Body found
Andrei Yustschinsky
|
The Kievskaya Mysl (Kiev Thought) gave the following report at the time about
the discovery of the body: "When the body of the unfortunate boy was carried out
of the pit, the crowd shuddered, and sobbing could be heard. The aspect of the
slain victim was terrible. His face was dark blue and covered with blood, and a
several windings of a strong cord, which cut into the skin, were wrapped around
the arms. There were three wounds on the head, which all came from some kind of
piercing tool. The same wounds were also on the face and on both sides of the
neck. When the boy's shirt was lifted up, the chest, back, and abdomen showed
the same piercing wounds. There were two stab wounds in the region of the heart,
three on the body and several on the sides. The entire body showed approximately
twenty wounds. All of the wounds were apparently inflicted upon the naked body,
since the shirt showed no tears. The exposure of these wounds excited the
greatest outrage among the crowd."
The forensic medical autopsy found 47 piercing and cutting (336) wounds; the
wounds on the head, left temple (1) and neck had produced the fatal
exsanguination; the loss of blood had been so considerable that the body was
close to being empty of blood.
The physicians rendering their expert opinions, the University professor,
lecturer for forensic Medicine, Obolonski and the prosector at the same
professorship, Tufanov, reached the following conclusions:
1. All of the wounds found on the body
of Yustschinsky
were produced while he was alive. Of these wounds, those on the head and
neck were inflicted during full cardiac activity, while all other wounds were
inflicted while cardiac activity was considerably reduced.
2. Likewise, the hands of the boy were bound and the mouth kept closed while he
was living.
3. While these wounds were being inflicted upon him, he was in a vertical (that
is, standing) position, with somewhat of an inclination toward the left.
4. A stabbing or piercing object served as the instrument which made the wounds.
A portion of the wounds were executed by means of an instrument in the form of
an awl or of a stiletto of flat, rectangular shape with an edge of two sides
sharpened like a chisel. All other wounds could also have been produced by the
same instrument. The first piercing wounds were inflicted upon the boy in the
head and neck, and the final ones were inflicted in the heart. With one of the
heart-stabs, the blade penetrated the body up to the grip, which left behind an
impression on the skin.
5. There had to have been several
persons who participated in this crime.
6. The type of the instrument and the multiplicity of the wounds suggest that
one of the goals of the murderers was to cause as much agonizing pain to
Yustschinsky as possible.(337)
7. There was not more than 1/3 of the entire amount of blood which remained in
the body itself; the greatest portion of the blood escaped through the veins of
the brain, the arteries at the left temple, and the neck veins.
8. The absence of traces of blood in the ditch where the body was discovered,
its situation at the place of discovery, and other circumstances suggest that
Yustschinsky was slain at another location and only afterwards dragged into the
pit in a condition of rigor mortis and leaned up against its wall, and that
therefore the place of discovery is not the scene of the crime. -- (We are
reminded of Xanten, Skurz, Konitz, etc.)
Based upon these determinations, another expert, the psychiatrist Professor
Sikorski, distinguished three peculiarities which preceded the murder: the
gradual withdrawal of blood, the causing of special torments, and last of all
the murder by a stab to the heart. The latter followed after the victim had
served [his purpose] for the first two goals (withdrawal of blood, as an object
for torturing) and when the nearness of death was recognized by the murderers.
-- By the circumstance that all wounds
were cold-bloodedly produced by a sure and calm hand, by a hand which was
accustomed to the slaughtering of animals, Professor
Sikorski
saw in the technique of this murder an indication that
the possibility of such an exact, emotionless and unhurried work was secured
for the murderers in corresponding manner, and he came to the conclusion that
the slaying of Yustschinsky represented an act which was carefully prepared
and which was carried out according to plan under cautious supervision!
The murder excited the public attention of all of Russia -- all the more, when
similar events were known from the past, which showed a striking conformity with
the existing case.
On 13 May 1911, the Russian Duma was forced to occupy itself with an
interpellation which concerned this murder of a boy and which contained the
question as to whether the existence of a 'sect' which employed human blood was
known to the government, and what it (338) was considering doing to suppress
this 'sect.' The interpellations had enclosed a detailed autopsy report in the
matter of the murder of the boy Emelyanov which occurred in 1893, from which it
clearly emerged that this victim had been murdered according to every rule of
ritual-slaughter. -- The reply of the Duma has not become known. At the last
Russian trial concerning the attempted murder of the boy Vinzens Grudsinskoi,
which had been committed on the night of 2 March (!) 1900, the Ministry of
Justice had ordained that questions of ritual-murder were not to be raised! The
people, in any case, were convinced that this most recent murder was also a link
in the chain of crimes which were all carried out according to a definite system
and for a particular purpose.
The Murderers
Immediately after announcement of the
crime, the Jewish press displayed an extremely suspicious activity; the Kiev
Jewish paper Kievskaya
Mysl
never grew tired of continually labeling for the court new, naturally non-Jewish
persons as the indubitable murderers. In fact, they managed, merely on the basis
of information from a press-Jew, to accuse the mother of the murdered boy of the
gruesome crime and to put her under lock and key -- she was not allowed to take
part even in the burial of her child! We are reminded by this of the
entirely similar kind of events in Polna! -- After some time the tormented
mother was again set free, since not the slightest suspicion for her guilt had
resulted. Then again, suspicion was directed upon the step-father, who was
supposed to have committed the murder in order to free himself from his
obligation to support [the child], and then, finally, upon other relatives of
the murdered boy. This all happened at the instigation of the press-Jew
Borchevsky, who had a compliant instrument in the corrupted police chief
Mischtschuk. As then later emerged from the speech of the prosecutor, "Mischtschuk
had been ordered to believe, and he did believe; he believed that the mother
(339) inflicted 47 stab wounds on her child and got rid of him in a sack(2). . .
The inquiries were not made there, -- which would have been necessary -- at the
place where the corpse had been discovered, but on the contrary, at a distance
of a mile away from it! Mischtschuk was publicly accused of corruption -- he
stepped down! As official of the investigation "a new power" appeared "from
outside" -- the method is sufficiently familiar [to us]! -- the Commissar
Kunzevitch; he preferred to stay in the Grand hotel of Kiev and to place his
name merely among press reports. He too was bought! Then the "secret policeman"
Krazovski entered the picture, "an able person, who not only was capable of
exposing the crime, but also certainly did actually expose it, yet found
advantage for himself in keeping to himself his knowledge of the decisive pieces
[of evidence]"(3). . .With that, judgement is expressed concerning these kind of
'investigations,' which merely pursued the goal, in alliance with the Jewish
press, of drawing away from the tracks of the actual murderers, of gaining time
and hopelessly confusing the entire affair, so that even non-Jewish newspapers
finally produced completely distorted reports.
But they had not reckoned with the youth of Kiev, "who, stirred within by the
crime, held it to be his duty to help with the solution of the case. I am proud
to name Golubov. He distinguished himself from the other parties by the fact
that he really honorably, unselfishly dedicated himself to the mission, and had
to put up with the mockery and the laughter, indeed, the danger to his life from
the Jews. (4)"
The student
Golubov,
named in the speech of the prosecutor, acquired great merit in throwing light
upon the crime by taking on the investigation of the case on his own initiative,
and had discovered important facts. As a result, however, he exposed
himself to the concentrated attacks of Jewish rats as an unintended recognition
of his activity, an (340) activity which, to be sure, did not move along in the
paths of the professional officials of the investigation prescribed by Jewry.
On the edge of the city of Kiev was located the brickyard of the Jew Zaitsev,
with the clay quarry belonging to it. A Jewish hospital, whose dining hall had
been converted into a 'prayer room' by getting around legal restrictions, was
later erected on the property in 1910. Frequently rabbis were observed there,
the whole place -- as the "religious center" of the Jews of Kiev -- was
enveloped with a mystery, according to the words of the prosecutor. The Jew
Mendel Beilis had been appointed as "guard and attendant." The inhabitants of
the territory around the brickyard could be counted on the fingers; only two
non-Jews lived at some distance from the kiln; in its vicinity lived a circle of
seven Jewish families.
Although the property could have been cordoned off and searched very easily
without a large police team immediately after the discovery of the body in the
clay pit, nothing of the sort happened. It was striking that on the day of the
murder, the 12th of March, no work was performed in the brickyard. The property
there was deserted. Work was taken up again just afterwards. The inner walls of
a shed of the brickyard were suddenly given a new coat of whitewash. . .
The people knew for a long time where
the murderers were to be found -- in spite of the tactics of confusion of the
Jewish press. Quite striking, if not to say incriminating, was the
behavior of the baptized Jew Breitmann, the publisher of the Jewish paper
Poslyednich novostyey, which sought to divert the ever thickening suspicion from
the brickyard, to gypsies who were travelling nearby. In his nervous activity,
one mistake slipped by him: he accused the gypsies of the blood-superstition!
The populace had a sharp ear and asked ironically -- according to the words of
the prosecutor -- "How can you believe in the use of blood by the Jews, while a
former Jew points at the gypsies, among whom a blood-superstition is supposed to
exist? Let one note: no Russian is pointing at them, but a baptized Jew!"
In July 1911 four months after the crime, the investigation official Krasovski
now also casually got into the brickyard (341) of Zaitsev, spoke with the
manager and held some sort of superficial search, only to appease public opinion
or to warn the Jews. He also visited Mendel Beilis, at whose place he found
nothing at all suspicious, however.
Now the local gendarmerie -- just as in the Polna case -- acted on their own
initiative. On 22 July, (older calendar) [Note: The use of the Julian calendar
persisted in some European countries for some time after the Gregorian calendar
had been generally accepted and in use by most of the rest of the continent.]
Beilis was arrested. Russian sources wrote the following: "The excitement of the
populace of Kiev due to the mysterious slaying of the boy Yustschinsky is
growing ever greater in extent, all the more, when it turned out that the
judicial authorities had to release the relatives of the murdered boy from
investigative custody again, who had been accused of being the actual murderers
by several Jews, because not the slightest suspicion of guilt could be brought
against them. On the contrary, they
proceeded to the arrest of the Jew
Beilis.
. .The Jew Beilis
received, shortly before the discovery of the murder, the visit of numerous
Austrian(5) Jews. The points of suspicion against the Jews are so
extraordinarily weighty, and the entire Christian press of Kiev and Petersburg,
as of other large cities, urges that in this case complete clarity be procured,
so that finally it can be absolutely determined whether there are really sects
among the Jews which commit acts of murder from religious reasons. . ."
Krasovski, who had for a long time complete and exact information about
everything, now feared losing his criminalist laurels -- possibly he only wanted
to extort larger sums from his Jewish wire-pullers -- and unexpectedly gave the
explanation that the murder of the boy had occurred neither at the place where
the body was found, nor in the presence of his accused mother, but that the boy
probably had been dragged away onto the broken clay by the attendant Mendel
Beilis! Actually, the Jews concluded a financial arrangement with Krasovski, the
typically corrupt Tsar's official, after the arrest of Beilis. . ."They had not
believed it possible that matters would be taken so far against them! I do not
deny, the legal position of the Jews is a difficult one, their destiny (342) is
to a certain extent a tragic one, yet we are all under the influence of Jewish
ideas, of Jewish money, of the Jewish press. The press, ostensibly Russian,
became the booty of the Jews. Any sort of steps [taken] against the Jews evokes
the invectives: 'reactionary,' 'enemy of progress' ! The Jews are judicially
without rights, but in reality they have all of Russia in their hands. The
promise has come into its fulfillment. We all feel that we are under the yoke of
all-powerful Jewry. We may be called enemies of progress and obstructionists,
but we cannot close our eyes to the corpse of Yustschinsky! The Jews accuse us
of inciting the people against them; but that they themselves want to keep the
peace! They know that Beilis is guilty, and because of that they seek to confuse
the case, to put it on a false track."(6) -- At Beilis's, notes were found
which, among others, listed a Faivel Schneerson. Therewith surfaces behind the
accused the fearful shape of the 'Zaddik': ("Saint") of the Hassidim, who is to
be seen as spiritus rector [guiding spirit] also of this blood-murder!
Schneerson out of Lubovitschy, "at whose name
Beilis a family of kosher butchers
the accused Beilis
constantly becomes uneasy and wipes the sweat from his brow, while his defense
counsel also immediately display an increased activity" (7), comes from an old
Hassidic family in Russia, from which come several
schächter
[ritual-slaughterers] and murderers; the 'Zaddik'
is the "Übermensch
[super-man] of Hassidism, who occupies almost the same position as Jesus Christ
in Christianity," is "sanctified from his mother's womb," i.e., the secret of
the ritual-slaughter is passed down from father to son(8). "He crawls out of his
mother's womb as completed 'Zaddik'"
(Bogrow).
(343) According to the information of
Theodor Fritsch, a
Salomon Schneerson was
condemned to death in 1797 due to a blood-murder proven in all details, brought
in chains to Petersburg, but here freed thanks to his influential tribal comrade Petretz. A grandson of Salomon Schneerson, Mendel Schneerson, was involved in a
blood-murder trial in 1852 in Saratov. In December 1852, the boy Chestobitov,
and in January 1853 likewise a youth, Masslov, both from the poorest classes of
Russia, had been kidnapped in the government capital city of Saratov. Their
bodies, with countless wounds, were later washed up on the banks of the Volga;
both showed signs of circumcision. After proceedings had been tried, the trial
had to be postponed for years, just in 1860 -- therefore after eight years
(respectively, seven years), of four strongly incriminated Jews, among them
Mendel
Schneerson, three were supposed to be sent into exile to Siberia, from
which their allegedly poor condition of health was spared, however. According to
information in the Jewish Lexicon, the Alliance Israélite Universelle intervened
with the Russian envoy in Paris in favor of the "unjustly condemned Jews"(9).
The chief accused left prison already in 1867 at the instigation of the all too
well known Crémieux, the specialist for that kind of trial, since merely
"superstitious motives" were accepted! A son of this Mendel, Shalom-Bähr, was
held to be a Hassidic 'prophet' to whom the Jews made pilgrimages, his brother
Bunya filled the office of ritual-slaughterer.
His nephew, finally, was that
Faivel who, as was proven, stayed with Mendel
Beilis, then mysteriously
disappeared, but immediately surfaced again when the danger seemed eliminated
for himself personally -- in order to present himself as a witness! "One (344)
is allowed to assume that he knew more of the murder than all of those who
escaped with their lives know in totality. But it is pure irony to question the
man as a witness in this trial, instead of placing charges against him. His
statements will most certainly not betray anything," wrote Theodor Fritsch in
1913 in the Hammer(10).
". . .Like all those witnesses who escaped with their lives" -- what does this
mean?
We prod our memory, so poor in such matters, and find that in the Trent trial in
the year 1475, poison played a large role, and then, for example, in the great
Hilsner trial in Kuttenberg in Bohemia (1899) a witness (Marie Pernicek), who
had given very essential evidence under oath to the protocol, perished a short
time later under the most tortured symptoms of having been poisoned and thus had
been rendered 'harmless' forever!
In Kiev these things were repeated, only with the difference that international
Jewish criminality went to work still more thoroughly.
Next, a tribal comrade was gathered to his patriarchs -- a not entirely rare
phenomenon (Moses Abu-el-Afieh, Damascus; Samuel Rosenthal from Kamin), how
interesting and rewarding a task it would be for a criminalist to collect all
those cases for once, in which Jews who were held to be not completely
'reliable,' were 'liquidated' by other Jews for reasons of caution! -- The old
Jew Tartakovski, living as a sub-tenant with other Jews in the vicinity of the
brickyard, is supposed to have loved Andrusha very much -- possibly (certain
later statements indicate this) he warned the child, when the
schächter
Schneerson was staying with Mendel
Beilis, which
Tartakovski believed must be a
sign of impending disaster; in any case, directly after the death of Andrusha,
this Jew began to make confused speeches and very soon was found strangled!
The Cheberyakov family belonged to the few non-Jews who lived in the vicinity of
this miserable property: the (345) husband, by trade a telegraph official,
industrious, of unblemished reputation, as husband a pitiful figure -- his wife
all the more resolute and dubious -- who also maintained close relations with
the Jews. She invited her Jewish friends to small household entertainments, at
which her husband was made drunk for the enjoyment of those present -- so much
for this family Idyll! In any case, in their press, the Jews called this
remarkable woman a "Lady MacBeth" but treated her otherwise very considerately,
in conspicuous contrast to the other non-Jewish witnesses. One got the
impression as if they were not entirely certain whether it might not finally
occur to Mrs. Cheberyakov to say what she knew.
Witnesses
This woman was the mother of three children, a young boy (Zhenya) and two
girls (Valya and Ludmilla); early on the day of the murder, these three were
awakened in the absence of their mother by Andrusha; they should go
play with him in the clay pit.
Having arrived there, they were approached from behind by the attendant Mendel
Beilis. He seized the small Zhenya, who was able to tear himself loose, however,
and Andrusha. Meanwhile, two more Jews, among them the young Beilis, were added
to the group -- they had been stalking the children according to a plan! The
little Valya still saw how Andrusha was dragged to the brickyard. This happened
on the day of the murder, the 20th of March. These statements of the children
leaked out, although press and commissars had made an effort to take no notice
of this! The student Golubov had then questioned the children once again and
recorded their statements. On 22 July (old calendar)
Beilis
was finally arrested together with Mrs.
Cheberkov;
her children were from that time on for the most part entrusted to the
care of strange people.
After one week the little ones fell critically ill with symptoms of poisoning,
after the "secret commissar"
Krasovski
had "visited" them and brought them "pies"! Two children, Zhenya and
Valya, died in quick succession, while Ludmilla slowly recovered only after many
weeks -- according to reports by the press, the children died of "dysentery"!
Now the mother could be set free again -- the most important witnesses had been
eliminated, the surviving child, (346) not able to be questioned for a long
time, was besides under the influence of the dubious subject Krasovski.
Mother bribed
|
From the speech of the prosecutor, we wish to excerpt the following passage for
a closer illumination: ". . .There in Kharkov, in the salon of the great hotel,
the clinking of gold sounded, and under the sound of silver coins, the entire
investigation was running. This company [of people] which the journalists of a
Jewish paper have trained, who write so clairvoyantly about this trial, this
society wanted that Cheberyakova, after [drinking] champagne, should sign a
blank piece of paper which would then have contained her confession as
murderess. Cheberyakova turned down the proposal, despite having been assured of
a defense by the best advocates and a safe-conduct into foreign lands. And thus
this version, too -- how many is it now? -- has collapsed. . . "(12)
Cheberyakova therefore returned to Kiev and immediately had to watch her step,
although, as mentioned, she was treated with a certain respect.
Characteristically, (347) she broke off from her earlier Jewish dealings, she
seemed at last cured by the terrible events! Shortly after the death of both of
Cheberyakova's children, a stop was put to the plans of investigation official
Mischtschuk, who had conducted the trial five months long in entirely the wrong
direction. After his dismissal, he joined -- this may be taken as the conclusive
assessment of his person -- that circle of press-Jews who had made a
well-planned and expert investigation impossible from the beginning onwards.
Mischtschuk now declared publicly that there could no longer be ritual-murder in
the 20th century(!). He appeared before the court with new 'research,' from
which the perfect innocence of the Jews was supposed to follow; nonetheless, it
soon emerged that the former Commissar wished to lead the court astray with the
most crude distortions. It succeeded in making short work of him and his
accomplices in Kharkov. But only Mischtschuk himself was put in prison; with
him, one exponent of Jewry had left the stage!
The Beilis 'Trial' and the 'Intelligentsia of Europe'
Jew charged
At the beginning of 1912, charges were
finally filed against Beilis.
According to the Nordlivländischen Zeitung [North Livonian Times], in the
documents charging Belis it reads: "Beilis is accused, according to arrangement
with other still not discovered persons, with forethought, on the basis of
religious superstition for ritual purposes, of having seized the boy
Yustschinsky, who was playing with other children, and of having dragged him
into a factory building. Here his accomplices bound Yustschinsky's hands and
stuffed his mouth and killed him by 47 stab wounds in the head, neck, and body.
These woundings caused long and severe suffering and brought about a complete
exsanguination."
In this critical situation, the Kiev press-Jews indicated three non-Jews who
were supposed to have committed the murder, of which all details were given with
exactitude. Witnesses were also found who were prepared, after a substantial
fee, to swear to anything. But this diversionary maneuver was (348) so stupidly
contrived that these new Jewish machinations were soon seen through.
The proceedings against Beilis were not set for 29 May 1912. But once again
Jewry stepped in with a new, the seventh announcement, by which suspicion was
supposed to be directed toward a crime brotherhood. But with this, such
considerable "irregularities" were found on the side of even the new
investigation official, that he likewise had to be dismissed from the service
and the trial placed in other hands. These intrigues had at least the result
that the proceedings against Mendel Beilis were again postponed for about a full
year!
These maneuvers literally cost Jewry massive sums. Naturally, the German
intelligentsia was also mobilized -- when had it not been misused! -- On 23
March 1912 there appeared a "Declaration" in the notorious Berliner Tageblatt
[Berlin Daily] -- in the parlance of the people called "Jerusalemer Straßenblatt"
[Jerusalem Street Sheet], signed by perhaps 200 personalities completely unfit
to render an expert opinion on the question of ritual-murder, in which a
sharply-worded position was taken "against an insane belief, which attributes to
the Jews the use of human blood for ritual purposes." At the beginning, it
sounds at first almost completely rational: "Whether this Jew (Mendel Beilis) is
the murderer, concerning that we cannot judge. It would be illegitimate to
anticipate a legal proceeding still pending, and besides that, one pending in a
foreign state." In taking up the murder of Andrei Yustschinsky, however, it
continues on then with the well-known tirade: "The agitation of the streets (13)
has greedily snatched at this event and brazenly claimed that the
boy
Yustschinsky was slaughtered by Jews, in order to tap off his blood and to use
this blood for ritual purposes, in accordance with an allegedly Jewish religious
law. This madness, carried unscrupulously to the people, has again and again
called forth terrible consequences from the Middle Ages right down to the most
recent times. It has seduced the uneducated mass of the people [into committing]
gruesome massacres of the Jews, and crowds, led astray by this madness, have
(349) befouled themselves with the innocent blood of their fellow-man. And yet
never has the mere shadow of a proof for the justification of this insane belief
been produced. The most respected Christians knowledgeable about Jewish
scripture have shown absolutely, that at no time were the Jews ever incited to
the murder of their fellow-man by their religion.
We hold it to be the duty of everyone who has the moral progress of Man close to
his heart, to raise his voice against such pathetic craziness. We conclude with
a cry of warning to the most respected Russian (?) scholars, writers, and
artists, in the awareness that such a warning knows no boundary posts. It must
be a matter for the heart of the entire world of culture."
This article could just as well have had a Paul Nathan or a "famous writer" of
the same race, as clerical authors -- but it was signed by, besides a
half-hundred Christian theologians of all ranks, privy councillors, etc., among
others by Prince Heinrich of Schönaich-Carolath, Count Posadovsky, the Reichstag
President Kaempf, the Chief Reichstag Vice-President Paasche, who stated at a
military council in the Reichstag: "Things would go to the devil if Jews could
not be officers" -- moreover, he had a Jewish daughter-in-law -- , the second
Vice-President Dove, numerous members of the Reichstag, among them we note the
leader of the National Liberals, Bassermann, married to a Jewess, and the "Royal
Teacher and City School Councillor of Munich," Georg Kerschensteiner. Many
University professors came to help; thus we also find Werner Sombart, "Professor
at the Commercial College of Berlin," who besides saw to it that his letter
appeared in the same year (1912): The Future of the Jews, in which he first
takes on the causes of the hostile-to-Jews mood of this year in Russia and
reaches the remarkable determination that the mental and economic life of
Germany is already Jewish-permeated to a considerable degree. Although Sombart
now even admits, in further developing his theme, that the differences of blood
between Jews and Aryans are too great, he (350) nevertheless saw "in the Jewish
people, if we regard it as a whole, one of the most valuable types which
humankind has ever produced". . ."Which would have to give rise to powerful gaps
in the human world, if the Jewish type should disappear. . .We never want to
lose the deep, sad Jewish eyes (p. 57)." -- Without Jews, collapse of the
economy of the people! "We owe gratitude to Providence, for the not so sparse
proportion of Jewish elements. . .Especially since there, where we are most
purely German, is the Oriental part which with the Jews intrudes into our gray
Northland world, a true restorative. For we might perish, in the end, from pure
blondness. Regarded from the purely bodily aspect: what colorfulness the dark
Oriental type brings into our Northern environment! How should we want do
without the race of Judith and of Miriam" (p. 72 - oy veh, Herr Professor!).
"Also in the spiritual realm we might run the danger of suffocating from our
blondness, if we did not feel between us the hot Oriental souls of our
fellow-citizens." -- When Sombart now determines, that without a doubt there
exists a racial distinction between Aryans and Jews, and that on the other hand
the "Jewish people represents one of the most valuable types," then the only
logical conclusion which remains is that the Aryan part is the less valuable.
Actually, Sombart designates (p. 82) the non-Jewish of two competitors (for
professorships) as the stupider: "Since the Jews, on the average, are so much
more clever and industrious than we are." -- At the time of Sombart the
"cleverer" third of the teaching body of Breslau University already consisted of
-- Jews! This result, then, also means that "living together with the Jews is
rich in blessings for all"!
These are merely some informative samples from one letter of one of the leading
German national economists, which he -- probably by no means by accident, let
appear still, during the events in Kiev, and by no means as a parody but rather,
as Sombart himself emphasized, wished to have understood as an apologia, with
which he intended to step out of the reserve which he had imposed upon himself
in his book: Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben (1911) [The Jews and Economic
Life].
(351)The "living together rife with blessings for all segments [of the
populace]" was experienced in the following decades not by the representatives
of this intellectual direction, but by the non-Jewish corpus of the people in
probably the most horrible way, in their own bodies(14).
The Christian Theology Professor and Privy Church Councillor Dr. D. Rudolf
Kittel in Leipzig, Rosenthalgasse 13, likewise one of the subscribers, in his
letter originating in these years, Judenfeindschaft oder Gotteslästerung
[Hostility to the Jews or Blasphemy] (Leipzig, 1914), in which he took a
position as exponent of Judaism with extreme severity against Theodor Fritsch,
expressed, like Sombart, his "gratitude for that which we owe Israel." -- "This
gratitude will be powerful enough in any friend of the truth, to protect him
from this danger (i.e., of 'throwing a stone upon Israel')." In his concluding
remarks, Kittel blubbers on that "for their part, the German Jews are also
happily prepared to offer that upon the altar of the Fatherland, which Germany
demands from each of its citizens, and that the German Jews have rallied to the
flag in great numbers. . ." -- So it seemed in the head of that German
intelligentsia, who believed that they had to jump into the breach even for the
"Russian Jews"!
It was signed by -- to mention only a few more names -- furthermore, the actor
Albert Bassermann, Richard Dehmel, Rudolf Eucken, Jena, writer Herbert Eulenberg,
Berlin, Gerhart Hauptmann, Agnetendorf, Thomas Mann, Munich, Hermann Sudermann,
Berlin -- he had formerly been tutor in Jewish families and journalistic
colleague of the "estimable General of the Jewish Colonial Troops," Rickert,
(see Sudermann's Bilderbuch meiner Jugend [Picture Book of My Youth], 1922),
Ludwig Thoma, Munich, authoress Clara Viebig, and last but not least -- the
"Christian" Talmud translator and senior master at a girls' school, Professor
Dr. August Wünsche of Dresden, who on the occasion of the Tisza-Eszlár
ritual-murder trial of 1882 (352) had once already given testimony(15) against
the "blood-accusation of the Jews," just as the Privy Councillor Friedrich
Delitzsche, University professor, Berlin, whose father Franz Delitzsche (1890)
had likewise rendered an 'expert opinion' against the blood-accusation!(16)
The stereotypical phrases contained in this "Declaration" of a Jewish
loaf-about, like "Medieval madness," "leading astray," "craziness," "insane
belief," "moral progress," "persecution of the Jews," "innocent Jewish blood,"
"most respected scholars," "Christian scholars," "cultural world," and so forth,
have become wearisome for us -- nevertheless, their longevity seems to be
boundless, for the same old chestnuts, only a little up-dated, still adorn
today, in well-paid reanimation, the part of the world controlled by Jews -- and
that is not inconsiderable!
"Christians knowledgeable about the Jewish scriptures. . ." -- this is naturally
first and foremost meant to suggest August Wünsche and both Delitzsches; but we
already have gotten to know, among the 'experts' in Tisza-Eszlár, still one
other 'authority,' the Berlin University Professor Dr. Hermann Strack! This man
now added a "scientific expert opinion" concerning the ritual-murder question to
that declaration published in the Berlin Tageblatt, and then also sent to the
Russian authorities. -- In 1893, already Strack, who conducted a "Jewish
mission" as a specialty and from upon this sloping platform had already sunk to
the level of masterly advocate of Judaism, although allegedly Gentile himself,
had published a brochure: Die Juden, dürfen sie Verbrecher von Religions wegen
genannt werden? [The Jews, are they to be called criminals because of
religion?]; this letter is an exposition -- collected with highly suspicious
zeal -- of those kinds of petitions with which Strack had showered the courts
with the goal of making the blood-accusations raised against the Jews impossible
in the future by means of judicial decision, on account of insult to the Jewish
religious community -- which did not succeed, however! In 1900, the treatise Das
Blut im Glauben und Aberglauben der Menschheit(17) [Blood in the Faith and
Superstition of Humanity] followed, in a reworking of a letter in defense of his
beloved Judaism which had appeared in 1891.(17)
(353)The composition of the title already betrays the direction in which the
case is to be steered. "When the horrible human
butcherings of
Skurz,
Xanten,
Polna and
Konitz cried ever louder to Heaven, and no one whose eyes were open
was able any longer to doubt where the guilty were to be sought, there Strack
wrote a book to order, which was supposed to prove to the world the innocence of
the Jews in respect to all blood-murders."(18)
"Toward the completion of this work," (among others) the Jews Hirschfeld, Preuß,
Moritz Stern -- the 'revisor' of the Trent trial documents! -- and the Rabbi
Hoffmann, gave their suggestions so that the book, to which we shall have to
return once more in a special chapter, could then finally be found suitable by
the "Herr Professor Th. G. Masaryk in Prag" to be translated into
Czechoslovakian for getting the ritual-murderer Hilsner released! But the
craziest thing Strack himself did, when, for the convincing conclusion of his
work, he paraded a list several pages long of "pious" Jews as chief witnesses of
Jewish innocence, in addition to numerous Jewish "scholars," -- among whose fine
society Paul Nathan and the "missionary" Pieritz were to be found. (19)
Small wonder, that such a commissioned Christian Theology professor was then
able to act in times to follow as "expert witness" of the "Central Union of
German Citizens of the Jewish Faith" in numerous criminal trials against brave
German men, who had attempted to expose the teachings of the Talmud and thereby
suggest to the German people the inference to be drawn from these monstrosities,
as to the true character of the people belonging to it [i.e., the religion of
the Talmud]. Small wonder, also, that Strack then received his alloted place in
the "Hall of Honor" of the Jewish Philo-Lexikon (Handbuch des jüdischen Wissens
[Handbook of Jewish Knowledge], still in the year 1935 (!), as the "scientific
defender of Judaism"!
The court in Kiev was also supposed to be forced by Jewry to accept Professor
Strack as "expert witness," without an application for this having been made at
all by the Russian authorities! (354) The Hammer wrote this prophetic sentence
in response to these machinations(20): "Yet should the Russian court allow
itself to be coerced into accepting these expert witnesses, it will be very
ill-advised!"
Jew
Newspapers try to agitated Jews into killing potential witnesses
|
|
Go to Kiev/Page 2
Back to Table of Contents
Source 2
In Fall of 1913, thus after a two-year span of investigation, the proceedings
against Beilis were supposed to be opened. On 1 October 1913, (22) Theodor (355)
Fritsch addressed himself to this point: "In Kiev there sits a man, in
investigative custody for two years due to suspicion of having murdered a
twelve-year-old boy. There would be nothing special about this, since murders
happen in all times and in all countries. But this time there has to be
something special going on, because the entire cultural world has been stirred
into an uproar over the fate of this man. . .what could have awakened so much
sympathy for this ordinary human being? And how were the wise men in Germany,
England, and America -- without a closer knowledge of the situation -- able to
judge whether the man was guilty or not?. . .So there has to be a special
circumstance having to do with Beilis and his crime of murder, and in fact:
Beilis is no ordinary mortal, for he belongs to the 'Chosen People'. And his
crime of murder is also of a special type; there's no question of either a
robbery- or of a lust- murder. Therefore, because a Jew was accused of a serious
crime, for that reason the Jewry of the entire world exerts itself in order to
bring criminal justice to a standstill. " -- What had happened in the Kiev of
the 20th century was merely what the Jew Maier Balaban(23) described quite
frankly as already existing as the rule for relations in Lublin of the 16th
century: ". . .When that sort (i.e., ritual-murder) of trial was held in the
tribunal, the families of the accused, the seniors of the Jewish community, all
came to Lublin to assist their nearest and dearest. The seniors of the Lublin
community were first of all bombarded, . . in order to procure for (the accused)
at least the smaller comforts. (356) Patronages for the Schöffen [type of lay
judges, somewhat like American justices of the peace], for the executioners, for
the wardens, had to be gotten. They ran from judge to judge, they sought Jews at
the market who were acquainted with the judges, had business relationships with
them, were their lease-holders or creditors (!), and an effort was made, through
their mediation, to convince the judges of the innocence of the accused." -- But
the bribery money was raised by ruthless "contributions"!
The final attempt of Jewry to have Beilis declared ill and to get him out of
investigative custody, misfired because the physicians had determined that
Beilis was enjoying the best of health!
The Main Trial
The trial was now finally set, for 8 October 1913.
Jewry thereupon undertook a new "offensive," to hinder jurisdiction. In the
Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums, [General Times of Jewry](24) the Rabbi Ziegler
in Karlsbad issued the following "flaming appeal": "On the day of the opening of
the Beilis trial in Kiev, protest meetings should be held by the most respected
Jews and Christians in all cities and all communities of the world, to lodge a
protest against the affront which was done to Jewry, to the truth, and to
justice with this trial. Jews of all states, of all nations, get ready to
protest! Let no city, let no town be absent! Gather your best [people] around
me, ask noble, truth-loving Christians, theologians (!) as well as laity, to
stand beside you; this concerns the honor of that religion which Jesus, too,
loved with every fiber of his heart (!). The entire cultural world is united to
wash the shame of the Beilis trial from itself!" -- Who does not recall the
"appeal" of the chief Rabbi Güdemann in Vienna on the occasion of the Hilsner
trial in Kuttenberg in 1899, which likewise beseeched the non-Jews "in the names
of Christ and the Virgin Mary," to help an "honest, innocent" little Jew; an
appeal which was framed in total similarity in its content, and equally
scornful. (357)
Judah always knew how to begin -- some representatives of the "mobilized
cultural world" we have already introduced by their signatures [i.e., those
mentioned on p. 353]!
Blood Libel
|
But the President of the Reich Union of German Jews had become stupid from the
loud protests, and had the carelessness to state at a meeting: "As a consequence
of this accusation, not only Beilis, but all of the world's Jewry sits in the
dock. If Beilis is guilty, then we are all guilty."(26) Out of fear of ensuing
difficulties, perhaps, numerous Russian Jews let themselves be baptized. The
Lutheran pastor Pir in Helsingfors conducted a land office business, by making
out a baptismal certificate for anyone for a fee. The Russian government saw
itself forced to warn the police officials (358) against admission of these "Geschwindigkeitschristen"
["speeded-up Christians"] -- as the Hammer (27) named them -- into forbidden
areas!
Not fewer than 219 witnesses were
available during the 20 days of the trial.
Baldgrov
had the presidency of the court, while Prosecutor Fischer acted for the State.
Unfortunately, detailed reports like those that exist for other ritual-murder
trials, are missing; Jewry, for obvious reasons, had hindered an informative,
objective coverage.
Court loaded Jewish newspapers
Among the 44 representatives of the
press who were admitted, only a few non-Jews were to be found, according to
statements of one of the few Jew-free papers, the Petersburg
Zemschina!
Not only the entire press outside of Russia, but with few exceptions, even the
majority of Russian papers had been 'served' by Jewish correspondents. -- In
Kiev there was only a single paper whose publishers weren't Jews!
The Hammer, as the single German paper, was able to publish fragments from
reliable Russian sources at the end of the year 1913; the outbreak of the World
War prevented a detailed account of the trial from the protocols and
stenographic records, and after the war Judah 'liquidated' documents and
witnesses which had become dangerous for it. The Jewish terror during the trial
in Kiev is supposed to have overshadowed everything prior to it -- even the
events in Nyiregyháza in Hungary! Thus, witness testimony which was unfavorable
to the Jews was simply made unintelligible by means of continuous noise from the
galleries; it appeared that the court President did not work up the courage to
have these young Jews thrown out.
|
As we recall, Golubov had been been made to look like a true scoundrel in the Jewish press, while a non-Jewish voice (Novoya Vremya) described his appearance before the court in the following manner: "A hushed silence descended upon the courtroom when the witness Golubov appeared on the witness stand in his white student smock, a tall, gaunt figure with a youthfully fresh and peaceful, almost child-like facial expression, a youngster whom the leftist (read: Jewish!) press had described as an agitator, almost as a footpad [archaic term for a mugger], whereas he presented a thoroughly sympathetic appearance. Golubov delivered his testimony with great unbiased calmness and clarity. . ."
|
"Tell me, my child" -- so inquired the presiding judge Baldgrov -- "what you
know of the case!" And the girl related in the hushed courtroom: "Mama went out
up to the market. We were sleeping, Zhenya was sleeping, I was sleeping, and
Valya was sleeping. Then we heard someone call from the street: 'Zhenya, Zhenya!'
It was Andrusha, he was calling Zhenya, [telling him that] he should go with
him. Zhenya wanted to go and said I was supposed to look after the room, but I
said [that] Valya would cry. Then we all got dressed, locked the room, and went
playing on the broken clay. There were still other children there. Then Mendel
Beilis came running up behind us; we ran away from [him]. Mendel caught Zhenya
and Andrusha; Zhenya tore and tore, and tore himself loose, but Andrusha didn't;
Mendel and one other Jew held him by the hands. Also, the young Mendel was
there. Valya was scared and didn't run with us, but toward the other side; she
saw how they were dragging Andrusha to the kiln. I didn't see that, I saw how
they were dragging him off; that they were dragging him to the kiln, Valya told
me that."
(360)The Prosecutor: "Do you remember how Andrusha was found?" -- "I remember."
Prosecutor: "Why didn't you tell right away, what you are saying now?" -- "I was
at my grandma's, and later on they didn't ask me." Prosecutor: "How did you get
into the quarry?" -- "There was a hole in the fence." -- Prosecutor: "Were you
chased away from there sometimes?" -- "They chased us away because we did
damage; sometimes we ran through the bricks." Prosecutor: "Was Andrusha always
along?" -- "May God keep him, but this time he did come along." Prosecutor: "And
where was your father?" -- "He had to work." Prosecutor: "Were you [children] in
the habit of sometimes going to Beilis? " -- "We went with Zhenya after milk.
There were Jews there who were praying, or were doing some such thing -- I don't
know." The defense counsel for Beilis, Grusenberg, asked: "When Mama returned,
did you tell her what had happened?" -- "Yes, I told her." -- Karabatschevski
asked: "Did somebody give you a pie?" -- "Yes!" -- "And did you become sick from
it?" -- "We all became sick." -- "When did Valya die?" -- "One week after my
brother."
Ludmilla screwed her face up, tears were in her eyes. The presiding judge: "Why
are you crying?" -- "I'm scared," replied the girl!
Afraid
|
|
According to the testimony of this child, Andrusha had not been involved in the
tours of the children through the property of the brick works up till then. Now,
how did the -- according to the inquiries of the court -- painfully
conscientious, almost shy boy, who was at one time supposed to become a
clergyman, come to play hookey from his classes at the Sophie School and tramp
about on that fatal 20th of March, 1911?
According to the exposition of the State's Attorney, Fischer, a few days before
his death, the youngster had received a shotgun as a gift from the Jew Arendar,
who lived in the vicinity of the Cheberyakov family, and who had taken in the
Jew Tartakovski, who died suddenly under mysterious circumstances; beaming with
happiness, he had shown it to his siblings -- all that was missing was the
gunpowder, and that was the cleverly laid snare! A day before his death,
Andrusha told his mother that "good people" would buy him the gunpowder, on the
next day, he forgot about going to school because of it, in order to go to these
"good people". . .
A Jew with fox-red hair, who has remained unidentified, had observed every step
of the boy in his final hours; after the murder, he vanished without a trace;
the page in the list of houses where he would have had to be entered, was torn
out! Just as numerous foreign Jews, who -- according to the inquiries of the
State's Attorney -- had stopped on the day before the crime at the estate of
Zaitsev, were "as if blown away" again. The shed which had conspicuously been
suddenly whitewashed, was burned down three days before its appointed judicial
inspection! Fischer remarked at this: "This fire is one of the many Jewish
advantages we are up against in this trial; it is of help to them. . ."
|
The suspicion is confirmed by the Jews themselves, who immediately take in
hand defensive measures at the discovery [of such a crime]. -- Repeatedly,
stormy scenes resulted during the questioning of this expert, who participated
in the judicial proceedings in spite of a serious heart condition; he was
persistently interrupted by the attorneys of the Jewish party in a shameless
manner, and his giving of evidence made more difficult in every way. Thus, the
defender of the Jews Zarudny thought it necessary to take away his notes and
pages from the expert witness, so that Sikorski was obliged to give oral
testimony! "How much filth this man was pelted with. . .Other scholars whom we
have heard, have been more cautious; one of them, an attorney (!) of surgery,
compromised himself for the Jews. For this man, the puncture [wounds] were
inflicted upon Yustschinsky -- according to his opinion -- 'only as a jest,' and
[the rest of the testimony] of this expert could be filled in according to his
views: they [the wounds] have provided endless amusement for him. This expert. .
.differed from all other expert witnesses on a total of 25 points. Not only I,
but all of Russian society, knows what to think of this man." (29)
Against the psychiatrist Professor
Sikorski were also arrayed the Professors of
the religious academy in Kiev and Petersburg,
Hlogelev and
Troizki (baptized
Jews?), who, on the basis of Bible and Talmud denied categorically the
possibility of the use of human, and in particular Christian blood, by the Jews!
-- We thereby brush up against, once again, the 'Intelligentsia' of Europe:
"Almost no day goes by, without some sort or other of 'highly significant (363)
statement' not only of diplomats, men of science, etc., but also from bishops
(even from the 'reformed,' for example Dr. Desidor Baltazzar), cardinals,
nuncios, the generals of [monastic] orders, and the like. . . (30) In the
overcrowded Russian churches, however, "entire populations [i.e., of towns and
villages, etc.] prayed in common for the repayment of the murderers; a profound
stirring went through the Russian folk-soul."(31)
But Jewish megalomania had taken on unbearable proportions! The Russian paper
Druglavny orel copied the following excerpts from Jewish papers: "The fate of
the Russian people -- its future -- not merely in Russia, but in the entire
world -- now finds itself in the hands of twelve unenlightened Russian peasants.
These have challenged the great Jewish people. With a feeling of disgust,
gnashing our teeth with pain and humiliation, we take off the glove which has
been stained with our sacred blood (32)."
Gradually, the line was crossed into blunt threats: "The Russian government has
resolved to deliver up the Jewish people in Kiev to a general slaughter. Upon
the outcome of this titanic struggle depends the fate -- you believe, of the
Jewish people -- oh, no! -- the Jewish people is unconquerable -- the fate of
the Russian State is at stake: To be or not to be? That is the question for it.
The victory of the Russian government is the beginning of its end. There is no
way out for it. Take note of it!. . ."
Or: "In Kiev, we will show before the eyes of the entire world, that the Jews
cannot be trifled with." -- "If Jewry, up until now, has for tactical reasons
concealed the fact that it has held the leadership of the Russian Revolution, so
now, after the staging of the Kiev trial, an end must come to that. Let the
outcome of this trial be what it will, for the Russian government there is no
(364) salvation. So Jewry has decided, and thus will it happen. . ."
And thus will it happen: Five years later, the Romanovs met their end in the
Ipatyev House at Ekaterinburg by the hands of their Jewish executioners -- their
ashes were scattered to the winds! [Not literally true of all the remains;
forensic anthropologists identified the skulls of several members of the Romanov
family, some seventy years after their slaughter by the Jews. But these remains
were obscurely buried under rubble and might well have been lost to posterity,
had it not been for a combination of pure chance and the persistence of those
who cherished the memories of the Romanov family as symbolic of the Old Russia
which Jewish Bolshevism had murdered along with the Tsar and his family.] The
Elders of Zion had already decided upon this -- according to the excerpted press
citations -- in 1913, in the year of the Beilis trial!
Another Jewish paper called upon the Jews of all nations to boycott the Russian
state bonds on all the stock exchanges, to depress the currency, in order to
intimidate in this way the Russian government!(33) In Berlin, the Jew Oppenheim,
by profession a college teacher in the capital city of the Reich, raged that
Mendelssohn must stop all credit for Russia. . .It's unnecessary to go into the
role of the Rothschilds again! It would still be, at best, a curious
circumstance, to relate that the London Rothschild (Lionel Walter, a 'Lord')
turned to the then State Secretary of the Pope, Merry del Val, with the "very
humble request for merciful protection for my persecuted comrade in the faith,
for the defense of the truth and justice." In his humble petition, he enclosed a
certified copy of the papal brief of Innocent IV which dealt with protection of
the Jews!(34) It is known by far too few that the "Miracle Monk," Rasputin, this
demonic instrument in Jewish hands, also took a direct influence upon the course
and outcome of this trial. According to the words of his Jewish "secretary,"
Aron Simanovitch, Rasputin declared categorically to the Justice Minister
Cheglovitov: "You will surely lose the trial. Nothing will come of it!" -- Even
before the trial, Rasputin had prophesied the acquittal of the Jew, but
Cheglovitov was "dismissed"!(35)
17 million
(365) The
Beilis trial is supposed to have cost the Jews 17 million Rubles.
"Some kind of invisible power directs these machinations, an invisible hand
disperses money to cover up the murder. . ."(36) -- But to the dubious Vyera
Cheberyakova in Kharkov, 40,000 Rubles were "offered" for her signing a blank
sheet of paper. The Rubles rolled -- "the golden bullets had shot the truth":
Beilis was acquitted!
Theodor Fritsch commented upon this news in the December issue (1913) of the
Hammer as follows: "After all the peculiarities which distinguished this amazing
trial, nothing other than this was to be expected. This time, also, much has
occurred which was able to contribute to the finding of not guilty, just as in
the trials of Skurz, Xanten, Konitz! Throughout five months the investigation
was led in a false direction in accordance with a plan; two examining judges,
one after the other, proved to have been bribed, had to be relieved of their
office and charged. When the third finally took up the sure trail and proceeded
to the arrest of Beilis, remarkable things happened: two chief witnesses against
Beilis (both the children of Cheberyakova) died a sudden (366) death, and when
the examining judge was on the verge of inspecting a shed in the brick yard of
Zaitsev, in which according to all probability the murder of the boy took place,
this shed suddenly burned down. . .In the trial it has been shown that several
witnesses, intimidated by threats, did not dare to directly testify; with
others, the ringing of gold demonstrably played its role.
Thus a mysterious power has so strangely led by the nose the Russian court of
justice, whose honest intentions are otherwise by no means to be doubted, that
one hole remained for the caught fox through which he could slip away. Should
the consequences of a sentence of condemnation really have been feared?"
They were feared! The State's Attorney, who, in contrast to his foreign
colleagues, had not appeared for Jewry, had quite clearly recognized its
machinations in this giant trial -- how else is this passage from his address to
the jury to be explained: "You should not allow yourselves to fear [anything
that could happen] with the condemnation of Beilis, may the image of the martyr
Andrusha Yustschinsky step before your inner eyes; Beilis may be a saint for
others, for us he is not. The Russian people will extinguish his name from its
memory, his name will not be allowed to beshadow that of Andrei Yustschinsky;
for the latter is the name of a martyr. . .We do not fear the consequences of
the matter in which we have ventured ourselves, however difficult and serious
they might be. . ."
In his analysis of the motives of the crime, State's Attorney Fischer arrived at
the conviction, similar to that of the Czech attorney Dr. Baxa (37) in the
Hilsner trial at Kuttenberg, that Jewry had imposed once again a blood toll upon
non-Jewish humanity -- the Jews have not forgotten it! Fischer explained: ". . .
People call the Beilis case an outrageous case; we have experienced days of
revolution, in which officials (367) were killed, bombs were thrown at the
representatives of power, the people were shot at. . .but even out of this
bloody past the murder of Andrusha Yustschinsky stands out by its terrifying
character! On a bright day they slay an innocent boy, who never did anyone harm,
whom everyone loved; they murder him under unbelievable tortures, they loot his
blood. . .But this atrocity becomes a world event, because judgement is supposed
to be passed on a [certain] Beilis, because we possessed the impertinence to put
a Jew on the dock! If only we had been trying a case concerning Russians, . .
.then we would have seen at the defense table neither the cream of the legal
profession, nor famous scholars as expert witnesses. . .Who had need of his
blood? You have heard the definitive remarks of the expert witnesses, that the
crime could not have been committed by madmen or psychopaths. . .what interest
had they in the murder? Who are the murderers? One of them sits in the dock. .
.With what [crime] is the accused charged? It is determined that two thirds of
the boy's blood was removed, that he was tortured. . .Are there sects which use
blood? There is an entire series of trials which indicate this: One of these
trials has taken place in Austria in the case of Polna. . .These trials extend
back through all times. . .In all cases, the Jews have made the greatest efforts
to shelter their fanatics. . .They are unusual human beings, these Jews. . .The
Bible speaks of bloody sacrifices. . .From the Talmud, one could infer what one
wishes. We have the Zohar. The Hassidim appear on the scene, at their head the
famous (read: notorious!) Schneerson. . .It is a single current of religious
superstition. The use of the blood of Christians by the Jews is beyond any
question. Jewry feels the burden of the blood secret, but does not dare lay it
aside. . ." -- "We will remain pariahs, as long as it remains," a Jewess had
written in 1900, who was complicit in the blood-murder of Konitz. . .
Beilis
had been acquitted on [the strength of] Jewish-international pressure -- not,
however, by the Russian people! "Believe us, (368) o child, the Russian
Mother Earth will open itself and spit from out its depths the miserable wretch
who has shed your innocent blood. 'Twelve unenlightened peasants' -- may this
conscience of the Russian people stand as surety for you."(38) The files
concerning the "Beilis case" had thereby concluded. The outbreak of the World
War prevented their systematic revision, and after the collapse of Russia they
were likewise disposed of like those in Paris which concerned the "Damascus
case" after the take-over of the Ministry of Justice by the "attorney"
Crémieux-Smeerkopp in 1870!
Epilogue
400,000
Beilis
was "compensated" in princely fashion. The "Israelite Committee" in New York had
arranged a collection of about 400,000 Gold Marks, in order to be able to
offer their "innocent, persecuted" racial comrade a large farm as a present upon
his arrival in the Land of Freedom, after a large number of Jews had already
emigrated to America already, during the trial -- in a similar manner, of
course, the ritual-slaughterer and "martyr" Buschhoff in Xanten had also been
"compensated."
Nevertheless, Beilis seemed to have developed no inclination toward agriculture.
According to a report in the Hammer of May 1914 (39), Beilis surfaced suddenly
in the land of his patriarchs. In Alexandria he was received like a king at his
disembarkation, especially for this purpose a "reception committee" had been
formed, at whose head stood a certain Isaac Piccioto. -- This name also seems
known to us: Two Jews of the same name had, if we rightly recall, played a role
in the ritual-murder trial of Damascus in 1840 -- just as it is a striking
phenomenon in general, that at Jewish blood-murder trials names surface over and
over again which have been previously mentioned for the same reason (Schneerson!).
Orient and Occident reached out their hands to each other once again: the circle
was closed! In Palestine Beilis was able to await in peace the coming ruin (369)
of the State over which the death sentence had already been pronounced by Jewry,
in order to return there, if needed, as an expert in the slaughtering of human
beings. . .
The men who had exerted themselves for Right and Justice fared otherwise,
however. The shocking scenes and abuses
to which, for example, the student Golubov and the psychiatrist
Sikorski
had been exposed through Jewish sub humanity, still continued on after the
conclusion of the trial.
So [it was for] Professor Kossorotov; he had belonged to the scientific experts
in Kiev, after the sudden demise -- which remained unsolved -- murder by
poison was spoken of here, too --
of the University Professor Obolonski. He had presented his opinion before the
court to the best of his knowledge, in full scientific agreement with the other
experts, which did not at all please the Jews! A terrible campaign ensued
against him in the following period, which continued to his lecture hall in
Petersburg University, without his having been protected from these Jewish
impertinences by his authority. There were tumultuous scenes in his college. He
even wrote about it in the Novoye vremya: "If I had been told earlier about
student nonsense, I would not have believed it; but on 23 October (1913), I had
to change my opinion. I saw human beings who behaved like beasts, made
ear-splitting noise, and were not receptive to a single rational word. I had to
believe in that which had formerly seemed incompatible with the concept of
[what] a student [is]. . ."(40)
Unfortunately, it isn't clear from the report, whether Kossorotov had clearly
recognized the racial membership of his audience who were "behaving like
beasts"!
The Beilis trial also lapsed into oblivion; but in the same measure as the
memory of non-Jewish humanity failed, Jewish memory retained its liveliness!
In 1917, armed with enormous financial
resources, Trotsky was ordered to Russia, in order to create a terra
deserta,
a desert, out of this land. In a (370) bloodshed which was unprecedented
in history up until then, next to which even the bloody slaughters of the Old
Testament pale, he fulfilled his instructions to the fullest satisfaction of his
secret Jewish task-masters. "The Jewish people is unconquerable -- at stake is
the fate of the Russian State," thus was World Jewry able to cry out already, in
1913, in the certainty of its imminent victory!
After the collapse of Russia, there
began a genuine round-up against, first and foremost, those persons who somehow
or other stood suspected of harboring anti-Jewish tendencies; it is now very
instructive to discover that nearly all accusers, witnesses and expert
witnesses, who during the Beilis
trial in Kiev had spoken out against Jewry, fell as victims to the
Jewish-Bolshevist Terror. Thus, in 1919, the Professor of Psychiatry, J.
Sikorski, was shot under martial law in Kiev, together with a series of
nationally-minded professors, while one of his chief opponents in the Kiev
trial, Bechterev, who appeared at the request of the defense in the trial with a
denial of the possibility of ritual-murder, received a leading scientific
administrative post, thanks to Jewish protection.(41) Naturally, the Kiev judges
also bled to death under their Jewish executioners; but even the Russian Justice
Minister Cheglovitov, who remained completely indifferent during the trial,
whose single "crime" had consisted of having finally, after a period of a year
(in the middle of 1912), taken the trial -- which was threatening to become
disastrously entangled in Jewish snares, away from the authority of corrupt
local officials and getting it underway. . .even he went the same way [as the
judges, etc.]. . .
"The murder of the boy Yustschinsky provided the occasion for the Minister
Cheglovitov and other enemies of the Jews, to initiate the famous ritual-murder
trial against Beilis. But this trial did not have the expected result, its
ramifications were, rather, very unpleasant for its originators," confirmed a
knowing Jew. . .(42)
(371)"Thus has Jewry decided, and thus had it happened!" But in one of the
Hammer issues of 1913 (Nr. 275) there are also these prophetic words: ". . .Once
again the Jewish party has triumphed; but -- some more such victories, and it
will lose without hope of recovery!"
The final monstrous victory of Jewry was the Jewish-Bolshevist massacre and the
sacrifice of racially flawless, and for that reason consciously or unconsciously
anti-Jewish classes of the people in numerous nations of the Old World. It was
the last victory. Aryan humanity attained consciousness. It won its way to the
conviction that it has a common enemy: the Jews
Recognizing the enemy, however, means: taking up the struggle. A new world order
is in the process of arising, after unspeakably difficult birth pangs, an order
in which the Jew has nothing more to seek and -- to murder!
Back to Table of Contents
Copyright 2001 by R. Belser. Reproduction in whole or in part without express
written permission of the translator is not permitted. All rights reserved.
Source3
r(p. 354)K i e v 1 9 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1
(p. 335)
Andrei Yustschinsky
|
|
|
The forensic medical autopsy found 47 piercing and cutting (336) wounds; the
wounds on the head, left temple (1) and neck had produced the fatal
exsanguination; the loss of blood had been so considerable that the body was
close to being empty of blood.
Boy was alive
The physicians rendering their expert
opinions, the University professor, lecturer for forensic Medicine,
Obolonski and the prosector at the same professorship, Tufanov, reached the
following conclusions:
1. All of the wounds found on the body
of Yustschinsky
were produced while he was alive. Of these wounds, those on the head and
neck were inflicted during full cardiac activity, while all other wounds were
inflicted while cardiac activity was considerably reduced.
2. Likewise, the hands of the boy were bound and the mouth kept closed while he
was living.
3. While these wounds were being inflicted upon him, he was in a vertical (that
is, standing) position, with somewhat of an inclination toward the left.
4. A stabbing or piercing object served as the instrument which made the wounds.
A portion of the wounds were executed by means of an instrument in the form of
an awl or of a stiletto of flat, rectangular shape with an edge of two sides
sharpened like a chisel. All other wounds could also have been produced by the
same instrument. The first piercing wounds were inflicted upon the boy in the
head and neck, and the final ones were inflicted in the heart. With one of the
heart-stabs, the blade penetrated the body up to the grip, which left behind an
impression on the skin.
5. There had to have been several persons who participated in this crime.
6. The type of the instrument and the multiplicity of the wounds suggest that
one of the goals of the murderers was to cause as much agonizing pain to
Yustschinsky as possible.(337)
7. There was not more than 1/3 of the entire amount of blood which remained in
the body itself; the greatest portion of the blood escaped through the veins of
the brain, the arteries at the left temple, and the neck veins.
8. The absence of traces of blood in the ditch where the body was discovered,
its situation at the place of discovery, and other circumstances suggest that
Yustschinsky was slain at another location and only afterwards dragged into the
pit in a condition of rigor mortis and leaned up against its wall, and that
therefore the place of discovery is not the scene of the crime. -- (We are
reminded of Xanten, Skurz, Konitz, etc.)
Sikorski testimony
Based upon these determinations, another
expert, the psychiatrist Professor
Sikorski,
distinguished three peculiarities which preceded the murder: the gradual
withdrawal of blood, the causing of special torments, and last of all the murder
by a stab to the heart. The latter followed after the victim had served [his
purpose] for the first two goals (withdrawal of blood, as an object for
torturing) and when the nearness of death was recognized by the murderers. -- By
the circumstance that all wounds were cold-bloodedly produced by a sure and calm
hand, by a hand which was accustomed to the slaughtering of animals, Professor
Sikorski
saw in the technique of this murder an indication that
the possibility of such an exact, emotionless and unhurried work was secured
for the murderers in corresponding manner, and he came to the conclusion that
the slaying of Yustschinsky
represented an act which was carefully prepared
and which was carried out according to plan under cautious supervision!
The murder excited the public attention of all of Russia -- all the more, when
similar events were known from the past, which showed a striking conformity with
the existing case.
On 13 May 1911, the Russian Duma was forced to occupy itself with an
interpellation which concerned this murder of a boy and which contained the
question as to whether the existence of a 'sect' which employed human blood was
known to the government, and what it (338) was considering doing to suppress
this 'sect.' The interpellations had enclosed a detailed autopsy report in the
matter of the murder of the boy Emelyanov which occurred in 1893, from which it
clearly emerged that this victim had been murdered according to every rule of
ritual-slaughter. -- The reply of the Duma has not become known. At the last
Russian trial concerning the attempted murder of the boy Vinzens Grudsinskoi,
which had been committed on the night of 2 March (!) 1900, the Ministry of
Justice had ordained that questions of ritual-murder were not to be raised! The
people, in any case, were convinced that this most recent murder was also a link
in the chain of crimes which were all carried out according to a definite system
and for a particular purpose.
The Murderers
|
The inquiries were not made there, -- which would have been necessary -- at the
place where the corpse had been discovered, but on the contrary, at a distance
of a mile away from it! Mischtschuk was publicly accused of corruption -- he
stepped down! As official of the investigation "a new power" appeared "from
outside" -- the method is sufficiently familiar [to us]! -- the Commissar
Kunzevitch; he preferred to stay in the Grand hotel of Kiev and to place his
name merely among press reports. He too was bought! Then the "secret policeman"
Krazovski entered the picture, "an able person, who not only was capable of
exposing the crime, but also certainly did actually expose it, yet found
advantage for himself in keeping to himself his knowledge of the decisive pieces
[of evidence]"(3). . .With that, judgement is expressed concerning these kind of
'investigations,' which merely pursued the goal, in alliance with the Jewish
press, of drawing away from the tracks of the actual murderers, of gaining time
and hopelessly confusing the entire affair, so that even non-Jewish newspapers
finally produced completely distorted reports.
But they had not reckoned with the youth of Kiev, "who, stirred within by the
crime, held it to be his duty to help with the solution of the case. I am proud
to name Golubov. He distinguished himself from the other parties by the fact
that he really honorably, unselfishly dedicated himself to the mission, and had
to put up with the mockery and the laughter, indeed, the danger to his life from
the Jews. (4)"
The student Golubov, named in the speech
of the prosecutor, acquired great merit in throwing light upon the crime by
taking on the investigation of the case on his own initiative, and had
discovered important facts. As a result, however, he exposed himself to
the concentrated attacks of Jewish rats as an unintended recognition of his
activity, an (340) activity which, to be sure, did not move along in the paths
of the professional officials of the investigation prescribed by Jewry.
On the edge of the city of Kiev was located the brickyard of the Jew Zaitsev,
with the clay quarry belonging to it. A Jewish hospital, whose dining hall had
been converted into a 'prayer room' by getting around legal restrictions, was
later erected on the property in 1910. Frequently rabbis were observed there,
the whole place -- as the "religious center" of the Jews of Kiev -- was
enveloped with a mystery, according to the words of the prosecutor. The Jew
Mendel Beilis had been appointed as "guard and attendant." The inhabitants of
the territory around the brickyard could be counted on the fingers; only two
non-Jews lived at some distance from the kiln; in its vicinity lived a circle of
seven Jewish families.
Although the property could have been cordoned off and searched very easily
without a large police team immediately after the discovery of the body in the
clay pit, nothing of the sort happened. It was striking that on the day of the
murder, the 12th of March, no work was performed in the brickyard. The property
there was deserted. Work was taken up again just afterwards.
The inner walls of a shed of the
brickyard were suddenly given a new coat of whitewash. . .
The people knew for a long time where the murderers were to be found -- in spite
of the tactics of confusion of the Jewish press. Quite striking, if not to say
incriminating, was the behavior of the baptized
Jew
Breitmann,
the publisher of the Jewish paper
Poslyednich
novostyey,
which sought to divert the ever thickening suspicion from the brickyard, to
gypsies who were travelling
nearby. In his nervous activity, one mistake slipped by him: he accused
the gypsies of the blood-superstition! The populace had a sharp ear and asked
ironically -- according to the words of the prosecutor -- "How can you believe
in the use of blood by the Jews, while a former Jew points at the gypsies, among
whom a blood-superstition is supposed to exist? Let one note: no Russian is
pointing at them, but a baptized Jew!"
In July 1911 four months after the crime, the investigation official Krasovski
now also casually got into the brickyard (341) of Zaitsev, spoke with the
manager and held some sort of superficial search, only to appease public opinion
or to warn the Jews. He also visited Mendel Beilis, at whose place he found
nothing at all suspicious, however.
Now the local gendarmerie -- just as in
the Polna
case -- acted on their own initiative. On 22 July, (older calendar)
[Note: The use of the Julian calendar persisted in some European countries for
some time after the Gregorian calendar had been generally accepted and in use by
most of the rest of the continent.] Beilis was arrested. Russian sources wrote
the following: "The excitement of the populace of Kiev due to the mysterious
slaying of the boy Yustschinsky is growing ever greater in extent, all the more,
when it turned out that the judicial authorities had to release the relatives of
the murdered boy from investigative custody again,
who had been accused of being the actual
murderers by several Jews, because not the slightest suspicion of guilt
could be brought against them.
On the contrary, they proceeded to the arrest of the Jew Beilis. . .The Jew Beilis received, shortly before the discovery of the murder, the visit of numerous Austrian(5) Jews. The points of suspicion against the Jews are so extraordinarily weighty, and the entire Christian press of Kiev and Petersburg, as of other large cities, urges that in this case complete clarity be procured, so that finally it can be absolutely determined whether there are really sects among the Jews which commit acts of murder from religious reasons. . ." Krasovski, who had for a long time complete and exact information about everything, now feared losing his criminalist laurels -- possibly he only wanted to extort larger sums from his Jewish wire-pullers -- and unexpectedly gave the explanation that the murder of the boy had occurred neither at the place where the body was found, nor in the presence of his accused mother, but that the boy probably had been dragged away onto the broken clay by the attendant Mendel Beilis! Actually, the Jews concluded a financial arrangement with Krasovski, the typically corrupt Tsar's official, after the arrest of Beilis. . ."They had not believed it possible that matters would be taken so far against them! I do not deny, the legal position of the Jews is a difficult one, their destiny (342) is to a certain extent a tragic one, yet we are all under the influence of Jewish ideas, of Jewish money, of the Jewish press. The press, ostensibly Russian, became the booty of the Jews. Any sort of steps [taken] against the Jews evokes the invectives: 'reactionary,' 'enemy of progress' ! The Jews are judicially without rights, but in reality they have all of Russia in their hands. The promise has come into its fulfillment. We all feel that we are under the yoke of all-powerful Jewry. We may be called enemies of progress and obstructionists, but we cannot close our eyes to the corpse of Yustschinsky! The Jews accuse us of inciting the people against them; but that they themselves want to keep the peace! They know that Beilis is guilty, and because of that they seek to confuse the case, to put it on a false track."(6) --
|
Ritual murderers stayed with beilis
(343) According to the information of Theodor Fritsch, a
Salomon
Schneerson
was condemned to death in 1797 due to a blood-murder proven in all
details, brought in chains to Petersburg, but here freed thanks to his
influential tribal comrade Petretz. A grandson of Salomon
Schneerson,
Mendel
Schneerson, was involved in a
blood-murder trial in 1852 in Saratov.
|
A son of this Mendel, Shalom-Bähr, was held to be a Hassidic 'prophet' to whom the Jews made pilgrimages, his brother Bunya filled the office of ritual-slaughterer. His nephew, finally, was that Faivel Schneerson who, as was proven, stayed with Mendel Beilis, then mysteriously disappeared, but immediately surfaced again when the danger seemed eliminated for himself personally -- in order to present himself as a witness! "One (344) is allowed to assume that he knew more of the murder than all of those who escaped with their lives know in totality. But it is pure irony to question the man as a witness in this trial, instead of placing charges against him. His statements will most certainly not betray anything," wrote Theodor Fritsch in 1913 in the Hammer(10).
The old Tartakovski, living as a sub-tenant with other Jews in the vicinity of the
brickyard, is supposed to have loved Andrusha very much -- possibly (certain
later statements indicate this) he warned the child,
when the
schächter
Schneerson was staying with Mendel Beilis, which Tartakovski
believed must be a sign of impending disaster
". . .Like all those witnesses who escaped with their lives" -- what does this
mean?
We prod our memory, so poor in such matters, and find that in the Trent trial in
the year 1475, poison played a large role, and then, for example, in the great
Hilsner trial in Kuttenberg in Bohemia (1899) a witness (Marie Pernicek), who
had given very essential evidence under oath to the protocol, perished a short
time later under the most tortured symptoms of having been poisoned and thus had
been rendered 'harmless' forever!
In Kiev these things were repeated, only with the difference that international
Jewish criminality went to work still more thoroughly.
Tartakovski, strangled
|
The Cheberyakov family belonged to the few non-Jews who lived in the vicinity of
this miserable property: the (345) husband, by trade a telegraph official,
industrious, of unblemished reputation, as husband a pitiful figure -- his wife
all the more resolute and dubious -- who also maintained close relations with
the Jews. She invited her Jewish friends to small household entertainments, at
which her husband was made drunk for the enjoyment of those present -- so much
for this family Idyll! In any case, in their press, the Jews called this
remarkable woman a "Lady MacBeth" but treated her otherwise very considerately,
in conspicuous contrast to the other non-Jewish witnesses. One got the
impression as if they were not entirely certain whether it might not finally
occur to Mrs. Cheberyakov to say what she knew.
This woman was the mother of three children, a young boy (Zhenya) and two girls
(Valya and
Ludmilla);
early on the day of the murder, these three were awakened
in the absence of their mother by Andrusha; they should go play with him in the
clay pit. Having arrived there, they were approached from behind by the
attendant Mendel Beilis. He seized the small
Zhenya, who was able to tear
himself loose, however, and Andrusha. Meanwhile, two more Jews, among them the
young Beilis, were added to the group -- they had been stalking the children
according to a plan! The little Valya still saw how Andrusha was dragged to the
brickyard. This happened on the day of the murder, the 20th of March. These
statements of the children leaked out, although press and commissars had made an
effort to take no notice of this! The student
Golubov had then questioned the
children once again and recorded their statements. On 22 July (old calendar) Beilis was finally arrested together with Mrs. Cheberkov; her children were from
that time on for the most part entrusted to the care of strange people. After
one week the little ones fell critically ill with symptoms of poisoning, after
the "secret commissar" Krasovski had "visited" them and brought them "pies"! Two
children, Zhenya and Valya, died in quick succession, while Ludmilla slowly
recovered only after many weeks -- according to reports by the press, the
children died of "dysentery"!
Now the mother could be set free again -- the most important witnesses had been
eliminated, the surviving child, (346) not able to be questioned for a long
time, was besides under the influence of the dubious subject Krasovski.
The mother, for the sake of caution, was next "ordered" at once to Kharkov, in
fact this Jewish-owned creature went there -- to where the Jewish 'General
Staff" had cautiously retreated(11) -- she was royally received by a
"distinguished" society -- naturally exclusively Jewish -- in the chief hotel of
the city; one can thoroughly imagine that they expressed their "profound
sympathy" to the mother, only to become more clear then: The Jew Margolin, the
later defense counsel of Mendel Beilis -- he had omitted for reasons of caution
to properly register himself in Kharkov -- introduced himself (according to the
prosecutor) to Cheberyakova as "Member of the Reichsrat" [Council of the Reich]
and offered her the round sum of 40,000 Rubles, so that she might voluntarily
accept the guilt herself for the murder of Andrusha. In front of the court,
Margolin later in no way denied this monstrous proposal, but cynically explained
that "every job must be paid for"!
From the speech of the prosecutor, we wish to excerpt the following passage for
a closer illumination: ". . .There in Kharkov, in the salon of the great hotel,
the clinking of gold sounded, and under the sound of silver coins, the entire
investigation was running. This company [of people] which the journalists of a
Jewish paper have trained, who write so clairvoyantly about this trial, this
society wanted that Cheberyakova, after [drinking] champagne, should sign a
blank piece of paper which would then have contained her confession as
murderess. Cheberyakova turned down the proposal, despite having been assured of
a defense by the best advocates and a safe-conduct into foreign lands. And thus
this version, too -- how many is it now? -- has collapsed. . . "(12)
Cheberyakova therefore returned to Kiev and immediately had to watch her step,
although, as mentioned, she was treated with a certain respect.
Characteristically, (347) she broke off from her earlier Jewish dealings, she
seemed at last cured by the terrible events! Shortly after the death of both of
Cheberyakova's children, a stop was put to the plans of investigation official
Mischtschuk, who had conducted the trial five months long in entirely the wrong
direction. After his dismissal, he joined -- this may be taken as the conclusive
assessment of his person -- that circle of press-Jews who had made a
well-planned and expert investigation impossible from the beginning onwards.
Mischtschuk now declared publicly that there could no longer be ritual-murder in
the 20th century(!). He appeared before the court with new 'research,' from
which the perfect innocence of the Jews was supposed to follow; nonetheless, it
soon emerged that the former Commissar wished to lead the court astray with the
most crude distortions. It succeeded in making short work of him and his
accomplices in Kharkov. But only Mischtschuk himself was put in prison; with
him, one exponent of Jewry had left the stage!
The Beilis 'Trial' and the 'Intelligentsia of Europe'
At the beginning of 1912, charges were finally filed against Beilis. According
to the Nordlivländischen Zeitung [North Livonian Times], in the documents
charging Belis it reads: "Beilis is accused, according to arrangement with other
still not discovered persons, with forethought, on the basis of religious
superstition for ritual purposes, of having seized the boy Yustschinsky, who was
playing with other children, and of having dragged him into a factory building.
Here his accomplices bound Yustschinsky's hands and stuffed his mouth and killed
him by 47 stab wounds in the head, neck, and body. These woundings caused long
and severe suffering and brought about a complete exsanguination."
In this critical situation, the Kiev press-Jews indicated three non-Jews who
were supposed to have committed the murder, of which all details were given with
exactitude. Witnesses were also found who were prepared, after a substantial
fee, to swear to anything. But this diversionary maneuver was (348) so stupidly
contrived that these new Jewish machinations were soon seen through.
The proceedings against Beilis were not set for 29 May 1912. But once again
Jewry stepped in with a new, the seventh announcement, by which suspicion was
supposed to be directed toward a crime brotherhood. But with this, such
considerable "irregularities" were found on the side of even the new
investigation official, that he likewise had to be dismissed from the service
and the trial placed in other hands. These intrigues had at least the result
that the proceedings against Mendel Beilis were again postponed for about a full
year!
These maneuvers literally cost Jewry massive sums. Naturally, the German
intelligentsia was also mobilized -- when had it not been misused! -- On 23
March 1912 there appeared a "Declaration" in the notorious Berliner Tageblatt
[Berlin Daily] -- in the parlance of the people called "Jerusalemer Straßenblatt"
[Jerusalem Street Sheet], signed by perhaps 200 personalities completely unfit
to render an expert opinion on the question of ritual-murder, in which a
sharply-worded position was taken "against an insane belief, which attributes to
the Jews the use of human blood for ritual purposes." At the beginning, it
sounds at first almost completely rational: "Whether this Jew (Mendel Beilis) is
the murderer, concerning that we cannot judge. It would be illegitimate to
anticipate a legal proceeding still pending, and besides that, one pending in a
foreign state." In taking up the murder of Andrei Yustschinsky, however, it
continues on then with the well-known tirade: "The agitation of the streets (13)
has greedily snatched at this event and brazenly claimed that the boy
Yustschinsky was slaughtered by Jews, in order to tap off his blood and to use
this blood for ritual purposes, in accordance with an allegedly Jewish religious
law. This madness, carried unscrupulously to the people, has again and again
called forth terrible consequences from the Middle Ages right down to the most
recent times. It has seduced the uneducated mass of the people [into committing]
gruesome massacres of the Jews, and crowds, led astray by this madness, have
(349) befouled themselves with the innocent blood of their fellow-man. And yet
never has the mere shadow of a proof for the justification of this insane belief
been produced. The most respected Christians knowledgeable about Jewish
scripture have shown absolutely, that at no time were the Jews ever incited to
the murder of their fellow-man by their religion.
We hold it to be the duty of everyone who has the moral progress of Man close to
his heart, to raise his voice against such pathetic craziness. We conclude with
a cry of warning to the most respected Russian (?) scholars, writers, and
artists, in the awareness that such a warning knows no boundary posts. It must
be a matter for the heart of the entire world of culture."
This article could just as well have had a Paul Nathan or a "famous writer" of
the same race, as clerical authors -- but it was signed by, besides a
half-hundred Christian theologians of all ranks, privy councillors, etc., among
others by Prince Heinrich of Schönaich-Carolath, Count Posadovsky, the Reichstag
President Kaempf, the Chief Reichstag Vice-President Paasche, who stated at a
military council in the Reichstag: "Things would go to the devil if Jews could
not be officers" -- moreover, he had a Jewish daughter-in-law -- , the second
Vice-President Dove, numerous members of the Reichstag, among them we note the
leader of the National Liberals, Bassermann, married to a Jewess, and the "Royal
Teacher and City School Councillor of Munich," Georg Kerschensteiner. Many
University professors came to help; thus we also find Werner Sombart, "Professor
at the Commercial College of Berlin," who besides saw to it that his letter
appeared in the same year (1912): The Future of the Jews, in which he first
takes on the causes of the hostile-to-Jews mood of this year in Russia and
reaches the remarkable determination that the mental and economic life of
Germany is already Jewish-permeated to a considerable degree. Although Sombart
now even admits, in further developing his theme, that the differences of blood
between Jews and Aryans are too great, he (350) nevertheless saw "in the Jewish
people, if we regard it as a whole, one of the most valuable types which
humankind has ever produced". . ."Which would have to give rise to powerful gaps
in the human world, if the Jewish type should disappear. . .We never want to
lose the deep, sad Jewish eyes (p. 57)." -- Without Jews, collapse of the
economy of the people! "We owe gratitude to Providence, for the not so sparse
proportion of Jewish elements. . .Especially since there, where we are most
purely German, is the Oriental part which with the Jews intrudes into our gray
Northland world, a true restorative. For we might perish, in the end, from pure
blondness. Regarded from the purely bodily aspect: what colorfulness the dark
Oriental type brings into our Northern environment! How should we want do
without the race of Judith and of Miriam" (p. 72 - oy veh, Herr Professor!).
"Also in the spiritual realm we might run the danger of suffocating from our
blondness, if we did not feel between us the hot Oriental souls of our
fellow-citizens." -- When Sombart now determines, that without a doubt there
exists a racial distinction between Aryans and Jews, and that on the other hand
the "Jewish people represents one of the most valuable types," then the only
logical conclusion which remains is that the Aryan part is the less valuable.
Actually, Sombart designates (p. 82) the non-Jewish of two competitors (for
professorships) as the stupider: "Since the Jews, on the average, are so much
more clever and industrious than we are." -- At the time of Sombart the
"cleverer" third of the teaching body of Breslau University already consisted of
-- Jews! This result, then, also means that "living together with the Jews is
rich in blessings for all"!
These are merely some informative samples from one letter of one of the leading
German national economists, which he -- probably by no means by accident, let
appear still, during the events in Kiev, and by no means as a parody but rather,
as Sombart himself emphasized, wished to have understood as an apologia, with
which he intended to step out of the reserve which he had imposed upon himself
in his book: Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben (1911) [The Jews and Economic
Life].
(351)The "living together rife with blessings for all segments [of the
populace]" was experienced in the following decades not by the representatives
of this intellectual direction, but by the non-Jewish corpus of the people in
probably the most horrible way, in their own bodies(14).
The Christian Theology Professor and Privy Church Councillor Dr. D. Rudolf
Kittel in Leipzig, Rosenthalgasse 13, likewise one of the subscribers, in his
letter originating in these years, Judenfeindschaft oder Gotteslästerung
[Hostility to the Jews or Blasphemy] (Leipzig, 1914), in which he took a
position as exponent of Judaism with extreme severity against Theodor Fritsch,
expressed, like Sombart, his "gratitude for that which we owe Israel." -- "This
gratitude will be powerful enough in any friend of the truth, to protect him
from this danger (i.e., of 'throwing a stone upon Israel')." In his concluding
remarks, Kittel blubbers on that "for their part, the German Jews are also
happily prepared to offer that upon the altar of the Fatherland, which Germany
demands from each of its citizens, and that the German Jews have rallied to the
flag in great numbers. . ." -- So it seemed in the head of that German
intelligentsia, who believed that they had to jump into the breach even for the
"Russian Jews"!
It was signed by -- to mention only a few more names -- furthermore, the actor
Albert Bassermann, Richard Dehmel, Rudolf Eucken, Jena, writer Herbert Eulenberg,
Berlin, Gerhart Hauptmann, Agnetendorf, Thomas Mann, Munich, Hermann Sudermann,
Berlin -- he had formerly been tutor in Jewish families and journalistic
colleague of the "estimable General of the Jewish Colonial Troops," Rickert,
(see Sudermann's Bilderbuch meiner Jugend [Picture Book of My Youth], 1922),
Ludwig Thoma, Munich, authoress Clara Viebig, and last but not least -- the
"Christian" Talmud translator and senior master at a girls' school, Professor
Dr. August Wünsche of Dresden, who on the occasion of the Tisza-Eszlár
ritual-murder trial of 1882 (352) had once already given testimony(15) against
the "blood-accusation of the Jews," just as the Privy Councillor Friedrich
Delitzsche, University professor, Berlin, whose father Franz Delitzsche (1890)
had likewise rendered an 'expert opinion' against the blood-accusation!(16)
The stereotypical phrases contained in this "Declaration" of a Jewish
loaf-about, like "Medieval madness," "leading astray," "craziness," "insane
belief," "moral progress," "persecution of the Jews," "innocent Jewish blood,"
"most respected scholars," "Christian scholars," "cultural world," and so forth,
have become wearisome for us -- nevertheless, their longevity seems to be
boundless, for the same old chestnuts, only a little up-dated, still adorn
today, in well-paid reanimation, the part of the world controlled by Jews -- and
that is not inconsiderable!
"Christians knowledgeable about the Jewish scriptures. . ." -- this is naturally
first and foremost meant to suggest August Wünsche and both Delitzsches; but we
already have gotten to know, among the 'experts' in Tisza-Eszlár, still one
other 'authority,' the Berlin University Professor Dr. Hermann Strack! This man
now added a "scientific expert opinion" concerning the ritual-murder question to
that declaration published in the Berlin Tageblatt, and then also sent to the
Russian authorities. -- In 1893, already Strack, who conducted a "Jewish
mission" as a specialty and from upon this sloping platform had already sunk to
the level of masterly advocate of Judaism, although allegedly Gentile himself,
had published a brochure: Die Juden, dürfen sie Verbrecher von Religions wegen
genannt werden? [The Jews, are they to be called criminals because of
religion?]; this letter is an exposition -- collected with highly suspicious
zeal -- of those kinds of petitions with which Strack had showered the courts
with the goal of making the blood-accusations raised against the Jews impossible
in the future by means of judicial decision, on account of insult to the Jewish
religious community -- which did not succeed, however! In 1900, the treatise Das
Blut im Glauben und Aberglauben der Menschheit(17) [Blood in the Faith and
Superstition of Humanity] followed, in a reworking of a letter in defense of his
beloved Judaism which had appeared in 1891.(17)
(353)The composition of the title already betrays the direction in which the
case is to be steered. "When the horrible human butcherings of Skurz, Xanten,
Polna and Konitz cried ever louder to Heaven, and no one whose eyes were open
was able any longer to doubt where the guilty were to be sought, there Strack
wrote a book to order, which was supposed to prove to the world the innocence of
the Jews in respect to all blood-murders."(18)
"Toward the completion of this work," (among others) the Jews Hirschfeld, Preuß,
Moritz Stern -- the 'revisor' of the Trent trial documents! -- and the Rabbi
Hoffmann, gave their suggestions so that the book, to which we shall have to
return once more in a special chapter, could then finally be found suitable by
the "Herr Professor Th. G. Masaryk in Prag" to be translated into
Czechoslovakian for getting the ritual-murderer Hilsner released! But the
craziest thing Strack himself did, when, for the convincing conclusion of his
work, he paraded a list several pages long of "pious" Jews as chief witnesses of
Jewish innocence, in addition to numerous Jewish "scholars," -- among whose fine
society Paul Nathan and the "missionary" Pieritz were to be found. (19)
Small wonder, that such a commissioned Christian Theology professor was then
able to act in times to follow as "expert witness" of the "Central Union of
German Citizens of the Jewish Faith" in numerous criminal trials against brave
German men, who had attempted to expose the teachings of the Talmud and thereby
suggest to the German people the inference to be drawn from these monstrosities,
as to the true character of the people belonging to it [i.e., the religion of
the Talmud]. Small wonder, also, that Strack then received his alloted place in
the "Hall of Honor" of the Jewish Philo-Lexikon (Handbuch des jüdischen Wissens
[Handbook of Jewish Knowledge], still in the year 1935 (!), as the "scientific
defender of Judaism"!
The court in Kiev was also supposed to be forced by Jewry to accept Professor
Strack as "expert witness," without an application for this having been made at
all by the Russian authorities! (354) The Hammer wrote this prophetic sentence
in response to these machinations(20): "Yet should the Russian court allow
itself to be coerced into accepting these expert witnesses, it will be very
ill-advised!"
In the summer of 1912, the Jewish intrigues in Russia had reached an unbearable
pitch, so that the Minister of Justice saw himself forced to take sharp measures
in order to put an end to the cunning subversions which were staged for the
benefit of the accused.
Thus, for example, a vast quantity of Jewish pamphlets of inflammatory content,
composed in Ghetto argot, were circulated in the country, in order to inform the
uneducated people, the rabble, the agitation of the streets, that Jewish
"fellow-citizens" were innocent and holy, while the enemies of progress, who
dared to "slander" those saviors so basely, were to be exterminated as quickly
as possible from the earth, after which the "Kingdom of God" would appear! --
Six years later, in 1918, and in repetition in our day, the German people were
also promised the "Golden Age," if it should resolve to destroy its "enemies of
progress". . .
The Gouverneur of Kiev summoned to him some editors of "progressive" papers and
urgently suggested to them that they refrain from their attempts at provocation.
The authorities [he said] would not allow themselves to be diverted by anything.
The Prosecutor Chaplinsky was ordered to Petersburg to make a detailed report to
the Minister of Justice.
Since these interviews had remained unsuccessful, the Russian government saw
itself forced, on account of incendiary articles in the following days, to
arrest several "editors" and to confiscate 24 newspapers and four brochures. Two
papers had to stop publication. Finally, 34 (!) Jewish papers were sentenced to
pay a total of 10,250 Rubles in fines for falsifications, slanders and lies!(21)
K i e v 1 9 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
(p. 354)
In Fall of 1913, thus after a two-year span of investigation, the proceedings
against Beilis were supposed to be opened. On 1 October 1913, (22) Theodor (355)
Fritsch addressed himself to this point: "In Kiev there sits a man, in
investigative custody for two years due to suspicion of having murdered a
twelve-year-old boy. There would be nothing special about this, since murders
happen in all times and in all countries. But this time there has to be
something special going on, because the entire cultural world has been stirred
into an uproar over the fate of this man. . .what could have awakened so much
sympathy for this ordinary human being? And how were the wise men in Germany,
England, and America -- without a closer knowledge of the situation -- able to
judge whether the man was guilty or not?. . .So there has to be a special
circumstance having to do with Beilis and his crime of murder, and in fact:
Beilis is no ordinary mortal, for he belongs to the 'Chosen People'. And his
crime of murder is also of a special type; there's no question of either a
robbery- or of a lust- murder. Therefore, because a Jew was accused of a serious
crime, for that reason the Jewry of the entire world exerts itself in order to
bring criminal justice to a standstill. " -- What had happened in the Kiev of
the 20th century was merely what the Jew Maier Balaban(23) described quite
frankly as already existing as the rule for relations in Lublin of the 16th
century: ". . .When that sort (i.e., ritual-murder) of trial was held in the
tribunal, the families of the accused, the seniors of the Jewish community, all
came to Lublin to assist their nearest and dearest. The seniors of the Lublin
community were first of all bombarded, . . in order to procure for (the accused)
at least the smaller comforts. (356) Patronages for the Schöffen [type of lay
judges, somewhat like American justices of the peace], for the executioners, for
the wardens, had to be gotten. They ran from judge to judge, they sought Jews at
the market who were acquainted with the judges, had business relationships with
them, were their lease-holders or creditors (!), and an effort was made, through
their mediation, to convince the judges of the innocence of the accused." -- But
the bribery money was raised by ruthless "contributions"!
The final attempt of Jewry to have Beilis declared ill and to get him out of
investigative custody, misfired because the physicians had determined that
Beilis was enjoying the best of health!
The Main Trial
The trial was now finally set, for 8 October 1913.
Jewry thereupon undertook a new "offensive," to hinder jurisdiction. In the
Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums, [General Times of Jewry](24) the Rabbi Ziegler
in Karlsbad issued the following "flaming appeal": "On the day of the opening of
the Beilis trial in Kiev, protest meetings should be held by the most respected
Jews and Christians in all cities and all communities of the world, to lodge a
protest against the affront which was done to Jewry, to the truth, and to
justice with this trial. Jews of all states, of all nations, get ready to
protest! Let no city, let no town be absent! Gather your best [people] around
me, ask noble, truth-loving Christians, theologians (!) as well as laity, to
stand beside you; this concerns the honor of that religion which Jesus, too,
loved with every fiber of his heart (!). The entire cultural world is united to
wash the shame of the Beilis trial from itself!" -- Who does not recall the
"appeal" of the chief Rabbi Güdemann in Vienna on the occasion of the Hilsner
trial in Kuttenberg in 1899, which likewise beseeched the non-Jews "in the names
of Christ and the Virgin Mary," to help an "honest, innocent" little Jew; an
appeal which was framed in total similarity in its content, and equally
scornful. (357)
Judah always knew how to begin -- some representatives of the "mobilized
cultural world" we have already introduced by their signatures [i.e., those
mentioned on p. 353]!
In response, the President of the Kiev Court of Justice, Senator Meißner, stated
to a correspondent that the Prosecutor, Fischer, would emphatically seek to
prove the facts of the case, that ritual motives were the basis for the murder
which was perpetrated upon the boy Yustschinsky.
Jews petrified of trrial
|
. .We declare ourselves to
be in unreserved solidarity in this matter with our Russian brothers in the
faith."(25)
But the President of the Reich Union of German Jews had become stupid from the
loud protests, and had the carelessness to state at a meeting: "As a consequence
of this accusation, not only Beilis, but all of the world's Jewry sits in the
dock. If Beilis is guilty, then we are all guilty."(26) Out of fear of ensuing
difficulties, perhaps, numerous Russian Jews let themselves be baptized. The
Lutheran pastor Pir in Helsingfors conducted a land office business, by making
out a baptismal certificate for anyone for a fee. The Russian government saw
itself forced to warn the police officials (358) against admission of these "Geschwindigkeitschristen"
["speeded-up Christians"] -- as the Hammer (27) named them -- into forbidden
areas!
Not fewer than 219 witnesses were available during the 20 days of the trial.
Baldgrov had the presidency of the court, while Prosecutor Fischer acted for the
State. Unfortunately, detailed reports like those that exist for other
ritual-murder trials, are missing; Jewry, for obvious reasons, had hindered an
informative, objective coverage. Among the 44 representatives of the press who
were admitted, only a few non-Jews were to be found, according to statements of
one of the few Jew-free papers, the Petersburg Zemschina! Not only the entire
press outside of Russia, but with few exceptions, even the majority of Russian
papers had been 'served' by Jewish correspondents. -- In Kiev there was only a
single paper whose publishers weren't Jews!
The Hammer, as the single German paper, was able to publish fragments from
reliable Russian sources at the end of the year 1913; the outbreak of the World
War prevented a detailed account of the trial from the protocols and
stenographic records, and after the war Judah 'liquidated' documents and
witnesses which had become dangerous for it. The Jewish terror during the trial
in Kiev is supposed to have overshadowed everything prior to it -- even the
events in Nyiregyháza in Hungary! Thus, witness testimony which was unfavorable
to the Jews was simply made unintelligible by means of continuous noise from the
galleries; it appeared that the court President did not work up the courage to
have these young Jews thrown out. When one of the chief witnesses, the student
Golubov, wanted to communicate to the court the statements made to him by the
little Zhenya Cheberyakov, who later succumbed to the murderous attack by
poison, at first a hushed silence prevailed in the hall; but when the
expositions of Golubov took an incriminating shape, they were soon drowned out
by the galleries of the correspondents by means of riotous noise, moving around,
the overturning of seats, the dumping out of coins, knocking with canes, and so
forth, so that (359) the the presiding judge finally decided to send up
bailiffs, to make continuation of the trial possible!
As we recall, Golubov had been been made to look like a true scoundrel in the
Jewish press, while a non-Jewish voice (Novoya Vremya) described his appearance
before the court in the following manner: "A hushed silence descended upon the
courtroom when the witness Golubov appeared on the witness stand in his white
student smock, a tall, gaunt figure with a youthfully fresh and peaceful, almost
child-like facial expression, a youngster whom the leftist (read: Jewish!) press
had described as an agitator, almost as a footpad [archaic term for a mugger],
whereas he presented a thoroughly sympathetic appearance. Golubov delivered his
testimony with great unbiased calmness and clarity. . ."
The high point of these 20 days of testimony, however, was shaped by the
questioning of the little ten-year-old Ludmilla Cheberyakov, whose younger
sister had succumbed to the murder attack of the Jewish Feme [The Feme court was
a type of unofficial, secret tribunal held in Westphalia during the 14th and
15th centuries, and the analogy is a fitting one, although rabbinical courts --
particularly the Hassidic variety -- were and are potentially far more
sinister.]. She was the single witness who was able to tell about something [she
had] observed about the disappearance of her companion at play, Andrusha. Her
testimony shall be reproduced here verbatim:
"Tell me, my child" -- so inquired the presiding judge Baldgrov -- "what you
know of the case!" And the girl related in the hushed courtroom: "Mama went out
up to the market. We were sleeping, Zhenya was sleeping, I was sleeping, and
Valya was sleeping. Then we heard someone call from the street: 'Zhenya, Zhenya!'
It was Andrusha, he was calling Zhenya, [telling him that] he should go with
him. Zhenya wanted to go and said I was supposed to look after the room, but I
said [that] Valya would cry. Then we all got dressed, locked the room, and went
playing on the broken clay. There were still other children there. Then Mendel
Beilis came running up behind us; we ran away from [him]. Mendel caught Zhenya
and Andrusha; Zhenya tore and tore, and tore himself loose, but Andrusha didn't;
Mendel and one other Jew held him by the hands.
Also, the young Mendel was
there. Valya was scared and didn't run with us, but toward the other side; she
saw how they were dragging Andrusha to the kiln. I didn't see that, I saw how
they were dragging him off; that they were dragging him to the kiln,
Valya told
me that."
(360)The Prosecutor: "Do you remember how Andrusha was found?" -- "I remember."
Prosecutor: "Why didn't you tell right away, what you are saying now?" -- "I was
at my grandma's, and later on they didn't ask me." Prosecutor: "How did you get
into the quarry?" -- "There was a hole in the fence." -- Prosecutor: "Were you
chased away from there sometimes?" -- "They chased us away because we did
damage; sometimes we ran through the bricks." Prosecutor: "Was Andrusha always
along?" -- "May God keep him, but this time he did come along." Prosecutor: "And
where was your father?" -- "He had to work." Prosecutor: "Were you [children] in
the habit of sometimes going to Beilis? " -- "We went with Zhenya after milk.
There were Jews there who were praying, or were doing some such thing -- I don't
know."
Jews Kill The brother and sister who were witnesses
|
"Who threatened
you?" -- Poleschtschuk."(28) -- "And what did Krasnovski say?" -- "He said that
I was supposed to say only two or three words!" -- "Turn around and say whether
you don't see Poleschtschuk?" -- "Yes, Poleschtschuk is here!" -- "Point him out
to me!" -- The girl walks up to Poleschtschuk, points at him, he gazes at her
threateningly, and she begins to cry. "Why are you crying?" asks the presiding
judge, "no one will do anything to harm you here!" The girl cannot calm down and
replies: "I'm afraid, I'm scared. . .They threatened, (361) if we would testify,
then the same thing would happen to us as with
Yustschinsky. . ."
(boy killed)
According to the testimony of this child, Andrusha had not been involved in the
tours of the children through the property of the brick works up till then. Now,
how did the -- according to the inquiries of the court -- painfully
conscientious, almost shy boy, who was at one time supposed to become a
clergyman, come to play hookey from his classes at the Sophie School and tramp
about on that fatal 20th of March, 1911?
According to the exposition of the State's Attorney, Fischer, a few days before
his death, the youngster had received a shotgun as a gift from the Jew Arendar,
who lived in the vicinity of the Cheberyakov family, and who had taken in the
Jew Tartakovski, who died suddenly under mysterious circumstances; beaming with
happiness, he had shown it to his siblings -- all that was missing was the
gunpowder, and that was the cleverly laid snare! A day before his death,
Andrusha told his mother that "good people" would buy him the gunpowder, on the
next day, he forgot about going to school because of it, in order to go to these
"good people". . .
A Jew with fox-red hair, who has remained unidentified, had observed every step
of the boy in his final hours; after the murder, he vanished without a trace;
the page in the list of houses where he would have had to be entered, was torn
out! Just as numerous foreign Jews, who -- according to the inquiries of the
State's Attorney -- had stopped on the day before the crime at the estate of
Zaitsev, were "as if blown away" again. The shed which had conspicuously been
suddenly whitewashed, was burned down three days before its appointed judicial
inspection! Fischer remarked at this: "This fire is one of the many Jewish
advantages we are up against in this trial; it is of help to them. . ."
The expert Dr.
Sikorski once again threw light upon the murder from all sides
and came to the conclusion that religious insanity was as work here. He stated
that the murder of Yustschinsky was distinguished by numerous characteristic
signs, that it appears as a striking crime of definite type and evokes by its
(362) accompanying circumstances a terrifying impression. [That] its
interpretation is not based upon prejudice or fantasy, it is a matter of a
genuine event of the 20th century. [He stated that] murders, tied in with the
drawing off of blood, have been committed by fanatics, but persons who are
healthy and act with deliberation. [That] such murders occur everywhere where
Jews and Christians live together, yet Jewish children are never victims of such
murders; sometimes, the victims are circumcised beforehand, as the Zaratov trial
has shown. The suspicion is confirmed by the Jews themselves, who immediately
take in hand defensive measures at the discovery [of such a crime]. --
Repeatedly, stormy scenes resulted during the questioning of this expert, who
participated in the judicial proceedings in spite of a serious heart condition;
he was persistently interrupted by the attorneys of the Jewish party in a
shameless manner, and his giving of evidence made more difficult in every way.
Thus, the defender of the Jews Zarudny thought it necessary to take away his
notes and pages from the expert witness, so that Sikorski was obliged to give
oral testimony! "How much filth this man was pelted with. . .Other scholars whom
we have heard, have been more cautious; one of them, an attorney (!) of surgery,
compromised himself for the Jews. For this man, the puncture [wounds] were
inflicted upon Yustschinsky -- according to his opinion -- 'only as a jest,' and
[the rest of the testimony] of this expert could be filled in according to his
views: they [the wounds] have provided endless amusement for him. This expert. .
.differed from all other expert witnesses on a total of 25 points. Not only I,
but all of Russian society, knows what to think of this man." (29)
Against the psychiatrist Professor
Sikorski were also arrayed the Professors of
the religious academy in Kiev and Petersburg, Hlogelev and Troizki (baptized
Jews?), who, on the basis of Bible and Talmud denied categorically the
possibility of the use of human, and in particular Christian blood, by the Jews!
-- We thereby brush up against, once again, the 'Intelligentsia' of Europe:
"Almost no day goes by, without some sort or other of 'highly significant (363)
statement' not only of diplomats, men of science, etc., but also from bishops
(even from the 'reformed,' for example Dr. Desidor Baltazzar), cardinals,
nuncios, the generals of [monastic] orders, and the like. . . (30) In the
overcrowded Russian churches, however, "entire populations [i.e., of towns and
villages, etc.] prayed in common for the repayment of the murderers; a profound
stirring went through the Russian folk-soul."(31)
But Jewish megalomania had taken on unbearable proportions! The Russian paper
Druglavny orel copied the following excerpts from Jewish papers: "The fate of
the Russian people -- its future -- not merely in Russia, but in the entire
world -- now finds itself in the hands of twelve unenlightened Russian peasants.
These have challenged the great Jewish people. With a feeling of disgust,
gnashing our teeth with pain and humiliation, we take off the glove which has
been stained with our sacred blood (32)."
Gradually, the line was crossed into blunt threats: "The Russian government has
resolved to deliver up the Jewish people in Kiev to a general slaughter. Upon
the outcome of this titanic struggle depends the fate -- you believe, of the
Jewish people -- oh, no! -- the Jewish people is unconquerable -- the fate of
the Russian State is at stake: To be or not to be? That is the question for it.
The victory of the Russian government is the beginning of its end. There is no
way out for it. Take note of it!. . ."
Or: "In Kiev, we will show before the eyes of the entire world, that the Jews
cannot be trifled with." -- "If Jewry, up until now, has for tactical reasons
concealed the fact that it has held the leadership of the Russian Revolution, so
now, after the staging of the Kiev trial, an end must come to that. Let the
outcome of this trial be what it will, for the Russian government there is no
(364) salvation. So Jewry has decided, and thus will it happen. . ."
And thus will it happen: Five years later, the Romanovs met their end in the
Ipatyev House at Ekaterinburg by the hands of their Jewish executioners -- their
ashes were scattered to the winds! [Not literally true of all the remains;
forensic anthropologists identified the skulls of several members of the Romanov
family, some seventy years after their slaughter by the Jews. But these remains
were obscurely buried under rubble and might well have been lost to posterity,
had it not been for a combination of pure chance and the persistence of those
who cherished the memories of the Romanov family as symbolic of the Old Russia
which Jewish Bolshevism had murdered along with the Tsar and his family.] The
Elders of Zion had already decided upon this -- according to the excerpted press
citations -- in 1913, in the year of the Beilis trial!
Another Jewish paper called upon the Jews of all nations to boycott the Russian
state bonds on all the stock exchanges, to depress the currency, in order to
intimidate in this way the Russian government!(33) In Berlin, the Jew Oppenheim,
by profession a college teacher in the capital city of the Reich, raged that
Mendelssohn must stop all credit for Russia. . .It's unnecessary to go into the
role of the Rothschilds again! It would still be, at best, a curious
circumstance, to relate that the London Rothschild (Lionel Walter, a 'Lord')
turned to the then State Secretary of the Pope, Merry del Val, with the "very
humble request for merciful protection for my persecuted comrade in the faith,
for the defense of the truth and justice." In his humble petition, he enclosed a
certified copy of the papal brief of Innocent IV which dealt with protection of
the Jews!(34) It is known by far too few that the "Miracle Monk," Rasputin, this
demonic instrument in Jewish hands, also took a direct influence upon the course
and outcome of this trial. According to the words of his Jewish "secretary,"
Aron Simanovitch, Rasputin declared categorically to the Justice Minister
Cheglovitov: "You will surely lose the trial. Nothing will come of it!" -- Even
before the trial, Rasputin had prophesied the acquittal of the Jew, but
Cheglovitov was "dismissed"!(35)
(365) The
Beilis trial is supposed to have cost the Jews 17 million Rubles.
"Some kind of invisible power directs these machinations, an invisible hand
disperses money to cover up the murder. . ."(36) -- But to the dubious Vyera
Cheberyakova in Kharkov, 40,000 Rubles were "offered" for her signing a blank
sheet of paper. The Rubles rolled -- "the golden bullets had shot the truth":
Beilis was acquitted!
Theodor Fritsch commented upon this news in the December issue (1913) of the
Hammer as follows: "After all the peculiarities which distinguished this amazing
trial, nothing other than this was to be expected. This time, also, much has
occurred which was able to contribute to the finding of not guilty, just as in
the trials of Skurz, Xanten, Konitz! Throughout five months the investigation
was led in a false direction in accordance with a plan; two examining judges,
one after the other, proved to have been bribed, had to be relieved of their
office and charged. When the third finally took up the sure trail and proceeded
to the arrest of Beilis, remarkable things happened: two chief witnesses against
Beilis (both the children of Cheberyakova) died a sudden (366) death, and when
the examining judge was on the verge of inspecting a shed in the brick yard of
Zaitsev, in which according to all probability the murder of the boy took place,
this shed suddenly burned down. . .In the trial it has been shown that several
witnesses, intimidated by threats, did not dare to directly testify; with
others, the ringing of gold demonstrably played its role.
Thus a mysterious power has so strangely led by the nose the Russian court of
justice, whose honest intentions are otherwise by no means to be doubted, that
one hole remained for the caught fox through which he could slip away. Should
the consequences of a sentence of condemnation really have been feared?"
They were feared! The State's Attorney, who, in contrast to his foreign
colleagues, had not appeared for Jewry, had quite clearly recognized its
machinations in this giant trial -- how else is this passage from his address to
the jury to be explained: "You should not allow yourselves to fear [anything
that could happen] with the condemnation of Beilis, may the image of the martyr
Andrusha Yustschinsky step before your inner eyes; Beilis may be a saint for
others, for us he is not. The Russian people will extinguish his name from its
memory, his name will not be allowed to beshadow that of Andrei Yustschinsky;
for the latter is the name of a martyr. . .We do not fear the consequences of
the matter in which we have ventured ourselves, however difficult and serious
they might be. . ."
In his analysis of the motives of the crime, State's Attorney Fischer arrived at
the conviction, similar to that of the Czech attorney Dr. Baxa (37) in the
Hilsner trial at Kuttenberg, that Jewry had imposed once again a blood toll upon
non-Jewish humanity -- the Jews have not forgotten it! Fischer explained: ". . .
People call the Beilis case an outrageous case; we have experienced days of
revolution, in which officials (367) were killed, bombs were thrown at the
representatives of power, the people were shot at. . .but even out of this
bloody past the murder of Andrusha Yustschinsky stands out by its terrifying
character! On a bright day they slay an innocent boy, who never did anyone harm,
whom everyone loved; they murder him under unbelievable tortures, they loot his
blood. . .But this atrocity becomes a world event, because judgement is supposed
to be passed on a [certain] Beilis, because we possessed the impertinence to put
a Jew on the dock! If only we had been trying a case concerning Russians, . .
.then we would have seen at the defense table neither the cream of the legal
profession, nor famous scholars as expert witnesses. . .Who had need of his
blood? You have heard the definitive remarks of the expert witnesses, that the
crime could not have been committed by madmen or psychopaths. . .what interest
had they in the murder? Who are the murderers? One of them sits in the dock. .
.With what [crime] is the accused charged? It is determined that two thirds of
the boy's blood was removed, that he was tortured. . .Are there sects which use
blood? There is an entire series of trials which indicate this: One of these
trials has taken place in Austria in the case of Polna. . .These trials extend
back through all times. . .In all cases, the Jews have made the greatest efforts
to shelter their fanatics. . .They are unusual human beings, these Jews. . .The
Bible speaks of bloody sacrifices. . .From the Talmud, one could infer what one
wishes. We have the Zohar. The Hassidim appear on the scene, at their head the
famous (read: notorious!) Schneerson. . .It is a single current of religious
superstition. The use of the blood of Christians by the Jews is beyond any
question. Jewry feels the burden of the blood secret, but does not dare lay it
aside. . ." -- "We will remain pariahs, as long as it remains," a Jewess had
written in 1900, who was complicit in the blood-murder of Konitz. . .
Beilis had been acquitted on [the strength of] Jewish-international pressure --
not, however, by the Russian people! "Believe us, (368) o child, the Russian
Mother Earth will open itself and spit from out its depths the miserable wretch
who has shed your innocent blood. 'Twelve unenlightened peasants' -- may this
conscience of the Russian people stand as surety for you."(38) The files
concerning the "Beilis case" had thereby concluded. The outbreak of the World
War prevented their systematic revision, and after the collapse of Russia they
were likewise disposed of like those in Paris which concerned the "Damascus
case" after the take-over of the Ministry of Justice by the "attorney"
Crémieux-Smeerkopp in 1870!
Epilogue
Beilis was "compensated" in princely fashion. The "Israelite Committee" in New
York had arranged a collection of about 400,000 Gold Marks, in order to be able
to offer their "innocent, persecuted" racial comrade a large farm as a present
upon his arrival in the Land of Freedom, after a large number of Jews had
already emigrated to America already, during the trial -- in a similar manner,
of course, the ritual-slaughterer and "martyr" Buschhoff in Xanten had also been
"compensated."
Nevertheless, Beilis seemed to have developed no inclination toward agriculture.
According to a report in the Hammer of May 1914 (39), Beilis surfaced suddenly
in the land of his patriarchs. In Alexandria he was received like a king at his
disembarkation, especially for this purpose a "reception committee" had been
formed, at whose head stood a certain Isaac Piccioto. -- This name also seems
known to us: Two Jews of the same name had, if we rightly recall, played a role
in the ritual-murder trial of Damascus in 1840 -- just as it is a striking
phenomenon in general, that at Jewish blood-murder trials names surface over and
over again which have been previously mentioned for the same reason (Schneerson!).
Orient and Occident reached out their hands to each other once again: the circle
was closed! In Palestine Beilis was able to await in peace the coming ruin (369)
of the State over which the death sentence had already been pronounced by Jewry,
in order to return there, if needed, as an expert in the slaughtering of human
beings. . .
The men who had exerted themselves for Right and Justice fared otherwise,
however. The shocking scenes and abuses to which, for example, the student
Golubov and the psychiatrist Sikorski had been exposed through Jewish sub
humanity, still continued on after the conclusion of the trial.
So [it was for] Professor Kossorotov; he had belonged to the scientific experts
in Kiev, after the sudden demise -- which remained unsolved -- murder by poison
was spoken of here, too -- of the University Professor Obolonski. He had
presented his opinion before the court to the best of his knowledge, in full
scientific agreement with the other experts, which did not at all please the
Jews! A terrible campaign ensued against him in the following period, which
continued to his lecture hall in Petersburg University, without his having been
protected from these Jewish impertinences by his authority. There were
tumultuous scenes in his college. He even wrote about it in the Novoye vremya:
"If I had been told earlier about student nonsense, I would not have believed
it; but on 23 October (1913), I had to change my opinion. I saw human beings who
behaved like beasts, made ear-splitting noise, and were not receptive to a
single rational word. I had to believe in that which had formerly seemed
incompatible with the concept of [what] a student [is]. . ."(40)
Unfortunately, it isn't clear from the report, whether Kossorotov had clearly
recognized the racial membership of his audience who were "behaving like
beasts"!
The Beilis trial also lapsed into oblivion; but in the same measure as the
memory of non-Jewish humanity failed, Jewish memory retained its liveliness!
In 1917, armed with enormous financial resources, Trotsky was ordered to Russia,
in order to create a terra deserta, a desert, out of this land. In a (370)
bloodshed which was unprecedented in history up until then, next to which even
the bloody slaughters of the Old Testament pale, he fulfilled his instructions
to the fullest satisfaction of his secret Jewish task-masters. "The Jewish
people is unconquerable -- at stake is the fate of the Russian State," thus was
World Jewry able to cry out already, in 1913, in the certainty of its imminent
victory!
After the collapse of Russia, there began a genuine round-up against, first and
foremost, those persons who somehow or other stood suspected of harboring
anti-Jewish tendencies; it is now very instructive to discover that nearly all
accusers, witnesses and expert witnesses, who during the Beilis trial in Kiev
had spoken out against Jewry, fell as victims to the Jewish-Bolshevist Terror.
Thus, in 1919, the Professor of Psychiatry, J. Sikorski, was shot under martial
law in Kiev, together with a series of nationally-minded professors, while one
of his chief opponents in the Kiev trial, Bechterev, who appeared at the request
of the defense in the trial with a denial of the possibility of ritual-murder,
received a leading scientific administrative post, thanks to Jewish
protection.(41) Naturally, the Kiev judges also bled to death under their Jewish
executioners; but even the Russian Justice Minister Cheglovitov, who remained
completely indifferent during the trial, whose single "crime" had consisted of
having finally, after a period of a year (in the middle of 1912), taken the
trial -- which was threatening to become disastrously entangled in Jewish
snares, away from the authority of corrupt local officials and getting it
underway. . .even he went the same way [as the judges, etc.]. . .
"The murder of the boy Yustschinsky provided the occasion for the Minister
Cheglovitov and other enemies of the Jews, to initiate the famous ritual-murder
trial against Beilis. But this trial did not have the expected result, its
ramifications were, rather, very unpleasant for its originators," confirmed a
knowing Jew. . .(42)
(371)"Thus has Jewry decided, and thus had it happened!" But in one of the
Hammer issues of 1913 (Nr. 275) there are also these prophetic words: ". . .Once
again the Jewish party has triumphed; but -- some more such victories, and it
will lose without hope of recovery!"
The final monstrous victory of Jewry was the Jewish-Bolshevist massacre and the
sacrifice of racially flawless, and for that reason consciously or unconsciously
anti-Jewish classes of the people in numerous nations of the Old World. It was
the last victory. Aryan humanity attained consciousness. It won its way to the
conviction that it has a common enemy: the Jews
Recognizing the enemy, however, means: taking up the struggle. A new world order
is in the process of arising, after unspeakably difficult birth pangs, an order
in which the Jew has nothing more to seek and -- to murder!
S u m m a r y
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1
(p.375)
The newest Talmud research will have to also concern itself with ritual-murder.
A study group cannot help but begin with ethnology, in order to put the research
on the broadest possible basis. F. W. Ghillany(1), who was silenced by death,
already blazed the trail a hundred years ago. If our own historical
investigations could be extended in this direction -- of the Talmudists and
ethnologists -- this would be their greatest reward.
However, one should not be allowed to forget that for centuries, Jewry itself
has taken care to work to "clear things up." Already, in printings of the Talmud
of the 15th century, various printers had "left white, empty spots in many
passages, in order to avoid as much as possible the chance of attack by
non-Jews."(2) Thus the Amsterdam edition of the Talmud appears as "revised" in
1644, and the editions following in the next two centuries have also been still
more thoroughly "checked." In Damascus, the former Rabbi Moses Abu-el-Afieh,
having converted to Islam, spoke about this on the occasion of the ritual-murder
trial in 1840 and said that in the editions of the Talmud which were intended
for Europe, "empty places" were left in the books. At the inquiry of the Court's
Chairman, as to what purpose these empty places served, Moses gave the
diplomatic response: "In order to fill these up with the names of those
(non-Jewish) peoples, and everything that concerns them.(3)
It is extremely informative to discover in this connection that already, in the
Trent ritual-murder trial of the year 1475, a colleague of this Rabbi, Samuel,
stated that the Italian Jews had nothing "of this" in their books; but probably
writings "about it" would be found (376)with the Jews beyond the Ocean(4)!
Rohling correctly assumes that these "writings beyond the ocean" were the old,
still "uncastrated" copies of the Talmud which still existed in the Orient!
In the course of time the "castrated" Talmud arose, of which Rohling speaks in
his writings to the court at Cleves on the occasion of the ritual-murder of
Xanten. The omitted passages were immediately handed on orally with utmost care
or collected in the private notes of the rabbis. "Jewry earlier omitted passages
hostile to Christ or to Christians out of (justified) fear of severe
unpleasantness, or substituted harmless- sounding ones, but they orally filled
in the omissions (clearly indicated in part by sentence gaps in the printing);
or they likewise orally replaced the falsifications in the text with the proper
versions again, collected in special writings -- but they never held those
alterations to be correct, while Christians have constructed entire doctrinal
structures upon the Jewish additions to the text and similar falsifications in
the New Testament. Jewry knew and knows that those textual alterations are false
and doesn't give a thought to believing in them. . ." (5)
The Jew Horodezky, by the estimation of Bischoff "a meritorious Jewish scholar,"
and thus a man who had to know, wrote in his book which appeared in Bern in
1920, Religiöse (!) Strömungen im Judentum [Religious Currents in Judaism] (6):
"Besides the written literature, they (Hassidic Jews) keep a handed-down oral
teaching, into which they do not allow a stranger access. This is passed from
the father to the eldest son and has been kept so secret up to the very present,
that nothing of it has penetrated into the public [awareness]" Horodezky himself
uses the designation "secret teaching" for this oral tradition! In another
passage of his book, Horodezky cites the statement of the Rabbi Abraham (377)
Abu-laffia (1240): "The traditional teachings are for the fools," said this
Rabbi, "the secret teachings are for the clever ones. . ." Furthermore, the
former Rabbi Neophyte (Noe Weinjung) speaks in the year 1803 of a secret
blood-ritual, knowledge of which is permitted to be passed only from the father
to his son.
In the Kurzgefaßten Religions- und Sittenlehre für die israelitische Jugend
[Abridged Religious and Moral Teachings for Israelite Youth], revised by Dr. G.
Wolf (8th improved edition, Vienna, 1892, Alfred Hölder, "royal and imperial
court printing house"), the following portentious sentence is found (p. 15, §6):
"Aside from the commandments and laws which the Holy Scripture contains,
religion prescribes for us still [other] commandments, which have been passed
down from tradition."
On page 83 of the Israelitische Glaubens- und Pflichtenlehre, Leitfaden beim
Religionsunterricht der israelitischen Jugend [Israelite Teachings of the Faith
and Duty, Manual for Religious Instruction of Israelite Youth] of Leopold Bräuer
(5th edition, 1876 -- both books of instruction were registered by the
authorities as safe!), it says: "Judaism recognizes, apart from the written law,
an oral transmission, still originating from Moses, or tradition, which explains
the written law and states the further conditions for these practices. . .All
lawful regulations and prescriptions issuing from the Sanhedrin (High Council)
were propagated until toward the end of the second century after the beginning
of the common chronology [i.e., A.D. or C.E. = Common Era] by practice and oral
tradition in the schools, from generation to generation. The writing down of the
same was even forbidden, as contrary to law."
How very much has Jewry always feared a serious non-Jewish scientific occupation
with its literature of Law (Talmud, Schulchan aruch, etc.), is shown especially
graphically by the case of the German scholar Eisenmenger. This Orientalist, who
died in 1704 as a University professor in Heidelberg, had studied Judaism and
its literature most thoroughly in Amsterdam -- according to the information of
Theodor Fritsch(7) he had gone to the Rabbis under the pretext of desiring to
convert to Judaism, "since [he said] his studies in the Jewish writings had so
much (378) attracted him," asked for instruction in the Jewish religious books,
and was actually instructed for several years in the key writings of the Hebrew
texts. In 1700, Eisenmenger published -- or rather attempted to publish -- what
he had written down of his nearly twenty years of studies conducted with such
immense industry, in the two volumes of his Endecktes Judentum [Judaism
Discovered]. But hardly had it become known that such a work was being
published, when the Notary of the Jewish community at Frankfurt-am-Main, Simon,
reported on 22 May 1700, on behalf of the Jewish President of the Community, to
the regional Rabbi of Vienna and Chief Imperial Court Factor (!) Simson
Wertheimer about this event: "As is being said, a book is supposed to be printed
in High German, by the name of Endecktes Judentum, in which without a doubt many
slanders (!) to Judaism were allowed into print. Now it is known how easily we
Jews can fall into quarrelling, because we Jews have so many enemies at any
time. In particular, because the book is supposed to be printed in High German,
it's to be feared that great disaster could come out of this. Whether it would
be useful that the gentleman in Vienna wanted to present this suitably to
reliable friends, in order to prevent this evil. . ."
The first edition of the year 1700, of 2050 copies, which Eisenmenger had
printed at his own expense by Joh. Philipp Andrea in Frankfurt a. M., was
actually confiscated already on 21 July 1700 by the Kaiser at the behest of the
Frankfurt Jews and deposited in the Frankfurt poorhouse, after the author had
rejected a Jewish offer of 10,000 Taler for stopping the printing [of the book].
For a payment of 12,000 Ducats, the jews received the "right" of confiscating
the "dangerous" book even in private homes, should they find it there! However,
after Eisenmenger had died a"a sudden death" in total impoverishment during the
trial proceedings with the imperial authorities, King Friedrich I of Prussia let
the book be printed anew at his expense in 1711 in Königsberg, where the Kaiser
had nothing to say about it; afterwards, this new edition which had come into
existence thanks to the generosity of a Prussian king, disappeared but for a few
copies, in the well-known mysterious fashion, attained the status of a rarity,
and then fell to oblivion(8) -- we recall (379) that these events always repeat
themselves when Jewry feels itself struck in its innermost being by
publications!
If we nonetheless do not wish to go into the researches of Eisenmenger at this
juncture, this is to spare ourselves the objection of basing our work on
possibly outdated material!
Here we wish only to emphasize: Jewish laws, viewed from a racial- and
religious- psychological perspective, are a truly infernal manifestation of the
Jewish spirit, preaching only hatred and ruin toward non-Jews. Regarded from
this vantage point, a further expression of the racial soul, which till now was
taken much too little note of, conceals the most valuable information: it is the
festivals, for in these all the characteristic emotions are made manifest.
Indeed, what tones of feeling our German festivals and celebrations hold! An
immeasurably rich folk-soul holds sway here, where it believes itself to be most
undisturbed and and most private, in its own beauty, simplicity and purity for
uncounted generations.
In scarcely imaginable, eternally unbridgeable contrast to this are the Jewish
festivals and celebrations: these, too, know only one thing: hatred to the point
of extermination, the hatred of the racially and thus spiritually depraved
toward all of an elevated or refined character.
In the mythology of all people with a culture, the sun enjoys divine reverence;
but it is extremely distinctive that the Jews themselves regard themselves as
expressly "moon people." The University Professor S. Passarge, Hamburg, writes
as follows in his highly interesting introduction to the Buch vom Kahal [[Book
of the Kahal] (9) in relation to the lunar nature of the ghetto Jew: "Just as
the moon constantly turns toward men only one side and conceals the other from
his gaze, just so many people and organizations have a front side turned to the
outer world . . .but the back, on the other hand, corresponds to the true nature
of the entity concerned. Such 'moon natures' make the greatest effort (380) to
hide their reverse side. On this point they are extremely sensitive and feel
themselves threatened in their existence by its revelation. That is easily
understandable, for criminals and members of secret societies possess the 'moon
nature.' -- "The deeds of the Jews and their morals are not known to the world.
People believe they know them, because they've seen their beards. But they have
seen nothing other than these beards. Besides, they are still now, as in the
Middle Ages, a wandering mystery" wrote Heinrich Heine!
In Xanten the "honest citizen" Buschhoff took delight in bowling with his
bowling cronies on the evening after the blood-murder. -- The Jewish girls
Caspary and Tuchler in Konitz displayed themselves as "good citizen"
dance-lesson daughters, who had the instruction to hold onto the
ritual-slaughter victim Winter. -- "Good people" sent a shotgun to the little
Andrei in Kiev, but forgot to give him the powder with it, so that they could
lure him that way on a determined day. -- "Distinguished" Jews of Damascus were
numbered among the "circle of friends" of Father Thomas for decades, the same
Jews then butchered him in a back room. . .
Twelve "moons" determine the Jewish year: "You have made the moon, to divide the
year according to it" (Psalm 104, 19), and the Jewish festival calendar is also
based upon the course of the moon: "according to the moon man reckons his
festivals; it is a light that wanes and waxes again" (Sirach 43, 6 etc.).
The festival of the New Moon was still celebrated every month by the Jews of
Eisenmenger's times (around 1700); on the occasion of the ritual-murder of
Tisza-Eszlár in the year 1882 among other topics being talked about was the fact
that the Jews of the remote Theiß village were observed at nocturnal,
periodically repeated processions!
On the day before the Day of Atonement (the middle of September), the highest
Jewish holiday, according to the testimony of the Jew Berliner the symbolic hen
sacrifice (Kapporah) is still performed in a home ceremony during modern times:
According to the sex of the [family] member, a rooster or a hen is taken in hand
and swung three times around the head [of the person performing the rite], while
three times the words are repeated: "Let this be a substitute for me. . .let it
go (381) to its death, and may I enter into a long life of good fortune." This
ritual custom has the name Kapporah (10). In the Haggah (appendix) to the
Schulchan aruch (11) (Orach Chaiyim § 605) Moses Isserles, whose prescriptions
still possess normative authority today, according to Bischoff, says the
following: "Today the custom is in use in all nations. No one is allowed to
change it, for it is has become firmly incorporated. One takes a rooster for
every male and a hen for every female person. For a pregnant woman, one takes a
hen and a rooster. . ." After being subjected to the Kapporah swing-around three
times , the animal is ritually slaughtered following satanic tortures. "It is
customary to throw the entrails upon the roof, so that the birds eat them" (Sheftelowitz,
p. 34, etc.). -- "One throws the entrails upon the roofs or in the yard, from
where the birds are able to bear them away" (Moses Isserles). The
ritual-slaughtering forms the core purpose of the ceremony, and therefore the
pouring out of the blood of the victim!
According to the testimony of the Syrian Jewess Ben-Noud, in the Jewish families
of her native country the Kapporah-hen was tormented with the wings nailed down
and in a thousand ways before the ritual-slaughter by long needles, nails, and
the like, under horrid curses. Ben-Noud says further: "If they (382) could
crucify a non-Jew instead of a rooster, their joy would be all the greater. .
.the most timid Jews display the wildest fanaticism on this occasion."(12)
Antonius Margaritha, the son of the Chief Rabbi Margoles of Regensburg, in his
book Der gantz Jüdisch glaub [The Complete Jewish Faith], published in 1530,
says of this (p. 35), that in the opinion "of old Hassidim," a still more
effective sacrifice is made possible if an ape is taken for such a sacrifice,
"for the same is most like a human being"; the most effective victim, however --
is the non-Jew himself.
We know that by Jewish notions, every non-Jew -- thus not only every Christian
-- is the equivalent of cattle, for according to strict rabbinical concept only
the Jew is to be defined as a human being: "The Israelites are more pleasing to
God than the angels." -- "The seed of a non-Jew is like that of cattle." --
"Whoever dines with an Uncircumcised man does as if he were eating with a dog;
just as the dog is uncircumcised, so also the Foreskinned One (non-Jew)." -- The
non-Jews, whose souls come from the unclean spirit, are called swine." -- "One
is not permitted to send meat to a non-Jew, rather it is better that it be
thrown in front of dogs, because the dog is better than the non-Jew. . ." -- "A
strange woman that is not a daughter of Israel, is a piece of cow." Yesaya
Hurwitz writes in his work, Die zwei Gesetzestafeln [The Two Tablets of the Law]
(Wilmersdorf, 1686, page 250b, cited by E. Bischoff): "Although the non-Jews
have the same corporeal structure as the Jews, they resemble them only like an
ape does a human being. . ."
The Purim and the Pessach festivals were already considered at the beginning [of
this book]. The Purim festival, which memorializes the treacherous slaughter of
countless Persians committed in the kingdom of the degenerate King Xerxes
(485/465 B.C., biblical name Ahasverus), who had succumbed to total Jewish
influence, falls about 14 February (14 Adar). On this day the Book of Esther is
read, which we know, of course, was presented in a glorious edition to the Chief
Jew Crémieux, who had set free the murderers of (383) Father Thomas, ritually
slaughtered on this Purim festival in Damascus!
The curses of the Purim festival stretch out in monotonous repetition to the
start of the Jewish Easter (Pessach) [Passover] "festival" on 15 Nisan (about 28
March), which lasts a full eight days and signifies the downright satanic
heightening of Jewish hatred in commemoration of the affliction of Egypt. --
Neophyte, former Rabbi, in his work which appeared under the title: Il sangue
cristiano nei riti ebraici delle moderna Sinagoga [Christian Blood in Hebrew
Rites of Modern Synagogues] in 1883 at Prato, said: "The Jews are most satisfied
when they are able to kill children, for children are virginal and innocent. .
.they ritually slaughter them in the days of Passover. . ." Actually, the
overwhelming majority of victims, as we have been able to determine, are
children!
Hatred unto death -- it is that hatred, according to the Jewish idea, as it has
been trumpeted forth to the Jews down from Sinai against all non-Jews, it is the
"quietly smoldering hatred imbibed with mother's milk, which is taught and
nourished in the ghetto and the synagogues" (Neophyte-Weinjung, cited by
Athanasius Fern, page 17) and has been precipitated out not only as an essential
component of perhaps a minority within Judaism!
"The mass of modern Jewry in its hatred against the non-Jews today is just as
blind and ruthless as were the Old Testament Hebrews, striding with dry feet
across the Red Sea; the Orthodox Jew of the 19th century is even today still the
same, filled with fanatic bigotry, a weird being soaked in hatred of everything
non-Jewish, just as was the Talmud-Jew of the Middle Ages who was burned to
ashes at the stake . . ." (13)
But all the hate-songs of the Jewish festivals belong, in the final analysis, to
that "great Jewish hatred" which Cheskel Zwi-Klötzel adorned in the following
classic words in the Janus(14): ". . .Just as we Jews know of any non-Jew, that
he somewhere in a corner of his heart is an anti-Semite and must be (384) one,
so is every Jew, in the deepest foundation of his being, a hater of every
non-Jew. I well prevent myself from saying 'anti-Christian,' or something
similar, for perhaps our hatred is mildest toward Christianity, because in the
Christianity of today we need not see a foe(15).
Whoever among us is not spiritually and intellectually castrated, whoever isn't
too impotent to hate, he shares this hatred! Let it be gladly admitted that it
goes against the grain of many a man, but that is only a proof for the vital
potency of this hatred! I am not authorized to speak in the name of Judaism;
perhaps I have never exchanged a word with Jews over just these things; but this
custody [of words] is of purely legalistic form, in reality there is nothing as
alive in me as the conviction of this, that if there is anything at all which
unifies all Jews of the World, it is this great sublime hatred. I believe I must
do without tracing out any sort of scientific basis, perhaps of an historical or
psychological nature. I feel this hatred, this hatred against something
impersonal, intangible, as a portion of my nature that has ripened in me, for
whose growth and for whose development I must call a natural law responsible.
And for that reason it seems shameless to be ashamed of this hatred, as a part
of nature, and base and mean, to hide it. . .
No one can question the fact that a strong Jewry is a danger for everything that
is non-Jewish. All attempts of certain Jewish circles to prove the contrary must
be (385) described as cowardly as they are comical. And as doubly deceitful as
cowardly and comical!
The reproach was made to the Jews of the Middle Ages, that they drew all gold to
themselves and did not give it back out again. Of course one could help oneself
easily -- with violence. The Jews of the present are doing exactly the same
thing with spiritual gold, we shall see whether it is possible for Germany to
take it away from them. Whether we have the power or not, that is the single
question which interests us, and for that reason we must strive to be and to
remain a power. . .
Jewry can only be overcome spiritually! Become strong in non-Jewry, stronger
than we are in Jewry, and you shall remain the victor!"
Now one must beware of positing hatred as the sole foundation of ritual-murder.
We are thoroughly aware that it may require the research labor of entire
generations to find an unambiguous, satisfying solution. To a much stronger
degree than till now, for example, Jewish philosophy must be taken into account;
Johann von Leers has performed the service of having made the research of
ritual-murder aware of this path, in that he points to the work of the Jew Oskar
Goldberg(16). Yet before we accept these attempts at interpretation, which
perhaps will assist in guiding [us to] the solution of the whole problem, it is
necessary once again to summarize, step by step, the results attained up to now
under definite perspectives.
As has emerged from the collected historical evidence, the Jewish blood-laws
find their application first and foremost during the Purim and Pessach
revenge-festivals, without our wishing to say thereby that they were not applied
at other times of the year!
It is striking that in the places at which the blood-toll was imposed, (386) a
large number of foreign Jews surfaces before the blood-murder, as if these had
received secret instructions to be present at the performance of the
ritual-slaughter as representatives of other Jewish communities.
At the ritual-crime of Lincoln of the year 1255, a ramified murder-organization
is already recognizable; the strands extend to London -- a generation later all
the Jews of England had to be arrested due to other crimes! In more recent days
these connections allow themselves to be more acutely recognized. On the evening
before the Jewish "Atonement" holiday of 1875, numerous foreign Jews, among them
a ritual-slaughterer, had arrived in Zboró (Hungary) in order to seize the
already decided-upon victim; in 1877, on the occasion of the double
ritual-murder of Szalacs (Hungary), according to the statement of a coachman not
fewer than 40 Jews from abroad arrived, and in Tisza-Eszlár, whose Jewish
population already consisted of perhaps a seventh of the total, the crowd of
foreign Jews was nevertheless conspicuous when Esther Solymosi had disappeared.
Likewise, in 1895 in Hungary, a girl, the small Juliska, was
ritually-slaughtered; on this day (6 September) three wagon loads of Jews, among
them a schächter, arrived! On the evening after the vanishment of the boy
Cybulla in Skurz, on 21 January 1884, numerous foreign Jews assembled in the
presence of the manager, where then the whole night through a striking level of
goings-on prevailed. In Polna the murder gang found a hiding place with the
Rabbi and in the Jewish school -- already there was reference to the role of the
"limping" Jew! Konitz was teeming with Jews when Ernst Winter was
ritually-slaughtered. Six foreign schächter had arrived, but in front of the
house of a Jewish resident, ten foreign Jews, probably cult officials, were
noticed, and the station assistant of Konitz later stated under oath that there
had never been so many Jews to arrive in the place, as around the time of the
murder of Winter. -- A conversation of the Rabbi Kellermann had been overheard:
". . .that so many devils are crawling around here?" -- ". . .that of course
nothing will get out. . ." At the time of the fair of Lobsen, on 31 March (!)
1913, when the small Kador disappeared, a large number of mostly Polish-speaking
Jews had turned up in the near vicinity, and in (387) Kiev, the remote property
of the Zaitsev brickyard, which was occupied only by a few families, offered a
simply ideal place of concealment.
In almost all cases, the victim is surveiled and selected in accordance with a
plan. In Tisza-Eszlár they thought to have especially free rein when the "lot"
was tossed upon the child of a widow living in the most penurious conditions. In
Corfu the foster child of the Jew Chaim Sarda, the little Maria Desylla, had
never been entered into the Register, and if her kidnapping had not been
noticed, she could have been eliminated without attracting much attention. In
the same year in Xanten, a stunningly beautiful boy, Johann Hegmann, fell into
the net -- he was lured into a Jewish store! In Polna the vagabond Hilsner
chased after both his victims for a long time in pursuit of the instructions of
his taskmasters in Prague or Vienna; Agnes Hruza, moreover, was visited and
"given the once over" in her living quarters in Wieschnitz shortly before her
death by unknown Jews. Ernst Winter was surveiled by his Jewish dance class
acquaintances in Konitz; this victim therefore also seemed particularly
suitable, since the parents lived outside the area and could not immediately
order inquiries made. Young people working as servants, who no longer were able
to live with their parents were in especial danger -- we recall the victims
about whom Géza v. Ónody and Theodor Fritsch reported! The "lot" finally fell to
the little Andrusha in Kiev, who in order to procure the still missing powder
for the gun presented to him by Jews, ran into the clutches of his slaughterers.
The ritual-slaughter act, performed according to an exactly defined rite, is
supposed to occur -- as the act of sacrifice -- before the eyes of all Jews
"invited" to it, according to Rohling(17); thus, according to the testimony of
the young Scharf, during the ritual-slaughtering of Esther Solymosi, the
Tisza-Eszlár synagogue was nearly filled up with foreign Jews, when the girl was
led to sacrifice by the beggar-Jew Wollner ("and when she refused, he seized her
by the (388) hand and led her out of our apartment")! In Konitz the worker
Masloff heard the din of voices of numerous people and in between a gurgling
sound at the murder-cellar of the Levy property during the slaughtering of the
gymnasium student; in the building of the Jewish Zaitsev brickyard in Kiev,
numerous Jews were already living there already days before the blood-murder,
among them the representative of the schächter-dynasty and Zaddik ("holy man")
Faivel Schneerson, "at the naming of whom the accused Beilis wiped the sweat
from his brow." The slaughter was in all probability carried out in the shed,
which then later suddenly went up in flames during the machinery of
investigation, which was put into suspiciously slow operation. Father Thomas and
his servant bled to death within view of the heads-of-family who had come
together in Damascus for the celebration of the Purim festival. -- there were
seven, but the number seven has a "holy" character for the Jews! At the
horrific, in its details scarcely to be described torture and slaughter of the
three-year-old Ivanov in Welish (1883), a half-hundred Polish Jews were present.
At the house of the Head Rabbi Copinus in Lincoln, the executioners of the
eight-year-old victim formed a "Justice Court" in 1255 and gloated over the
inhuman tortures. The small Andreas Oxner, "Anderl von Rinn," was likewise layed
upon a sacrifice-stone and bled to death in the presence of the Jews who stood
around him. In 1529 at Bösing, the Jews were "invited" to be present at the
ritual-slaughter of a nine-year-old child -- "and then each one of the Jews
stabbed the little child for a while". . .in 1540 Jewish dealers stood around
the boy Michael Pisenharter from Sappenfeld who had been bound to a pillar and
flayed. In 1598 a four-year-old child was ritually slaughtered in a Podolia
village, at which the "leading" Jews of the region were present. . .During the
horrible "sacrifice" of little Simon of Trent in the house of the Rabbi Samuel,
according to the Jew Angelus ("Angel") "all the Jews stood around the child, who
was stretched out upon a board placed above a small container."
The society of the sacrificers is supposed to consist only of reliable people,
who see something sacred in the act (389) and -- can keep their mouths shut! For
this reason, women, youths, and children are not supposed to be drawn into the
actual act of slaughter. In the year 1452 the adolescent son of a Jewish
physician had been present at the slaughter of a two-year-old child and had even
enjoyed some of the fruits which had been dipped in the blood of the victim:
"and for him it was as if his intestines wanted to be heaved out of him. . ."
Throughout the years this picture of horror pursued him, until he made a
complete confession and converted to Christianity (18). In Easter time of 1540 a
Jewish child reported about the torture of little Michael: "This dog howled for
three days long. . ." The five-year-old son of the Jew Abraham blabbed out to a
shocked court about the death of Andreas Takáls. The offspring of the temple
servant Scharf in Tisza-Eszlár threw the Jewish stage- direction into confusion!
Through the keyhole of the synagogue, Moritz Scharf had seen and was so stunned
by the sight, that he broke down and before the examining judge Bary, gave to
the protocol a comprehensive report, and a Konitz Jewess wrote that letter in
which, in contrast to her racial comrades, she maintained that this indeed was
murder!
"And your death shall be with a blocking of your mouth like a beast, that dies
and has not voice or speech." Gruesome tortures precede the actual slaughtering.
In the Trent ritual-murder trial of 1475, the Rabbi Samuel testified that it is
necessary that the victim give up the ghost while being tortured; otherwise the
blood is no good! (Est necesse, quod ille puer moriatur in tormentis; aliter
ille sanguis non est bonus.) [It is necessary that that boy should expire in
torment; else that blood is not good.] In this case the victim, "ille puer," the
boy Simon, was stabbed with needles and portions of his flesh were ripped away
with tongs while he was fully conscious, at which [events] they spoke and sang
in Hebrew: "So may all the enemies of Israel be destroyed. . ."
We do not wish to let those images of the horror arise again: the stabbed and
cut up body of the victim resembled, for the most part, (390) a single wound --
"and the entire body so badly abused, that itself it seemed to be one entire
wound. . ." : On the body of the seven-year-old Simon Kierelis, tortured to
death in Vilna in 1592, over 170 wounds were counted -- aside from the many
piercing wounds which Jewish executioners had inflicted upon him under the nails
of his fingers and toes; the corpse of a five-year-old boy, discovered in 1826
on a highway near Warsaw, showed over 100 wounds as signs of the withdrawal of
blood. . .
The victims have often been sexually abused, such as Ludwig van Bruck, in 1429;
Szydlov in 1597; Andreas Takáls in 1791; even this is to be understood as a
symbolic act.
Then the schächter gets to work; in his capacity as designated Jewish cult
official, he reads out a prayer of praise, part of it before and part of it
following his "holy act," in which he promises sacred silence and vows to God to
that he will perform (19) the same act -- daily, if he can.
In most cases, as for example in Damascus (1840), the act of slaughter occurs
approximately at sundown; it is the time for which (Exodus 12: 6) the
slaughtering of the "Paschal lambs" is prescribed. . .
In Kiev Faivel Schneerson surfaced, and in Polna Hilsner himself performed the
slaughter in both ritual-murders after the ritual-slaughter knife had been
delivered to him from outside the area; the so-called "crooked" Jew, that
Galician monster who then surfaced again a year later in Konitz, would probably
not have been one of the lower cult officials, such as a precentor (cantor),
schächter (schochet) [ritual-slaughterer; the second term, schochet, is Hebrew],
or circumciser (mohel), but rather, to judge by the fearful anxiety with which
[making] further statements about his person was avoided, and the deference
shown to him, a very highly-placed "personality" who had been sent for the
supervision of the ritual and who possibly was in contact with those Hassidic
"holy men" to which group the Schneersons also belonged. -- The witness Marie
Pernicek, who had given her evidence concerning these Jews to the protocol,
(391) was poisoned (20). In Damascus, the Rabbi Moses Abu-el-Afieh had been
present at both ritual killings, and the Károlyer Rabbi was consulted for the
nocturnal ritual-slaughter of Andreas Takáls in 1791. The Jews retreating
through the Inn Valley in 1462 had brought along a rabbi, and the ritual slaying
of Simon of Trent in 1475 and of Hugh of Lincoln in 1255 were performed in the
houses of rabbis. Even these few examples suffice to show that at all times the
ritual act of slaughter was and is most carefully supervised.
Often, the schächter of the surrounding area arrive at the place of slaughter
together; in Konitz, for example, it was proven that not fewer than six outside
ritual-slaughterers appeared at the time of the blood-murder of Winter; in the
case of Damascus, where apparently a schächter was not immediately reachable,
the Jewish barber was sent for! In Tisza-Eszlár, an eyewitness, the young Scharf,
likewise discovered several schächter had appeared from the surrounding area.
A man who, in his native Hungary, had come to know this murder pestilence in all
its manifestations, the Knight Georg von Marcziányi, wrote the following about
the Jewish ritual-slaughterers: "Despite all of the enlightenment and all the
humanitarianism-pap of the 19th century, which has become a very effective
slogan for a millennium of superstition and fanatic religious hatred, so that it
has darkened the progressive spirit of the times with its kosher prejudice, like
spider webs obscure with their network of threads the window nooks of seedy
apartments, the Jewish ritual-slaughterer has remained a ritual-slaughterer: a
traditional creature from out of gray antiquity, with long peyes [earlocks,
which Orthodox and particularly Hassidic Jews believe to be prescribed by Mosaic
Law], grease-dripping kaftans, and full of the most bigoted superstition." (21)
The circular cut of ritual-slaughter carves the tissues of the neck down to the
cervical vertebrae and simultaneously the large neck vessels which lead to the
brain, exactly in the same way that the Jewish ritual-slaughterers of cattle
still to this day slaughter the (392) unstunned beast. The non-Jew, too, is of
course merely an animal, which receives its ritual consecration only through the
fact that it is offered to Yahweh as a pleasing sacrifice! "In order to execute
the act of ritual-slaughter," says the Jewish medical officer Dammann in his
Gutachten über das jüdische Schlachtverfahren [Expert Opinion Concerning the
Jewish Procedure of Ritual-Slaughter] (Hanover, 1886), "the schächter stretches
the skin of the neck with his left hand and quickly makes a cut somewhat below
the larynx, through the tissues of the neck with the razor-sharp knife held in
his right hand -- so deeply, that he penetrates to the vertebral bones. By the
same (cut), the skin, the windpipe, the esophagus (gullet), the veins and
arteries, as well as the nerve trunks which accompany these large vessels, are
completely severed. In the beginning, the blood streams out massively from the
opened vessels, then gradually more sparsely. . ." Dr. Steiner, as an example,
who as the chief doctor saw the body of little Hegmann in Xanten on the evening
of 29 June 1891, was convinced "that was a very sharp, large instrument with
which the crime must have been done," since all parts of the neck down to the
cervical vertebrae had been cut through.
In the Polna ritual-murder trial of 1899, according to the existing protocols,
the court physician Dr. Prokes in Kuttenberg determined that the
ritual-slaughter cut could have been performed only by an expert hand and only
with a long, sturdy, and very sharp instrument which left behind completely
smooth wound edges and thrust down to the cervical spine. The second forensic
expert witness, Dr. Michalek, reached the same conclusion.
This method of killing makes possible a complete running out of the blood from
all blood vessels, since the heart still continues to keep the blood moving even
after the neck is cut: the blood is, so to speak, pumped out of the body through
the opened arteries until death by exsanguination intervenes. While the autopsy
of those who died [as victims] in the usual types of murder cases yield the
finding that the blood in the blood vessels is still present aside from that
which ran out directly through the fatal wounds, the bodies and/or body parts of
the victims who bled to death under the ritual-slaughter knife show themselves
to be absolutely empty of blood! As we have seen, this evidence, confirmed by
plentiful, strictly objective medical expert opinions in many centuries, stands
unshakably firm (393) and can in no way be impaired or reduced in its
significance: to the murderers, what matters is gaining the blood of their
victims, without, insofar as it is possible, leaving any behind. The blood
flowing out is caught as carefully as possible; thus, at the scene of the
slaughter of Agnes Hruza in the Brezina Woods at Polna, only the most
insignificant traces of blood -- spatters -- were to be discovered, according to
official findings. The traces of blood in the barn at Xanten proved to be merely
traces of secondary blood from the child's body having been dragged there. The
blood of Esther Solymosi, according to the testimony of the young Scharf, flowed
at first into an earthenware plate (more probably a bowl), which then was
emptied into a saucepan; the blood of Father Thomas was caught in a large bowl
"without there having been a drop lost" (protocol statement of the barber
Soliman). The blood of the servant, Ibrahim Amara, was poured into a large white
bottle from out of a copper bowl by means of a tin funnel (testimony of
Murad-el-Fattal). The blood of the small Simon of Trent filled "one and a half
pots" (unam scutellam cum dimidio). In the year 1235, on Christmas Day, Jews of
Fulda collected the blood of the five (!) children of a miller in prepared
pouches; in 1267 the ritual-slaughter victim, a little girl, was layed upon
linen which had been folded over several times and, according to the same
collection of documents, her blood was caught up by the bedding (Aronius). In
1452 the blood of a two-year-old child killed at Savona flowed into ritual
containers, like the blood of the ritually-slaughtered "Anderl of Rinn" in 1462.
The blood of the nine-year-old Maißlinger, tortured to death in Bösing on
Ascension Day of 1529, was sucked out from the body by means of quills and small
"Röhrle" [tubes] and collected into bottles. Likewise collected in bottles was
the blood of the three-and-a-half-year-old Russian nobleman's son, who had bled
to death on Good Friday 1753 in the vicinity of Kiev under [the knife of] his
schächter. . .The Jewess Ben-Noud found a large brass vase in the house of
relatives, "which the Arabs call a laghen," totally filled with blood after she
had noticed a short time before the bodies of two ritually-killed boys hanging
on the roof! -- And these few examples can be multiplied.
According to Lyutostansky, (Die Juden in Rußland [The Jews in Russia]), the
Polish Jews also employed so-called rolling barrels in order to obtain the blood
of their (394) victims. This will always have been the case when no Schächter
was available. The victims, mostly children, were tied up and then rolled back
and forth for a long time in barrels which were densely outfitted with nails,
knives, and other sharp objects, until the completely cut and pierced body had
given all its blood. This procedure was also generally known in the Orient and
was never requited!
For Germany, we can detect one case where Jews employed this procedure: it was
the Breslau child-murder of the year 1453(22).
It has to be striking that the Jewish murderers, who otherwise acted so
shrewdly, did not, in one single case in all these centuries, get rid of or hide
the bodies of their ritually-slaughtered victims so that there were no remains,
be it by burying or burning, so as to erase the traces of the crime, but on the
contrary, disregarding any precautionary measures, they did not trouble
themselves further, and indeed, actually put them on public display! At most,
they sunk the bodies in swamps, canals, lakes, or in the sea. Thus a stabbed and
cut child's body was discovered in 1244 at the cemetary of St. Benedict in
London, and in 1247 the cut-to-pieces body, empty of blood, of the two-year-old
Meilla was thrown into the city ditch of Valréas. The abused body of the
schoolboy Conrad was found in a Thuringia vineyard in 1303; in 1503, D. Johann
Eck saw near Freiburg the child's body which had been discovered "in the woods";
a peasant woman found the little Maißlinger among thorn hedges in 1529, and in
1590 and 1592 ritually-slaughtered children's bodies were come upon, lying in
the open, in the small town of Szydlow and in Vilna; in 1744, a father found his
abused and ritually-slaughtered child lying on a tree trunk in the Kaltener
forest at Eppan (Tyrol). In 1826 a boy's body, drained of blood and disfigured,
was lying on a highway near Warsaw. The corpses of the Hungarian Szabó children
were squeezed into the box of a fire engine in 1877. The mutilated body of
Franziska Mnich (1881) had been hurled into a forest ravine! Thrown into wells
(395) were, for example, the bodies of the victims in Lincoln (in 1255),
Überlingen (Baden, 1332), Damascus (in 1890), Kaschau (1891). The bodies of
Father Thomas and of his servant were dismembered and tossed into a sewage canal
of the Jewish Quarter; the young Hungarian woman Sipos was pulled out of the
Türr-Canal in 1879; the dismembered corpse of the boy Cybulla in Skurz was found
under a bridge outside of the village, after the schächter Josephson had been
observed there in the gray of morning with a heavy sack on his back; the body of
the little Johann Hegmann was layed upon the hay of a barn in Xanten so
challengingly, that anyone who walked through the barn door absolutely had to
come across it! In Corfu the mutilated body of Maria Desylla was set down in a
hallway. The corpse of Marie Klima, discovered in the Brezina Woods, and of
Agnes Hruza, were covered only superficially with brushwood, in the direct
vicinity of a heavily used path. The torso of the gymnasium student Winter was
sunk in a city rinse basin; other body parts were found scattered all across the
entire area of the city! The mutilated corpse of Helene Brix disappeared into
the Neuendorfer Lake in 1910 near Stettin, and in 1911 the empty-of-blood body
of Olga Hagel was pulled from the Breitensteiner Lake (West Prussia); in 1912
someone stumbled upon the blood-emptied body of the merchant's apprentice
Stanislaus Musial in front of a house in Posen in the early morning hours of the
first day of the Pentecost holidays; the dismembered and blood-empty corpse of
the twelve-year-old Elma Kelchner was stuffed in a sack and set down upon open
land in Ludwigshafen, and in 1911 the cut-up and blood-drained body of the
little Andrusha had been displayed, so to say, publicly in a clay pit in Kiev:
"The body was not hidden, but on the contrary, to a certain degree publicly
displayed, as if they wanted to say: here, see, we have the power! We will prove
it to you! Who dares to come up against us? We are all-powerful. . ."(23)
S u m m a r y
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
(p.395)
In his day, a Masaryk believed that the circumstance that the body of Agnes
Hruza, for example, was only superficially concealed, (396) had to be
interpreted as proof of Jewish innocence. In the year 1900 he wrote as a
representative of the European Intelligentsia as follows about this: "And
finally, it must be once again and urgently emphasized: the body of Agnes Hruza
was not in the least concealed, on the contrary, it was downright obtrusively,
so to speak, put on display. Secret ritual-murderers could never have dealt with
their victim in this way; I repeat, the place where the body was discovered was
clearly so selected with the intention that the murder could be ascribed to
perpetrators from Polna. The covering of the body with four flimsy spruce
branches originated quite obviously more from the need of a certain piety, than
the aim of hiding the body . . .(24) But Theodor Fritsch correctly assumed in
this connection that here, too, ritual-symbolic motives were at work. Actually,
in the year 1598 -- which could not have been known to Fritsch -- in a Polish
ritual-murder trial on the occasion of the blood-murder of Woznik in the Podolia
province, to which a four-year-old child of a peasant from Smirzanóv fell
victim, a Rabbi explained at his interrogation that Jews are not allowed in any
instance to bury one of the goyim, because they would thereby pollute themselves
by this act and burden themselves with a deadly sin(25).
The final and most important question, which concerns the use of the blood, has
often been answered in a totally distorted and superficial manner. According to
our findings up to this point, to begin with, a symbolic act of sacrifice will
also have to be the basis for the ritual use of the blood.
In 1247(26) the Jews in the little city of Valréas, which belongs to what is now
the Department of Vaucluse, took the blood from a two-year-old girl-child with
horrific accompanying mutilations, after they had nailed her to a cross, on 26
March, which was the Tuesday of Easter week. Thanks to an energetic capture,
some of the Jews of this province could be convicted. The Jew Burcellas, when
asked what they wanted to do with the blood, confessed (397) "that in olden
times the High Priest had sprinkled the blood of a bull upon the altar"; the Jew
Lucius added to this, that, if a child had been obtained, they would want to
make from the blood a sacrifice, so to speak (quasi sacrificium), and that they
would be obligated to send some of the blood to other Jews, and that the child
actually was supposed to have been crucified on Good Friday, but they had not
been able to keep it hidden that long and because of this they killed it during
the night on Wednesday. The words that appear in the interrogation protocol,
quasi sacrificium, Lucius explained by the additional statement that the Jews
were not able to produce a real sacrifice, because they no longer had a temple.
According to Lucius, the symbolic sacrifice of a non-Jew = cattle, enters the
picture, whose blood is "sent on" to others, i.e., to Jews not living in the
region, so as to allow these to participate directly, so to speak, in the
sacrifice! "For, though Yahweh took our temple away from us, he nevertheless has
left us a substitute for it, which enlightens the soul still more, namely the
shedding of the blood of the goyim onto a dry stone before the face of
Yahweh."(27) Thomas Cantipratanus (named from the cloister Cantimpré at Cambrai,
died around 1263), living around the same time, answered the question of why the
Jews have to shed Christian blood each year, as follows(28): "It is, you see,
quite certain, that they cast lots each year in every province, as to which
community or city is supposed to furnish the other communities with Christian
blood. . ." It is obvious, that H. L. Strack had himself a very delicate task in
devaluating this and further historical evidence to the favor of the Jews.
At the Trent ritual-murder trial of 1475, a Jew living in Feltre, who later
converted to Christianity (Johannes Christianus de Feltro), swore that his
father, in days gone by, had been a schächter in a city in Germany and had told
him that 40 years ago the Jews of Landshut, where his father had then been
living, murdered a Christian boy with the aim of getting possession of his
blood. On the first day of Easter (398), before the evening meal, his father
regularly mixed some drops of blood in a glass of wine and, with gruesome
curses, sprinkled the table with it. He knew this from his own experience [he
said] but this occurred always in the greatest secrecy.
Athanasius Fern(29) describes this ceremony as follows: "The Paterfamilias pours
some drops of the fresh, or a substance of powdered, blood into a glass, dips
the finger of his left hand in and besprinkles ('blesses') everything that is on
the table with it: 'therefore, we ask Yahweh, that he might send the ten plagues
to all enemies of the Jewish faith.' At this, they dine, and the father of the
family intones at the end of the meal: 'Therefore (like the child, whose blood
the bread and wine contain) may all goyim go down to destruction!'" Purim and
Easter wine are especially valuable when they contain the blood of non-Jews:
Thus, as these are consumed, Yahweh might consume, exterminate, "devour" all
that is non-Jewish! "You shall devour all the peoples, whom the Lord your God
gives unto you, and let not thine eye look upon them with mercy" (Deuteronomy 7:
16). . ."For we shall devour them like bread" (Numbers 14: 9).
The Trent ritual-murderers were -- as is known -- questioned separately. Israel,
the son of the Rabbi Samuel, in whose house the synagogue was located, confessed
as chief witness that various Jews had complained that this time they were not
able to bake any Easter bread (sacrificial meal), since none of them had blood
from non-Jews in stock. In answer to the question as to for what the blood was
necessary, Israel replied: "that their faith teaches them that they would smell
bad if they did not include Christian blood in the Easter bread." This "bad
smell" is, in this case -- and, to be sure, only in this case -- to be taken
figuratively, since, according to Israel, "the Rabbis want to express by this,
that the Jew who does not use Christian blood offends against the Law". . .To
the question, what meaning inheres in the enjoyment of this blood, and why the
Jews eat it in Easter bread, Israel relied: "that this symbolizes a
commemoration of that blood, of which Yahweh spoke to Moses, when he commanded
him, during the time when the Jews were in the captivity of Pharaoh, to sprinkle
the thresholds of their houses with blood. . ."
(399) The judges also wished to know how much blood was taken from the victim.
Israel answered: "One and a half pots full." The blood tapped from the boy Simon
was supposed to be distributed among the co-religionists in other lands.
The remaining accused confirmed and/or supplemented this exposition. The Jew
Angelus knew that non-Jewish blood also was employed for staunching the bleeding
at circumcision. The Master Joseph, [he said] who lives in Riva and has
circumcised his sons, has constantly been supplied with non-Jewish blood. But
once he did not have any, so as a "substitute" a dark red, liquid tree resin,
which has the name "dragon blood" (sanguis draconis) was used. H.L. Strack also
heard a rumor of the use of this "dragon blood," which he determined on further
inquiry to be resin from a kind of palm tree native to Farther India, and, with
relief, grasped at the existence of this (note well!) substitute remedy in his
"expert opinion" given for the release of the ritual-murderers at the
ritual-murder trial of Tisza-Eszlár, in which he writes: "Also, ignorance of the
dragon blood used for the healing of the wound of circumcision, has given rise
to the formation of the erroneous opinion that the Jews need Christian blood."
(30) In such a way were "expert opinions" rendered, although Strack was very
well acquainted with the Trent evidence!
The old Samuel, the proprietor of the murder-house, determines the age of a
ritual-slaughter victim as follows: ". . .it is better if the child to be
slaughtered is not more than seven years old. . .a girl-child is only suitable
for sacrifice if she is a virgin . . ." The forensic medical autopsy of Agnes
Hruza had yielded the fact that the victim had remained unmolested. . .
Asked about the time of slaughter, Samuel explained: "The victim can be killed
at any time, but it is more pleasing to God (Yahweh!) if this occurs shortly
before Easter. [He said that] he did not learn this from the Scriptures, but
heard it from Master David Springer, who had taught at Bamberg and Nuremberg. .
." Here the Rabbi Samuel produced an additional (400) proof for our
above-mentioned exposition that the compromising ritual-slaughter prescriptions
are passed down orally.
The eldest male of the Jewish community, Moses, an eighty-year-old gray-beard,
who had lived in Germany earlier and had come to Trent from there, told that,
among the Jews, he who uses the most Christian blood also enjoys the most esteem
(ille judeus magis laudatur, qui plus utitur de sanguine pueri christiani).
Asked for his further expositions and to go into details about the use of the
blood, about which he would know all, Moses answered still more clearly than the
Rabbi Samuel: "Concerning these things, no written laws exist, but the rabbis
and the scholars teach us, and this teaching is transmitted by means of
tradition, from generation to generation"
In 1494 at Tyrnau in Hungary, several Jews arrested due to a ritual-crime were
questioned by the then Palatine and Lord of the highest court, Stefan v. Zápolya.
An old Rabbi, on being questioned as to what, then, had actually been the cause
of the murdering of an innocent child, gave as a fourth reason the explanation
that, according to an old, secret commandment of the religion, the Jewish
community was admonished to slaughter a non-Jew every year, by a sort of casting
of lots, in order to procure his blood(31)!
The proceedings against the Jewish ritual-murderers in Damascus, under the
chairmanship of the French Consul, take place 365 years after the Trent trial,
and here likewise, the evidence given to the protocol is totally congruent in
content with that given over a third of a millennium before at Trent -- there is
not a more conclusive historical proof for the effectiveness of Jewish
ritual-slaughter instructions and their ritual expositions having lasted for
centuries.
Paul Nathan, in his book about Tisza-Eszlár, is not at a loss for an
"explanation," even in the face of this evidentiary material; he brazenly and
cheekily claims that the statements of their unfortunate co-religionists in
Trent "tortured out" of them at the time, were "suggested" to the "accused" Jews
in Damascus by the (401) "devilish" methods of the French Consul -- but the
Jewish hack leaves it up to his European Intelligentsia to explain, how, of all
people, a Consul sitting in Damascus could have knowledge of the then
still-missing court documents, composed in the judicial Latin of the Middle
Ages! The Jewish barber Soliman, answered the question of the French Consul
Ratti-Menton, what was done with the blood of the murdered Father: "It was
needed for the festival of the unleavened bread." The Pasha put the same
question to Isaak Harari; this man replied after various evasions: "We have
slain him in order to get his blood, and indeed, out of reasons of religion, for
we had need of the blood for the fulfillment of a religious duty . . .We put it
in the unleavened bread!" -- Aaron Harari confirmed this! The Rabbi Moses
Abu-el-Afieh stated to the protocol: "The blood is for the unleavened bread; on
the day, where they are baked, the Great Rabbi (in this case Jacob Antabli)
stays standing in front of the baking oven. The Pious Ones (=Jews) send him meal
out of which he makes bread, which he himself kneads and works in the blood. .
.Then he sends the bread to the Pious Ones. . ." These breads were then sent on
to Baghdad! Rabbi Moses further reported: "They were all at the slaughtering and
were joyful, since it was a matter of performing a religious act. . .It is a
secret of the Great Rabbi, which ones are entrusted with the how and what of
using the blood."
The same statements were then given to the protocol also about the obtaining and
use of the blood of the murdered servant, Ibrahim Amara.
But one member of the panel, the Greek merchant Chebeli, was not yet satisfied
with the explanations of this Rabbi, he had discovered an obvious contradiction
and put the following additional question: "You say that human blood serves for
the celebration of the festival of the unleavened bread, yet it is known that
according to the Jewish religion, blood is regarded as being "unclean," so that
even if it were the blood of an animal, the Jews are not permitted to use such.
There's also a contradiction in the property "unclean," which is imputed to the
blood, and to the (402) use of the blood in the unleavened bread (matzos) --
give us the explanation!"
The Rabbi Moses replied: "The Talmud says that two kinds of blood are pleasing
to Yahweh: the blood of Easter and that of circumcision. . .This is the secret
of the Great Rabbis, who are knowledgeable about the ways and means of using the
blood . . ." The Head Rabbi Antabli, asked about his opinion in connection with
this, confirmed these statements in full scope.
In the trial of Valréas (in 1247), the fact came out for the first time that the
Jews are obligated to send on human sacrificial blood. Strack, in this case,
too, would have been immediately ready with the "exonerating" retort that
certainly no ritual, but rather, at most, a "folk-medicinal" significance, not
to be taken seriously, would fit this [evidence]! Typically, Strack keeps silent
about what came out in the Trent trial concerning these matters, and diverts
attention to the "document excerpts" of the Jew Moritz Stern, his colleague.
In Trent, the Jew Israel, the son of Samuel, told that shortly before the Jewish
Easter festival, several Jews had met in the synagogue located in his father's
house and had complained over the fact that this time no Easter bread could be
made, since no one had any supply of Christian blood (quia nemo habebat de
sanguine pueri christiani). The examining judges "smelled a rat" and did not let
loose of it, and after a time inquired further with the precise question: "What
did the Trent Jews do earlier, when they had need of Christian blood?" Israel,
driven into a corner, answered: "Approximately four years ago, he had seen a
glass in his father's hand, which contained desiccated blood. This his father
had obtained, according to his own statement, from a Jew who had come from
Germany."
Now the Rabbi Samuel, to whom these statements were read out, resigned himself
to [making the] confession that perhaps four years ago he had bought "for a
costly sum" a bottle, about a hand's breadth long, from a Jew of the name of Bär
(Ursus), who had come from Saxony, (403) and who had had a certificate of
verification with him by which it was certified that Bär was conducting his
business (!) legally, and that the goods that he was carrying with him were
genuine. In this certificate of verification (literas legalitalis) it was
written in Hebrew that what he had with him was proper! It was signed by "Moses
de Saxonia, Head Rabbi of the Jews." Bär carried the blood, present in
pulverized condition, in an interior, tin-plated vessel sealed with white wax.
In the layer of wax the Hebrew words were incised: "Moses, Head Rabbi of the
Jews." Samuel, as he added to it, then set his name under it: "Samuel of Trent,"
to make known that he, for his part, joined the attested record concerning the
reliability of the dealer. One other Jew, Engel (Angelus), confessed in Trent
that he had bought the dry blood of a non-Jewish boy in the size of a bean more
than four years ago, for four Lire of good coins from a certain Isaak from the
Netherlands, out of the bishopric of Cologne; Isaak had carried with him the
container of blood wrapped in a cloth, the blood itself had been clotted and in
the form of a dust. Isaak then moved father on, from Trent to Venice.
Before he came to Trent, Engel himself had lived with his Uncle Lazzari
(Lazarus) for seven years in Castel Gaverdi in the region of Brescia. The latter
was in correspondence with the Jew Rizardo of Brixen concerning blood; Rizardo
had reported that he was selling blood and offered it.
The Jew Tobias, described in the Trent documents as a surgeon or physician (artis
chirurgiae peritus) -- he also occasionally "transacted" usury business --
admitted after initial denials that years before, he had already bought dried
blood, perhaps as much as a nut, from a Jewish merchant Abraham for a Rheinish
Gulden. Samuel had certified the genuineness of the blood for him. Abraham
carried the clotted blood in small pieces in a red container, presumably he had
moved on to Feltro or Bassano. Finally, Tobias testified concerning a mysterious
"distinguished" Jew from the island of Crete, who about six or seven years ago
had stopped in Venice (404), around the same time that the Kaiser Friedrich III,
followed by a great swarm of Jews, had arrived at Venice; these Jews had
attached themselves to the imperial progress, in order to be able to procure for
themselves untaxed wares which then, stowed away on the imperial wagons, had
been smuggled across the border(32). All these Jews were also supplied with
blood, with which a "powerful" Jew, who constantly went about with "a large
quantity of Christian blood," had furnished them. For the rest, the man dealt in
sugar, and was called "Sugar-Jew" on account of this. This Jew from Crete had
worn a black robe, which, in the Greek fashion, reached down to his feet; the
universally well-known Jew Hossar of Cologne with residence in Venice in
particular had had much traffic with this Sugar-Jew.
Along the same lines was the testimony given -- completely independently and
under conditions of having been separated [from the others] -- by the old Moses.
When the judge asked the eighty-year-old Jew where, then, he always obtained the
necessary blood, he answered that for the last ten years he had not needed to
make any effort for it; he was no longer the father of the family. Earlier, he
had lived for 30 years straight in Speyer. There he always got blood from an
Alsace Jew, Isaak Rotpoch; but 50 years ago he had lived in Mainz, where be
bought the required blood from the Cologne Jew Sveschint and had consumed it in
the manner already mentioned (matzos, Easter wine). When he was asked how, then,
in all the various places [in which he had lived] he was able to know that he
really was getting "genuine," therefore non-Jewish blood, Moses also answered
that the certificates of verification of the head Rabbis had confirmed it.
The Trent documents therefore unveil, besides the details of a crime committed
with unimaginable cruelty, further monstrous facts:
1. There existed -- and naturally still exists! -- a "lawful" Jewish "trade" in
non-Jewish blood,
organized to the last detail, just as there has been for ages a Jewish slave
trade
and drug trade. (405)
2. There are dealers in blood, equipped with rabbinical certificates of
verification
and who have been expressly commissioned for that purpose.
In the Trent trial, not fewer than seven Jewish blood dealers appeared [in the
record]: Bär (probably from Saxony), Isaak (from the region of Cologne), Rizardo
(Brixen), Abraham, Rotpoch (Alsace), Sveschint (Cologne), and that frightful Jew
from Crete, who can be described frankly as a wholesale dealer in blood.
Beyond this, we can fix the route of this blood trade on the basis of the trial
reports.
In that 15th century, Venice was blossoming into a commercial city of the very
first rank as trade center between Orient and Occident ; in the judgement of
Petrarch, it was arising as the "emporium orbis" (world city of commerce), which
the contemporary voice of Fabri lauded as "the most wonderful and most
remarkable in the entire world" and a Jakob Burkhardt praised as "the jewel box
of the world in its day," and a fabulous wealth was emerging, of industrious,
bold traders and seafarers, who stood in striking contrast to the debt economy
of the slothful doges -- good use of the latter circumstance was made by those
vultures who are to be found everywhere where there is already a whiff of decay
despite a high economic bloom: the Jews.
In no sense is it coincidental that just exactly the Venetian region of that
time was a true Dorado of Jewish blood-murder -- in the year 1480 alone --
therefore, as soon as five years after an example had been made in Trent -- in
this area not fewer than three (!) children were tortured most cruelly and
ritually-slaughtered(33) (Portobuffole, Motta, Treviso). In spite of uprisings
by the people, financial-political reasons moved the Venetian government
repeatedly to allow the Jewry as such, consisting in great part of immigrating
Oriental elements, to remain unmolested, so that the Jews could live in the
completely justified belief that they might take risks, indeed, the Doge Pietro
Mocenigo even during the Trent investigative proceedings had made out a sort of
certificate of innocence for "his" Jews, (406)
while he attempted to interfere in the course of the proper hearing by means of
declaring in a decree the Trent blood-murder to be a malicious rumor, took the
Jews under his protection, and arranged that they should live unhindered in his
land. This Jewish-protective decree, however, later had to be rescinded.
In these areas -- in the trial documents, aside from Trent, the names of Brescia,
Feltro, Bessano occur -- there was not only trade with the treasures of the
Orient and the products of European, and, in particular southern German
industry; among comrades of the faith there existed in strict secrecy the blood
trade as an internal Jewish affair, which took the same route as the rest of the
goods: the ancient trade route across Trent, through the Etsch Valley. By the
testimony of the Jewish physician Tobias, a whole swarm of Jews, who had
smuggled their equally precious and mysterious property among the other wares,
had once followed an imperial progress: the blood of non-Jews was transported in
this manner by non-Jews themselves, and in addition, duty-free yet!
"In this 15th century, Man stood at the eve of the Renaissance, he invented
printing, he discovered America; the arts and the sciences took an unsuspected
upswing. Yet Europe was teeming with all sorts like Enselin (Lazarus), Rizard,
Samuel, Moses, Isaak of Cologne, the Bear from Saxony, who their whole life long
bought, sold, and used Christian blood. . ." (H. Desportes, p. 328).
The trade of Venice with the shores of the Near East made use of for its bases
the ideal island bridges provided by Nature: Corfu -- Zante -- Crete -- Rhodes
-- Cyprus. Upon all these islands, in a proportion which was increasing from
century to century, Oriental Jews were encysted who, in constant contact with
their racial comrades sitting on the crossroads of Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt,
had brought the booming trade -- at least as middlemen -- into dependency upon
Jewish parasites and were able to pocket fabulous profits.
But from these times, the non-Jewish population on these islands never again was
to know peace; its blood -- in the literal sense -- (407) is sucked out of it.
In Crete sat the frightful shape of a blood dealer, dressed "in the Greek
fashion," who also surfaced in Trent, supplied the Jews present there with blood
and then vanished again. . .
Many centuries later, however, bloody riots broke out on Corfu, Zante, and
Rhodes, because the population had become convinced as a result of the periodic
disappearance of children in countless cases, that the Jewish murderer is still
at work(34)! The ritual-murders of Damascus (1840) and Corfu (1891), which, of
course, only became known from among the others by accident, while numberless
others remained in eternal oblivion, threw a bright light upon these
circumstances.
In the Orient, where human life in itself is already of little value, the trade
in the blood of slaughtered non-Jews appears to be just another line of
business; especially the harbor cities like Alexandria, Beirut, Smyrna,
Constantinople, with the Quarters of Balata, Galata and Pera show blood-murders
in great number, as we were able to determine, but even these can be only a
miniscule fraction of those [ritual] crimes actually committed. "A very
highly-placed man said to me, that of the Oriental diplomats, not one doubted
that in the East, where these cases of murders of Christians are very easily
concealed because there is no public opinion there, they are much more frequent
than we think. . ."(35)
One year before the trial of Damascus, in 1839, at the customs office of
Damascus, in a box intended for the Jew Aaron Stambuli -- thus the
blood-murderer and blood dealer of Damascus -- a bottle with blood was
discovered and confiscated; this was not given back, despite an offer of 10,000
Piasters from the protesting Jews. At his interrogation, the Jew in his
consternation gave the confused statement that it was a custom with them to
preserve(36) the blood of their great men(408). Concerning the further
prosecution of the affair nothing more was known, according to Achille Laurent,
the most that was known was that the head of Customs of Damascus died a sudden
death!
This clumsy kind of dispatching [of blood] has not been allowed to prevail as
general practice, in view of the shrewdness of its originators. The refined and
always secure lodging of the blood was done just by introducing it into the
mixture using minimal-sized doses of it.
The former Rabbi Noe Weinjung, born about 1765 in Kitchenev as the son of a
Hassidic Rabbi, and, after his baptism under the name of Neophyte, living in the
Cernika monastery in Bucharest(37), reports about his blood-practice in his
confessions which were published first in the Romanian language in 1803, then,
due to their importance, in Greek in 1834, and then in Italian in 1883, that one
other cunning method of preservation and shipment consisted in keeping cotton or
linen burned to ashes and soaked in the blood sealed in bottles in the treasury
and secret drawers of the synagogue and constantly at the disposal of the
rabbis, who took from it according to need or sent from it to the Jews of those
lands which were under especially sharp police control or which nursed special
mistrust or even hostility against the Jews due to bad experiences: the blood of
the tortured victim was now able without peril to travel under a pharmaceutical
label. . .
That a blood trade has existed on German soil until the most recent times, can
be inferred from the events in Xanten, Polna, and Konitz. The foreign Jew, who
appeared with a black leather bag around the time of the murder of little Jean
in Xanten (29 June 1891) and just as suddenly vanished again, might have had the
same function as that "crooked Jew" who on the day of the murder of the Hruza
girl (409)(29 March 1899) was hurrying out of the apartment of the Polna Rabbi
clutching a container of approximately six liters capacity packed in waxed
canvas. Already in 1529, after the ritual-crime of Tyrnau, the blood was first
hidden in the synagogue -- "on that account there was great rejoicing" -- before
it was handed over to various Jewish middlemen for further distribution.
But even blood-dealing and blood-dealers are finally merely components of a
System for which all of Jewry itself alone is to be made answerable before
history: the extermination, conducted intentionally and consciously, of all that
is non-Jewish.
That an important role of blood-doctrine and blood-practice belongs to the local
center in this struggle for destruction, the synagogue, "the very own daughter
of the Pharisaic school" (Rohling), does not need to be further proven after the
expositions up to now.
The "President of the Court of Appeals of the Free City of Frankfurt and Envoy
of the four Free Cities of Germany at the Bundestag, Dr. of Theology and
Jurisprudence, J. F. Meyer, the learned and founding trustee," believed himself
able to dismiss these things with the following witty remark: "But as concerns
the alleged blood-thirst, this would have been been able to be amply satisfied
for many centuries now without killing, in any bath or barber's room; but not
even one Jew has been found to buy blood there. No one has ever seen a Jew
sampling blood."(38)
In 1693, a woman at a cattle market offered for sale to some Jewish cattle
dealers a bowl of blood, "because she knew that the Jews like to have blood from
Christian children. . ." The Jews, however, were craftier than this efficient
business woman, they indignantly raised an alarm, called the city patrol and had
the woman taken away. Before the magistrate, she confessed that she had been
trading out of poverty in order to get a few Groschen; "it truly is human blood,
but not of (410) a child, but from a couple of soldiers who opened a vein for
the sake of their health and were supposed to let the blood be carried away by
flowing water. . ."Now because such was found to be the case after inquiry, the
woman was released again with sharp warnings to abstain from such dealings in
the future. . ."(39)
No, learned and founding trustee and Doctor of Jurisprudence and Theology, Jews
buying liters of blood never have actually been seen to this day -- we could, of
course, repeatedly pluck these peculiar blossoms in the imaginary world of those
scholars!
But Moses Abu-el-Afieh spoke in Damascus of two kinds of blood that are pleasing
to Yahweh, of which one is the blood of ritual-slaughter.
We know with what stamina the Jews and their comrades, in order to defang the
charges which involve their use of blood, call upon the minutiae of directives
of the Talmud and other Jewish codices, around which interpretations as
nit-picking as they are obscure are wound like tendrils, and which are supposed
to keep the children of Israel from contact with blood -- insofar as it is not a
matter of sacrificial blood; Jewry has, in fact, ever felt an inner horror of
this "unconsecrated" blood. Among one another, they wish to remain so clean of
blood, that they do not even consume animal blood, and loathe even the blood
which comes from the most minor wounds (e.g. blood from their gums on bread!).
And yet -- here their moon-nature reveals itself -- they are the only people who
conduct blood-politics, in the symbolic as well as the physical sense.
There is no contradiction in the fact that, for example, in the Old Testament
the consumption of animal blood is forbidden by religious law under threat of
"divine" punishment, which, as such, is grasped at by theologians over and over
again for the "refutation" of the blood-accusation -- while the consumption of
human blood is found to be forbidden nowhere, to say nothing of the rabbinical
blood-doctrine. The Jews have the firm and subtle belief that social intercourse
with other peoples, even the mere (411) gaze of an Akum (40), materially
pollutes their blood! Their sharp and ruthless rabbinical intelligence found an
equally subtle means millennia ago, by which they believed to be able to purify
themselves and which was, for later centuries, transmitted orally for the sake
of caution. Olden Asiatic physicians already were familiar with that natural law
which says that like is to be healed by like [i.e., sympathetic magic]. In the
mechanical world, one knows that like poles repel each other. This general law,
adopted into Medicine, is followed exactly in homeopathic practice by use of
small, refined, counter-doses: when one feels infected by a sickness, one
partakes of the same substance thought to be causing the sickness, and indeed, a
dose in a specific and absolute purity and in minute amounts. The most modern
Medicine proves satisfactorily the profound law of Nature, that like is healed
by like, and indeed what is more striking, the smaller the dose is, the better
the results.
In the most refined dosing, non-Jewish blood, for example, enters into the
Easter baking of the Jews, the matzos. Regarding the meal [i.e., in the sense of
the grain from which bread is baked] of sacrifice, the Rabbi Samuel of Trent
stated in 1475 that the Jewish father of the family would mingle some portion of
the blood from a non-Jewish child into the dough at the preparation of the
matzos; the size of a lentil seed would suffice! The Head Rabbi of Damascus
personally baked the Easter breads intermingled with the non-Jewish sacrificial
blood and sent them for "purification" in all direction to his co-religionists.
But this blood is especially effective, according to Jewish teaching, if it has
been obtained under circumstances of unimaginably sadistic tortures and
sufferings for the non-Jewish victim! "The matzos are prepared as they must be,"
said Samuel at their distribution in Trent, and those present understood what
was meant by that. . .
Lazarus Goldschmidt cites a passage of the Talmud tract of the Schabbath, where
an "emperor" asks the Rabbi Joshua ben Chananya why the Jewish Sabbath meal has
such a pleasant aroma. The Rabbi answers: "Because we (412) have a spice by the
name of Sabbath that we put in!" The "emperor" also wants to have some of it,
but the Rabbi says: "It is only proper for them who observe the Sabbath. Since
you do not do this, it would do you no good." What kind of special spice is
this, this "spice named Sabbath," which "is of use to" only the Jews??
Under the date 19 January 1882, in the Archives Israélites, there is offered vin
cascher ("kosher wine") with the express certificate of the Head Rabbi -- we are
reminded of the "certificates" of the Trent blood-dealers!; on 2 March, again,
"kosher wine" (vin cascher) for the Easter feast. On 16 March 1882 we read,
printed in a list of other notices: "Spices for Jewish Easter use: Madame Haas
guarantees unleavened bread (matzos)." To deceive the reader unfamiliar with
these matters, the word kosher is written in various ways: coscer, causcher,
cascher, cascer, kascer, koscer, etc.
The Almanach zum Gebrauch der Israeliten [Almanac for the Use of the Israelites]
(appeared at the time from Blum, Paris, 11, rue des Posiers) is filled with
similar notices. Several pastry bakers supply the "customary Easter bread for
the Pessach feast," but another says that he alone has the authority to offer
everything that is necessary for the celebration of Pessach -- And in the
Orient, of course, there was and is the notorious mossa guésira (blood-matzos)
next to the "customary" mossa! These concordances are amazing(41).
Why do these things bear the certificates of the rabbis, and why not the
"certificate of quality" of the corresponding experts, thus the bakers and
vintners, if, according to Jewish opinion, this is supposed to be such a
harmless matter?
The Jews of our day, therefore, in confidence of the ignorance of non-Jewish
humanity, sell in open public, their ritual Pessach and Purim breads and wines,
furnished with the blood-certifications of their rabbis, exactly as they were
accustomed to do in the Middle Ages!
We now understand Heine better, when he said of his (413) racial comrades: ". .
.in all other ways they now still are as they were in the Middle Ages, a
wandering mystery. . ."
On 30 March 1882 the same Archives Israélites warned the "faithful" that the
"religious" Pessach prescriptions were of extreme importance and one ought not
to neglect even one of them. The preparation of the matzos "demands scrupulous
care," the women should go off during their work. "The scrupulous care, which is
required here, the omission of not even one Pessach prescription, the removal of
the women -- compare with the documents of the Trent trial -- makes one ponder.
. .The rabbinical blood-doctrine has existed as a secret teaching, the Trent
trial bears witness to this; it probably exists still even today. . ." (42) That
woman of the common people, who called out to her ward, Werner, who had taken on
work in a Jewish house around the time of Easter in 1287: "Beware of the Jews,
for Good Friday is approaching," and six centuries later the mother of the
Xanten boy, who called out at the news of the death of her child, with a
mother's unerring instinct: "It was the Jews!," are more valuable witnesses than
all the learned "expert opinions" put together. "Volkes Stimme -- Gottes Stimme"
["The voice of the people -- the voice of God"] -- may say more than all those
"Christian" theologians and their baptized and unbaptized Jewish relatives.
Blood is a special sap. It also has the effect, as Nature teaches at every turn,
of establishing antipathy, hostility. Every hunter can tell countless examples
from his own experience to illustrate that blood, which has flowed as a result
of murder-lust or the lust for pleasure, prevents the friendly "scenting" of
creature to creature. The blood that we take from creatures, separates us from
them; the milk they they give to us, forms a bond with them. A cow which gives
milk to a child and a Jew, who ritually slaughters it, are images which have
stamped themselves in the blood of every people throughout the generations, as
an inextinguishable instinct; a child runs to an old cow to caress it -- while
he runs away crying from an old Jew. On the Lower Rhine, the girls say "when a
Jew is in the village, (414) I do not go through the corn alone," and there were
wealthy and independent peasants who, when one of these black-garbed beasts, one
of the "fellow-citizens of the Mosaic faith" came through their village, became
uneasy, like their cattle in the well-locked stall when a predator was lurking
about. It is the eternal and natural "fear of the Jews" which the Galileans knew
long ago.
That thousand-year-old Jewish hatred, that "great hatred," is not stoked and
nourished anew by theoretical instruction alone, but, to a much more effective
degree, still by -- blood.
But the final meaning of the blood sacrifice, its final interpretation, can
perhaps best be given by only a Jew himself. A philosophical work appeared about
sixteen years ago, entitled Die Wirklichkeit der Hebräer. Einleitung in das
System des Pentateuch [The Reality of the Hebrews: Introduction into the System
of the Pentateuch], by the Jew Oskar Goldberg. This extremely rare book was made
available only to leading Jews and was anxiously protected. "If one works his
way through this not simply written book, it falls open to him as if unveiled
before his eyes," was the assessment of this book by Joh. v. Leers(43). Now
Goldberg, one of those "Wise Men of Israel," expresses clearly that the purpose
of the Jewish service of sacrifice is through blood, in which the biological
power of life is contained, to keep Yahweh lastingly present. The purpose of the
ritual is to hold the people together continually in struggle against the other
Elohim (gods!), while at the same time suppressing the elements within the
people which stem from the essence of the other Elohim (that is, the non-Jews!).
"The commandments of purity . . .are derived for him (Goldberg) from this basic
thought." (v. Leers).
By the judgement of v. Leers, the justification for ritual-slaughter, as of
ritual-murder, can be derived from the arguments which Goldberg gives. . .
The presence of Yahweh, therefore, is conjured by black magic "in order to turn
these powers against the other peoples in the wars of Yahweh. . ."
Jew Goldberg permits us -- to speak in the words of his colleague Güdemann (44)
-- (415) a look into those "halls of the Jewish literature, to which, for those
standing outside them, it is almost more difficult to gain access than many a
princely court. . ."
Separation from all other peoples, state-within-a-state, fodder and corruption
of the alien blood and final reunification among themselves, that is the
unextinguishable impulse and thought of the Jew, not to be rinsed away by
baptismal water. Hostility between their own blood and that of the rest of the
world! "And I shall put enmity between your seed and their seed. . ."
The blood of the non-Jew rises up against the fanatic blood-politics of the
Jews. Germany has been intended by History to have the leading role in this
mamouth struggle: morality struggles against immorality, heroism against
criminality, light against darkness, and blood against blood!
The Jewish Question is not otherwise to be solved. Destiny seems to desire that
each people which struggles with the Jews, ventures its best blood against
Jewish blood, and, if it must, unto death.
Thus has it been for millennia -- so it is again today, only with the
distinction that a Führer and rescuer has arisen: "In that I am resisting the
Jew, I am struggling for the work of the Lord" (Adolf Hitler).
A p p e n d i x 1.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 419)
Translation of the Address Given before the Vice-King of Egypt (1)
May it please Your Highness, etc. After we in Europe heard of the accusations
issued in Damascus against some Jews who belonged to Your Highness's subjects,
and of the tortures and sufferings done to them in order to extract confessions,
and because we know that our religion not only does not sanction the crime of
which they are accused, but rather even teaches us most expressly to be
horrified at the use of blood, we have been sent by our co-religionists in
Europe to ask Your Highness for Justice. . .
We come here with the most sure conviction that Your Highness, of such great
fame in Europe due to your bravery in the Field, your wisdom in the Council, and
your tolerance toward all good subjects without distinction, will grant our
request with your accustomed kindness. We come without hatred, without passion,
merely with the upright desire of bringing the truth to light. Therefore our
request goes out to Your Highness, to impart to us the authority to go to
Damascus, and there to initiate such inquiries which will be able to lead to the
obtaining of sufficient evidence in respect to those accusations which have
brought the entire Jewish population of that city into suffering unheard of till
now, and so that the results of such investigation may be officially confirmed
by the Gouverneur of Damascus and presented to Your Highness. That moreover,
Your Highness might facilitate for us the means for obtaining this information,
as well as grant safe conduct for those persons who belong to our mission, and
provide full security for all parties who have credentials; the permission to
speak with and question the prisoners as often as necessary, and that the
authority and permission of Your Highness will be enforced by means of a special
Firman [an edict or decree], sent to the Gouverneur of Damascus and officially
entered into the local archives and publicly read out in the streets there. May
we add that the eyes of all of Europe are directed upon Your Highness, and that
the granting of our request will gratify the entire civilized world. It is well
known (420) that the prince who has attained such a great reputation, treasures
justice even more highly. It is an homage to your genius, to your love of truth,
your love of justice, which has caused this deputation of all the Israelites of
the Earth to appeal to Your Highness with confidence, in the consciousness that
this appeal can not have been made in vain.
Alexandria, 4 August 1840.
Moses Monetfiore
A p p e n d i x 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 420)
Herr Crémieux in Vienna(2)
Vienna (Beginning of December 1840).
Herr Crémieux has departed for Paris, heaped with tributes, and especially,
naturally, with evidence of the participation of the local Israelite population.
Prince Metternich, as has also been the case with several high statesmen, has
received with honor the defender of injured and abused humanity , which always
finds protection and the warmest sympathy in the humanitarianism of our
principles of government, of whatever region or religion it may be. The
community of Jews has arranged a banquet for him, in gratitude for the
protection of its brothers in Beirut, and not many have been seen of equal
magnificence. This took place in the Hotel of the Roman Emperor, comprised over
80 place settings, and the arrangement was designed by the women, who
nevertheless declined to appear there themselves.
Before the beginning of the meal, an address of thanks of the community, which
expressed the sentiments of the rescued human dignity of their co-religionists,
written on parchment and read aloud by the local teacher of religion, Dr.
Manheimer, was delivered to him. This was enclosed in a golden case and so
abundantly set with diamonds that its value is reckoned at 14,000 Florins. The
address reads:
"The community of Israelites of Vienna, enspirited by the most moving sympathy
for the sacred interests and rights of their people and faith, permeated by the
innermost and deep respect and admiration for the noble men of word and deed,
who have ventured themselves for these interests and rights and have proven
themselves in the holy, glorious struggle, grasps with eagerness the opportunity
which is offered to it here, to bear witness to its most (421) profound
reverence and admiration for you, most highly respected sir, you, who have put
yourself in the advance rank and have wrested the laurel of victory in this the
struggle. If we admire all the more the gifts of words and the power of speech
which God has lent you in fullness, the more complete and compelling its success
and influence is, and God's Rule of Mercy is recognized in that He, in a time
when intellect and talent have been elevated to a prevailing power, has let men
arise in our ranks who are full of the divine spirit and know how to speak in
truth and clarity with frankness and victorious power; if we, in a word, admire
the talent which is the foundation of your reputation, and made you the equal as
an orator and advocate to the most celebrated men of your class, so we revere
and honor still more the noble attitude, the sacred zeal for the Right, which
has guided you so fortunately thus far in the fulfillment and practice of your
godly profession and in the application of these inestimable gifts of the
spirit. You have been the representative of Right, when and where it was
imperilled. You have bestowed your protection upon the powerful man, when good
fortune abandoned him, and chivalrously taken on the mantle of fallen greatness.
You have entered the lists for your co-religionists, when men wished to cast
doubt upon their oaths and vows and thus throw suspicion upon the faith of
Israel, and you have unburdened them of shame, annihilated the last trace of
disgrace which still attached to them, in the nation where all barriers had been
opened to them, yet prejudice was yet unconquered, where property and law,
office and dignity had been granted and conceded to the Jew, yet doubt and
suspicion of his lawfulness and loyalty had not been able to be eliminated and
overcome. You have saved their honor and shown that religion began with Abraham
and his tribe, which first raised its hand up to Almighty God, who has created
Heaven and Earth, who fills the world and placed firmly upon it the pillars of
the law, of justice and morality. You have now crowned these noble efforts,
revered Sir, and everlastingly entered your name in the annals of the history of
our people, which is as old as the history of the world, by chivalrously and
fraternally entering the lists for the unfortunate victims in the battle against
tyranny and religious frenzy, whose frightful fate was filling not only all the
tribes of Israel, but also all the men of nobility and good will in the entire
world with horror and terror. You left hearth and home, as the prophets of
ancient times once did, traveled across the sea into that old land of Egypt,
where plagues rage and war and discord threaten life, you have spoken before the
powerful for your people and their faith, and you spoke as Moses once did to
Pharaoh: 'Let go the sons of my people, who are in chains, that they may serve
me!' You have broken the chains from the hands of those in bondage, you have
rescued the imprisoned from out of their captivity -- as the prophet (422)
described it, a godly calling. You have returned those who were outcast to free
and unbound life, you have held back the sword in its descent, which was
hovering but a hair's breadth above their heads, and those whom you could not
save, who departed the world under torture, and who have found their declaration
of innocence and vindication in a higher world and before a more elevated seat
of judgement than Man can establish. . .have God's blessing over you! You have
fulfilled a divine commandment, which is the most sacred thing in Israel; You
have fulfilled the commandment of Love. . .If the name Damascus, which is to be
found listed on the first and most ancient pages of our history, has again in
most recent days attained a gloomy fame and leaves behind memories which for us
are as unforgettable as they are painful, so, along with it, the names of the
noble fighters, who have brought an end to the struggle and have wrested the
chains from those in bondage and brought the tormented to freedom, will be as
immortal and unforgettable. The self-reliance we have won again, and the joyful
consciousness that wherever Israel is in need and distress, and its name shamed
and its faith ostracized, God awakens for it its heroes and fighters from out of
its own midst -- that consoles us for the painful experience which we have
recently had, and which we had never expected in our century. With these
sentiments we greet you as one of the champions in the holy struggle. And if our
voices do not reach so far that they might also reach your noble
comrade-in-arms, the high-hearted Sir Moses Montefiore, toward whom we have the
same admiration, may this confession [of faith, admiration, etc.], which is the
first that you have received on German soil, be a testimonial for you of the
esteem and recognition which your efforts and exertions have found among your
German co-religionists. We say to you, in the words of the Scriptures: Stride
forth vigorously and courageously upon the trodden path -- it shall be your
glory and your honor!"
At this juncture, Herr Crémieux, moved by this expression of gratitude, arose
and gave an improvised speech in the French language, which, due to the
beautiful themes which are the basis of its contents and the recognition which
the speaker expresses for humane principles, deserves to be more universally
known:
"Gentlemen, I am greatly moved, you understand this and will not wonder if words
fail me to express my thoughts. I was unable to hold back my tears at the sight
of this precious empathy of my co-religionists, of the immeasurable reward of
such a simple, such a natural action. I am an attorney and saw to saving the
unfortunate; I am a Jew and saw to fighting religious persecution; I am a human
being and saw to crushing [the use of] barbaric torture; was I allowed to
hesitate without committing a crime? I did my duty and such a reward! The
Israelites surround me (423) on my journey as in an endless triumphal
procession. In Corfu I was received with acclamations and by wishes for good
fortune; in Trieste I was surrounded by the sweetest, most touching sympathy; in
Venice the heartiest festivals were duplicated for my sake; here, at last, my
heart is succumbing to the feelings with which you have intoxicated it. I have,
you tell me, carried on the sacred matter of the emancipation of the Jews before
the law courts and the press; but indeed, I was defending my own hearth, and the
principle of the freedom of worship, the great, noble principle which ties
Heaven to the Earth, in that it permits each human being to offer to God the
homage of his love according to his own belief. I took up my pen when the
slanderers spread their poison against the Jewish religion, I called upon all
the sympathies of noble persons to assist me; but I felt the strength of the
Good, the Right and energy of soul; would not my silence have been an unworthy
cowardice? I have defied the personal danger with which fanatical hatred and a
murderous atmosphere wanted to threaten me. Having stood upright, I did not
think of this danger; I would have answered him who would have wanted to
frighten me: Death is everywhere, but fortunate is he who seeks a great death!
Our mission has been crowned with success; the chains have fallen; the prisons
have opened [their doors] to the tortured, their families have been restored to
those who were in flight. But our cause was such a righteous one, and our right
was so great! I have also founded schools in the Orient for the poor children
who have been abandoned until now. But with this, I have only the merit of
having understood your thoughts and have said to myself: it is good, that the
Jews of the West unite with the Jews of the East through the bond of a sacred
protection, whose consequences could be immeasurable for the cause of
civilization and progress in the lands of fanaticism and ignorance.
What do they, who persecute us with their bitter hatred, want with their foolish
prejudices? Why do they reawaken, in this century of philosophy and
enlightenment, those wretched slanders of the Middle Ages and the ridiculous
superstitions of crude times? Do not they, who, in so many countries, still
stand outside the law of the peoples among whom they live, possess all the
virtues of free men, when they demonstrate such explicit, such moving, such
unanimous gratitude toward those who demand for them the same common rights and
social freedom? And is not the sympathy for the maliciously persecuted brothers,
which was suddenly awakened, as if by an electric shock at every point on Earth,
a great virtue? Does not this Jewish population, whose heart is so full of the
fine feelings of love of relatives, deserve to live among other men and to have
equal standing with them? What virtue do we lack. . .the love of country?
(424) We French Israelites, we citizens of a free country, which has given us a
fatherland, our enthusiasm is intensified in that feeling which founds a people
and makes it great, and you, gentlemen, who only can dimly know that [feeling
of] country, since country is the equality of rights and duties, are you not all
prepared to shed your purest blood for the happiness of the ground upon which
you see the light? Ach, you shall attain it, gentlemen, one day you shall obtain
this precious fatherland, this life-within-life! And those, who will be able to
call you their fellow- citizens, will see whether your hearts are not at one
with their hearts. Indeed, Jews of Austria, you will get the fatherland, for in
that memorable affair of Damascus, Austria has shown that it knows no
distinction of faith, when humanity speaks. Austria was first to extend a
helping hand to the oppressed. Ach, its power did not reach so far as to be able
to restore to life those whom torture had murdered, but it stepped between the
executioner and those victims whose death had been decided; it noble-mindedly
protested against the bloody proceedings. With joy I -- I, a Frenchman - call
out in this capital city of the Austrian Imperial State: Honor to Austria! Honor
to you, Prince Metternich, whose active as well as generous power covered like a
shield those who were languishing beyond the sea; Honor to you -- you, who
demonstrated a sublime spirit and an exalted philosophy in this final struggle
of prejudice against reason, and unfolded the banner of humanity before the eyes
of the world, without consideration for politics, which always is so foreign to
justice! The General Consul Laurin, who found in his own heart an abhorrence for
injustice and first brought the light of his clear reason and the dedication of
his noble heart into this bloody drama, has also shown himself to be worthy of
you. . . Honor also to Merlato, who struggled even to the final day at the scene
of the horrible executions(3), and did not fear to unveil all secrets of this
work of darkness, and with tireless zeal opened himself to the ideas of the
General Consul. Let his name be for us a revered name!
Gentlemen, the Press, too, has forcefully supported us, the German, the French,
the English Press; it dealt the most powerful blows to religious intolerance.
The Press has its torches: the light terrifies fanaticism and persecution. .
.the martyrs of Damascus will be our last martyrs. The West is making incursions
into the East with its civilization, not merely in matters of political
questions, but also in social issues, as a guarantee of the future of the
peoples. Thank you, gentlemen, a thousand thanks for (425) this precious pledge
of your esteem, your friendship! I shall keep it as a precious treasure, as a
legacy for my beloved son. . ."
The cheering of those present was boundless, and with great enthusiasm toasts
were offered to the Kaiser and the whole Imperial House, to the Prince State
Chancellor, to the Consuls of the Great Powers, etc., who rendered assistance in
this affair of justice and humanity, and the celebration was inscribed
inextinguishably in the emotions of the Israelites by its many significant
features.
Fürth, 4 December 1840(4).
At the arrival of Herr Crémieux on 2 December in Nuremberg, a deputation of the
local Israelites left to show him honor and to invite him to a celebratory meal.
The representatives of the local congregation solemnly received him. At the
banquet the Rabbi, Dr. Löwi, gave an address of thanks, which he delivered to
him, together with the book of Esther, in a beautiful manuscript in an antique
case. . .
Frankfurt a. M.
Manifold evidence of respect and reverence for the celebrated advocate of
innocence and advancer of civilization was also produced at this local setting.
. . On 7 December Herr. C. Kann assembled a close circle of friends and admirers
of the celebrated man at a dinner at the end of which Herr Crémieux visited the
lodge of the Frankfurt Eagle (5) and attended till late at night the hurriedly
arranged supper. The Society of the Frankfurt Eagle delivered to him 1000
florins as a voluntary contribution for the Crémieux School in Cahira. . .Herr
Crémieux also honored our Bürgerschule [a school roughly equivalent to grades 5
- 10] and Realschule [upper grade elementary school] with his presence and
attended some classes. Finally, a fine banquet should be mentioned, which the
Society of the Rising Dawn arranged to (426) celebrate the noble fighter and at
which about 100 guests were present. In the gloriously decorated hall memorial
tablets were displayed, which detailed the main events of his dynamic life.. . .
With genuine friendliness, many accompanied the celebrated man to his quarters,
in front of which a brilliant serenade by the members of the Society of the
Frankfurt Eagle was prepared in his honor.
A p p e n d i x 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 426)
Protocol II of 22 May 1882, 1:15 A.M. in Nagyfalu.
Interrogation by the Examining Magistrate Bary.
"Did you know the daughter, Esther, of Frau Johann Solymosi? If so, what did she
look like?"
"I knew Esther Solymosi by sight, but I only knew that she was the daughter of
Mrs. Solymosi. The other daughter, Sophie, I knew well. The younger sister I
only knew by sight, she looked almost like the older sister, only she was
smaller."
"How was Esther dressed at the time and did she have something in her hand when
she came in?"
"She had a worn-out white scarf on her head, a red scarf at her neck and she was
wearing a light-colored jacket and a blue skirt. She had an old yellow scarf in
her hand; my father asked her where she had been and what she was carrying in
the scarf, and she said that she had been in the Kohlmayer arcade where Frau
Andreas Huri, whom she was working for, had sent her to get paint."
"Did your parents know Esther?"
"They knew her, because they spoke to her then by name, and I also knew that she
was called Esther; until then I only knew that she was the daughter of Mrs.
Solymosi and was Sophie's sister and that she was working for Mrs. Huri."
"What happened with Esther on the Saturday on which she came into your father's
apartment?"
"At my father's request she took the candlesticks from the table and put them on
the chest, after she got up on a chair."
"Who was in the room at the time?"
"My father, my mother, my little Geschwister [= siblings, which would be an
unlikely term for English speakers to use to indicate their own collective
brother/s and/or sister/s, but it is a very common noun in German] Samu and
Rószi and I."
"What happened with Esther next?"
"After she had put the five candlesticks on top of the chest, a Jewish beggar
came in, who had already come to us the day before (427) with two women beggars
and a two- to three-year-old boy, and they were all staying with us till Sunday.
What the beggar's name was I don't know, I only know that he came from Lök and
was tall, had a black beard and was tan: he said to Esther that she should go
with him into the synagogue and when she refused, he grabbed her by the hand and
led her out of our apartment."
"Did you and your parents follow the beggar?"
"My parents stayed in the room, but I went after the beggar and saw how he went
into the synagogue with Esther. After a while I heard screaming in the
synagogue, I heard three or four cries for help, just like if someone had called
out: 'Help, people!' Then I ran to the synagogue door but this was locked; now I
looked through the keyhole, and since the key wasn't in the hole, I saw that
Esther was lying on the floor in her slip while her clothes were on the table.
The foreign ritual-slaughterers from Téglás and Tarczal and the beggar were
holding the girl pressed to the floor and our present ritual-slaughterer Salomon
Schwarz was cutting her in the neck with a knife that was somewhat longer and
much broader than a regular table knife (6). He made a cut in her neck, and then
the two foreign schächter and the beggar lifted the girl up, but Salomon Schwarz
held two bloody bowls, one after the other, under her head, in them the blood
was flowing, which they poured into a large pan. Then they dressed the girl
again. While they were dressing the girl, four other Jews came out of the inner
part of the synagogue: Samuel Lustig, Abraham Braun, Lazar Weißstein, and Adolf
Junger and stood around the body of the girl. Now I went back to the room and
told my parents what I'd seen. They had just sat down at the table and begun
eating; when I started to tell them about it, my mother said to me that I should
be quiet."
"Did you still go back then into the synagogue?"
"No, I ate with my parents at noon, until after about an hour, when the Jewish
beggar came out of the synagogue and said to me that I should lock the door. I
went out and saw how the schächter from Téglás and Tarczal and Salomon Schwarz
were leaving. I found the key in the window of the hall, and without looking
into the inner part of the synagogue, I came back out and locked the outer door.
In the hall I didn't see the body of Esther any longer, nor did I see any traces
of blood any more."
"Where then did you carry the key?"
"Into the room and hung it on a nail."
"How long did the key hang there?"
"Until five in the afternoon, then I opened the door again; at first, (428) the
three schächter and the former schächter Emanuel Taub, Hermann Rodenberg, and
Jacob Süßmann came. Later, several more came, whose names I can no longer
recall."
"Where was the body of Esther hidden?"
"That, I don't know"
"Why didn't you tell all this at your first interrogation?"
"I was afraid that my father would kick me out of the house then."
"What made you make a confession yesterday, when you came to Nagyfalu with the
Security Commissar and another gentleman? Did anyone threaten you or force you
to do this?"
"No one threatened me, no one forced me, and I spoke the truth out of my own
free will, and just as I've now told it."
Read, certified, and signed.
Moritz Scharf Joseph Bary, Examining Magistrate
A p p e n d i x 4.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 428)
From the Speech of the Deputy Rickert in the Prussian House of Deputies on 9
February 1892(7)
Gentlemen, it is my intention to direct the attention of the honorable House and
of the Minister of Justice to an affair which for months has aroused a portion
of the populace to a high degree. I mean the Buschhoff case, the Xanten
boy-murder.
On 29 June, at six o'clock in the evening, the five-year-old boy Hegmann was
murdered in the byre [cowshed] of the town councilor Küppers; the body of the
small boy was found in a condition, so it was said, which created the suspicion
that someone who was familiar with the business of ritual-slaughtering had to
have committed this murder, since the cut, as they said, had been made
skillfully and professionally. The boy was empty of blood. A lively excitement
immediately arose in the town of Xanten, which probably has between 3000 and
4000 inhabitants, and one part of the populace pointed at one man whom it held
to be guilty -- at the Jewish schächter Buschhoff, living in the vicinity of
that byre.
Gentlemen, since those days the Jewish members of this community have had to
endure a difficult time; every means was brought to bear to agitate against
them. They were even ready to characterize this murder as a ritual-murder, and
if I have been informed correctly, (429) the same things have also been said to
arouse the populace in Xanten that had been used earlier in Corfu.
The anti-Semitic press has now not only cast suspicion in a despicable manner
upon the State's Attorney and the examining judge, but also upon the Minister of
Justice and the Minister of the Interior. I do not believe that any purpose is
served by going into detail on this, at least for the time being. Should the
matter perhaps be taken up by the other side, then I am prepared to offer a list
of these things which have outraged me. For example, congenial relations between
the defense attorney of the main defendant and the examining judge have been
alleged to be the reason that the case is being handled slowly and carelessly.
These are unprecedented insinuations against these men, who have surely acted
only in the fulfillment of the duties of their office.
To show you how far this matter has gone, I want to produce for you two
documents. After the release of Buschhoff, they were demanding that he be
rearrested. In what sense these people want to see the law practiced in Prussia
emerges from the following passage of the Neue Deutsche Zeitung [New German
Times]. There is the focal point of anti-Semitism and also the focal point of
these insinuations. In this periodical we find the following sentence, among
others:
'But if he (Buschhoff) is guilty -- why do they release him? Are there,
perhaps, relationships behind this which are even darker than the murder
of an innocent child? What does it matter, whether Buschhoff and family
sit in investigative custody for four or five weeks longer yet, if afterwards
the releasing, guilt-denying verdict is conceded to them by the jury, while
they remain afflicted with suspicion for the rest of their lives?'
What do you think, gentlemen? -- That's called the administration of justice! Of
course, when that is read abroad, that a newspaper dares to say such things --
what are they to think of our administration of justice?". . . Rickert complains
that even the Kaiser is "disturbed." "Gentlemen, I believe that the brazenness
with which they have drawn the highest of all persons into this pending
investigation without any grounds whatsoever, deserves the same. These gentlemen
are becoming bolder day by day -- not to use another expression!
Now in conclusion, gentlemen, one more main point, that is, the question of
ritual-murder! This silly fairy-tale of ritual-murder, which reaches back into
the times of the dark Middle Ages, when the Enlightenment was not yet so far
[developed], and even farther back, this question is being revived here in this
manner by the most distinguished organ of the conservative party! Has this organ
(Kreuzzeitung), then, no sensitivity for the fact that this foolish fairy-tale
no longer suits the present day?
(430) Not only did Bishop Kopp in the year 1882 (Tisza-Eszlár!) declare
ritual-murder to be an outrageous untruth, there were also prominent popes, the
supreme shepherds of the Catholic Church, who also entered the lists against it
in writing and in speech in earlier centuries when the enlightenment of the
people had not advanced so far and men were not as armored against such tales as
they are today. I have here before me that memorable letter from Cardinal
Ganganelli, who in the year 1759, when the Polish Jews were accused of
ritual-murder (laughter from the Right) -- I do not know what is so funny about
this to the gentlemen -- when the Polish Jews were accused, explicitly protested
against it and with the weapons of his scholarship, which encompassed broad
areas, proved that it was merely a fairy-tale, which must be rejected. . ."
Rickert then complained about an article in the Kreuzzeitung: "No, gentlemen,
such weapons are not suitable in the 19th century, whose end we are approaching;
these are not the weapons of Christian charity or of tolerance; nor are they the
weapons of the constitution or of the law. The Jews in our State are not guests,
as the Kreuzzeitung says, but on the contrary, fellow citizens with equal
rights, and woe unto him who lays a hand upon these rights in a flagrant
manner!" (Vigorous "bravo!" from the left.)
A p p e n d i x 5.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 430)
Letter of Rohling to the Court at Cleves.
To the Royal Criminal Court
at Cleves.
Your Honor!
The well-known Straßburg Professor, Dr. Nöldeke, along with the inclusion of my
person before your forum, has rendered an expert opinion concerning
ritual-murder by the Jews.
Conscience and honor force me to protest against this expert opinion. Professor
Nöldeke terms it frivolous, when over and over again it is repeated that Jews
require the use of Christian blood. He claims to be able to say "with tolerable
certainty" that nothing about this is contained in the Talmud; also, according
to his opinion, nothing in the Sefer halkutim and in the Zohar suggests it.
Delitzsch, according to Herr Nöldeke, is supposed to have most definitely
disproved the blood-accusation and my old friend Bickell to have declared it to
be a hoax.
I find it strange that Professor Nöldeke charges those who think differently
with frivolity, while he himself (431) lays claim to only a "tolerable"
certainty for himself. As for Delitzsche, he, like Nöldeke himself was refuted
by the work by Victor concerning the Rohling/Bloch trial, which appeared in two
editions published by Fritsch in Leipzig in 1887, without a defense following
from those involved. As for Professor Bickell, he never stated that the
blood-accusation was a hoax, but on the contrary, he agreed with me that history
fully justifies these accusations, because it reports numerous murders which
were forensically established.
Eisenmenger also points to these facts, although rabbinical textual evidence and
documentary proofs were not available to him. Concerning some texts of this type
Professor Bickell was also of another opinion from my own, although he later
withdrew an earlier statement about the impossibility of my idea, and Professor
Nöldeke would have been able to know all of this from Victor's work, which was
publicly available since 1887.
If the facts of history are not to be denied, it is well understood that despite
the expurgation of certain rabbinical works, indeed there are texts still
existing here and there, which hint at the subject, and contain allusions which,
in spite of every editorial precaution, speak very plainly in the light of
historical events. But as superfluous as texts of that sort are in the face of
the historical records, and therefore, if one desires, can be left to the
academic exercises of the philologists, I for my part find what others always
say, that the Talmud even in expurgated editions suggests the phenomenon, while
the Sefer halkutim and Zohar speak more definably, as is explained in my work
Polemik und Menschenopfer des Rabbinismus [Polemics and Human Sacrifice of the
Rabbinate] (Paderborn, pub. Schröder, 1883). This explanation is still
completely convincing to me today, and if I do not respond to private
publications of the newspapers and brochures, like Strack's Blutaberglaube
[Blood-Superstition], this is because the secular authority, to which I am
subject, desires the end of the Jewish controversy.
But after my sacred conviction was stigmatized before the Court as a frivolity,
I held it to be my duty to make known to you this, which stands before you: in
the face of death and of my eternal Judge, I cannot speak otherwise and must
state:
that the blood-accusation is the truth!
With great respect
signed, Canon Doctor of Theology and Philosophy, A. Rohling, Professor of Hebrew
Antiquities at the Royal and Imperial German University in Prague.
Prague, 10 July 1892.
A p p e n d i x 6.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 432)
From the Speech of the Czech Attorney Dr. Baxa before the Jury Court in
Kuttenberg(8).
Dr. Baxa first explained that the compensation for costs for the poor mother of
the murdered girl was unimportant. But the mother had a right to demand that she
learn why her daughter was murdered, why she had been killed in this frightful
manner!
"Let us go at once through all the motives which could come into consideration
here; she had no enemy, she was devout and kind and honest. A murder for
revenge, therefore, is not a possibility. The medical findings showed that the
girl was untouched and remained so. A lust-murder therefore did not occur. A
robbery-murder, perhaps? The murdered girl owned nothing, and what she did
possess was found with her. What, then, was the motive for this frightful act?
So the mother asks herself over and over again anew, why did her daughter, on a
well-travelled way, on a bright clear day, have to die such a terrible death?
Now, gentlemen of the jury! The perpetrators, as in a whole series of cases
which have preceded it, counted upon succeeding in not being discovered this
time, too. But the Bible has ever said, that at the commission of the crime of
murder, the blood of the victim cried unto Heaven. (Great commotion [in the
courtroom].) But here, indeed, the blood was unable to cry unto Heaven, for the
blood had disappeared! But the body speaks to Heaven in a terribly mysterious
language, yet we understood this language and we finally succeeded in lifting
the darkness that was supposed to be spread over it.
We were in a position to find the body in time, and from all this we could tell
the mother how her daughter was killed. (Great commotion.) You know, gentlemen
of the jury, how the doctors testified yesterday. You have heard how the
unfortunate girl was strangled, how she was rendered unconscious with blows from
a stone, and how the fatal cut was inflicted. That, gentlemen, says everything.
If it was only a matter, for the murderers, of killing the girl, they need only,
of course, have tightened the rope a moment longer. And consider how many pieces
of evidence of [their] guilt they would thereby not have supplied. They would
have shed no blood, they would have been finished all the sooner. But it was not
the life of this girl that they wanted, but something (433) different. Let us
think about the last hour of this unfortunate victim.
We think of how the rope was thrown around her neck, how three men suddenly bent
over her, how they struck her on the head, ripped off the clothes from her body
with terrible force, how she, perhaps, in the beginning, believing that this was
an assault upon her honor [i.e., virginity], suddenly had to see how the knife
shone, that terrible instrument in the hand of one of the men, how they prepared
everything for the horrible ritual-slaughtering, how they inclined her head to
the side, how she sees now, for the first time, what they intend to do with her,
how the whole terrible truth of that for which she has been selected becomes
clear to her -- and, gentlemen of the jury, you will agree with me, that this
girl is a martyr. Gentlemen! We have never seen such a case. Yesterday you
listened to the expert opinion of the physicians. Is there still need of proof
that the murderers did not want the life of this girl, but rather wanted her
blood alone? (Powerful excitement.) That is no longer debatable! From out of the
courtroom of the Kuttenberg circuit court today, yonder into all Gaue, it is
shouted that among human society live men who demand the blood of their fellow
men! We shrink from this. We defend ourselves against these horrible thoughts,
our emotions struggle against it, against this frightful secret, guarded for
centuries.
But here the fact exists! The actual, irrefutable fact, and against what has
been established here, no man on earth is able to prevail.
Now a second question forces itself on us. For what is the blood needed? And
there, gentlemen, I say to you now: It is the responsibility of all Christian
humanity to unwrap this secret. It is the duty, the highest duty of the
authorities, that they elucidate why there are people among us who use the blood
of of their neighbors for sinister purposes. We have the right to protect
ourselves, indeed, we must defend ourselves against these people who require our
blood. This terrible secret should finally be aired, it should finally be made
clear who these people are, whether it is only a religious sect, or whether it
is a race, we must defend ourselves and demand that the State proceed against
them. We warn the world that it is seeking to preserve this secret still longer.
Look at the accused and the society in which he lives. Why does Hilsner lie so
stubbornly, why is he supported by his entire society? Hilsner knows very well
that, if he confesses, the whole secret would come out, for it would all come
out, whether it was one schächter or another who made this cut [in the victims's
throat].
Therefore, why should we not help in discovering those who are complicit in
this! I say (434) to you, that the present proceedings are not the end of the
Polna murder affair. It is only the beginning of a new investigation, we are far
from the end of it. We will seek, seek inexorably to find out who the other
perpetrators were, we will find them, and then the whole Christian world will
heave a sigh of relief, as if freed from a monstrous nightmare."
Dr. Baxa then stated all the circumstances which made the guilt of Hilsner
beyond doubt, and said that the manner of the execution of the murder, the
limitless brazenness with which it was performed, amounts to the conclusion that
the perpetrators had to have gone to work with genuinely fanatic boldness, as if
they believed that their crime would not come to light for all eternity. Dr.
Baxa stated in conclusion that his conviction concerning the guilt of the
accused stood rock-firm.
"In the name of justice and integrity, you must vote in the affirmative and you
can vote with full conviction, and we will have taken a further great step
forward along the road which we are resolved to follow. . ."
A p p e n d i x 7.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 434)
An Alliance for Solving the Konitz Murder
has formed in the city of Konitz. On 11 March 1900 the gymnasium student Ernst
Winter, in the bloom of young manhood, was tortured to death by crazed
murderers' hands in Konitz, and the horrible crime still awaits earthly
punishment.
The public jury court proceedings held at Konitz in the days from 26 October
until 10 November against the Masloff family on account of perjury has thrown a
bright spotlight upon the dark affair, in that this trial went far beyond the
parameters of a simple perjury trial and took on the shape of a sort of
investigative procedure into the Winter murder case. It still seems possible
that the mysterious murder will find solution and punishment.
This possibility is thanks to the selfless and tireless activity of some few men
who, without sufficient financial means, but with the mustering of all their
powers, have followed the tracks of the murder. But the enormous difficulties
and obstacles which opposed every step toward the discovery of the murderer,
could not be overcome by the zeal and energy of individuals.
(435) The whole of the German people, without distinction of party, has a
pressing interest in seeing the strange darkness illuminated, which enshrouds
this gruesome murder. The father of the murdered boy, the builder Winter in
Prechlau, does not command the financial means to pursue on his own the existing
tracks so far as to succeed in bringing about justice in capturing the murderer.
In the city of Konitz, within whose walls the murder was committed, an alliance
has been formed from the ranks of respected citizens in the town and country,
which has set itself the goal of contributing with all its powers to the
solution of the murder and pursuing every lead regardless. This alliance
addresses itself to all Germans of every party. Everyone should contribute
according to his ability to the collection of a sufficient fund, which should be
used, under the responsibility of the undersigned, for a proper pursuit of the
leads of the murder.
We ask the newspapers of all political persuasions to promote our undertaking by
repeated printing of this appeal, and we ask every German citizen to contribute
his mite for this good cause.
Konitz, 24 November 1900.
Bönig, Catholic pastor
Hammer, Evangelical pastor
Gebauer, City Councilman and Member of the West Prussian Provincial Landtag
Heise, City Councilman
Klotz, City Councilman
Schultze, City Councilman
Schar, City Councilman
Stockebrand, City Councilman
Hilgendorff, Landstag Deputy and Reichstag Deputy
v. Parpatt, Member of the West Prussian Provincial Landtag
Osiander, Landtag Deputy
v. Gordon-Laskowitz, Member of the Prussian Herrenhaus [titled]
v. Nitykowski-Grellen, as above
Frh. v. Eckardstein, Rittergutsbesitzer [Baron]
A p p e n d i x 8.
------------------------------------------------------------------
(p. 435)
From the Speech of the Deputy Liebermann von Sonnenberg in the 43rd Session of
the German Reichstag of 7 February 1901.
President Count v. Ballestrem cedes the floor to the Reichstag Deputy Liebermann
von Sonnenberg:
". . .In the Konitz case, we are not dealing with just the purely human
sentiment of justice, which desires that there be an atonement for every crime,
but with a matter of very far-ranging (436) significance. . .I wish to state
with pure objectivity that large circles among our people, to which very
educated people in comfortable circumstances belong in great numbers, have
actually come to the point of view: nothing should come of this!
It's believed even in the country that the fear of the Jews even for us is
already so great that even the state authorities are not permitted to undertake
anything against Jewry. . .The desire to bring the German government as well
into a relationship of dependency, surely is present. Indeed, one need only
observe the storm which is presently raised against the Prussian Minister of
Justice, because he opposed the plainly mad claims of the Jews and has denied
that the fact of the examination having been passed ought to force the Minister
to appoint any Jew desired as judge or to appoint him as a Notary. In the entire
Jewish-Liberal press, the Minister is now harried and abused; he is blasted from
every direction.
Jewry is also at work here according to an old proven method. Herr Rickert (9)
need only look up the passages about the Jews in Rome, in Mommsen's Roman
history, how they behaved if some governor in the provinces had irritated them,
perhaps had been incorruptible. When such a man arrived in Rome after having
been relieved of his post, then the alarm was sounded, the rabble stirred up
against him, and every means tried to injure him and to make a new office
impossible for him. I do not know how the Jewish campaign of agitation against
the Herr Minister of Justice will end; perhaps there is also someone at hand as
a replacement for him, who is not yet positioned properly (very good!).
The riots of the summer of the previous year (in Konitz) were instigated by
Jewish agents provocateurs and agitators, or provoked by extreme Jewish
impudence toward the populace (quite correct!). The case of the Jew Zander, for
example, who threw a stone through the pane of his own window on the street,
demonstrates this for Konitz. Gentlemen, the populace must be protected against
such provocations!
But the Jews slip into the role of persecuted innocents at such riots, they
scream about violence and they know how to make their screaming heard in very
high places. Then troops -- which perhaps earlier had mostly been in place for
the cordoning off of the city -- immediately march in on orders from the highest
level, and then the saying comes true, that: 'in the presence of weapons the
laws are silent,' even without a declaration of a state of siege and martial
law. The entire population is overcome with consternation; the witnesses no
longer dare (437) to testify openly and hold back their most important evidence.
Thus they believe that they have finally laid to rest the story of the murder. .
.In my view, however, the Konitz affair is not permitted to be the cause of a
single party, the anti-Semitic party, but rather it must become the cause of all
decent people in the entire German Fatherland. The Konitz Alliance for the
solution of the murder of gymnasium student Winter (10) consists of people who,
by virtue of their social position and by the entire conduct of their lives, can
keep away any suspicion of their joining together merely out of virulent desires
[for excitement, for Jew-baiting, etc.].
Gentlemen, the German people remained at peace when the wholly similar murder in
Skurz found no punishment. The Criminal Commissar Hoeft, who has been the
exemplar for the present inquiries of the Berlin Criminal Commissar in Konitz,
had freed the Jew who was first accused and taken into custody and brought a
Christian master butcher -- everything is repeated! -- before the jury court.
The man had to be completely exonerated. And then the case was settled as far as
the authorities were concerned. The anti-Semitic movement was not yet strong
enough in Germany to interest the German people in the case, as is now the case,
thank God. The blood-murder in Skurz has remained unsolved and unrequited to the
present day. Neither has anyone heard that further investigations have taken
place. When ten years later a similar blood-murder in Xanten excited the world,
an exceedingly cunning means was employed to misdirect the case. A notorious
individual, who had insinuated himself into the anti-Semitic party, went to
Xanten on behalf of an anti-Semitic newspaper and wrote an untruthful brochure
which was printed in good faith and earned the editors responsible harsh prison
sentences. Thus it happened that the anti-Semitic press was unable to persist in
its involvement, and this murder, too, remained unpunished.
Buschhoff, the schächter accused of the crime, was acquitted by the jury court
in Cleves, not, perhaps, because they were convinced of his innocence, but
rather -- as is not at all very well known -- because a subsidiary question
regarding the charge of complicity had not been put, and the jurors considered
the evidence insufficient to pronounce him guilty as the perpetrator.
But the Konitz blood-crime, the third such similar crime in Prussia within a
period of six years, will not share the fate of Skurz and Xanten. The trials
that are still underway, the trial of the Jew Moritz Levy for perjury, which in
a few days (438) will play itself out in Konitz, the trial against the
Staatsbürgerzeitung, in which 114 witnesses are heard, will see to it that the
arousal of the people over the murder of the gymnasium student Winter does not
come to rest. . .yet I have taken the precaution of never stopping in Konitz for
24 hours at a time. It is teeming with Jewish spies, and I did not want to
involve myself without necessity in gossip, the defending against which would
have made work for me and have cost me time. Thus, not the 'anti-Semitic General
Staff, but rather a Jewish Confusion-sowing and Cover-up Committee was
established in Konitz after the murder and is still at work there. All the
disinformation which has gone out by means of the Jewish newspapers, which
consists of pure inventions and which is dispersed into the world, originates
with this Confusion- sowing and Cover-up Committee.
The most shameless thing of all, however, is attained in the recent insinuations
against highly respected Christian men in Konitz, the District School Inspector
Rohde, and the teacher Weichel, whom the Berlin newspapers describe as the
murderers, based upon the simple face that house searches were recently carried
out also at their residences. Both gentlemen live on a street, you see, where
every house and apartment was being searched; clearly no exceptions could be
made. Without there having been anything more to it than this simple fact, the
Berlin papers reported not long ago that the teacher, Weichel, had already
confessed to the murder. This was reported by telegraph from Konitz. This
horrible insinuation then circulated through a large section of the Press!
Likewise, accusations were disseminated in the most shameless manner by the
Berlin and other Jewish papers, against the District School Inspector, Rhode. I
would think then, that the authorities, the Ministry of Culture and Education
and also the War Ministry -- since Herr Rhode is Captain d. L [des Landstags --
of the provincial parliament] and both gentlemen are on the Board of Directors
of the Kriegerverein [Veteran's Association] -- that the supervising ministries
should protect their officials and file ex officio charges against all the
newspapers in question, so that the severely insulted men do not have to bear
useless costs and trouble because of this. Many another important matter may yet
result from this trial as well.
Out of sympathy for this House, I will omit today, at such a late hour,
unrolling a list of the instances of disinformation which have been broadcast to
the world from Konitz in the Jewish interest. I have a thick manuscript about
this lying at my place. . .I will immediately respond to all disinformation
speeches which have been made here concerning the Konitz case. All of the German
people and probably the Reichstag as well would be in agreement with me in this,
that in Konitz the leads ought finally to be pursued for once, (439) which up
till now have not been pursued, after all other leads have been shown to be
erroneous. . .It can only be a matter of complete indifference to us (?), to
what purpose the blood of the victims in Skurz, Xanten, and Konitz was destined
[to be put]. But the evidence cannot be denied, that the bodies or their parts
in all three cases were discovered to be completely empty of blood, and in all
three cases sound human reason can simply find no other motive for murder than
that of obtaining the blood. I have also asked the Director of the
slaughterhouse of Konitz, Herr Veterinarian Wendt, for his opinion. He gave me
the following information: he has been directing the slaughterhouse for ten
years, each year an average of 10,000 animals are killed there, some butchered,
some ritually-slaughtered, therefore he has been able to observe the effects on
100,000 animals of butchering and of ritual-slaughtering, and he was able to
assure me that he had never seen such a blood-drained piece of flesh as the body
parts of Winter. . .(commotion). Quite amazingly, directly after the murder,
five ritual-slaughterers left the area, first the Cantor, Hamburger from
Schlochau and then the schächter Heymann from Konitz, of which the one is
supposed to have made a million-dollar fortune in America, and the other have
gone to Russian Poland. The Jewish ritual-slaughterer Fuchs, who comes from
Russia, has gone back to Russia. . .The fact that Russian Jews were in Konitz,
has been judicially established. . .
The Herr Deputy Stadthagen(11) has described the populace of West Prussia as
being at an extraordinarily culturally low level. So that it is not much to be
wondered at that such people would believe in ritual-murder. . .But the country
populace of West Prussia stands tower-high in education above a category of
people who come into consideration again, at the Konitz murder. I mean the
Jewish population, which is streaming in to us from out of Russian Poland, out
of Galicia, Romania, etc., and because of our legislation, unfortunately nothing
can be done to prevent it." (12)
A p p e n d i x 9.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Ritual-Murders Established in this Investigation (13)
(p. 443)
<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
Time Place Victim/s
419 Jewish Easter Imnestar boy
1144 Easter Norwich twelve-year-old William
1160 Easter Gloucester boy
1171 Easter Blois boy
1179 Easter Pontoise boy
1181 Easter London Robert (child)
1192 Easter Braisne "a Christian"
1220 Easter Weißenburg (Alsace) Heinrich (child)
1225 Munich small child
1235 Christmas Fulda five (5) sons of a miller
1235 December Erfurt child
1244 London boy
Wikipedia
Menahem Mendel Beilis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Beilis trial" and "Beilis affair" redirect here.
Menahem Mendel Beilis (Russian: Менахем Мендель Бейлис; 1874-1934) was a
Ukrainian Jew accused of blood libel and ritual murder in a notorious
1913 trial, known as the "Beilis trial" or "Beilis affair". The process
sparked international criticism of the anti-Semitic policies of the Russian
Empire.
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Pre-trial period (1911-1913)
3 The trial
4 After the trial
5 Influence
6 Revival in 2006
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
[edit]
Background
Menahem Beilis and his family.Menahem Mendel Beilis was born into a pious Jewish
family, but he had little Torah learning and worked regularly on the Sabbath and
the Holy Days, with the exception of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. In 1911 he
was an ex-soldier and the father of five children, employed as a superintendent
at the Zaitsev brick factory in Kiev.
On March 12, 1911, a thirteen-year-old
Ukrainian boy, Andrei Yushchinsky
(Russian: Андрей
Ющинский),
disappeared on his way to school. Eight days later his mutilated body was
discovered in a cave near a local brick factory.
[edit]
Pre-trial period (1911-1913)
Beilis
was arrested on July 21, 1911, after a lamplighter testified that the boy
had been kidnapped by a Jew. A report submitted to the Tsar by the judiciary
regarded Beilis as the murderer of Yushchinsky. Menahem Beilis
spent more than two years in prison awaiting trial. Meanwhile, a vicious
anti-Semitic campaign was launched in the Russian press against the Jewish
community, with accusations of the blood libel and ritual murder.
Among those who wrote or spoke against false accusations of the Jews were Maxim
Gorky, Vladimir Korolenko, Alexander Blok, Alexander Kuprin, Vladimir Vernadsky,
Mykhailo Hrushevsky, Pavel Milyukov, Alexander Koni, and others.
[edit]
The trial
The trial took place in Kiev from September 25 through October 28, 1913. The
chief prosecutor A.I. Vipper made anti-Semitic statements in his closing
address.
The prosecution was composed of the government's best lawyers. One prosecution
witness, a "religious expert" in Judaic rituals was a Catholic priest Justinas
Pranaitis, brought from as far as Tashkent. Pranaitis testified that the murder
of Yushchinsky was a religious ritual, associating the murder of
Yushchinsky
with the blood libel hoax believed by many Russians at the time. Another expert
witness was Professor Sikorski of Kiev State University, a medical psychologist,
who also regarded the case as one of ritual murder.
Beilis was represented by the most able counsels of the Moscow, St. Petersburg,
and Kiev bars: Vasily Maklakov, Oscar Grusenberg, N. Karabchevsky, A. Zarundy,
and D. Grigorovitch-Barsky. Two
prominent Russian professors,
Troitsky and
Kokovtzov,
spoke on behalf of the defense in praise of Jewish values and exposed the
falsehood of the accusations and professor of Kiev Theological Seminary Orthodox
Christian philosopher Alexander Glagolev affirmed that "the Law of Moses forbids
spilling human blood and using any blood in general in food."
The lamplighter, on whose testimony the indictment of Beilis rested, confessed
that he had been confused by the secret police.
After deliberating for several hours,
the all-Christian jury acquitted
Beilis. There was no single representative of the intelligentsia in the
jury.
A later investigation determined that on that tragic morning Andrei Yushchinsky
decided to skip school and visit his friend, Zhenya Cheberyak.
[edit]
After the trial
The Beilis trial was followed worldwide and the anti-Semitic policies of the
Russian Empire were severely criticized. The Beilis case was compared with the
Leo Frank case in which an American Jew, manager of a pencil factory in Atlanta,
Georgia, was convicted of raping and murdering twelve-year-old Mary Phagan and
lynched after his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.
Israel
After his release
Beilis
with his family left Russia for the Land of Israel, then a province of the
Ottoman Empire. In 1920 he settled in the United States. He died in 1934.
[edit]
Influence
A popular movie was made based on these events: The Fixer with Alan Bates and
Dirk Bogarde in 1968, based on the book by Bernard Malamud.
[edit]
Revival in 2006\
Epilogue
executed
However, no doubts arise when one reads the concluding page which
Solzhenitsyn starts significantly: "The Beilis case had an epilogue as well".
According to Solzhenitsyn, the epilogue
was that soon after the revolution,
vengeance of the Jews overtook all prosecution witnesses. "The minister of
justice Shcheglovitov
(one report indicates that he had issued instructions to
investigate the case as a ritual murder), writes Solzhenitsyn (and refers to the
Short Jewish Encyclopaedia,
v.11, p.317), "was executed by the Bolsheviks".
The word "Bolsheviks" in Solzhenitsyn's lingo is a euphemism for Jews, similar
to Prokhanov's "democrats". Solzhenitsyn has but one name for the Bolshevik
party: "Lenin's Jewish Party".
Indeed, Ivan
Shcheglovitov
was executed by the CheKa
as prescribed in the
resolution of the Council of People's Commissars dated 05.09.1918, but he had
been arrested by the Provisional Government right after the February Revolution.
At the time of his arrest he was chairman of the State Council. He had been
appointed to one the Empire's highest posts by Nicholas II soon after the murder
of Rasputin. He had held this ministerial post for almost a decade and been
Stolypin's right-hand man in suppressing the revolution and gained renown as a
fervent and irreconcilable reactionary. Here is how Sergei Witte characterized
him:
"Stolypin had Shcheglovitov, a hypocrite and unscrupulous person, at his side as
the minister of justice. It was the most awful of all the awful ministerial
appointments after my retirement and during all the years right up to this day.
Shcheglovitov destroyed the judicial system. Today it is difficult to see where
the
court ends and the police force commences... Shcheglovitov is not the head of
judicial system, but rather the head or one of the heads of the secret police.
Disregarding the independence of judges, Shcheglovitov replaces whoever he
wants, and the law department has sunk into the marasmus of servility to the
minister of justice on whom the well-being of court officials depends... I am
sure
he will be remembered as a dark figure for many decades to come...
That is the way he is remembered. If I had to write a new "Comparative
Biographies" I would certainly take the pair Shcheglovitov-Vyshinsky.
Shcheglovitov was the principal "conductor" of the trial in Kiev. This fact is
well
known even outside the Jewish Encyclopaedia. The first fiddle in the
falsifications
was played by Georgy Chaplinsky. He had
taken the office of prosecutor in the
Kiev's Chamber of Justice on March 14, 1911, that is, two days after little
Andrei
was murdered and six days before his body was found. All the two years and
seven months of the investigation and trial passed under the tight control and
supervision of Chaplinsky.
Though the charges were dropped and the
prosecutors got an ill name the world over, Chaplinsky was showered with
awards, probably for his zeal. On January 1, 1914, the loyal servant of the
tsar's
Themis was promoted to the topmost rank – that of privy councillor, awarded the
order of St.Stanislaus First Class, and made a senator and a member of the
Senate's Criminal Appeals Department. That meant he would supervise the
legality of the functioning of courts of law. Right out of a fable! Such was the
tsar's New Year's gift to Chaplinsky.
Bolsheviks killed everyone
from trial
|
|
|
o
|
|
The Anti Semitic Trail that Shook the World
by Laurence Krane
In our cozy little modern world with all the modern conveniences and
appurtenances for entertainment, the world-shocking episode of Mendel Beilis is
almost a lost case. Yet, back in the early 1900's, the blatant anti Semitic
trial of Mendel Beilis that took place in Kiev, Ukraine, caused an international
sensation that showed the extents and roots of anti-Semitism.
It is important for us, who live in our times, to really understand this
ant-Semitic trial in order that we may learn the lessons of it, that we may
apply them to our own modern life. In it, we may understand more of the workings
of the anti-Semitic minds and their rationale.
The trial concerned a thirteen-year-old
boy by the name of Andrey
Yushchinsky
who left his home to go to school. This was on March 12, 1911. Eight days later
his mangled body was discovered in a cave.
Later it was determined that Andrey decided to skip school and visit his friend
Zhenya Cheberyak. Zhenya's
mother, Vera was known in the neighborhood as an associate of criminals and as a
"fence" (a seller of stolen property).
During preliminary hearings it was revealed that Andrey and Zhenya were seen
walking together at a point halfway between the Cheberyak home and the Zaitsev
brick factory where Mendel Beilis worked as a clerk. The police investigation,
at first, concentrated on Vera Cheberyak and her underworld associates.
During the funeral, leaflets were distributed accusing the Jews of the murder
and summoning the Christians to avenge the murder. Two Russian organizations,
the Union of the Russian People, and the
Double-Headed Eagle, which were both national reactionary anti-Semitic
groups, continued to clamor for the police to focus on the Jews.
Although the murder transpired in 1911, the court trial did not begin until
1913. The trial was in fact a major conspiracy conceived by high officers of the
government of Czar Nicholas II. Following a revolution of 1905, Russia was in
the grip of a counter-revolution in which the Jews were the major scapegoats and
victims. The czarist regime used the
blood libel charge as a convenient political weapon to divert the
attention of the masses from the corrupt and repressive policies of the
government. Blaming the Jews for all of the ill that beset the empire took
pressure away from the government.
The revolutionary movement was growing in scope and intensity and becoming
increasingly unmanageable. The monarchist elements in the government were on the
lookout for a new ploy to divert the revolutionary ferment against the czar.
Mendel Beilis was thirty-nine years old at the time of the trial. He was an
ex-soldier and the father of five children. He was employed as a clerk at the
Zaitsev brick factory. Kiev had a Jewish
population of approximately twenty thousand Jews out of a total population of
four hundred thousand.
Although Beilis's father was a pious Jew and hasid, Beilis had little learning.
He could recite Hebrew prayers and some knowledge of religious rites. He worked
regularly on the Sabbath and the Holy Days, with the exception of Rosh Hashanah
and Yom Kippur.
Top Jewish lawyers were appointed in his
behalf by the Jewish community to represent
Beilis.
The prosecution was composed of the government's best lawyers. The trial
took place in front of a jury that was devoid of "intellectuals", since the
prosecution knew that the "intelligentsia" was opposed to the czar. Of the
twelve jurors, seven were member of the notorious Union of the Russian People.
Indeed, it was the leadership of the Double-Headed Eagle organization that
constantly prodded the police in the direction of the Jews.
The Double-Headed Eagle had many connections in various ministries and it was
largely due to their influence that the trial turned from investigating Vera
Cheberyak and her underworld associates to seeking a Jewish scapegoat.
During the trial the presiding justice kept reminding the defense lawyers that
the Jewish religion was not on trial merely individual fanatical Jews.
The prosecution brought as an expert
witness an unknown and obscure Catholic priest who resided in far off Tashkent
to act as the religious expert for the prosecution. Although an
anti-Semite of the highest caliber, he failed to impress the judges with his
flimsy knowledge of Judaism and their rituals.
During the trial, the court established that the boy was murdered elsewhere and
his body brought to the cave. His head and body had multiple wounds, yet there
were no blood stains in the cave. The court established that the wounds were
inflicted by two or more persons. It was established that he was truant and
instead of going to school he went to visit his friend Zhenya, the son of Vera
Cheberyak. Vera told the police that
Zhenya, who died of dysentery
shortly after the murder, saw a black bearded man chase after
Andrey
and drag him towards the factory kiln.
Zhenya,
unfortunately, was dead, and could not substantiate the testimony.
At the same time rumors were being spread that the murder was perpetrated for
Jewish religious requirements. The police deliberately ignored neighbors who
heard the scuffle. Two sisters who entered the Cheberyak flat after the murder
revealed suspicious circumstances being that the carpet which was normally on
the floor was rolled up like a tube and stuffed under the sofa.
In addition, one of Vera's friends revealed that the boy was beaten in the
apartment and when his cries were becoming apparent, his mouth was stuffed with
pillow case. Yet the police and prosecution ignored the obvious, the boy had to
much knowledge of the underground activities of Vera Cheberyak and her
underworld associates. When he made his knowledge apparent, he was murdered.
They utilized the murder to avert the masses from their reasonable demands that
the government be civil and just.
Acquital
Fortunately for Mendel Beilis and the Jews of Russia the jury acquitted Beilis.
The jury was split six to six, and under Russian law, that is an acquittal.
The acquittal of Beilis was a stunning blow to a cunning and deceitful
government.
In Russia, the progressive elements, the intelligentsia, the liberal press felt
affronted by the spectacle the czarist government staged. The liberal press
claimed that from the beginning the authorities knew that Vera Cheberyak and her
underworld associates were guilty of the crime.
The world at large had followed the Beilis trial.
At its conclusion Russia was severely
criticized by the Western world for trying to bring back the myth of blood libel
to prop up a decedent monarchy. It was antics like the Beilis trial that
served the corrupt government to keep it in power. Fortunately for us, it
backfired. In 1917, the Russian revolution came.
Many of the players in the farce were
killed by the Bolsheviks.
The Beilis trial was a eye opener for many. But perhaps for us, we may learn a
very important lesson, and that is that anti-Semitism does not exist for no
reason. Those who perpetrate hatred of Jews do it for ulterior reasons. Wherever
Jews are being accused of something, there is a hidden agenda that utilizes
racial hatred to obscure the true rational.
Government Blood Libel: The Beilis Affair
Mendel Beilis...
During the Beilis trial...
"Beilis and his Defenders"...
In this telegram...
Mendel Beilis, reunited...
IN FEBRUARY 1911, the liberal and socialist factions in the Third Duma introduce
a proposal to abolish the Pale of Settlement. Right wing and monarchist
organizations such as the Union of the Russian People and the Congress of the
United Nobility react violently: they embark on a campaign to harshen
anti-Jewish policies instead of lessening them. For this campaign, both
organizations receive secret state subsidies from a government that has lost
practically all support in parliament.
When in March 1911 the body of a young Christian boy is found in Kiev, the
Czarist authorities seize the opportunity to revive the age-old accusation of
ritual murder. A Jewish inhabitant of Kiev, Mendel
Beilis,
the superintendent of a brick kiln, is arrested and charged, although by that
time the authorities already know the true perpetrators.
For more than two years, Beilis remains in prison while the authorities try to
build a case against him by falsifying papers and pressurizing "witnesses." But
the case backfires. In October 1913, the jury unanimously declares Beilis not
guilty. The Beilis case not only draws international attention to the plight of
the Jews in Russia, it also unites the conservative Octobrists and the radical
Bolsheviks in their opposition to the government.
The Czarist government finds it difficult to accept this humiliating defeat.
G.
Zamyslovsky,
one of the prosecutors in the case, repeats the accusation against Beilis
in his book The Murder of Andrei
Yushinsky. The book is published
on the eve of the revolution in 1917 with secret funds of the Interior Ministry
that have been approved by the Czar.
Beilis lawyers
After the Revolution of 1917, the Provisional Russian Government immediately set about the task of prosecuting former Czarist ministers for crimes against the Russian people. The Beilis case was the first case submitted for investigation. In the summer of 1919, although the archives of the Czar had not yet been researched and the commission was only allowed to investigate illegal acts done in an official capacity, the Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal convicted Minister of Justice Shtchedlovitoff, Ministers of the Interior Makaroff and Maklakoff and Director of Police Bielezky. They were all executed. Zamislovsky and Shmakoff died in the interim. Prosecutor Viper had died awaiting trial following his indictment in 1919. Vera Tchebiriak was shot in Kiev in 1918.
Click on the chapter you wish to read
Editor’s Preface: The Making of a Martyr
Karabchevsky
More Lies Exposed
1911 June 22 -1913 BEILIS TRIAL (Russia)
Took place after a Christian boy was found dead near a brick factory in which Mendel Beilis worked. He was accused of ritual murder by the government. The only evidence was the word of a drunken couple who claimed they saw a man with a black beard walking with the child. The Russian government actively took up the case after the assassination of Stolypin by a Jewish revolutionist. Professor Sikowsky, a neurologist, "proved" that Jews use Christian blood for ritual purposes. Beilis's lawyers, Margolin and Grusenberg, fought the government for two years until diplomatic pressure forced the Russians to drop the charges. Beilis then settled in the United States, where he died after a long illness in 1934.
Menachem
Beilis
was born in 1874. He worked in a brick kiln in Kiev. On
March 20, 1911, the mutilated
body of Andrei Yushchinsky, a 12-year-old boy, was discovered in a cave on the
outskirts of Kiev. The monarchist rightist press immediately launched a vicious
anti-Jewish campaign, accusing the Jews of using human blood for ritual
purposes.
At the funeral of Yushchinsky, leaflets circulating the blood libel were
distributed by members of the reactionary "Black Hundred" ("Union of Russian
People") organization. Meanwhile the
police investigation traced the murder to a gang of thieves associated with a
woman, Vera Cheberiak,
notorious for criminal dealings.
However, the reactionary anti-Semitic organizations led by the "Black Hundred"
pressured the anti-Semitic minister of justice, I. G. Shcheglovitov, to call the
death a ritual murder. Accordingly, the chief district attorney of Kiev
disregarded the police information and instead looked for a Jew on whom to shift
the crime, through whom the entire Jewish people could be publicly indicted.
In July 1911, a lamplighter testified that on March 12, the day Yushchinsky
disappeared, he had seen him playing with two other boys on the premises of the
brick kiln owned by a Jew, Zaitsev. He also alleged that a Jew had suddenly
appeared and kidnaped Yushchinsky, pulling him toward the brick kiln. On the
strength of this testimony, Mendel Beilis, the superintendent of the brick kiln,
was arrested on July 21, 1911,
and sent to prison, where he remained for over two years. A report was submitted
to Czar Nicholas II that Beilis was regarded by the judiciary as the murderer of
Yushchinsky.
Case attention
The case attracted universal attention.
Protests and addresses by scientists, public and political leaders, artists, men
of letters, clergymen, and other liberal-minded men were published in all the
civilized countries of Europe and the United States affirming that the blood
libel was baseless.
The trial of Beilis took place in Kiev from Sept. 25 through Oct. 28, 1913. The
chief prosecutor A. I. Vipper
made anti-Jewish statements in his closing address and defended the Cheberiak
gang against the charge of Yushchinsky's murder. Beilis was represented by the
most able counsels of the Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Kiev bars: Vassily
Maklakov, Oscar O. Grusenberg, N. P. Karabchevsky, A. S. Zarundy, and D. N.
Grigorovitch-Barsky.
The lamplighter and his wife, on whose testimony the indictment of Beilis
rested, when questioned by the presiding judge, answered, "We know nothing at
all." They confessed that both had been confused by the secret police and made
to answer questions they did not comprehend.
"Scientific" foundation for the
blood libel was supplied at the trial by a
Catholic priest with a criminal record,
Justin Pranaitis,
who stated that the murder of Yushchinsky had all the characteristics of
ritual murder commanded by the Jewish religion. His arguments were refuted by
the rabbi of Moscow, Jacob Mazeh, who proved that Pranaitis was ignorant of the
talmudic texts cited.
Two Russian professors of high standing, Troitsky and Kokovtzoff, also spoke on
behalf of the defense in praise of Jewish values and exposed the falsity of the
ritual murder hypothesis. The jury, composed of simple Russian peasants, after
several hours of deliberation unanimously declared Beilis "not guilty."
Russians would kill the Jew
Beilis,
who still remained in danger of revenge by the "Black Hundred," left Russia with
his family for Israel.. In 1920 he settled in the United States. Bernard
Malamud's novel The Fixer is based on the Beilis case. Menachem Beilis died in
1934.
1911-3: The Beilis case, an
accusation of ritual murder of a boy by the name of
Andriusha
Yustchinsky,
surfaced in Kiev, Russia. At first,
his mother looked like a possible suspect. Although the boy had
disappeared eight days before his body was found, she had not notified the
police. She showed no emotion when her son's body was discovered. Upon his
death, she inherited 500 rubles, which had been held in trust.
Suspicion later fell on Vera Tchebiraik who was involved with a gang of thieves. Andriusha was a schoolmate of her son, and would often stay overnight in her home. The boy might have heard about or seen some criminal act by the gang and been murdered to assure his silence. However, this was a time of great unrest in the country, and widespread anti-Jewish sentiment. Soon, the blood libel myth surfaced. "Mendel Beilis was a Jew arrested in 1911 by the Czarist secret police in Kiev and accused of ritually murdering a Christian boy to use his blood in baking matzoh. He was jailed for almost two and one-half years, under horrible conditions, while awaiting trial. In 1913, after a dramatic trial, he was [unanimously] acquitted by an all Christian jury." 6,7,8,12 |
|
1920s: Mendel Beilis emigrated to the U.S. and wrote his autobiography, called "The Story of My Sufferings." 6 |
Page 1
The Beilis Case PapersDocuments on the Beilis Case from theState Archive of the
Kiev OblastFonds 2,183, 864By Vladimir Danilenko,Director of the State Archiveof
the Kiev OblastThe State Archives of the Kiev Oblast (GAKO) contain documents
pertaining to the so-called Beilis Case œ the 1913 trial of Mendel Beilis, a Jew
who worked as a clerk at a brickfactory on the outskirts of Kiev. He was charged
with murdering a young Ukrainian boy, AndreiYushchinsky.
Incited by Russian Black-Hundred
organizations, the Beilis
case aimed to provoke mass
anti-Semitic pogroms1in the country. The timing of the trial was not
accidental. On 9February 1911, the Third State Duma began debating a draft law
on abolishing the Jewish Paleof Settlement. This drew indignation and unrest
from anti-Semitic monarchist parties and Black-Hundred organizations that railed
against the bill. Exhausting the then standard anti-Semiticslogans, they tried
to reanimate the medieval accusation of the Jews using —Christian blood“ intheir
rites. This accusation had to be proven in a concrete court case. At the time,
the localpolice were investigating the murder of
Andrei
Yushchinsky,
a student at St. Sophia
religiousschool in Kiev, whose body had been found on the outskirts of
Kiev, near the factory whereBeilis was employed (Fond 183, opis‘ 5, delo 4, p.
4). As early as March 1911, members of theBlack Hundred in Kiev claimed that the
young boy had died in a ritual killing. The authoritiesbacked this claim.
Kiev psychiatrist I. Sikorsky asked by
the prosecutor whether it was
possibleto determine the
murderer‘s nationality based on the examination of the body said that the
boyhad
been murdered by Jews.
The prosecution brought in as an expert witness a Catholic priest,I. Pranaitis, to act as the religious expert for the prosecution. Using randomly collected excerptsfrom Jewish texts he was trying to prove that Jews hated people of other religions andespecially Christians.2The only thing left was to select a culprit for the trialœ a Jew.The Beilis case was investigated for two and a half years. The trial took place inSeptember and October 1913. Progressive Russian and Ukrainian intelligentsia rose up todefend Beilis. Writer V.G. Korolenko wrote an open letter to the newspaper Rech (30 October1911) entitled —To Russian Society“ against the —blood calumny.“ It was signed by prominentintellectuals Andreev, Blok, Kuprin, Merezhkovsky, Aleksei Tolstoy, Vernadsky, and Tugan-Baranovsky. Some of the top lawyers pleaded Beilis's case at the trial: Gruzenberg, Zarudny,Karabchevsky, Grigorovich-Barsky, and Maklakov. There is a poster (Fond 2, opis‘ 229, delo264, p. 321) with the likenesses of Beilis and his lawyers. The poster was printed in St.Petersburg and virtually the entire print run was seized by the authorities. There was also amedal bearing the likeness of Mendel Beilis which suffered the same fate as the poster.—Evidence“ provided by I. Sikorsky and I. Pranaitis was refuted by psychiatrist V.Bekhterev, Semitologist P. Kokovtsev, Kiev Theological Academy professor, priest A. Glagolev,and Moscow Rabbi Ya. Maze.
|
(Fond 2, opis‘ 229, delo 264).The municipal authorities were seriously
alarmed over the situation surrounding theBeilis case. They turned to the
headquarters of the Kiev Military District: —…
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
…“ The authorities asked for three Cossack squadrons to assist Kiev municipal
police (Fond, 2.Opis‘ 220, delo 264, pp. 1-4).TheMinistry of the Interior issued
a circular letter, No. 12539 of 17 October 1913, banning thescreening of a film
about the Beilis case (Ibid., pp. 102-104) and recommending to apprehend
agitators only as a last resort.There were
355 witnesses in the trial (their
alphabetically arrange list in Fond 864, opis‘10, delo 22). Attached to the case
is a list of books borrowed for the duration of the Beilis trialfrom A.S.
Shmakov Library (19 book in all, Ibid., p. 13).The jury of 14 members acquitted
Beilis. The court decision said: —The District Court hasruled:By virtue of the
decision by members of the jury and based on para 1 of Article 771 of the
Statute of the CriminalCourt, the defendant, Menakhil-Mendel Teviev Beilis, 39,
resident of the city of Vasilkov, Kiev Province, is therebyruled acquitted after
trial in this case… (Fond 864, opis‘ 10, delo 16, pp. 425-426).Documents in the
archives contain much information adding up to the full picture of the Beilis
case, including: a report on discovering Yushchinsky‘s body, opinions of the
cause of his deathby forensic medicine
professor Obolonsky
and dissector Tufanov,
the ruling on putting Beilis incustody and the formal charge, lawyers‘ request,
newspapers with articles (Fond 183, opis‘ 5,delo 4), correspondence pertaining
to the trial. Here is an example of one of the letters:We can state the fact
that Beilis rose from obscurity to world fame, he has become a historic figure.
His name is known to the population of the globe as well as the name of Tolstoy
although Beilis has done nothing of the things that some people …An amazing
fact: to win world fame that would last forever. One shouldn‘t be sorry to
spendseveral years in custody for that. I envy you! You‘ll be most certainly
acquitted. (Fond 183, opis‘ 5, delo 6, pp. 93, 94).Also included are the file of
the examining magistrate of the St. Peterburg District Court forespecially
important cases, Mashkovsky, pertaining to the killing of Andrei
Yushchinsky,materials of the questioning
of suspects Korzhenevsky,
Krasovsky,
Voloshenko,
Vera and Lyudmila
Cheberyak
(Fond 864, opis‘ 10, delo 52), the memorandum of the proceedings of
thecourt, names of lawyers, members of the jury, experts, the court‘s resolution
and its decision(Ibid., delo 10), the charge (Ibid., delo 22).As a whole, the
documents are a valuable source for studying this cause célèbre of the
early20thcentury. Most of them are originals and have a powerful information
potential yet to beexplored.The documents are in Russian, Yiddish, German, and
Polish.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
Beilis and his family left Russia for Palestine and finally emigrated to
America. In 1926,he published in New York his memories recounting his ordeal. He
died in the United States in1934.NOTES:1. Armed pogrom gangs organized by the
police and monarchist organizations for combatingthe revolutionary movement,
inciting racial enmity and staging attacks on Jews. In a broadersense, Black
Hundreders was the name for extreme reactionary and chauvinistic elements.2.
See. Delo o ritual‘nom ubiistve Andruyshi Yushchinskogo. —Taina krovi“ u evreev.
EkspertizaI.Ye. Pranaitisa. Izdaniye russkogo narodnogo Soyuza imeni Mikhaila
Arkhangela (Fond 2, opis‘229, delo 264, pp. 276-294).The trial went ahead
despite the fact that the security police, which was simultaneously conducting
its own investigation, knew the actual
murderers œ Vera Cheberyak,
member of a Kiev street gang, and her accomplices. The murderers were not
brought to trial on instructions from the Ministry of Justice.Beilis was
arrested 12 June 1911 (Fond 183, opis‘ 5, delo 4, pp. 163-165). The
Black-Hundred press launched a rabid anti-Semitic campaign and called for
pogroms against Jews. The archives have the newspapers Russkoye Znamya issues
76, 84,85; Groza and Novoye vremya(Fond 183, opis‘ 5, pp. 17, 23, 24) with
stories of Jewish ritual killings headlined —Christians,Protect Your Children,“
—A Murder Committed by Kikes in Kiev,“ and so on; the newspaperKievlyanin,
issues 102, 103, 106, 108 speaking out in defense of Beilis.
As y'all may know, Solzhenitsyn's seemingly
never-to-be-translated book on the history of
Russian-Jewish relations contains an epilogue to the
1913 Beilis blood libel trial which has gotten him
accused of anti-Semitism. I think it's a load of crap,
but now you can decide for yourselves, because
courtesy of me, Anglophones can actually read what he
wrote. I translated the offending few paragraphs (in a
book of several hundred pages) for a couple of
correspondents and figured I might as well post them
here. It's totally ripped out of context,
unfortunately.
The Beilis affair had an epilogue.
"Under the threat of revenge from the side of the
Black Hundreds, Beilis left Russia and went with his
family to Palestine. In 1920 he resettled to the US."
He died his death, at the age of 60, near New York.(1)
Justice Minister
Shcheglovitiv
(according to one
source, it was he who "gave the order to investigate
the case as a ritual murder"(2)) was shot by the
Bolsheviks.
Vera Cheberak shot
|
In 1919 prosecutor
Vipper
was discovered in the role
of a Soviet bureaucrat in Kiev and was tried by the
Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal. The Bolshevik
prosecutor Krylenko said the following: "proceding
from his proven danger to the Republic... let there be
one less Vipper among us." (This black joke had in
mind that an R. Vipper, a professor of the history of
the Middle Ages, remained.) However, the Tribunal only
sentenced Vipper "to a concentration camp... until the
complete strengthening of a Communist structure in the
Republic." (4) Vipper's further tracks have been
effaced.
Belis
was found not guilty by peasants -- the same
Ukrainian peasants that had participated in the
pogroms of the turn of the century and who would soon
learn of the collectivization and
extermination of
1932-33 -- an extermination that was not reflected by
all the world's journalists and not held up as a crime
of the regime.
These are also steps of History.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pranaitis, after considering the ritual murders known throughout the history of mankind, arrived at the following conclusion: Murders of Christians by Jews for religious purposes do take place as a perverted cumulative effect of the entire Jewish religion. As for the murder of Youtchinsky, the circumstances under which it took place, the method by which the wounds were inflicted, their disposition, the draining of the blood from the body, the time of committing the crime, all these give to it the characteristic traits of a typical ritualistic murder (Cf. 243, Vol. VI).
~ Talmud ~
Home
The Life Of Christ/The Christian Cross What The Talmud Teaches About Christians Christians Unworthy To Associate With Jews Christians To Be Harmed Indirectly Christians To Be Harmed Directly Appendix - How The Pope Treated The Jews Gregory XVII "Siri" The Pope in Red The Coming Great Catholic Monarch St. John Bosco's Dream (Vision) of Hell
|
THE SECRET RABBINICAL TEACHINGS CONCERNING CHRISTIANS By Rev. I. B. Pranaitis With Ecclesiastical Imprimatur
St. Petersburg, Printing office of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1892 *IMPRIMATUR: C. Propolanis, S.Th.C, Secretary All Rights Reserved Copyright 1939 by E. N. SANCTUARY, 156 Fifth Avenue - New York INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Epilogue Part I - Teaching of the Talmud Concerning Christians Chapter I. Jesus Christ in the Talmud
Chapter II. Christians in the Talmud
Part II - Precepts of the Talmud Concerning Christians Chapter I. Christians are to be Avoided
Chapter II. Christians are to be Exterminated
Appendix - How the Popes Treated the Jews
Note from the Webmaster: This unchanged, online version of Fr. Pranaitis scholarly book, The Talmud Unmasked, is dedicated to the Holy Infant Martyr St. Simon of Trent, who was mercilessly slayed by the Jews in Trent, Italy on the 21st March, 1475 A.D.
|
© StGemma.com
Web Productions Inc. 2005. All rights reserved.
Once again, Mendel Beilis found himself at the mercy of events beyond his control. Most of the world was either embroiled in World War I or caught up in its aftermath, and Palestine did not prove to be the safe haven Beilis so desperately sought. In 1920, at the age of forty-six, Beilis emigrated to America and settled in New York City, where he lived until his death in 1934.
In New York, Beilis wrote his personal memoirs, The Story of My Sufferings, which were published in 1926 by Beilis himself. Originally composed in Yiddish but published in English, the original edition contains two articles written by Beilis’s first attorney, Arnold Margolin, in which he pays tribute to those Russian gentiles who valiantly assisted the effort to free Mendel Beilis. There is also a special memorium honoring Rabbi Jacob Mazeh for his extraordinary performance at the trial and his lifelong dedicated service to Russian Jewry. Also of interest at the end of the book is an “Honor List” of individuals and workers’ organizations that financed the publication of the book by paying thirty cents for each of twenty-three hundred copies.
This personal memoir provides posterity with a rare inside view of a martyr’s ordeal, but it by no means tells the whole story of the Beilis trial, either from the prosecution’s side or the defense’s. It does, however, form an invaluable addition to the large body of records and literature pertaining to this sensational trial. In addition to the actual stenographic record of the trial, which fills three immense volumes, the archival materials also contain a voluminous collection of articles that appeared in Russian and foreign newspapers. But the most remarkable body of correspondence concerning the Beilis trial was discovered after the Revolution of 1917 in the Czar’s secret papers.
It is here that the criminal complicity of the Czar and his officials is factually detailed. Goluboff, Tchaplinsky and Schtcheglovetoff were all conspirators who, with the full knowledge of the Czar, carried out their scheme to make an innocent Mendel Beilis the quintessential scapegoat. These incriminating papers reveal the extent of their involvement in the falsification of documents and testimony. There is included the original medical report, as well as the “altered” versions. Receipts were found for payments to Kossovsky, Zamyslovsky and others for “services” rendered. At the time of the verdict, however, the general public was totally unaware of the government’s treachery. Ironically, the verdict of acquittal actually allayed some of the criticism of the Czar, for it showed that the Russian justice system was still capable of freeing an innocent man.
Even after the trial, the governmental agitation did not cease. In an effort to repair the government’s image abroad, the Minister of Justice paid a member of the Duma named Zamyslovsky, an original organizer of the trial, seventy-five thousand rubles to publish a work entitled, The Murder of Andrei Yustchinsky. Defending the Czar’s persecution of the Jews, he wrote, “The fanatic murder committed by the Jews in order to obtain Christian blood is not a legend even in the twentieth century; it is not a blood libel. It is a terrible reality, and many who doubted and hesitated about it became convinced after the Kiev trial.”
After the Revolution of 1917, the Provisional Russian Government immediately set about the task of prosecuting former Czarist ministers for crimes against the Russian people. The Beilis case was the first case submitted for investigation. In the summer of 1919, although the archives of the Czar had not yet been researched and the commission was only allowed to investigate illegal acts done in an official capacity, the Moscow Revolutionary Tribunal convicted Minister of Justice Shtchedlovitoff, Ministers of the Interior Makaroff and Maklakoff and Director of Police Bielezky. They were all executed. Zamislovsky and Shmakoff died in the interim. Prosecutor Viper had died awaiting trial following his indictment in 1919. Vera Tchebiriak was shot in Kiev in 1918.
While this new edition of Beilis’s memoirs will undoubtedly stimulate new interest in this dark chapter of history, it will hopefully also correct certain misconceptions about Beilis that may have arisen after the publication of Bernard Malamud’s The Fixer in 1966. The Fixer was a highly acclaimed work of fiction whose plot was contructed around a twentieth century Russian blood libel trial strongly reminiscent of the Beilis trial. The resemblance, however, ends there. Malamud’s Yakov Bok was never meant to be a representation of Mendel Beilis. Bok was an obscure little handyman fleeing from his heritage, while Beilis, manager of a huge factory, was not “a little man,” and he certainly was not fleeing from his heritage. In an era of rampant assimilation, even in the totally hostile, gentile environs of the factory where he lived and worked, he was conspicuous as “the Jew with the beard.” Throughout his memoirs, Beilis proudly and repeatedly portrays himself as a religious Jew. The first words he spoke at his trial were “I am a Jew.”
Mendel Beilis was an honorable man, a man of great courage and dignity. Even his accusers confessed that they could find no flaws in his character. His industriousness and integrity were beyond reproof; he had served loyally in the army of the Czar, and he had broken no laws, violated no rules. And above all, the faith and courage he displayed throughout his ordeal was truly remarkable. Had he at any time “confessed” or succumbed to his tormentors, the history of the Jews of Kiev, and perhaps of all Russia, would have contained an additional tragic chapter. Yet Mendel Beilis endured and, in the end, prevailed.
|
||||||||||
|
||||
‘The apparent spontaneity of their enthusiasm for war, which shook the American
people, should not astonish those who know America, or who lived there for some
years before 1914. For at that time thousands and thousands of non-Jewish
people, who had nevertheless been intoxicated by a costly and clever publicity
campaign, demanded at the tops of their voices that diplomatic and commercial
relations should be broken off with the Tsar's government – a measure which
would gravely prejudice the American portfolio – for the sole reason that a mean
and obscure little Jew, who was completely unknown in his own town, but whose
international ubiquity had organized his defence, had been brought before a
court of assize and the regular jury of a provincial city in the Russian empire
on a charge, whether justly or unjustly, of committing a ritual murder.
‘On both occasions, the result was exactly the same: the nation which above all
others claims to be free and in sovereign command of its own destiny was
brainwashed to the hilt