|
K i e v 1 9 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1
(p. 335)
Andrei Yustschinsky
On 20 March (!) 1911 the body of a boy was found on the border of the urban
area of Kiev in a clay pit. It was found in a half-sitting position, the hands
were tied together upon the back with a cord. The body was dressed merely with a shirt,
underpants, and a single stocking. Behind the head, in a depression in the earthen wall,
which according to the record of the then Kiev attorney and high school teacher Gregor
Schwartz-Bostunitsch was inscribed with mystical signs, were found five rolled-together
school exercise books which bore the name "property of the student of the fore-class, Andrei
Yustschinsky, Sophia School"; because of this, the identification was made very
shortly. It turned out to be the thirteen-year-old son of the middle-class woman Alexandra
Prichodko of Kiev.
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 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.
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)
Go to Kiev/Page 2
Back to Table of Contents
|