the departure of the Jews from Russia--althoughin reality it was the ultimate aim of its policies--in the beginning ofthe nineties it suddenly cast off its mask and gave its public sanctionto a Jewish exodus from the Russian Empire. As if to strengthen theeffect of this sanction, the Jews were to taste even more fully the whipof persecution and expulsion than they had done during the precedingdecade. 

CHAPTER XXVIII

JUDAEOPHOBIA TRIUMPHANT

1. INTENSIFIED REACTION

The poisonous Judaeophobia bacilli seemed to thrive more than ever inthe highest Government circles of St. Petersburg. However, not only thehatred against the Jews but also the fury of general political reactionbecame more rabid than ever after the "miraculous escape" of theimperial family in the railroad accident near Borki on October 17, 1888. [1] Amidst the ecclesiastic and mystic haze with which Pobyedonostzevand his associates managed to veil this episode the conviction becamedeeply ingrained in the mind of the Tzar that it was the finger of Godwhich pointed to him the way in which Russia might be saved from"Western" reforms and brought back into the fold of traditional Russianorthodoxy. This conviction of Alexander III. Led to the counter-reformswhich marked the concluding years of his reign, having for their purposethe strengthening of the police and Church régime in Russia, such as thecurtailment of rural and urban self-government, the increase of thepower of the nobility and clergy, the institution of Zemstvo chiefs, [2]and the multiplication of Greek-Orthodox parochial schools at theexpense of secular schools. The same influences also stimulated theluxurious growth of Judaeophobia which from now on assumed in thehighest Government circles a most malignant character. A manifestationof this frame of mind may be found in the words of the Tzar which hepenned on the margin of a report submitted to him in 1890 by a highofficial, describing the sufferings of the Jews and pleading for thenecessity of stopping the policy of oppression: "_But we must not forgetthat it was the Jews who crucified our Lord and spilled his pricelessblood_. " Representatives of the court clergy publicly preached that aChristian ought not to cultivate friendly relations with a Jew, since itwas the command of the gospel "to hate the murderers of the Savior. " TheMinistry of the Interior, under the direction of two fanaticreactionaries, Durnovo and Plehve, [3] set on foot all the inquisitorialcontrivances of the Police Department, of which both these officials hadformerly been the chiefs. 

[Footnote 1: Borki is a village in the government of Kherson. Of thefifteen cars of the imperial train only five remained intact. Fifty-eight persons were injured, twenty-one fatally. The members of theimperial family were saved, although their car had been completelywrecked. 

The following quotation from Harold Frederic, _The New Exodus_, p. 168et seq. , is of interest in this connection: "It was reported about thatthe Tzar regarded the escape alive of himself and family from theterrible railway accident at Borki as the direct and miraculousintervention of Providence. The facts were that the imperial train wasbeing driven at the rate of ninety versts an hour over a road calculatedto withstand at the utmost a speed of thirty-five versts; that theengineer humbly warned the Tzar of the danger, and was gruffly orderedto go still faster if possible, and that the miracle would have been theavoidance of calamity. "]

[Footnote 2: On the Zemstvos compare p. 173, n. 1. The reactionary lawof June 12, 1890 (see later, p. 358 et seq. ) puts in place of theexecutives formerly elected by the people the "Zemstvo chiefs, "officials appointed from among the landed proprietors. ]

[Footnote 3: Durnovo became Minister of the Interior in 1889, after thedemise of Tolstoi; Plehve was assistant-minister. ]

The press was either tamed or used as a tool of the governmentalpolicies. The most widely read press organs of the capital, with theexception of the moderately liberal _Novosti_ ("The News") which managedto survive the shipwreck of the liberal press, became either openly orsecretly the official mouthpieces of the Government. The venal _NovoyeVremya, _ which the Russian satirist Shchedrin had branded as "thesewer, " embarked, towards the end of the eighties, on the nobleenterprise of hunting down the Jews with a zeal which was clear evidenceof a higher demand for Judaeophobia in the official world. There was noaccusation, however hideous, which Suvorin's paper, steeredsimultaneously by the Holy Synod and by the Police Department, failed tohurl in the face of the Jews. As an organ generally reflecting the viewsof the Government, the _Novoye Vremya_ served at that time as a sourceof political information for all dignitaries and officials. Theministers, governors and the vast army of subordinate officials, whowished to ascertain the political course at a given moment, consultedthis "well-informed" daily, which, as far as the Jewish question wasconcerned, pursued but one aim: to make the life of the Jews in Russiaunbearable. Apart from the _Novoye Vremya_, which was read by the Tzarhimself, the work of Jew-baiting was also carried on with considerablezeal by the Russian weekly _Grazhdanin_ ("The Citizen"), whose editor, Count Meshcherski, enjoyed not only the personal favor of Alexander III. But also a substantial Government subsidy. These metropolitan organs ofpublicity gave the tone to the whole official and semi-official press inthe provinces, and the public opinion of Russia was systematicallypoisoned by the venom of Judaeophobia. 

When the Pahlen Commission was discharged, the Tzar having "attachedhimself to the opinion of the minority, " [1] the Government had nodifficulty in finding a few kind-hearted officials who were eager tocarry the project framed by this reactionary minority into effect. Theproject itself, which had been elaborated in the Ministry of theInterior under the direction of Plehve, the sinister Chief of Police, was guarded with great secrecy, as if it concerned a plan of militaryoperations against a belligerent Power. But the secret leaked out verysoon. The Minister had sent out copies of the project to thegovernors-general, soliciting their opinions, and ere long copies of theproject were circulating in London, Paris, and Vienna. In the spring of1890, Russia and Western Europe were filled with alarming rumorsconcerning an enactment of some "forty clauses, " which was designed tocurtail the commercial activities of the Jews, to increase the rigor ofthe "Temporary Rules" within the Pale, and restrict the privilegesconferred upon several categories of Jews outside of it, to establishmedieval Jewish ghettos in St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Kiev, and similarmeasures. The foreign press made a terrible outcry against thesecontemplated new acts of barbarism. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 370. ]

The voice of protest was particularly strong in England. The London_Times_ assailed in violent terms the reactionary policies of Russia, and a special organ, called _Darkest Russia_, was published for thispurpose by Russian political refugees in England. The Russian Governmentdenied these rumors through its diplomatic channels, though at the verysame time the well-informed _Novoye Vremya_ and _Grazhdanin_ were notbarred from printing news items concerning the projected disabilities orfrom recommending ferocious measures against the Jews for the purpose"of removing them from all branches of labor. "

This comedy was well understood abroad. At the end of July and in thebeginning of August interpellations were introduced in both Houses ofthe English Parliament, as to whether Her Majesty's Government found itpossible to make diplomatic representations in defence of the persecutedRussian Jews for whom England would have to provide, were they to arrivethere in large masses. Premier Salisbury, in the House of Lords, andFergusson, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in theHouse of Commons, replied that "these proceedings, which, if rightlyreported to us, are deeply to be regretted, concern the internal affairsof the Russian Empire, and do not admit of any interference on the partof Her Majesty's Government. " [1] When shortly afterwards preparationswere set on foot for calling a protest meeting in London, the RussianGovernment hastened to announce through the British ambassador in St. Petersburg that no new measures against the Jews were in contemplation, and the meeting was called off. Rumor had it that the Lord Mayor ofLondon, Henry Isaacs, who was a Jew, did not approve of this meeting, over which, according to the English custom, he would have to preside. The action of the Lord Mayor may have been "tactful, " but is wascertainly not free from an admixture of timidity. 

[Footnote 1: See _The Jewish Chronicle_ of August 8, 1890, p. 18b. ]

2. CONTINUED HARASSING

While anxiously endeavoring to appease public opinion abroad, theRussian Government at home did all it could to keep the Jews in anagitated state of mind. The legal drafts and the circulars which hadbeen sent out secretly by the central Government in St. Petersburgelicited the liveliest sympathy on the part of the provincialadministrators. Not satisfied with signifying to the Ministry theirapproval of the contemplated disabilities, many officials of high rankbegan to display openly their bitter hatred of the Jews. 

At one and the same time, during the months of June, July, and August of1890, the heads of various local provincial administrations publishedcirculars calling the attention of the police to the "audacious conduct"of the Jews who, on meeting Russian officials, failed to take off theirhats by way of greeting. The governor of Moghilev instructed the policeof his province to impress the local Jewish population with thenecessity of "polite manners, " in the sense of a more reverent attitudetowards the representatives of Russian authority. In compliance withthis order, the district chiefs of police compelled the rabbis toinculcate their flock in the synagogues with reverence for Russianofficialdom. In Mstislavl, a town in the government of Moghilev, thepresident of the nobility [1] assembled the leading members of theJewish community, and cautioned them that those Jews who would fail tocomply with the governor's circular would be subjected to a publicwhipping by the police. The governor of Odessa, the well-known despotZelenoy, issued a police ordinance for the purpose of "curbing theimpudence displayed by the Jews in places of public gathering andparticularly in the suburban trolley cars" where they do not give uptheir seats and altogether show disrespect towards "persons of advancedage or those wearing a uniform, testifying to their high position. " Evenmore brutal was the conduct of the governor-general of Vilna, Kakhanov, who, despite his high rank, allowed himself, in replying to the speechof welcome of a Jewish deputation, to animadvert not only on Jewish"clannishness" but also on the "licentiousness" of the Jewishpopulation, manifesting itself in congregating on the streets, andsimilar grave crimes. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 303. ]

The simultaneous occurrence of this sort of official actions in widelyseparated places point to a common source, probably to some secretinstructions from St. Petersburg. It would seem, however, that theprovincial henchmen of the central Government had overreached themselvesin their eagerness to carry out the behest of "curbing the Jews. " Thepettiness of their demands, which, moreover, were illegal, such as theorder to take off the hats before the officials, or to give up the seatsin the trolley cars, merely served to ridicule the representatives ofRussian officialdom, giving frequent rise to tragi-comic conflicts inpublic and to utterances of indignation in the press. The publicpronouncements of these genteel _chinovniks_ who were anxious to trainthe Jewish masses in the fear of Russian bureaucracy and inculcate inthem polite manners aroused the attention both of the Russian and theforeign press. It was universally felt that these farcical performancesof uncouth administrators were only the manifestations of a bottomlesshatred, of a morbid desire to insult and to humble the Jews, and thatthese administrators were capable at any moment to proceed frommoralizing to more tangible forms of ill-treatment. This dangerintensified the state of alarm. 

While making preparations for storming the citadel of Russian Jewry, theGovernment took good care to keep it meanwhile in its normal state ofsiege. The resourcefulness of the administration brought the _technique_of repression to perfection. The officials were no longer content withinventing cunning devices for expelling old Jewish residents from thevillages. [1] They now made endeavors to reduce even the area of the_urban_ Pale in which the Jews were huddled together, panting forbreath. In 1890, the provincial authorities, acting evidently on asignal from above, began to change numerous little townlets intovillages, which, as rural settlements, would be closed to the Jews. As aresult, all the Jews who had settled in these localities after theissuance of the "Temporary Rules" of May 3, 1882, were now expelled, andeven the older residents who were exempt from the operation of the Maylaws shared the same fate unless they were able (which in very manycases they were not) to produce documentary evidence that they had livedthere prior to 1882. Simultaneously a new attempt was made to drive theJews from the forbidden fifty verst zone along the Western border of theEmpire, particularly in Bessarabia. These expulsions had the effect offilling the already over-crowded cities of the Pale with many morethousands of ruined people. 

[Footnote 1: There are cases on record when Jewish soldiers who returnedhome after the completion of their term of service were refusedadmission to their villages, on the ground that they were "newsettlers. "]

At the same time the life of the outlawed Jews was made unbearable inthe cities outside the Pale, particularly in the large centers, such asKiev, Moscow, and St. Petersburg. The governor-general of Kievprohibited the wives of Jewish artisans who were legally entitled toresidence in that city to sell eatables in the market, on the technicalground that under the law artisans could only trade in the articles oftheir own manufacture, thus robbing the poor Jewish workman of themiserable pittance which his wife was anxious to contribute by herhonest labor towards the maintenance of the family. 

A great _political_ blow for the Jews was the clause in the newreactionary "Statute Concerning the Zemstvo Organizations" issued onJune 12, 1890, [1] under which the Jews, though paying the local taxes, were completely barred from participating in the election of deputies tothe organization of local self-government. This clause was inserted inthe legal draft by the three shining lights of the political inquisitionactive at that time, Pobyedonostzev, Durnovo, and Plehve. They justifiedthis restriction on the following grounds: the object of the new law isto transform local self-government into a state administration and tostrengthen in the former the influence of the central Government at theexpense of the local Government; hence the Jews, "being altogether anelement hostile to Government, " are not fit to participate in theZemstvo administration. The Council of State agreed with thisbureaucratic motivation, and the humiliating clause passed into law. 

[Footnote 1: The new law invalidated to a large extent the libertiesgranted to the Zemstvos by Alexander II. In 1864 (compare p. 173) byplacing them under state control. ]

While a large part of the Russian public and of the Russian press hadsuccumbed to the prevailing tendencies under the high pressure of theanti-Semitic atmosphere, the progressive elements of the Russian_intelligenzia_ were gradually aroused to a feeling of protest. VladimirSolovyov, "the Christian philosopher, " a friend of the Jewish people, who had familiarized himself thoroughly with its history and literature, conceived the idea of issuing a public protest against the anti-Semiticmovement in the "Russian Press, " [1] to be signed by the most prominentRussian writers and other well-known men. During the months of May andJune, 1890, he succeeded under great difficulties to collect for hisprotest sixty-six signatures in Moscow and over fifty signatures in St. Petersburg, including those of Leo Tolstoi, Vladimir Korolenko, andother literary celebrities. Despite its mild tone, the protest which hadbeen framed by Solovyov [2] was barred from publication by the Russiancensor. Professor Ilovaiski, of Moscow, a historian of doubtfulreputation, but a hide-bound Jew-baiter, had informed the authorities ofSt. Petersburg of the attempt to collect signatures in Moscow for a"pro-Jewish petition. " As a result, all newspapers received orders fromthe Russian Press Department to refuse their columns to any collectivepronouncements touching the Jewish question. 

[Footnote 1: The latter expression was a euphemism designating theRussian Government and its reactionary henchmen in the press. Theseverity of the police made this evasion necessary. ]

[Footnote 2: The following extracts from this meek appeal deserve to bequoted: "The movement against the Jews which is propagated by theRussian press represents an unprecedented violation of the mostfundamental demands of righteousness and humanity. We consider it ourduty to recall these elementary demands to the mind of the Russianpublic. . . . In all nationalities there are bad and ill-minded persons butthere is not, and cannot be, any bad and ill-minded nationality, forthis would abrogate the moral responsibility of the individual. . . . It isunjust to make the Jews responsible for those phenomena in their liveswhich are the result of thousands of years of persecution in Europe andof the abnormal conditions in which this people has been placed. . . . Thefact of belonging to a Semitic tribe and professing the Mosaic creed isnothing prejudicial and cannot of itself serve as a basis for anexceptional civil position of the Jews, as compared with the Russiansubjects of other nationalities and denominations. . . . The recognitionand application of these simple truths is important and is first of allnecessary for ourselves. The increased endeavor to kindle national andreligious hatred, which is so contradictory to the spirit ofChristianity and suppresses the feelings of justice and humaneness, isbound to demoralize society at its very root and bring about a state ofmoral anarchy, particularly so in view of the decline of humanitarianideas and the weakness of the principle of justice already noticeable inour life. For this reason, acting from the mere instinct of nationalself-preservation, we must emphatically condemn the anti-Semiticmovement not only as immoral in itself but also as extremely dangerousfor the future of Russia. "]

Solovyov addressed an impassioned appeal to Alexander III. , but receivedthrough one of the Ministers the impressive advice to refrain fromraising a cry on behalf of the Jews, under pain of administrativepenalties. In these circumstances, the plan of a public protest had tobe abandoned. Instead, the following device was resorted to as amakeshift. Solovyov's teacher of Jewish literature, F. Goetz, waspublishing an apology of Judaism under the title "A Word from thePrisoner at the Bar. " Solovyov wrote a preface to this little volume, and turned over to its author for publication the letters of Tolstoi andKorolenko in the defence of the Jews. No sooner had the book left thepress than it was confiscated by the censor, and, in spite of allpetitions, the entire edition of this innocent apology was thrown intothe flames. In this way the Russian Government succeeded in shutting themouths of the few defenders of Judaism, while according unrestrictedliberty of speech to its ferocious assailants. 

3. THE GUILDHALL MEETING IN LONDON

The cry of indignation against Jewish oppression, which had beensmothered in Russia, could not be stifled abroad. The Jews of Englandtook the initiative in this matter. On November 5, 1890, the London_Times_ published a letter from N. S. Joseph, honorary secretary to theRusso-Jewish Committee in London, passionately appealing to the publicmen of England to intercede on behalf of his persecuted coreligionists. The writer of the letter called attention to the fact that, while theRussian Government was officially denying that it was contemplating newrestrictions against the Jews, it was at the same time applying theformer restrictions on so comprehensive a scale and with suchextraordinary cruelty that the Jews in the Pale of Settlement were likea doomed prisoner in a cell with its opposite walls graduallyapproaching, contracting by slow degrees his breathing space, till theyat last immure him in a living tomb. 

The writer concludes his appeal in these terms:

 It may seem a sorry jest but the Russian law, in very truth, now declares: The Jew may live here only and shall not live there; if he lives here he must remain here; but wherever he lives he shall not live--he shall not have the means of living. This is the operation of the law as it stands, without any new edict. This is the sentence of death that silently, insidiously, and in the veiled language of obscurely worded laws has been pronounced against hundreds of thousands of human beings. . . . Shall civilized Europe, shall the Christianity of England behold this slow torture and bloodless massacre, and be silent?

The appeal of the Russo-Jewish Committee and the new gloomy tidings fromRussia published by the _Times_ decided a number of prominent Englishmento call the protest meeting which had been postponed half a yearpreviously. Eighty-three foremost representatives of English societyaddressed a letter to the Lord Mayor of London calling upon him toconvene such a meeting. The office of Lord Mayor at that time wasoccupied by Joseph Savory, a Christian, who did not share thesusceptibilities which had troubled his Jewish predecessor. Immediatelyon assuming office, Savory gave his consent to the holding of themeeting. 

On December 10, 1890, the meeting was held in the magnificent Guildhall, belonging to the City of London, and was attended by more than 2000people. The Lord Mayor who presided over the gathering endeavored in hisintroductory remarks to soften the bitterness of the protest for thebenefit of official Russia. 

 As I hear--he said--the Emperor of Russia is a good husband and a tender father, and I cannot but think that such a man must necessarily be kindly disposed to all his subjects. On his Majesty the Emperor of Russia the hopes of the Russian Jews are at the present moment fixed. He can by one stroke of his pen annul those laws which now press so grievously upon them and he can thus give a happy life to those Jewish subjects of his who now can hardly be said to live at all. 

In conclusion, the Lord Mayor expressed the wish that Alexander III. Maybecome the "emancipator" of the Russian Jews, just as his fatherAlexander II. Had been the emancipator of the Russian serfs. 

Cardinal Manning, the warm-hearted champion of Jewish emancipation, whowas prevented by illness from being present, sent a long letter whichwas read to the meeting. The argument against interfering with the innerpolitics of a foreign country, the cardinal wrote, had found its firstexpression in Cain's question, "Am I my brother's keeper?" There is aunited Jewish race scattered all over the world, and the pain inflictedupon it in Russia is felt by the Jewish race in England. It is wrong tokeep silent when we see six million men reduced to the level ofcriminals, particularly when they belong to a race "with a sacredhistory of nearly four thousand years. "

The speakers who followed the Lord Mayor pictured in vivid colors thepolitical and civil bondage of Russian Jewry. 

The first speaker, the Duke of Westminster, after recounting thesufferings of Russian Jewry, moved the adoption of the protestresolution, notwithstanding the fact that the "great protest of 1882"(at the Mansion House meeting)[1] had brought no results. "We read inthe history of the Jewish race that 'God hardened the heart of Pharaohso that he would not let the people of Israel go'; but deliverance cameat last by the hand of Moses. "

[Footnote 1: See p. 288 et seq. ]

After brilliant speeches by the Bishop of Ripon, the Earl of Meath, andothers, the following resolution was adopted:

 That in the opinion of this meeting the renewed sufferings of the Jews in Russia from the operation of severe and exceptional edicts and disabilities are deeply to be deplored, and that in this last decade of the nineteenth century religious liberty is a principle which should be recognized by every Christian community as among the natural human rights. 

At the same time a second resolution was adopted to the followingeffect:

 That a suitable memorial be addressed to his Imperial Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, respectfully praying his Majesty to repeal all the exceptional and restrictive laws and disabilities which afflict his Jewish subjects; and begging his Majesty to confer upon them equal rights with those enjoyed by the rest of his Majesty's subjects; and that the said memorial be signed by the Right Hon. The Lord Mayor, in the name of the citizens of London, and be transmitted by his Lordship to his Majesty. 

A few extracts from the memorandum may be quoted by way of illustratingthe character of this remarkable appeal to the Russian emperor:

 We, the citizens of London, respectfully approach your Majesty and humbly beg your gracious leave to plead the cause of the afflicted. 

 Cries of distress have reached us from thousands of suffering Israelites in your vast empire; and we Englishmen, with pity in our souls for all who suffer, turn to your Majesty to implore for them your Sovereign aid and clemency. 

 Five millions of your Majesty's subjects groan beneath the yoke of exceptional and restrictive laws. Remnants of a race, whence all religion sprung--ours and yours, and every creed on earth that owns one God--men who cling with all devotion to their ancient faith and forms of worship, these Hebrews are in your empire subject to such laws that under them they cannot live and thrive. . . . 

 Pent up in narrow bounds within your Majesty's wide empire, and even within those bounds forced to reside chiefly in towns that reek and overflow with every form of poverty and wretchedness; forbidden all free movement; hedged in every enterprise by restrictive laws; forbidden tenure of land, or all concern in land, their means of livelihood have become so cramped as to render life for them well-nigh impossible. 

 Nor are they cramped alone in space and action. The higher education is denied them, except in limits far below the due proportion of their needs and aspirations. They may not freely exercise professions, like other subjects of your Majesty, nor may they gain promotion in the Army, however great their merit and their valour. . . . 

 Sire! we who have learnt to tolerate all creeds, deeming it a principle of true religion to permit religious liberty, we beseech your Majesty to repeal those laws that afflict these Israelites. Give them the blessing of equality! In every land where Jews have equal rights, the nation prospers. We pray you, then, annul those special laws and disabilities that crush and cow your Hebrew subjects. . . . 

 Sire! your Royal Sister, our Empress Queen (whom God preserve!) bases her throne upon her people's love, making their happiness her own. So may your Majesty gain from your subjects' love all strength and happiness, making your mighty empire mightier still, rendering your Throne firm and impregnable, reaping new blessings for your House and Home. 

The memorial was signed by Savory, who was Lord Mayor at that time, andforwarded by him to St. Petersburg. It was accompanied by a letter, dated December 24, from the Lord Mayor to Lieutenant-General de Richter, aide-de-camp of the Tzar for the reception of petitions, with therequest to transmit the document to the emperor. 

It is almost unnecessary to add that this touching appeal for justice bythe citizens of London failed to receive a direct reply. There wererumors that the London petition threw the Tzar into a fury, and thefuture court annalist of Russia will probably tell of the scene thattook place in the imperial palace when this document was read. Anindirect reply came through the cringing official press. The mouthpieceof the Russian Government abroad, the newspaper _Le Nord_ in Brussels, which was especially engaged in the task of whitewashing the blackpolitics of its employers, published an article under the heading "ALast Word concerning Semitism, " in which the rancor of the highestGovernment circles in Russia found undisguised expression:

 The Semites--quoth the semi-official organ with an impudent disregard of truth--have never yet had such an easy life in Russia as they have at the present time, and yet they have never complained so bitterly. There is a reason for it. It is a peculiarity of Semitism: a Semite is never satisfied with anything; the more you give him the more he wishes to have. 

In the evident desire to fool its readers, _Le Nord_ declared that theprotesters at the London meeting might have saved themselves the troubleof demanding "religious liberty" for the Jews--which in the Londonpetition was understood, of course, to imply civil liberty for theprofessors of Judaism--since nobody in Russia restricted the Jews intheir worship. Nor did the civil disabilities weigh heavily upon theJews. On the contrary, they felt so happy in Russia that even the Jewishemigrants in America dreamt of returning to their homeland. 

4. THE PROTEST OF AMERICA

The same attitude of double-dealing was adopted by the smooth-tonguedRussian diplomats toward the Government of the United States. Arousedover the inhuman treatment of the Jews in Russia, and alarmed by theeffects of a sudden Russian-Jewish immigration to America, which wasbound to follow as a result of this treatment, the House ofRepresentatives adopted a resolution on August 20, 1890, requesting thePresident--

 To communicate to the House of Representatives, if not incompatible with the public interests, any information in his possession concerning the enforcement of proscriptive edicts against the Jews in Russia, recently ordered, as reported in the public press; and whether any American citizens have, because of their religion, been ordered to be expelled from Russia, or forbidden the exercise of the ordinary privileges enjoyed by the inhabitants. 

In response to this resolution, President Harrison laid before Congressall the correspondence and papers bearing on the Jewish question inRussia. [1]

[Footnote 1: The material was printed as _Executive Document_ No. 470, dated October 1, 1890. It reproduced all the documents originallyembodied in _Executive Document_ No. 192 (see above, p. 294, n. 1), inaddition to the new material. ]

A little later, on December 19 of the same year, the followingresolution of protest was introduced in the House of Representatives andreferred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs:

 _Resolved_, That the members of the House of Representatives of the United States have heard with profound sorrow, and with feelings akin to horror, the reports of the persecution of the Jews in Russia, reflecting the barbarism of past ages, disgracing humanity, and impeding the progress of civilization. 

 _Resolved_, That our sorrow is intensified by the fact that such occurrences should happen in a country which has been, and now is, the firm friend of the United States, and in a nation that clothed itself with glory, not long since, by the emancipation of its serfs and by its defense of helpless Christians from the oppression of the Turks. 

 _Resolved_, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Secretary of State, with a request that he send it to the American Minister at St. Petersburg, and that said Minister be directed to present the same to his Imperial Majesty Alexander III. , Czar of all the Russias. [1]

[Footnote 1:_Congressional Record_, Vol. 22, p. 705. --The resolutionwas reported back on February 5, 1891, in the following amended form(loc. Cit. , p. 2219):

_Resolved_, That the members of the House of Representatives of theUnited States have heard with profound sorrow the reports of thesufferings of the Jews in Russia; and this sorrow is intensified bythe fact that these occurrences should happen in a country which is, and long has been the friend of the United States, which emancipatedmillions of its people from serfdom, and which defended helplessChristians in the East from persecution for their religion; and weearnestly hope that the humanity and enlightened spirit then sostrikingly shown by His Imperial Majesty will now be manifested inchecking and mitigating the severe measures directed against men ofthe Jewish religion. ]

In the meantime the Department of State was flooded with protestsagainst the Russian atrocities. 

 Almost every day--Secretary of State, James G. Blaine, writes to Charles Emory Smith, United States Minister at St. Petersburg, on February 27, 1891--communications are received on this subject; temperate, and couched in language respectful to the Government of the Czar; but at the same time indicative and strongly expressive of the depth and prevalence of the sentiment of disaprobation and regret. [1]

[Footnote 1: _Foreign Relations of the United States_, 1891, p. 740. ]

The American Minister was therefore instructed to exert his influencewith the Russian Government in the direction of mitigating the severityof the anti-Jewish measures. He was to point out to the Russianauthorities that the maltreatment of the Jews in Russia was not purelyan internal affair of the Russian Government, inasmuch as it affectedthe interests of the United States. Within ten years 200, 000 RussianJews had come over to America, and continued persecutions in Russia werebound to result in a large and sudden immigration which was notunattended with danger. While the United States did not presume todictate to Russia, "nevertheless, the mutual duties of nations requirethat each should use his power with a due regard for the other and forthe results which its exercise produces on the rest of the world. " [1]

[Footnote 1: _Loc. Cit_. , p. 737. ]

The remonstrances of the American people which were voiced by theirrepresentatives at St. Petersburg were received by the RussianGovernment in a manner which strikingly illustrates the well-knownduplicity of its diplomatic methods. While endeavoring to justify itspolicy of oppression by all kinds of libellous charges against theRussian Jews, it gave at the same time repeated assurance to theAmerican Minister that no new proscriptive laws were contemplated, andthe latter reported accordingly to his Government. [1] On February 10, 1891, the American Minister, writing to Secretary Blaine, gives adetailed account of the conversation he had had with the RussianMinister for Foreign Affairs, de Giers. The latter went out of his wayto discuss with him unreservedly the entire Jewish situation in Russia, and, while making all kinds of subtle insinuations against the characterof the Russian Jew, he expressed himself in a manner which wascalculated to convince the American representative of the conciliatorydisposition of the Russian Government. [2] Less than three weeks laterfollowed the cruel expulsion edict against the Jews of Moscow. 

[Footnote 1: Compare in particular his dispatch, dated September 25, 1890, published in _Executive Document_ No. 470, p. 141. ]

[Footnote 2: _Foreign Relations_, 1891, p. 734. ]

While the Russian Government, abashed by the voices of protest, made aneffort to justify itself in the eyes of Europe and America and pervertedthe truth with its well-known diplomatic skill, the _Russkaya Zhizn_("Russian Life"), a St. Petersburg paper, which was far from beingpro-Jewish, published a number of heart-rending facts illustrating thetrials of the outlawed Jews at Moscow. It told of a young talented Jewwho maintained himself and his family by working on a Moscow newspaperand, not having the right of residence in that city, was wont to savehimself from the night raids of the police by hiding himself, on asignal of his landlord, in the wardrobe. Many Jews who lived honestly bythe sweat of their brow were cruelly expelled by the police when theircertificates of residence contained even the slightest technicalinaccuracy. By way of illustrating the "religious liberty" of the Jewsin the narrower sense of the word, the paper mentioned the fact thatafter the opening of the new synagogue in Moscow, which accommodatedfive hundred worshippers, the police ordered the closing of all theother houses of prayer, to the number of twenty, which had been attendedby some ten thousand people. 

The governor of St. Petersburg, Gresser, made a regularsport of taunting the Jews. One ordinance of his prescribedthat the signs on the stores and workshops belonging toJews should indicate not only the family names of theirowners but also their full first names as well as their fathers'names, exactly as they were spelled in their passports, "withthe end in view of averting possible misunderstandings. " Theobject of this ordinance was to enable the Christian publicto boycott the Jewish stores and, in addition, to poke fun atthe names of the owners, which, as a rule, were mutilatedin the Russian registers and passports to the point of ridiculousnessby semi-illiterate clerks. 

Gresser's ordinance was issued on November 17, 1890, afew days before the protest meeting in London. As theRussian Government was at that time assuring Europe thatthe Jews were particularly happy in Russia, the ordinancewas not published in the newspapers but nevertheless appliedsecretly. The Jewish storekeepers, who realized the maliciousintent of the new edict, tried to minimize the damage resultingfrom it by having their names painted in small letters so asnot to catch the eyes of the Russian anti-Semites. ThereuponGresser directed the police officials (in March 1891) to see toit that the Jewish names on the store signs should be indicated"clearly and in a conspicuous place, in accordance withthe prescribed drawings" and "to report immediately" tohim any attempt to violate the law. In this manner St. Petersburgreacted upon the cries of indignation which rang at thattime through Europe and America. 

CHAPTER XXIX

THE EXPULSION FROM MOSCOW

1. PREPARING THE BLOW

The year 1891 had arrived. The air was full of evil forebodings. In thesolitude of the Government chancelleries of St. Petersburg theanti-Jewish conspirators were assiduously at work preparing for a newblow to be dealt to the martyred nation. A secret committee attached tothe Ministry of the Interior, under the chairmanship of Plehve, wasengaged in framing a monstrous enactment of Jewish counter-reforms, which were practically designed to annul the privileges conferred uponcertain categories of Jews by Alexander II. The principal object of theproposed enactment was to slam the doors to the Russian interior, whichhad been slightly opened by the laws of 1859 and 1865, by withdrawingthe privilege of residing outside the Pale which these laws hadconferred upon Jewish first guild merchants and artisans, subject to anumber of onerous conditions. 

The first object of the reactionary conspirators was to get rid of those"privileged" Jews who lived in the two Russian capitals. In St. Petersburg this object was to be attained by the edicts of Gresser, referred to previously, which were followed by other similarly harassingregulations. In February, 1891, the governor of St. Petersburg orderedthe police "to examine the kind of trade" pursued by the Jewish artisansof St. Petersburg, with the end in view of expelling from the city andconfiscating the goods of all those who should be caught with articlesnot manufactured by themselves [1]. A large number of expulsion followedupon this order. The principal blow, however, was to fall in Moscow. 

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 170 et seq. , and p. 347 et seq. ]

The ancient Muscovite capital was in the throes of great changes. Thepost of governor-general of Moscow, which had been occupied by CountDolgoruki, was entrusted in February, 1891, to a brother of the Tzar, Grand Duke Sergius. The grand duke, who enjoyed an unenviable reputationin the gambling circles of both capitals, was not burdened by anyconsciously formulated political principles. But this deficiency wasmade up by his steadfast loyalty to the political and religiousprejudices of his environment, among which the blind hatred of Judaismoccupied a prominent place. The Russian public was inclined to attachextraordinary importance to the appointment of the Tzar's brother. Itwas generally felt that his selection was designed to serve as apreliminary step to the transfer of the imperial capital from St. Petersburg to Moscow, symbolizing the return "home"--to theold-Muscovite political ideals. It is almost superfluous to add that thecontemplated change made it necessary to purge the ancient capital ofits Jewish inhabitants. 

The Jewish community of Moscow, numbering some thirty thousand souls wholived there legally or semi-legally, had long been a thorn in the fleshof certain influential Russian merchants. The burgomaster of Moscow, Alexeyev, an ignorant merchant, with a very shady reputation, wasgreatly wrought up over the far-reaching financial influence of a localJewish capitalist, Lazarus Polakov, the director of a rural bank, withwhom he had clashed over some commercial transaction. Alexeyev was onlytoo grateful for an occasion to impress upon the highest Governmentspheres that it was necessary "to clear Moscow of the Jews, " who werecrowding the city, owing to the indulgence of Dolgoruki, the formergovernor-general. The reactionaries of Moscow and St. Petersburg joinedhands in the worthy cause of extirpating Judaism, and received theblessing of the head of the Holy Synod, Pobyedonostzev. Thisinquisitor-in-chief appointed Istomin, a ferocious anti-Semite, who hadbeen his general utility man at the Holy Synod, the bureau-manager ofthe new governor-general, and thus succeeded in establishing hisinfluence in Moscow through his acting representative who waspractically the master of the second capital. 

The secret council of Jew-haters decided to accomplish the Jewishevacuation of Moscow prior to the solemn entrance of Grand Duke Sergiusinto the city, either for the purpose of clearing the way for the newsatrap, or in order to avoid the unpleasantness of having his nameconnected with the first cruel act of expulsion. Pending the arrival ofSergius the administration of Moscow was entrusted to Costanda, thechief of the Moscow Military District, an adroit Greek, who was to beginthe military operations against the Jewish population. The first blowwas timed to take place on the festival of Israel's liberation fromEgyptian bondage, as if the eternal people needed to be reminded of thenew bondage and of the new Pharaohs. 

2. THE HORRORS OF EXPULSION

It was on March 29, 1891, the first day of the Jewish Passover, when inthe synagogues of Moscow which were filled with worshippers an alarmingwhisper ran from mouth to mouth telling of the publication of animperial ukase ordering the expulsion of the Jews from the city. Soonafterwards the horror-stricken Jews read in the papers the followingimperial order, dated March 28:

 Jewish mechanics, distillers, brewers, and, in general, master workmen and artisans shall be forbidden to remove from the Jewish Pale of Settlement as well as to come over from other places of the Empire to the City and Government of Moscow. 

This prohibition of settling in Moscow _anew_ was only one half of theedict. The second, more terrible half, was published on the followingday:

 A recommendation shall be made to the Minister of the Interior, after consultation with the Governor-General of Moscow, to see to it that measures be taken to the effect that the above-mentioned Jews should gradually depart from the City and Government of Moscow into the places established for the permanent residence of the Jews. 

At first sight it seemed difficult to realize that this harmless surfaceof the ukase, with its ambiguous formulation, [1] concealed a crueldecree ordering the uprooting of thousands of human beings. But thosewho were to execute this written law received definite unwritteninstructions which were carried out according to all the rules of thestrategic game. 

[Footnote 1: The Byzantine perfidy of this formulation lies in thephrase "above-mentioned Jews, " which gives the impression of referringto those that had "removed" to Moscow from other parts of the Empire, i. E. , settled there _anew_, whereas the real object of the law was toexpel _all_ the Jews of the "above-mentioned" categories of masterworkmen and artisans, even though they may have lived in the city formany years. This amounted to a repeal, illegally enacted outside theCouncil of State, of the law of 1865, conferring the right of universalresidence upon Jewish artisans. Moreover, the enactment was givenretroactive force--a step which even the originators of the "TemporaryRules" of May 3 were not bold enough to make. In distinction from theMay Laws, the present decree was not even submitted to the Council ofMinisters, where a discussion of it might have been demanded; it waspassed as an extraordinary measure, at the suggestion of the Ministry ofthe Interior represented by Durnovo and Plehve. This is indicated by theheading of the ukase: "The Minister of the Interior has applied mosthumbly to his Imperial Majesty begging permission to adopt the followingmeasures. " This succession of illegalities was to be veiled by theambiguous formulation of the ukase and the addition of the hackneyedstipulation: "Pending the revision of the enactments concerning the Jewsin the ordinary course of legislation. "]

The first victims were the Jews who resided in Moscow illegally orsemi-legally, the latter living in the suburbs. They were subjected to asudden nocturnal attack, a "raid, " which was directed by the savageCossack general Yurkovski, the police commissioner-in-chief. During thenight following the promulgation of the ukase large detachments ofpolicemen and firemen made their appearance in the section of the citycalled Zaryadye, where the bulk of the "illegal" Jewish residents werehuddled together, more particularly in the immense so-called GlebovYard, the former ghetto of Moscow. The police invaded the Jewish homes, aroused the scared inhabitants from their beds, and drove the semi-nakedmen, women, and children to the police stations, where they were kept infilthy cells for a day and sometimes longer. Some of the prisoners werereleased by the police which first wrested from them a written pledge toleave the city immediately. Others were evicted under a police convoyand sent out of the city like criminals, through the transportationprison. [1] Many families, having been forewarned of the impending raid, decided to spend the night outside their homes to avoid arrest andmaltreatment at the hands of the police. They hid themselves in theoutlying sections of the city and on the cemeteries; they walked or rodeall over the city the whole night. Many an estimable Jew was forced toshelter his wife and children, stiffened from cold, in houses of illrepute which were open all night. But even these fugitives ultimatelyfell into the hands of the police inquisition. 

[Footnote 1: Transportation prisons are prisons in which convictssentenced to deportation (primarily to Siberia) are kept pending theirdeportation. Such prisons were to be found in the large Russian centers, among them in Moscow. ]

Such were the methods by which Moscow was purged of its rightless Jewishinhabitants a whole month before Grand Duke Sergius made his entranceinto the city. The grand duke was followed soon afterwards, in the monthof May, by the Tzar himself, who stopped in the second Russian capitalon his way to the Crimea. A retired Jewish soldier was courageous enoughto address a petition to the Tzar, imploring him in touching terms toallow the former Jewish soldiers to remain in Moscow. The request of theJewish soldier met with a quick response: he was sent to jail andsubsequently evicted. 

The establishment of the new régime in Moscow was followed, inaccordance with the provisions of the recent ukase, by the "gradual"expulsion of the huge number of master workmen and artisans who hadenjoyed for many years the right of residence in that city and were nowsuddenly deprived of this right by a despotic caprice. The localauthorities included among the victims of expulsion even the so-called"circular Jews, " i. E. , those who had been allowed to remain in Moscow byvirtue of the ministerial circular of 1880, granting the right ofdomicile to the Jews living there before that date. This vast host ofhonest and hard-working men--artisans, tradesmen, clerks, teachers--wereordered to leave Moscow in three installments: those having lived therefor not more than three years and those unmarried or childless were todepart within three to six months; those having lived there for not morethan six years and having children or apprentices to the number of fourwere allowed to postpone their departure for six to nine months; finallythe old Jewish settlers, who had big families and employed a largenumber of workingmen, were given a reprieve from nine to twelve months. 

It would almost seem as if the maximum and minimum dates within eachterm were granted specifically for the purpose of yielding an enormousincome to the police, which, for a substantial consideration, couldpostpone the expulsion of the victims for three months and therebyenable them to wind up their affairs. At the expiration of the finalterms the unfortunate Jews were not allowed to remain in the city evenfor one single day; those that stayed behind were ruthlessly evicted. Aneye-witness, in summing up the information at his disposal, the detailsof which are even more heart-rending than the general facts, gives thefollowing description of the Moscow events:

 People who have lived in Moscow for twenty, thirty, or even forty years were forced to sell their property within a short time and leave the city. Those who were too poor to comply with the orders of the police, or who did not succeed in selling their property for a mere song--there were cases of poor people disposing of their whole furniture for one or two rubles--were thrown into jail, or sent to the transportation prison, together with criminals and all kinds of riff-raff that were awaiting their turn to be dispatched under convoy. Men who had all their lives earned their bread by the sweat of their brow found themselves under the thumb of prison inspectors, who placed them at once on an equal footing with criminals sentenced to hard labor. In these surroundings they were sometimes kept for several weeks and then dispatched in batches to their "homes" which many of them never saw again. At the threshold of the prisons the people belonging to the "unprivileged" estates--the artisans were almost without exception members of the "burgher class"--had wooden handcuffs put on them. . . . [1]

 It is difficult to state accurately how many people were made to endure these tortures, inflicted on them without the due process of law. Some died in prison, pending their transportation. Those who could manage to scrape together a few pennies left for the Pale of Settlement at their own expense. The sums speedily collected by their coreligionists, though not inconsiderable, could do nothing more than rescue a number of the unfortunates from jail, convoy, and handcuffs. But what can there be done when thousands of human nests, lived in for so many years, are suddenly destroyed, when the catastrophe comes with the force of an avalanche so that even the Jewish heart which is open to sorrow cannot grasp the whole misfortune?. . . . 

 Despite the winter cold, people hid themselves on cemeteries to avoid jail and transportation. Women were confined in railroad cars. There were many cases of expulsions of sick people who were brought to the railroad station in conveyances and carried into the cars on stretchers. . . . In those rare instances in which the police physician pronounced the transportation to be dangerous, the authorities insisted on the chronic character of the illness, and the sufferers were brought to the station in writhing pain, as the police could not well be expected to wait until the invalids were cured of their chronic ailments. Eye-witnesses will never forget one bitterly cold night in January, 1892. Crowds of Jews dressed in beggarly fashion, among them women, children, and old men, with remnants of their household belongings lying around them, filled the station of the Brest railroad. Threatened by police convoy and transportation prison and having failed to obtain a reprieve, they had made up their mind to leave, despite a temperature of thirty degrees below zero. Fate, it would seem, wanted to play a practical joke on them. At the representations of the police commissioner-in-chief, the governor-general of Moscow had ordered to stop the expulsions until the great colds had passed, but . . . The order was not published until the expulsion had been carried out. In this way some 20, 000 Jews who had lived in Moscow fifteen, twenty-five, and even forty years were forcibly removed to the Jewish Pale of Settlement. 

[Footnote 1: Under the Russian law (compare Vol. I, p. 308, n. 2)burghers are subject to corporal punishment, whereas the higherestates, among them the merchants, enjoy immunity in thisdirection. ]

3. EFFECT OF PROTESTS

All these horrors, which remind one of the expulsion from Spain in 1492, were passed over in complete silence by the Russian public press. Thecringing and reactionary papers would not, and the liberal papers couldnot, report the exploits of the Russian Government in their war againstthe Jews. The liberal press was ordered by the Russian censor to refrainaltogether from touching on the Jewish question. The only Russian-Jewishpress organ which, defying the threats of the censor, had dared to fightagainst official Russian Judaeophobia, the _Voskhod_, had beensuppressed already in March, before the promulgation of the Moscowexpulsion edict, "for the extremely detrimental course pursued by it. " Asimilar fate overtook the _Novosti_ of St. Petersburg which had printeda couple of sympathetic articles on the Jews. 

In this way the Government managed to gag the independent press on theeve of its surprise attack upon Moscow Jewry, so that everything couldbe carried out noiselessly, under the veil of a state secret. Fortunately, the foreign press managed to unveil the mystery. TheGovernment of the United States, faced by a huge immigration tide fromRussia, sent in June, 1891, two commissioners, Weber and Kempster, tothat country. They visited Moscow at the height of the expulsion fever, and, travelling through the principal centers of the Pale of Settlement, gathered carefully sifted documentary evidence of what was beingperpetrated upon the Jews in the Empire of the Tzar. 

While decimating the Jews, the Russian Government was at the same timeanxious that their cries of distress should not penetrate beyond theRussian border. Just about that time Russia was negotiating a foreignloan, in which the Rothschilds of Paris were expected to take a leadingpart, and found it rather inconvenient to stand forth in the eyes ofEurope as the ghost of medieval Spain. It was this consideration whichprompted the softened and ambiguous formulation of the Moscow expulsiondecree and made the Government suppress systematically all mention ofwhat happened afterwards. 

Notwithstanding these efforts, the cries of distress were soon heard allover Europe. The Russian censorship had no power over the public opinionoutside of Russia. The first Moscow refugees, who had reached Berlin, Paris, and London, reported what was going on at Moscow. Already inApril, 1891, the European financial press began to comment on the factthat "the Jewish population of Russia is altogether irreplaceable inRussian commercial life, forming a substantial element which contributesto the prosperity of the country, " and that, therefore, "the expulsionof the Jews must of necessity greatly alarm the owners of Russiansecurities who are interested in the economic progress of Russia. " Soonafterwards it became known that Alphonse de Rothschild, the head of thegreat financial firm in Paris, refused to take a hand in floating theRussian loan of half a billion. This first protest of the financial kingagainst the anti-Semitic policy of the Russian Government produced asensation, and it was intensified by the fact that it was uttered inFrance at a time when the diplomats of both countries were preparing tocelebrate the Franco-Russian alliance which was consummated a few monthsafterwards. 

The expulsion from Moscow found a sympathetic echo on the other side ofthe Atlantic. President Harrison took occasion, in a message toCongress, to refer to the sufferings of the Jews and to the probableeffects of the Russian expulsions upon America:

 This Government has found occasion to express in a friendly spirit, but with much earnestness, to the Government of the Czar its serious concern because of the harsh measures now being enforced against the Hebrews in Russia. By the revival of anti-Semitic laws, long in abeyance, great numbers of those unfortunate people have been constrained to abandon their homes and leave the Empire by reason of the impossibility of finding subsistence within the Pale to which it is sought to confine them. The immigration of these people to the United States--many other countries being closed to them--is largely increasing, and is likely to assume proportions which may make it difficult to find homes and employment for them here and to seriously affect the labor market. It is estimated that over 1, 000, 000 will be forced from Russia within a few years. The Hebrew is never a beggar; he has always kept the law--life by toil--often under severe and oppressive restrictions. It is also true that no race, sect, or class has more fully cared for its own than the Hebrew race. But the sudden transfer of such a multitude under conditions that tend to strip them of their small accumulations and to depress their energies and courage is neither good for them nor for us. 

 The banishment, whether by direct decree or by not less certain indirect methods, of so large a number of men and women is not a local question. A decree to leave one country is in the nature of things an order to enter another--some other. This consideration, as well as the suggestion of humanity, furnishes ample ground for the remonstrances which we have presented to Russia; while our historic friendship for that Government cannot fail to give assurance that our representations are those of a sincere well-wisher. [1]

[Footnote 1: Third Annual Message to Congress by President Harrison, December 9, 1891, _Messages and Papers of the Presidents_, Vol. IX, p. 188. ]

The sentiments of the American people were voiced less guardedly in aresolution which was passed by the House of Representatives on July 21, 1892:

 _Resolved_, That the American people, through their Senators and Representatives in Congress assembled, do hereby express sympathy for the Russian Hebrews in their present condition, and the hope that the Government of Russia, a power with which the United States has always been on terms of amity and good will, will mitigate as far as possible the severity of the laws and decrees issued respecting them, and the President is requested to use his good offices to notify the Government of Russia to mitigate the said laws and decrees. [1]

[Footnote 1: _Congressional Record_, Vol. 23, p. 6533. ]

The highly-placed Jew-baiters of St. Petersburg were filled with rage, The _Novoye Vremya_ emptied its invectives upon the _Zhydovski_financiers, referring to the refusal of Alphonse de Rothschild toparticipate in the Russian loan. Nevertheless, the Government founditself compelled to stem the tide of oppression for a short while. 

We have already had occasion to point out that the Government hadoriginally planned to reduce the Jewish element also in the city of St. Petersburg, whose head, the brutal Gresser, had manifested his attitudetoward the Jews in a series of police circulars. Following upon thefirst raid of the Moscow police on the Jews, Gresser ordered hisgendarmes to search at the St. Petersburg railroad stations for allJewish fugitives from that city who might have ventured to flee to St. Petersburg, and to deport them immediately. In April there werepersistent rumors afloat that the Government had decided to remove bydegrees all Jews from St. Petersburg and thus make both Russian capitals_judenrein_. The financial blow from Paris cooled somewhat the ardor ofthe Jew-baiters on the shores of the Neva. The wholesale expulsions fromSt. Petersburg were postponed, and the Russian anti-Semites were forcedto satisfy their cannibal appetite with the consumption of Moscow Jewry, whose annihilation was carried out systematically under the cover ofbureaucratic secrecy. 

4. POGROM INTERLUDES

Under the effect of the officially perpetrated "legal" pogroms littleattention was paid to the street pogrom which occurred on September 29, 1891, in the city of Starodub, in the government of Chernigov, recallingthe horrors of the eighties. Though caused by economic factors, thepogrom of Starodub assumed a religious coloring. The Russian merchantsof that city had long been gnashing their teeth at their Jewishcompetitors. Led by a Russian fanatic, by the name of Gladkov, theyforced a regulation through the local town-council barring all businesson Sundays and Christian holidays. The regulation was directed againstthe Jews who refused to do business on the Sabbath and the Jewishholidays, and who would have been ruined had they also refrained fromtrading on Sundays and the numerous Greek-Orthodox holidays, thusremaining idle on twice as many days as the Christians. The Jewsappealed to the governor of Chernigov to revoke or at least to mitigatethe new regulation. The governor's decision fell in favor of the Jewswho were allowed to keep their stores open on Christian holidays fromnoon-time until six o'clock in the evening. The reply of the localJew-baiters took the form of a pogrom. 

On Sunday, the day before Yom Kippur, when the Jews opened their storesfor a few hours, a hired crowd of ruffians from among the local streetmob fell upon the Jewish stores and began to destroy and loot whatevergoods it could lay its hands on. The stores having been rapidly closed, the rioters invaded the residences of the Jews, destroying the propertycontained there and filling the streets with fragments of brokenfurniture and leathers from torn bedding. The plunderers were assistedby the peasants who had arrived from the adjacent villages. In theevening, a drunken mob, which had assembled on the market-place, laidfire to a number of Jewish stores and houses, inflicting on their ownersa loss of many millions. 

All this took place during the holy Yom Kippur eve. The Jews, who didnot dare to worship in their synagogues or even to remain in theirhomes, hid themselves with their wives and children in the garrets andorchards or in the houses of strangers. Many Jews spent the night in afield outside the city, where, shivering from cold, they could watch theglare of the ghastly flames which destroyed all their belongings. Thepolice, small in numbers, proved "powerless" against the huge hordes ofplunderers and incendiaries. On the second day, the pogrom was over, thework of destruction having been duly accomplished. The subsequentjudicial inquiry brought out the fact clearly that the pogrom had beenengineered by Gladkov and his associates, a fact of which the localauthorities could not have been ignorant. Gladkov fled from the city butreturned subsequently, paying but a slight penalty for his monstrouscrime. 

It should be added, however, that the Government was greatly displeasedwith the reappearance of the terrible spectre of 1881, as it only tendedto throw into bolder relief the policy of legal pogroms by which WesternEurope was alarmed. As a matter of fact, already in October, thesemi-official _Grazhdanin_ had occasion to print the following newsitem:

 Yesterday [October 15] the financial market [abroad] was marked by depression; our securities have fallen, owing to new rumors concerning alleged contemplated measures against the Jews. 

Commenting upon this, the paper declared that these rumors were entirelyunfounded, for the reason that "at the present time all our Governmentdepartments are weighed down with problems of first-rate nationalimportance which brook no delay, [1] and they could scarcely find timeto busy themselves with such matters as the Jewish question, whichrequires mature consideration and slow progress in action. "

[Footnote 1: The paper had in mind the crop failures of that year andthe famine which prevailed in consequence in the larger part of Russia. ]

The subdued tone adopted by Count Meshcherski, the court journalist, wasonly partially in accord with the facts. He was right in stating thatthe terrible country-wide distress had compelled the deadly enemies ofJudaism to pause in the execution of their entire program. But he forgotto add that the one clause of that program, the realization of which hadalready begun--the expulsion from Moscow--was being carried into effectwith merciless cruelty. The huge emigration wave resulting from thisexpulsion threw upon the shores of Europe and America the victims ofpersecution who re-echoed the cries of distress from the land of theTzars. 

Soon afterwards a new surprise, without parallel in history, was sprungupon a baffled world: the Russian Government was negotiating with theJewish philanthropist Baron Hirsch concerning the gradual removal of thethree millions of its Jewish subjects from Russia to Argentina. 

CHAPTER XXX

BARON HIRSCH'S EMIGRATION SCHEME ANDUNRELIEVED SUFFERING

1. NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT

Towards the end of the eighties the plan of promoting Jewish emigrationfrom Russia, which had been abandoned with the retirement of CountIgnatyev, was again looked upon favorably by the leading Governmentcircles. The sentiments of the Tzar were expressed in a marginal notewhich he attached to the report of the governor of Podolia for the year1888. The passage of the report in which it was pointed out that "theremoval of the Jewish proletariat from the monarchy would be verydesirable" was supplemented in the Tzar's handwriting by the words "andeven very useful. " In reply to the proposal of the governor of Odessa todeprive Jewish emigrants of the right to return to Russia, the Tzaranswered with a decided "yes. " The official Russian chronicler goes evenso far as to confess "that it was part of the plan to stimulate theemigration of the Jews (as well as that of the German colonists) by amore rigorous enforcement of the military duty "--a design which, fromthe political point of view, may well be pronounced criminal and whichwas evidently at the bottom of the severe military fines imposed uponthe Jews. The same open-hearted chronicler adds:

 It may be easily understood how sympathetically the Government received the proposal of the Jewish Colonization Association in London, which had been founded by Baron de Hirsch in 1891, to remove, in the course of twenty-five years, 3, 250, 000 Jews from Russia. [1]

[Footnote 1: This figure represents the official estimate of thenumber of Russian Jews. In other words, the Government hoped to getrid of all Jews. ]

The name of Maurice de Hirsch was not unknown to the Russian Government. For a few years previously it had had occasion to carry on negotiationswith him, with results of which it had scant reason to boast. This greatGerman-Jewish philanthropist, who was resolved to spend hundreds ofmillions on the economic and agricultural advancement of hisco-religionists in Eastern Europe, had donated in 1888 fifty millionfrancs for the purpose of establishing in Russia arts and craftsschools, as well as workshops and agricultural farms for the Jews. Itwas natural for him to assume that the Russian Government would only betoo glad to accept this enormous contribution which was bound tostimulate productive labor in the country and raise the welfare of itsdestitute masses. But he had forgotten that the benefits expected fromthe fund would accrue to the Jewish proletariat, which, according to thecatechism of Jew-hatred, was to be "removed from the monarchy. " Thestipulation made by the Russian Government to the representatives ofBaron Hirsch was entirely unacceptable: it insisted that the moneyshould not be handed over to Jewish public agencies but to the RussianGovernment which would expend it as it saw fit. Somebody conceived theshameful idea, which was accepted by the representatives of BaronHirsch, of propitiating Pobyedonostzev by a gift of a million francs forthe needs of his pet institution, the Greek-Orthodox parochial schools. The "gift" was accepted, but Hirsch's proposal was declined. Thus itcame about that the Russian Jews were deprived of a network of modelschools and educational establishments, while a million of Jewish moneywent to swell the number of the ecclesiastic Russian schools whichimbued the Russian masses with crass ignorance and anti-Semiticprejudices. The Hirsch millions, originally intended for Russia, wentpartly towards the establishment of Jewish schools in Galicia, a workwhich met with every possible encouragement from the AustrianGovernment. 

The generous Jewish philanthropist now realized that the assistance hewas anxious to render to his Russian coreligionists could not take theform of improving their condition in their own country but rather thatof settling them outside of it--by organizing the emigration movement. Hirsch's attention was called to the fact that, beginning with 1889, several groups of Russian Jews had settled in Argentina and, afterincredible hardships, had succeeded in establishing there severalagricultural colonies. The baron sent an expedition to Argentina, underthe direction of Professor Loewenthal, an authority on hygiene, for thepurpose of investigating the country and finding out the places fit forcolonization. The expedition returned in March, 1891, and Hirsch decidedto begin with the purchase of land in Argentina, in accordance with therecommendations of the expedition. 

This happened at the very moment when the Moscow catastrophe had brokenout, resulting in a panicky flight from "Russia to North and SouthAmerica, and partly to Palestine. Baron Hirsch decided that it was hisfirst duty to regulate the emigration movement from Russia, and he madeanother attempt to enter into negotiations with the Russian Government. With this end in view he sent his representative to St. Petersburg, theEnglishman Arnold White, a Member of Parliament, belonging to theparliamentary anti-alien group, who was opposed to foreign immigrationinto England, on the ground of its harmful effect upon the interests ofthe native workingmen. Simultaneously White was commissioned to travelthrough the Pale of Settlement and find out whether it would be possibleto obtain there an element fit for agricultural colonization inArgentina. 

White arrived in St. Petersburg in May and was received byPobyedonostzev and several Ministers. The martyrdom of the Moscow Jewswas then at its height. Shouts of indignation were ringing through theair of Europe and America, protesting against the barbarism of theRussian Government, and the latter was infuriated both by these protestsprotests and the recent refusal of Rothschild to participate in theRussian loan. The high dignitaries of St. Petersburg who had beendisturbed in their work of Jew-baiting by the outcry of thecivilized world gave full vent to their hatred in theirconversations with Baron Hirsch's deputy. White reportedafterwards that the functionaries of St. Petersburg had paintedto him the Russian Jew as "a compound of thief and usurer. "Pobyedonostzev delivered himself of the following malicious observation:"The Jew is a parasite. Remove him from the living organism in which andand on which he exists and put this parasite on a rock--and he willdie. " While thus justifying before the distinguished foreigner theirsystem of destroying the five million Jewish "parasites, " the RussianMinisters were nevertheless glad to lend a helping hand in removing themfrom Russia, on condition that in the course of twelve years alarge part of the Jews should be transferred from the country--in theconfidential talks with White three million emigrants werementioned as the proposed figure. White was furnished withletters of recommendation from Pobyedonostzev and the Minister ofthe Interior to the highest officials in the provinces, whither the London delegate betook himself to get acquainted withthe living export material. He visited Moscow, Kiev, Berdychev, Odessa, Kherson, and the Jewish agricultural colonies in South Russia. 

After looking closely at Jewish conditions, White became convinced thatthe perverted type of Jew which had been painted to him in St. Petersburg "was evolved from the inner consciousness of certain orthodoxstatesmen, and has no existence in fact. " Wherever he went he saw menwho were sober, industrious, enterprising business men, efficientartisans, whose physical weakness was merely the result of insufficientnourishment. His visit to the South-Russian colonies convinced him ofthe fitness of the Jews for colonization. 

 In short--he writes in his report--if courage--moral courage, --hope, patience, temperance are fine qualities, then the Jews are a fine people. Such a people, under wise direction, is destined to make a success of any well-organized plan, of colonization, whether in Argentina, Siberia, or South Africa. 

On his return to London, White submitted a report to Baron Hirsch, stating the above facts, and also pointing out that the assistance whichshould he rend red to the emigration work by the Russian Governmentought to take the form of granting permission to organize in Russiaemigration committees, of relieving the emigrants of the passporttax, [1] and of allowing them free transportation up to the Russianborder. 

[Footnote 1: The tax levied on passports for travelling abroad amountingto fifteen rubles ($7. 50). ]

2. THE JEWISH COLONIZATION ASSOCIATION AND COLLAPSEOF THE ARGENTINIAN SCHEME

White's report was discussed by Baron Hirsch in conjunction with theleading Jews of Western Europe. As a result, the decision was reached toestablish a society which should undertake on a large scale thecolonization of Argentina and other American territories with RussianJews. The society was founded in London in the autumn of 1891, under thename of the Jewish Colonization Association (JCA), in the form of astock company, with a capital of fifty million francs which was almostentirely subscribed by Baron Hirsch. White was dispatched to St. Petersburg a second time to obtain permission for organizing theemigration committees in Russia and to secure the necessary privilegesfor the emigrants. The English delegate, who was familiar with the frameof mind of the leading Government circles in Russia, unfolded beforethem the far-reaching plans of Baron Hirsch. The Jewish ColonizationAssociation was to transplant 25, 000 Jews to Argentina in the course of1892 and henceforward to increase progressively the ratio of emigrants, so that in the course of twenty-five years, 3, 250, 000 Jews would betaken out of Russia. 

This brilliant perspective of a Jewish exodus cheered the hearts of theneo-Egyptian dignitaries. Their imagination caught fire. When thequestion came up before the Committee of Ministers, the Minister of theNavy, Chikhachev, proposed to pay the Jewish Colonization Association abonus of a few rubles for each emigrant and thus enable it to transferno less than 130, 000 people during the very first year, so that thecontemplated number of 3, 250, 000 might be distributed evenly overtwenty-five years. A suggestion was also made to transplant the Jewswith their own money, i. E. , to use the residue of the Jewish meat taxfor that purpose, but the suggestion was not considered feasible. Theofficial chronicler testifies that "the fascinating proposition of BaronHirsch appeared to the Russian Government hardly capable ofrealization. " Nevertheless, prompted by the hope that at least part ofthe contemplated millions of Jews would leave Russia, the Governmentsanctioned the establishment of a Central Committee of the JewishColonization Association in St. Petersburg, with branches in theprovinces. It further promised to issue to the emigrants free of chargepermits to leave the country and to relieve them from military duty oncondition that they never return to Russia. 

In. May, 1893, the constitution of the Jewish Colonization Associationwas ratified by the Tzar. At that time the emigration tide of theprevious year was gradually ebbing. The flight from Russia to North andSouth America had reached its climax in the summer and autumn of 1891. The expulsion from Moscow as well as alarming rumors of imminentpersecutions, on the one hand, and exaggerated news about the plans ofBaron Hirsch, on the other, had resulted in uprooting tens of thousandsof people. Huge masses of refugees had flocked to Berlin, Hamburg, Antwerp, and London, imploring to be transferred to the United States orto the Argentinian colonies. Everywhere relief committees were beingorganized, but there was no way of forwarding the emigrants to their newdestination, particularly to Argentina, where the large territoriespurchased by Hirsch were not yet ready for the reception of colonists. Baron Hirsch was compelled to send out an appeal to all Jewishcommunities, calling upon they to stem for the present this disorderlyhuman avalanche. 

Ere long Baron Hirsch's dream of transplanting millions of people withmillions of money proved an utter failure. When, after longpreparations, the selected Jewish colonists were at last dispatched toArgentina, it was found that the original figure of 25, 000 emigrantscalculated for the first year had shrunk to about 2500. Altogether, during the first three years, from 1892 to 1894, the Argentinianemigration absorbed some six thousand people. Half of these remained inthe capital of the republic, in Buenos Ayres, while the other halfmanaged to settle in the colonies, after enduring all the hardshipsconnected with an agricultural colonization in a new land and under newclimatic conditions. A few years later it was commonly realized that themountain had given birth to a mouse. Instead of the million Jews, asoriginally planned, the Jewish Colonization Association succeeded intransplanting during the first decade only 10, 000 Jews, who weredistributed over six Argentinian colonies. 

The main current of Jewish emigration flowed as heretofore in thedirection of North America, towards the United States and Canada. In thecourse of the year 1891, with its numerous panics, the United Statesalone absorbed more than 100, 000 emigrants, over 42, 000 of whomsucceeded in arriving the same year, while 76, 000 were held back invarious European centers and managed to come over the year after. Thefollowing two years show again the former annual ratio of emigration, wavering between 30, 000 to 35, 000. 

The same fateful year of 1891 gave rise to a colonization fever even inquiet Palestine. Already in the beginning of 1890 the Russian Governmenthad legalized the Palestinian colonization movement in Russia bysanctioning the constitution of the "Society for Granting Assistance toJewish Colonists and Artisans in Syria and Palestine, " which had itsheadquarters in Odessa. [1] This sanction enabled the _Hobebe Zion_societies which were scattered all over the country to group themselvesaround a legalized center and collect money openly for their purposes. The Palestinian propaganda gained a new lease of life. This propaganda, which was intensified in its effect by the emigration panic of the"terrible year, " resulted in the formation of a number of societies inRussia with the object of purchasing land in Palestine. In the beginningof 1891 delegates of these societies suddenly appeared in Palestine _enmasse_, and, with the co-operation of a Jaffa representative of theOdessa Palestine Society, began feverishly to buy up the land from theArabs. This led to a real estate speculation which artificially raisedthe price of land. Moreover, the Turkish Government became alarmed, andforbade the wholesale colonization of Jews from Russia. The result was afinancial crash. 

[Footnote 1: The first president of the Society was the exponent of theidea of "Antoemancipation, " Dr. Leon Pinsker, who occupied this postuntil his death, at the end of 1891. ]

The attempt at a wholesale immigration into destitute Palestine with itsprimitive patriarchal conditions proved a failure. During the followingyears the colonization of the Holy Land with Russian Jews proceededagain at a slow pace. One colony after another rose gradually intobeing. A large part of the old and the new settlers were under thecharge of Baron Rothschild's administration, with the exception of twoor three colonies which were maintained by the Palestine Society inOdessa. It was evident that, in view of the slow advance of thePalestinian colonization, its political and economic importance for theRussian-Jewish millions was practically nil and that its only advantageover and against the American emigration day in its spiritualsignificance, in the fact that on the historic soil of Judaism therethere rose into being a small Jewish center with a purer nationalculture than was possible in the Diaspora. This idea was championedby Ahad Ha'am[1], the exponent of the neo-Palestine movement, who hadmade his first appearance in Hebrew literature in 1889 and in ashort time forged his way to the front. 

[Footnote 1: "One of the People, " the Hebrew pen-name of AsherGinzberg. ]

3. CONTINUED HUMILIATIONS AND DEATH OF ALEXANDER III. 

In the meantime, in the land of the Tzars events went their own course. The Moscow tragedy was nearing its end, but its last stages were markedby scenes reminiscent of the times of the inquisition. After banishingfrom Moscow the larger part of the Jewish population, thegovernor-general, Grand Duke Sergius, made up his mind to humble theremaining Jewish population of the second Russian capital so thoroughlythat its existence in the center of Greek Orthodoxy might escape publicpublic notice. The eyes of the Russian officials at Moscow were offendedby the sight of the new beautiful synagogue structure which had beenfinished in the fateful year of the expulsion. At first, orders weregiven to remove from the top of the building the large cupola cappedby the Shield of David, which attracted the attention of allpassers-by. Later on, the police, without any further ado, shutdown the synagogue, in which services had already begun to be held, pending the receipt of a new special permit to re-open it. Rabbi Minorof Moscow and the warden of the synagogue addressed a petition tothe governor-general, in which they begged permission to holdservices in the building, the construction of which had been dulysanctioned by the Government, pointing to the fact that Judaism wasone of the religions tolerated in Russia. In answer to theirpetition, they received the following stern reply from St. Petersburg, dated September 23, 1892:

 His Imperial Majesty, after listening to a report of the Minister of the Interior concerning the willful opening of the Moscow Synagogue by Rabbi Minor and Warden Schneider, was graciously pleased to command as follows:

 _First_. Rabbi Minor of Moscow shall be dismissed from his post and transferred for permanent residence to the Pale of Jewish Settlement. 

 _Second_. Warden Schneider shall be removed from the precincts of Moscow for two years. 

 _Third_. The Jewish Synagogue Society shall be notified that, unless, by January 1, 1893, the synagogue structure will have been sold or transformed into a charitable institution, it will be sold at public auction by the gubernatorial administration of Moscow. 

The rabbi and the warden went into exile, while the dead body of themurdered synagogue--its structure--was saved from desecration by placingin it one of the schools of the Moscow community. 

The fight against the places of Jewish worship was renewed by the policea few years later, during the reign of Nicholas II. The principalsynagogue being closed, the Jews of Moscow were compelled to holdservices in uncomfortable private premises. There were fourteen housesof prayer of this kind in various parts of the city, but, on the eve ofthe Jewish Passover of 1894, the governor-general gave orders to closenine of these houses, so that the religious needs of a community of tenthousand souls had to be satisfied in five houses of worship, situatedin narrow, unsanitary quarters. The Government had achieved its purpose. The synagogue was humbled into the dust, and its sight no longeroffended the eyes of the Greek-Orthodox zealots. The Jews of Moscow wereforced to pour out their hearts before God in some back yards, in thestuffy atmosphere of private dwellings. As in the days of the Spanishinquisition, these private houses of worship would, on the solemn daysof Rosh ha-Shanah and Yom Kippur, be stealthily visited by the"marranos" of Moscow, those Jews who had saved themselves from thewholesale expulsions by fictitious conversion to Christianity. Thepassionate prayers of repentance of these involuntary apostates rose upto heaven as they had done in centuries gone-by from the undergroundsynagogues of Seville, Toledo, and Saragossa. 

By and by, the attempt to take the Jewish citadel by storm gave way tothe former regular state of siege, which had for its object to starveout the Jews. The municipal counterreform of 1892 dealt a severepolitical blow to Russian Jewry. Under the old law, the number of Jewishaldermen in the municipal administration had been limited to one-thirdof the total number of aldermen, aside from the prohibition barring theJews from the office of burgomaster [1]. Notwithstanding theserestrictions, the Jews played a conspicuous part in municipalself-government, and could boast of a number of prominent municipalworkers. This activity of the Jews went against the grain of theinquisitorial trio, Pobyedonostzev, Durnovo, and Plehve, and theydecided to bar the Jews completely from participation in the municipalelections. 

[Footnote 1: See p. 198 et seq. ]

The reactionary, anti-democratic "Municipal Regulation" of 1892proclaimed publicly this new Jewish disfranchisement. The new lawdeprived the Jews of their right of passive and active election to themunicipal Dumas, merely granting the local administration the right to_appoint_ at its pleasure a number of Jewish aldermen, not to exceedone-tenth of the total membership of the Duma. Moreover, these Jewishaldermen "by the grace of the police" were prohibited from serving onthe executive organs of the Duma, the administrative council, and thevarious standing committees. As a result, even there where the Jewsformed sixty and seventy per cent of the total urban population, theironly representatives in the municipal administration were men who werethe willing tools of the municipal powers and who, moreover, werequantitatively restricted to five or ten per cent of the total number ofaldermen. 

In this wise, the law providing for an inverse ratio of popularrepresentation came into effect: four-fifths of the population werelimited to one-tenth of the number of aldermen, while one-fifth of itwere granted nine-tenths of aldermen in the city government. The lawseemed to tell the Jews: "True, in a given city you may form theoverwhelming majority of tax-payers, yet the city property shall not bemanaged by you but by the small Christian, minority which shall do withyou as it pleases. "

It goes without saying that the Christian minority, which was notinfrequently hostile to the Jews, managed the city affairs in a mannersubversive of the interests of the majority. Even the imposts on specialJewish needs, such as the meat and candle tax, were often used by thethe municipal Dumas towards the maintenance of institutions and schools toto which Jews were admitted in an insignificant number or not admitted atat all. This condition of affairs was in full accord with the medievalmedieval Church canons: A Jew living in a Christian country has no right toto dispose of any property and must remain in slavish subjection to hishis Christian fellow-citizens. 

A number of laws passed during that period are of such a nature as toadmit of but one explanation, the desire to insult and humiliate the Jewand to brand him by the medieval Cain's mark of persecution. The law, issued in 1893, "Concerning Names" threatens with criminal prosecutionthose Jews who in their private life call themselves by names differingin form from those recorded in the official registers. The practice ofmany educated Jews to Russianize their names, such as Gregory, insteadof Hirsch, Vladimir, instead of Wolf, etc. , could now land the culpritsin prison. It was even forbidden to correct the disfigurements to whichthe Jewish names were generally subjected in the registers, such asYosel, instead of Joseph; Srul, instead of Israel; Itzek, instead ofIsaac, and so on. In several cities the police brought action againstsuch Jews "for having adopted Christian names" in newspaperadvertisements, on visiting cards, or on door signs. 

The new Passport Regulation of 1894 orders to insert in _all_ Jewishpassports a physical description of their owners, even in the case oftheir being literate and, therefore, being able to affix their signatureto the passport, whereas such description was omitted from the passportsof literate Christians. In some places the police deliberately tried tomake the Jewish passports more conspicuous by marking on them thedenomination of the owner in red ink. Even in those rare instances inwhich the law was intended to bring relief, the Government managed toemphasize its hostile intent. The law of 1893, legalizing the Jewishheder and putting an end to the persecutions, which this traditionalJewish school had suffered at the hands of the police, narrowed at thesame time its function to that of an exclusively religious institutionand indirectly forbade the teaching in it of general secular subjects. There are cases on record in which the keepers of these heders, theso-called melammeds, were put on trial for imparting to their pupils aknowledge of Russian and arithmetic. 

However, the most effective whip in the hands of the Government remainedas theretofore the expulsion from the governments of the interior. In1893, this whip cracked over the backs of thousands of Jewish families. Durnovo, the Minister of the Interior, issued a circular, repealing theold decree of 1880, which had sanctioned the residence outside the Paleof Settlement of all those Jews who had lived there previously. [1] Thatdecree had been prompted by the motive to prevent the complete economicruin of the Jews who were settled in places outside the Pale and hadcreated there industrial enterprises. But such a motive, which even theanti-Semitic Ministry of Tolstoi had not been bold enough to disregard, did not appeal to the new Hamans. Many thousands of Jewish families, whohad lived outside the Pale for decades, were threatened with exile. Thedifficulties attending the execution of this wholesale expulsion forcedthe Government to make concessions. In the Baltic provinces thebanishment of the old settlers was repealed, while in the Great Russiangovernments it was postponed for a year or two. 

[Footnote 1: Compare p. 404. ]

There was a particularly spiteful motive behind the imperial ukase of1893, excluding the Crimean resort place Yalta from the Pale ofSettlement, [1] and ordering the expulsion from there of hundreds offamilies which were not enrolled in the local town community. Noofficial reason was given for this new disability, but everybody knewit. In the neighborhood of Yalta was the imperial summer residenceLivadia, where Alexander III. Was fond of spending the autumn, and thiscircumstance made it imperative to reduce the number of the local Jewishresidents to a negligible quantity. To avert the complete ruin of thevictims, many were granted reprieves, but after the expiration of theirterms they were ruthlessly deported. The last batches of exiles weredriven from Yalta in the month of October and in the beginning ofNovember, 1894, during the days of public mourning for the death ofAlexander III. On October 20, the Tzar was destined to die in theneighborhood of the town which was purged of the Jewish populace for hisbenefit. While the earthly remains of the dead emperor were carried onthe railroad tracks to St. Petersburg, trains filled with Jewishrefugees from Yalta were rolling on the parallel tracks, speedingtowards the Pale of Settlement. 

[Footnote 1: The Crimean peninsula, forming part of the government ofTavrida, is situated within the Pale. ]

Such was the symbolic _finale_ of the reign of Alexander III. Whichlasted fourteen years. Having begun with pogroms, it ended withexpulsions. The martyred nation stood at the threshold of the new reignwith a silent question on its lip: "What next?"