Ps. 101, 7: "He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tally in my sight." We make no apology for selecting this portion of a Psalm of David in preparing this appendix. In the Contemporary Jewish Record for July-August, 1939. Ben Zion Bokser has an article, entitled: "Talmudic Forgeries, A Case Study in Anti-Jewish Propaganda." From that we take the following: "Czarist Russia made its contribution to this gallery of literary swindlers in the person of the notorious Justin Pranaitis, a Catholic clergyman. * * * It was in 1912 during the trial of Beilis on the ritual murder libel that Pranaitis drew world notoriety upon himself by offering his services as an expert to the prosecution. * * * Beilis was, of course, acquitted, but the prosecution remunerated the star ‘expert’ with 500 rubles."

The American Jewish Year Books, in the Jewish Section of the New York Public Library, for the years 1913-1914, and 1914-1915, contain a number of references to this famous trial in which Beilis was the defendant. These will be condensed as much as possible for lack of space. "At the request of Mackevitch, Committee appointed to examine all books in library of St. Petersburg Ecclesiastical Academy for reference to the use of Christian blood by Jewish sects. * * * The Kolocol, organ of the Holy Synod, urges ecclesiastical committee to confirm belief in ritual murder theory and guilt of Beilis. * * * Ministry of Justice orders bringing of new indictment against Beilis at approaching session of court. Public prosecutor assures Beilis that trial will take place in May. Professor Troitsky, Christian authority on Jewish law and customs, declares it an unfounded myth. * * * Mackevitch completes report on Yuchinsky case, comprising 8 volumes of 500 pages. Minister of Justice orders further inquiry. * * * Second indictment against Beilis confirmed by Kieff Judicial Chamber. Indictment mentions ritual character of crime. The Retch fined 500 rubles for criticizing indictment of Beilis. * * * Prompted by Beilis trial, the Holy Synod requests Missionary Council to study life of religious Jews and of those who no longer adhere to principles of the Talmud. * * * A. Stolypin, brother of the late Premier, appeals to Jews to buy peace by confessing the existence of a sect practicing ritual murder. * * * At Irkutsk, preacher at the cathedral in special sermon, eulogizes prosecution of Beilis and attacks defense. * * * Minister of justice concurs in desirability of tracing real accusers of Yuchinsky but opposed steps against Cheberick as this would be interpreted as 'abandonment of the 'ritual' theory of the murder,' which he regarded as proven. * * * At St. Petersburg, anti-Jewish press charge that Jews bribed officials to destroy all documents against Beilis, and are about to burn secret books concerning code of ritual murders. * * * The Russkoe Znomya states that Jews have destroyed the Zohar which contained blood libel code. The Novoe Vremya continues to publish threats that acquittal of Beilis will not be accepted as Jews are masters of the court and Christian witnesses are all terrorized. * * * The Novoe Vremya, in article on Yuchinsky case, in reply to British protest, states that Jews ought to welcome arrest of Beilis as an opportunity of arriving at the truth. * * * The Novoe Vremya hints that experts in the Beilis case were bribed by the Jews, adding that 'after the part played by the banking House of Rothschild, nobody will be surprised at the Kieff mobilization of all savants and judicial authorities.' The Zemstchina charges that Papal Secretary of State, Cardinal Merry del Val, was also bribed into authenticating Papal bulls against blood accusations. * * * In a letter to Lord Rothschild, Cardinal Merry del Val, Secretary of State of the Vatican, certifies to the authenticity of Bulls of Popes Innocent IV, Paul III, Gregory X, and Clement XIV, which declare ritual murder a baseless accusation and wicked invention."

From the last page, 376, of Albert Monniot's "Le Crime Ritual chez les Juifs," 1914 edition, which book is in the Jewish section of the New York Public Library, we obtain a brief resume of this famous Beilis case: "By virtue of all that precedes, Menachile Mendel Teview Beylis, bourgeois of Kiev, 29 years of age, is accused of having killed, in company with other persons unknown to the law, Andre Ioutchinski, age 12 years, with fanatical religious intent. The foregoing boy was seized March 12, 1911, while he was playing in the brickyard at Zaitzew and dragged into the yard, where by the consent of Beylis, tied the hands of the boy, closed his mouth and killed him; the head, neck and trunk showing 48 wounds * * * causing the body to become bloodless."

In this Beilis case there were two points to be considered by the jury, first was a ritual murder committed; second, was Beilis guilty of the crime. On the first charge, the jury voted unanimously that Yuchinsky had been the victim of a ritual murder, but on the second, the jury voted six to six, which was a verdict for Beilis. Returning to the American Jewish Year Book, we find an interesting item: "Appeals on behalf of Professor Troitzky to permit him to return to his post at the Theological Academy, St. Petersburg, unavailing." Mr. Bokser did not tell his readers that Father Pranaitis after the trial continued to occupy his chair at said Academy. Again, Mr. Bokser, for obvious reasons, failed to mention that the government, in the Beilis case, put into the record the celebrated Saratov case.

1853. Saratov. Two ritual murders are involved this time: one, a 10-year-old boy in Dec., 1852; the other an 11-year-old, in January, 1853. After a flood, both bodies were found on the bank of the Volga, pierced with many wounds. Eight years afterwards, two Jews, Schiffermann and Zourloff, were duly tried for these murders and convicted. They were sentenced to 28 years labour in the mines and they died during their imprisonment. This being a juridically decided case, the sentence [in] which [was] passed for "killing two Christian boys and having them endure martyrdom" by the Senate and submitted to the Russian Empire Council, is, of course, not mentioned in Strack's book. Authority: Monniot's Le Crime Ritual chez les Juifs, 1914, p. 157 [sic; p. 257] (From Mr. Leese's book: Jewish Ritual Murder, p. 28).

Arnold S. Leese, London, England, has written a booklet of 57 pages on the subject of Ritual Murder. In the effort which Mr. Bokser makes to ridicule Father Pranaitis, also that he quotes two Popes, Innocent IV and Clement XIV, we quote from Mr. Leese [JRM, p. 44 –JR], who in turn quotes from the Catholic Bulletin which shows that the Bull is in two parts. The first sums up the case as presented by the Jews themselves. * * * The second part, which alone expresses the Pope's mind, is as follows: "* * * not wishing, therefore, that the said Jews be unjustly harassed, whose conversion God Expects in his mercy * * * we wish that you would show yourselves benign and favorable towards them. Restore to their proper state those of the mentioned matters that you find to have been rashly attempted by the said Nobles against the Jews, and do not permit that in the future they should be for those or similar pretexts unjustly molested by anyone!" Says Leese: "Jews must consider Christians to be very [un]critical and gullible if they think they can be induced to accept this document as a papal declaration that ritual crime does not exist. It is obvious that the Sovereign Pontiff merely gives instructions according to general principles, ordering that the Jews should not be unjustly oppressed or molested. He makes no pronouncement whatever regarding the truth or falsehood of the specific charges. * * * None could know better than he that it was not the teaching of the Scriptures, but the infamous teachings of the Talmud that caused people to look upon Jews as a grave danger to society. Only three years before the appearance of his letter, namely in 1244, he showed plainly what he thought of the Talmud by pressing Louis IX to collect from his subjects all the copies he could obtain and consign them to the flames." Continuing with Leese: "Before leaving Innocent IV, I ask the reader to realize the typical Jewish cunning exhibited by Rothschild in exploiting the answer of Cardinal Merry del Val regarding the authenticity of the letter as confirming an interpretation of that letter's contents by Rothschild—How Jewish. Gregory X in a Bull of 7th October, 1272, is a little more explicit than Innocent IV; the same exhortation is made for legal trial of all cases, but he says that they should 'not be arrested again on such groundless charge unless (which we think impossible) they are captured in flagrant crime.' Gregory thus does not deny that the crime exists; he says he THINKS it is impossible. * * * Then we come to Clement XIV (named by Mr. Bokser.—E.N.S.). Before he became Pope, he was Cardinal Ganganelli. He was dispatched by the Inquisition in 1759 to investigate Ritual Murder charges in Poland against the Jews, and he wrote a long report about it. * * * From the beginning to the end of Ganganelli's report, there is nothing that a scientific investigator would require as evidence that Ritual Murder was not practiced by the Jews. * * * Definitely, and far from being able to refute the charge of Ritual Murder against Jews, Ganganelli admits the Ritual Murders of St. Simon of Trent and St. Andreas of Rinn in these words: 'I admit, then, as true, the fact of the Blessed Simon, a boy three years old, killed by the Jews in Trent in the year 1475 in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ'; and 'I also admit the truth of another fact, which happened in the year 1462 in the village of Rinn, in the Diocese of Brixen, in the person of the Blessed Andreas, a boy barbarously murdered by the Jews in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ.' "

Says Leese, page 46: "And what of the Popes who have supported the Ritual Murder accusation by their acts? There are many. Sixtus IX approved in his Bull XII, Kal., July, 1478, of the conduct of the Bishop who dealt with the Jews in the St. Simon case at Trent. The Jews endeavored to enlist Sixtus IV on their side by pointing out that he had suspended the cult of St. Simon of Trent; this was done by Sixtus IV solely as a disciplinary measure, for Simon had not yet been beatified by papal authority, but was being made the center of a local cult.1

Gregory XIII recognized Simon as a martyr and himself visited the shrine. Sixtus V ratified the cult of St. Simon in 1588, allowing the celebration of mass in his name. This is confirmed as a fact by Benedict XIV, who in a Bull Beatus Andreas (1788, Venice, IV, p. 101 seq.) beatified both Simon and Andreas, two boys murdered by the Jews 'in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ'; 'the Jews,' he said, 'used every means to escape the just punishment that they had merited and to escape the just anger of the Christians.' How significant of the methods of the advocate for the Jew, to note that in Strack's book, no mention whatever is made of Benedict XIV's Bull, although the actions of Sixtus IV are wilfully misinterpreted.

"Pius VII, 24th November, 1805, confirmed a decree of the Congregation of Rites of 31st of August according to the Church at Saragossa the right to honor Dominiculus, killed by the Jews in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ. He also authorized for the Church at Toledo the same privileges in respect to St. Christopher, the boy crucified by the Jews near that place in 1490.

"In 1867, the Congregation of Rites authorized the cult of Lorenzino, at Vicenza, Padua, ritually murdered by the Jews.

"Gregory XVI, also, gave his support to the anti-Jewish accusers when he honored Gougenot des Mousseaux by making him a Chevalier of the Order of St. Gregory the Great in reward for writing his book, Le Juif, le Judaisme at la Judaisation des Peuples Chretiens, in which Gougenot des Mousseaux devoted a chapter charging the Jews with Ritual Murder of Christians for the sake of their blood.

"Pius IX refused to see the Jew Montefiore when the latter was returning from his visits to Egypt and Constantinople, where he had bribed the Khedive and the Sultan so that the Jews at Damascus could escape the consequences of their guilt of the Ritual Murder of Father Tomasi and his servant; this in spite of the shameless Jewish persistence which has been fully described in Sir Moses Montefiore's biography. That showed what Pius IX thought about it, and he himself was of Jewish blood.


"To sum up: The Popes who have appeared to disbelieve the existence of the Ritual Murder crime have, with the exception of Clement XIII, been those who lived in the least enlightened times; many later Popes have given very clear evidence that they hold the opposite opinion. * * * Remember that although other murdered boys, victims of Jewish Ritual Murder, have been regarded in many places as saints without papal authority, there is no record of papal disapproval of these cults except in the case of Sixtus IV, already mentioned, whose action was purely disciplinary, and who himself specifically approved of the conduct of the Ritual Murder Case to which the matter referred. Such locally beatified 'saints' or martyrs were St. William of Norwich (1144), St. Werner of Oberwessel (1286), St. Rudolph of Berne (1287), St. Richard of Pontoise (1179), and St. Hugh of Lincoln.2 In every such case it is quite obvious that the cult had the full approval at least of the episcopal authorities over the places mentioned.

"Those who condemn the Blood Accusation as a wicked invention for the purpose of persecuting Jews and robbing them, must at the same time condemn wholesale some of the highest dignitaries of the Catholic Church, men against whom nothing is known beyond that they had excellent characters, like William Turbe, Bishop of Norwich, to give an English example.

"Many of the earliest records we have of these Ritual Murders come from the pens of Catholic historians, such as the Bollandists, a body of Belgian Jesuits; a list of the principal works will be found at the end of the book.3

"Father Creagh, Redemptorist, publicly accused Jews of the practice of Ritual Murder, on 11th January, 1904, in a speech at Limerick. Authority: Jewish Encyclopedia (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 89.

Perhaps I may best wind up this chapter by giving the names of the twelve members of juries who investigated, considered and condemned the Jews in the Ritual Murder case of La Guardia in Toledo, together with their qualifications; (1) Maestre Fray Juan de S'antaspiratus, Professor of Hebrew, Salamanca University; (2) Maestre Fray Diego de Bretonia, Professor of Scripture; (3) Fray Antonio de la Pena, Prior; (4) Dr. Anton Rodiguez Carnejo, Professor of Canon Law; (5) Dr. Diego de Burgos, Professor of Civil Law; (6) Dr. Juan de Covillas, Professor of Canon Law; (7) Fray Sebastian de Huerta; (8) Licentiate Alvaro de Sant Estevan, Queen Isabel's corregidor for Avila; (9) Ruy Garcia Mansio, Bishop Talevera's provisor; (10) Fray Rodrigo Vela, head of the Franciscan Monastery, Avila; (11) Dr. Tristan, Canon of Avila; (12) Juna de Saint Estevan. On the findings of such men of standing we surely have every right to reply [sic; rely].

ON PAGE 100 IT WAS NOTED THAT POPE LEO XIII BESTOWED DISTINCTIONS ON EDOUARD DRUMONT, AUTHOR OF LA FRANCE JUIVE, WHO ACCUSED THE JEWS OF RITUAL MURDER THEREIN. DRUMONT WROTE THE PREFACE TO A MONNIOT'S LE CRIME RITUAL CHEZ LES JUIFS, 1914. Monniot reproduces long extracts written from a book written in the Moldavian language by a converted ex-Rabbi in 1803 which was published in the Greek in 1834 by Giovanni de Georgio under the title Ruin of the Hebraic Religion. This converted Rabbi called himself by the name of Neophyte. Extracts from his book were quoted in Achille Laurent's Relation Historique des Affairs de Syrie depuis 1840-1842. "This extract gives very full information, confirms the murder, crucifixion and bleeding of Christians by Jews for Ritual purposes, and the use of the blood for mixing with Passover bread; and says that the practice is handed down by oral tradition and that nothing appears about it in writing in the Jewish religious books."

Returning now to Monniot's book, especially to the Beilis trial: "Professor Troitzky, the expert for the defence, was asked how then are to be understood the two following texts: 'Every Goim (anyone who is not a Jew) studying the law must die' and 'even though he be the best of Goim.' Mr. Troitzy declared that he admitted unconditionally the existence of these two texts in the writings of the Jews, but was at a loss to determine their influence in the life of the Jews or on their relations with gentiles. Although always denying the use of the blood of Christians by the Jews for ritualistic purposes, Professor Troitzky declared that he never considered this question other than a point of view held by Jews-Talmudists. When it came to expressing himself unequivocally on this question, as envisaged by the Jewish mystics, the professor declared himself to be incapable to do so, having but a very vague idea of the subject. (Cf. 191, 231, Vol. VI).

"IV. The expert Pranaitis differed emphatically with Professors Glagoleff and Troitzky. Having studied the religion of the Jews in every form, he discovered the existence of the so-called 'blood tenet' among the Jews. The Catholic priest Pranaitis based this conclusion on the following facts: All the rabbinical schools, in spite of their divergence in many questions, meet on common ground in their hatred of non-Jews, who, according to the Talmud, are to be regarded as 'beasts in human form.' This feeling of hatred and malice which the Jews harbor towards all men belonging to other nationalities and religions reaches its apex when Christians are concerned. This feeling prompts the command to kill the non-Jews given in Talmud. The celebrated rule 'thou shalt not kill' pertains to Jews alone.

"However the feeling of hatred is not the sole motive that conditions the relations of the Jews with the gentiles in the indicated sense. The extermination of non-Jews is identified with religious heroism, prescribed by the Law. According to the mystic law especially, every death of a non-Jew hastens the advent of Messiah, to which every Jew should aspire. The death of a non-Jew also has the value of a sacrificial rite, a rite which was the most important one in the cult of the Jew. The blood sacrifices could not be performed after the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem and the altar. To replace these sacrifices the extermination of the non-Jews and Christians, these latter in particular, was inaugurated. In killing all non-Jews a certain method indicated in the Kabalah was recommended. They were to be killed 'with their lips compressed, as beasts that die voiceless and without a cry,' and 'twelve knife wounds and a final blow which makes thirteen, are to be inflicted.' Now in citing this text from the 'Zohar,' the mystic book in which this method of death is given, expert Pranaitis repeatedly brought the attention of the presiding judge to the fact that the mouth of Youtchinsky was compressed and that there were thirteen wounds on his right temple. * * * 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).

On page 102 we referred to a converted Rabbi who called himself by the name of Neophyte. A copy [of] his book was found in the Library of the Theological Academy of St. Petersburg. Leese then tells us: "This work was translated from the Greek at a Court Session by one of the experts, Professor Troitzky, who held a professorship in the same Academy. The Neophyte affirms in his work that Judaism holds an awesome mystery which is not revealed in its books and which consists in the fact that Jews murder Christians to obtain their blood for different purposes. If a Jew is in need of blood, he must not cut, but 'prick and pinch.' The opinion that the use of blood as food is forbidden to the Jews is quite erroneous, since there are in the Talmud indications to the contrary. * * * According to Neophyte, these murders have three purposes: first, the excessive hatred which they feel toward Christians and which makes them believe that in committing such crimes they offer a sacrifice to God; the second reason is the superstition which they harbor about the blood, attributing to its magic potentialities; finally, the rabbis who hesitate to affirm that Jesus Christ was not the real Messiah, think that they will be saved if they spill the blood of Christians. Having obtained the blood of Christians, they use it for different purposes. The rabbis consider it to be an excellent medicament for eye and skin diseases which afflict the Jews so often. Blood is also used in the ceremonies of marriage, circumcision, and burial, but first of all in making of unleavened bread. For this last purpose they kidnap children before the Passover, lock them up and then kill them to obtain their blood. The murder is always preceded by tortures. The Jews prick the children, believing that they are torturing Jesus Christ.4

Resuming the translation of Monniot's book: "The supreme mystery known only to rabbis, savants and Pharisees, and carefully concealed from the people, is this use of the blood of Christians. A father on his death-bed transmits this mystery under an extreme oath of secrecy to one of his sons. Neophyte says that this mystery was transmitted to him by his father, who exacted from him an oath never to reveal it, not even to his brothers. But having been baptized, Neophyte held it impossible to remain silent on this point." (Cf. 170, Vol. VI).

Quoting from p. 48 of Leese's book: "Martin Luther seems to have had an inkling of the true nature of the Jew when he said: 'How the Jews love the Book of Esther, which is so suitable to their bloodthirsty, revengeful, murderous appetite and hopes. The sun has never shone on such a bloodthirsty and revengeful people, who fancy themselves to be the chosen people so that they can murder and strangle the heathen.' (From the Erlangen edition of Luther's Table Talks, Vol. XXXII, p. 120). This seems plain speaking enough; but we find the Jew, C. Roth (Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew) citing Martin Luther as having condemned the 'libel' of Ritual Murder 'in unqualified terms.' However, the Jewish Encyclopedia, (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 213, definitely states that Luther charged the Jews with Ritual Murders."

"At Madgeburg, in 1562, a Protestant history of the Christian Church was compiled, called the Madgeburg Centuries; it was compiled by a number of Lutheran theologians headed by M. Flacius, and was first published as the Historia Ecclesiae Christi. This book records the ritual murders of Blois, Pontoise (Paris), Braisne, Fulda, Berne and Oberwesel."5



Page 28 of Leese's book, supra: "Sir Richard Burton, the great explorer and orientalist, who was English Consul at Damascus 30 years after the Ritual Murder (of Padre Tomasi,—E.N.S.) studied the whole question of the Blood Accusation, and eventually wrote The Jew, the Gypsy and El Islam, of which this author has the edition edited by W. H. Wilkins and published by Hutchinson in 1898. (I have a copy of this book which was bought in London in 1937.—E.N.S.). This work contains a damning indictment of the Talmud, and a list of Jewish Ritual Murders, but Wilkins, in his preface (p. x) says: 'In the exercise of the discretion given to me, I have thought it better to hold over for the present the Appendix on the alleged rite of Human Sacrifice among the Sephardim and the murder of Father Thomas; the only alternative was to publish it in mutilated form.' "

Continuing, Leese writes: "Let us therefore follow (1) the Book, (2) the Appendix on Ritual Murder.

(1) The Book. This is easy; it is well nigh impossible to obtain. [sic; "…it is well nigh unobtainable." –JR]

(2) The Appendix on Ritual Murder. What happened to it? This is what happened to it:--

" 'See D. L. Alexander versus Manners Sutton, King's Bench Division, 27th March, 1911, reported in the Times the following day. Herein, D. L. Alexander a Jew and President of the Jewish Board of Deputies was able to show that he had obtained an assignment of the manuscript from the surviving executors of Sir Richard Burton. The executors had sold them to a bookseller, who, in turn, sold them to Manners Sutton; and he (Sutton), not knowing of any assignment, made arrangements for the publication of the Appendix. D. L. Alexander brought the action to stop this publication from taking place, claiming copyright and delivery to him of the manuscript. The Jew won his case.'

From the Preface [p. vii-viii of Burton's The Jew ed. by Wilkins –JR] which is before us, we copy the following: 'The Jew, Burton, [sic!; the preface actually reads, "The first part—The Jew—has a somewhat curious history. Burton..." –JR] collected most of the materials for writing it from 1869 to 1871, when he was Consul at Damascus. * * * Disguised as a native, and unknown to any living soul but his wife, the British Consul mingled freely with the motley populations of Damascus, and inspected every quarter of the city—Moslem, Christian and Jewish. His inquiries bore fruit in material, not only for this general essay on the Jew, but for an Appendix dealing with the alleged rite of Human Sacrifice among the Sephardim or Eastern Jews, and more especially the mysterious murder of Padre Tomaso at Damascus in 1840. There is little doubt that his inquiry into these subjects was one of the reasons which aroused the hostility of the Damascus Jews against him; and that hostility was a powerful factor, though by no means the only one, in his recall by Lord Granville in 1871.'6

With this introduction, we now cite some parts of Burton's chapter dealing with "The Jew and the Talmud" (p. 77). According to the Talmud (chap. IV., Sanhedrin, of the fourth Mischnis section, or order Seder Nezikin), the Gentile sanctifying the Sabbath must be put to death without asking questions, even as the Lord said to him, "Thou shalt not rest day or night. The Oral Law is superior to all others."

P. 81. In the books of Moses we find that blood is used as a purifier. * * * Human blood is not used by us in its pure state; nor can we7 call it human for the Gentiles are mere vermin, and of their daughters it is said, "Cursed be he that lieth with any beast." It must also mostly undergo through manipulation a change in essence. Nor is it administered indiscriminately, but only to the most zealous. On the eve of the Passover the chief Scribe attends the oven, and mixes what he pleases with the cakes, which are then sent around to the congregation.

P. 98 of Burton's Jew, See the Mischnah, fifth part, tract Edonyoth, i. art. 5 et seq. This is a fair answer to the host of contradictions and the general charge of inconsistency leveled by anti-Talmud writers against the Oral Law, and it enables the modern rabbi to make almost any assertion that he pleases concerning disputed points. Thus, one will find in the Talmud that Christians should be put to death, the other that they should be treated like brothers. This is certainly very convenient.

P. 104. The large space given * * * to the unhallowed practices of magic and necromancy, the summoning and conversion with devils and spirits, the advocacy of astrology, charms, and philters served as a pretext for Pope and Inquisition to attack it. In A.D. 553, Justinian proscribed it (Talmud) by Novella 146 as a "tissue of puerilities, of fables, of iniquities, of insults, of imprecations, or heresies, and of blasphemies." It was destroyed by Gregory IX, in A.D. 1230; it was burnt in Paris by Innocent IV, 1244; and it was proscribed by Clement IV, by Honorius IV,8 and by John XXII.

P. 115. Obviously such cruel and vindictive teaching as that recounted in the previous chapter must bear fruit in crime and atrocities. * * * From earliest ages to these modern days, and not in one place, but all the world over, the hatred of the Jew against the non-Jew has been the fiercest. Those who are so ready to admit and deplore the mighty provocations which aroused a spirit of retaliation in the Rabbinical mind should equally make allowance for the natural feelings of the unfortunate Gentiles and heathens when the "People of the Synagogue" had their wicked will. * * * In A.D. 614, the Hebrews of Galilee, according to Eutychius, joining the Persian army under Chosroes II, caused a great slaughter of the Nazarenes. When the Holy City was captured, they bought at a cheap rate those taken by the Persians, especially from the Monastery of Mar Saba, for the sole purpose of butchering them. Burton then continues, giving thirty-eight other cases of ritual murder, ending with page 127. On page 122, he says: "According to the Cronica Serafica (della vita di S. Francesco d' Assisi, Opera del Padre Damiano Cornejo, 1721, lib. i, chap. 1) the Jews superstitiously used the blood of Christians in childbirth, and sent it in a dried state to China and other places, where they had synagogues, but where worshippers of Christ are not to be found. Hence the Jews were eventually expelled from Spain and Portugal."



In closing our reply to the accusations of Ben Zion Bokser, the reader is directed to that Christian classic: The History of the Christian Church, by Dr. Philip Schaff. In Vol. I, p. 59, he writes: "The Talmud (i.e. Doctrine) represents the traditional, post exilian, and anti-Christian Judaism" and then says on page 156 of the same book: "Such was the Jewish religion at the time of Christ. He was the only teacher in Israel who saw through the hypocritical mask to the rotten heart. None of the great Rabbis, no Hillel, no Shammai, no Gamaliel, attempted or even conceived of a reformation; on the contrary, they heaped tradition upon tradition and accumulated the Talmud rubbish of twelve large folios and 2947 leaves, which represents the anti-Christian petrification of Judaism; while the four Gospels have regenerated humanity and are the life and light of the civilized world to this day."

In Vol. I, p. 110, of George Foote Moore's Judaism, Harvard University Press, 1932 he says: "Down to the rise of Karaites in the eighth century and their revolt against the Talmud, there was nothing that deserved the name of schism." Again on p. 91 of the same volume, quoting Justin Martyr, who was a native of Palestine (Schechem) and a contemporary, he says: "Bar Cocheba took dire vengeance upon them (Nazarenes, or followers of Jesus Christ) if they refused to deny Jesus their Messiah."

About one thousand years later, 1759, Leese tells us, p. 40 of the book we have cited: "A converted Jew, J. J. Frank, formed a sect called the Frankists, at Lemberg. These people were all Jews who had become Christians in revolt against the evils taught in the Talmud. They said it was the Talmud which was the root of all troubles between the Jews and Gentiles. Prince Etienne de Mikoulissky, administrator of the archdiocese of Lemberg, instituted public debates between the Frankists and the Talmudic Jews. A debate held in July took place in which various matters were dealt with point by point until six points had been settled; the seventh one was the Frankists' declaration that 'the Talmud teaches the employment of Christian blood and he believes in the Talmud ought to make use of this blood.' The Frankists said they had learned this in their youth as Jews. Under the heading Baruch Yavan, the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. II, p. 563, admits that the Frankists brought the blood accusation against the Talmudists; also in Vol. VII p. 579, under Judah Lob ben Nathan Krysa. There is a large bibliography with reference to the Frankist community, of which the following two works may receive mention here: La Malfaisance juive, by Pikulski, Lvov, 1760; and Materiaux sue la question relative aux accusations portees contre les Juifs apropos des crimes rituels, by J. O. Kouzmine, St. Petersburg, 1914."

Paslms 106, 36-38: "And they served their idols: which were a snare unto them. Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, and shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood."

With reference to the death of Father Pranaitis, Mr. Leese, replying to this author's question on this, wrote me as follows: "The statement that Pranaitis was shot by the Cheka comes from the same eye-witness (who was a witness in the Beilis case). Eye-witness seen by me (Leese) personally; cannot give his name."


With the concerted persecution of this editor, especially by those whom he expected would be his friends on the record of his life and service, we now dare affirm in our effort to present the truth that we are not apprehensive of the final result and base our statement on Romans 8, 36-37: "For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us."

E.N.S., Nov. 20, 1939.



(Henry Field, writer of the article below, is curator of physical anthropology at Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. He was recently awarded the degree of Doctor of Science by Oxford University. He has been with the museum since 1926.)



"* * * members of the Field Museum anthropological expedition to the Near East in 1934 * * * According to their tradition the Jews of Iraq have lived in Mesopotamia since Sargon of Assyria brought their ancestors from Samaria in the eighth century B.C. * * * They mixed with other racial groups, absorbing their physical characters. What is popularly termed the 'Jewish' nose was thus acquired from the Hittites * * * To the protected southern slopes of the mountains of Kurdistan cling many villages where the struggle for existence combined with a constant dread of attack has engrained in the inhabitants a tenacity of purpose and religious zeal which has few modern parallels. Jew, Kurd, Armenian and Nestorian remain bitterly aloof, the Jews suffering much at the hands of the Kurds from a constant intertribal warfare. Moreover, belief that the Jews use Christian blood at the Passover sustained between Jew and Sephardim Jews who observe the Mosaic law * * * Seventy-two items of ritual are observed."—Asia Magazine.


1 In the Book Review of the New York Times—Rare Books—Dec. 19, 1937: "There is an amazing collection of works on the inquisition, beginning with a long manuscript of 614 pages written about 1478. 'Prozess gegen die Juden von Trent, 1476-1478.' This account of the 'Ritual Murder' of Simon of Trent in 1475 is one of three contemporary records of which the other two, in Latin, are in the Vatican and the National Library of Vienna. This is the only example known in German and it was [p. 100] made for Eberhardt I, the Bearded, first Duke of Wuerttemberg. The codex is a record of one of the cruelest examples of the persecution of the Jews in the Middle Ages, and it is almost the only detailed authority of a great medieval criminal case. * * * The notorious case had its origin when a 2˝-year-old child, Simon, the son of a cobbler, was found dead in the river near the house of Samuel, a Jew of Trent. Immediately all the members of the Jewish community, including women and children, were arrested and accused of having murdered the child in order to use his blood for the Passover ritual. Persuaded via the torture chamber into a 'confession,' the Jews were executed and all the women and children were forcibly baptized or otherwise punished. Various 'people interceded for the accused, but after hearings before a Papal court of juriconsults the case was finally declared, in a Bull of Sixtus IV of June 20, 1478, to be 'rite et recte factum.' "

2 With reference to these ritual murders at Norwich and Lincoln, we have corroborative evidence from John Foxe in his Acts and Monuments of the Church (1563), quoting from Mr. Leese, page 49, where Foxe says: "For every year commonly their (the Jews') custom was to set some Christian man's child from his parents and on Good Friday to crucify him indespite of our religion." He described the ritual crucifixion of British children by Jews at
Norwich and Lincoln, before the expulsion.

3 Acte Sanctorum * * * historical record between 1643 and 1883.
The volumes in which they recorded various ritual murders by Jews are mainly those written in the seventeenth century.

4 Leese tells the reader, p. 53 of his book: "Colonel Lindbergh's son was missed on 1st March, 1932. The Jewish feast of Purim was on 22nd March. A child's body was found on 12th May, dead at least two months, according to the experts, with the skull fractured in two places. I cannot see that it has ever been proved that the body found was that of Colonel Lindbergh's son." (We divert here to mention that in Emile Gauvreau's book, What So Proudly We Hailed, the last picture in that book is supposed to be that of the Lindbergh boy lying on a slab. Any observer will note that the body is very badly decomposed, that one leg is missing from the knee and that the height of the body, we are told, was four inches longer than that of the missing boy.--E.N.S.)

5 The McMillan Company, New York, 1906, published in four volumes, A History of the Inquisition of Spain, by Henry Charles Lea. In Vol. II, p. 42, we read: "In 1490, Davila went to Rome in his eightieth year. Since 1461 he had been Bishop of Segovia and, in spite of Jewish descent, his family was one of the most influential in Castile, intermarried with its noblest blood. He had given ample proof of pitiless orthodoxy, in 1468, when, at Sepulveda, the rabbi, Solomon Picco, and the leader of the synagogue were accused of crucifying a Christian boy during Holy Week. Bishop Davila promptly arrested sixteen of those most deeply implicated, of wham seven were burnt and the rest hanged, except a boy who begged to be baptized—although this did not satisfy the pious Sepulvedans, who slew some of the remaining Jews and drove the rest away."

6 On page 5 of the New York Times Book Review, April 11, 1937, there was a cut of Sir Richard Burton, and an article titled: "That Homeric Character, Burton of Arabia." That review stated, in part: "Burton was very much a man of earth, reveling in subjects not discussed in Victorian drawing-rooms. * * * He was broken on the wheel of official intrigue in India at the beginning of his career, lost the consulate of Damascus almost at the end for somewhat the same reasons. * * * He was both impetuous and honest, the two blackest vices in the consular service." The following week, April 18, 1937, in the Herald Tribune, reviewing the same book, Clare G. Stillman wrote: "Burton was a man of invincible moral courage and integrity, of wide enlightenment, the out-spoken enemy of stupidity and hypocrisy, too outspoken for his own good. * * * His encyclopedic Oriental erudition included an unsurpassed knowledge of erotic philosophies and practices which he loved to discuss in detail."

7 Sic Burton. The Hebrew scribe is supposed to be speaking. [a Wilkins footnote -- JR]

8 This Pope in 1286 wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury, directing him to have a care lest any one read a book from, which all evils flow. Pope Pius IV, when authorizing a new edition, expressly stipulated that it should not be published without the title of Talmud, which appears to have been a kind of Shibboleth, Si tamen prodierit sine nomine Talmud, tolerari deberet. Such was the terror which it inspired in the ecclesiastical mind.

A. is the father of B. B. told this author that A. started his education in Europe with the idea of becoming a rabbi but that when he had started his studies of the unexpurgated edition of the Talmud and found what it taught concerning Christ and Christians, he not only discontinued his studies but later was a convert to Christianity and out of this experience told B. never to read an unexpurgated copy of the Talmud.