|
T i s z a - E s z l á r 1 8 8 2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
(p.156)
As mentioned, old Frau Solymosi had reported to the community judge on 3 April; when he did
nothing, the mother repeated her report a full month later on 4 May. On the 19thy of May --
therefore now a month and a half after the loss of her child -- the examining judge Bary
appeared, who embarked upon the case all the more energetically from now on. This tactic of
dragging things on, which became endemic in all the nations where Jewry had already spun its
threads, was the topic of an interpellation of the Representative Istóczy,
which the latter directed toward the Justice Minister Dr. Pauler on 24 May 1882
in the Hungarian Reichstag: "In connection with that, which my Representative colleague
Géza von Ónody said in yesterday's sitting, in relation to the girl Esther
Solymosi, murdered in Tisza-Eszlár in the synagogue, directly before the Jewish Easter
festival by the Jewish schächter [ritual-slaughterer] Salomon Schwarz, I ask
the Herr Minister:
1. Have you knowledge of the fact that the sitting judge of the upper Dada region, in
the Szabolcser Comitat, to whom the mother of the murdered girl reported,
(157) instead of making the case the subject of a preliminary investigation, as
was his duty, referred the mother to the court of justice in Nyiregyháza, and that
this man in turn referred the mother back to the sitting judge again, and that, with the
sitting judge and the court of justice making a completely unreasonable issue of
jurisdiction out of the case, the investigation was first begun after weeks had
passed?
2. Do the Lord ministers intend to hold the sitting judge [I have] mentioned, and the
members of the court of justice who were involved, responsible for this conspicuous neglect
of duty?
3. Do you intend, considering the scope of the case -- incalculable as a
consequence of the prevailing circumstances -- to pursue the case with attention and to
exercise watchfulness that, despite the great financial resources of the Jews which have
now been set into motion, the guilty Jew or guilty Jews receive their rightful
punishment?"
Since Istóczy in the argument of his interpellation speaks of a Jewish race,
he receives a sharp rebuff from the Minister President and Leader of the ruling Jewish-Liberal
party, the freemason Koloman from Tisza, whose machinations substantially influenced
the course of the trial. Tisza replies: "My first comment is this, that it is totally
inadmissable to speak of any race or [religious] denomination in our fatherland,
that it is base and deserving of full contempt. . ." So far had the Judafication of Hungary
already progressed in the eighty years of the 19th century, that a corrupt Jewish race
was not permitted to be spoken of!
We now understand the following events better.
In the beginning, the state's attorney Melchior Both was in charge of the Office of
Public Prosecutor. On 18 May 1882, the proceedings were put under the charge of the
responsible court, on 3 June of the same year Both shot himself. Georg Ritter von
Marcziányi interprets this incident, which caused the greatest sensation in its time,
as follows in his book (page 19): "One of the most important moments in the judicial
preliminary examination was the suicide of the state's attorney of Nyiregyháza in the
first days of June, (158)Melchior Both, who put a
bullet in his head after the arrival of the Chief state's attorney von Kozma who had
traveled for the examination of the case. It turned out that Both had already
been in a position of closest intercourse with the top-level Jews there for a
long time. After the the ritual-murder had become known, a secret collection of money
took place among the Jews there, and the rumor was about among the people that the goal of
this collection was for the bribing of the Court of Justice. The fact of the matter
is, that Both did everything to nip the whole murder case in the bud. . ."
That was Both.
Ladislaus Egressi-Nagy functioned as the second state's attorney; he was soon relieved
of his duties in this trial as a result of a difficult falling-out with the examining judge
Bary, who was as incorruptible as he was energetic.
The Chief state's attorney von Kozma also seemed to be no longer sure of the case;
things must have been going on here which have never been fully explained. Characteristically,
the Chief state's attorney in his critical situation turned, not to the Justice Minister
Pauler, known for his incorruptible and unbiased attitude and on that account slandered
and avoided by the Jewish gang and their helpers, but to a Jewish-inspired and therefore
influential clique of journalists in Budapest, the so-called "Jókai-Club," which delightedly
rendered its expert opinion concerning the Chief state's attorney; in this opinion
we read(20): "Considering that the Herr Chief state's attorney
Alexander Kozma never has given grounds in his past life, spent in view of the
public, during a public career of many years, which could cast even the remotest suspicion
of corruption (!) upon him, the Court of opinion rules that: Herr Szabó has
impugned the Herr Chief state's attorney with such an unworthy suspicion, which the
Court(21) condemns decisively and declares to be perfectly
groundless."
The situation: A chief state's attorney has to allow the public (159)
reproach fall upon him, that he, too, has been bagged by Jewish gold. Now
[his] attacker is not put in his place, but rather [Kozma] seeks assistance from this
assuredly influential society of Jews which designates itself a "Court," and he allows
himself to be exposed to an endorsement of his incorruptibility by this Jewish Areopagus!
This could have served as material for the funny papers, had not these matters not become
so disheartening; for this rehabilitation was trumpeted forth in the Jewish press -- and
the struggle against the "anti-Semitic leprosy" received a new impetus, and this in turn
had a decisive effect upon the course of the trial!
In the full consciousness of the power of universal Jewry, Paul Nathan commented in
[his] extremely informative way: "In a nation with a parliamentary government (!), the
Press is an outstanding power, and in a country such as Hungary, the word of
certain men has a significance which is not to be compared with the findings of
a royal Court of Justice, even be that [a verdict of] of conviction. . .such (!) men
are, in fact, able to ultimately stigmatize a slanderer for the entire nation and
to restore honor where it has been impugned without cause. After this happens, the entire
Hungarian Press hesitates not one instant in expressing its disgust for those attacking
that honor. The matter is settled (!) and, with the exception of a small group of
outcasts of the nation, nobody dares [to do] anything further. There are attacks whose
purpose is clear, but whose goal, however, remains unreachable."
Under these auspices the trial could now begin. But, contrary to expectation, there was
again a halt in the proceedings -- the scenario, as the saying goes, did not go over
well.
Kozma remained, but he committed a tactical error. The vice state's attorney
Koloman von Soós, a creature of the Chief state's attorney, became the successor of
Nagy; but the reputation of being all too friendly to the Jews preceded him, so that he was
not able to stay long in Nyiregyháza. He likewise went.
On 11 October and on the 25th of November, the matter of delegating a new court of Justice
was discussed in the Hungarian parliament. The government refused this.
Now there appeared the state's attorney Emerich Havas. Meanwhile, it had become
(160) winter. On 29 November, the court was supposed to
open. On this date chief state's attorney Kozma received an urgent petition from
Havas, in which the latter asked for his "withdrawal from the state's attorney
functions in the affair of Tisza-Eszlár," because the Herr Justice Minister had instituted
against him a "criminal investigation because of suborning false witnesses and abuses of
the power of his office". We shall not go more deeply into the matter of the proceedings
against Havas here. Their course was likewise very murky. His successor, Eduard von
Szeyffert -- thus the fifth state's attorney -- was dispatched [in his place]!
A great deal of water had flowed under the bridge by the time the actual trial began. This
time of intermission appears filled with incidents which throw such a delineating light upon the
tactics of the Jewish struggle, that at least the most important ones, arranged in their
chronological sequence, should be resurrected from the oblivion to which they have been
intentionally consigned.
The Intrigues up to the Time of the Main Hearings
Already, before the beginning of the trial, there was a series of complaints about insults
and duels which we will pass over because of their unimportant nature.
In April 1882, the greatest variety of rumors were surfacing already in every region
of Hungary, such as: Esther Solymosi had been seen here or there -- the [possibility
of] a mistake was eliminated; since no one could produce the girl despite these claims, the
Jews let a large number of dead Esthers pop up. Even this disinformation campaign did not
catch on; the most that it accomplished was that inquiries went in circles. As later, in
1891 in Corfu and 1900 in Konitz, these clumsy maneuvers brought about unrest
and strong anti-Semitic disturbances in the populace, which could at first be suppressed by
military presence; but the local Jewish manipulation had miscalculated this time. From now
on, the "Alliance Israélite Universelle" considered the situation of the Jews in Hungary
to be so critical, that something most be done for its exoneration. Jewish Gold was supposed to
prepare this offensive, in that a "premium" [reward] of 5000 Fl. (161)
was subscribed for producing the girl. The Jew Josef Lichtmann in Tisza-
Eszlár received the commission of "offering" the mother Solymosi a sum of 1000 Fl. if
she would accept another girl instead of her daughter. This transpired with the
words: "If the girl should make an appearance, how nice 1000 Fl. would be for you, and you
could receive this sum from us right away." When this Jew was called to account for his
attempt at bribery, he naturally denied everything and admitted only this much, that he had
spoken not of 1000, but of 300 Fl., which the woman would receive in case she succeeded in
bringing the missing Esther back home.
A Jewess undertook a similar attempt at bribery, when she approached the mother of Esther
with the words: "Dear Frau Solymosi, how much money would you not receive, if
your daughter should again appear." -- Eight years later, a father whose
eighteen-year-old son had been bled to death under the ritual-slaughtering knife of Polish
Jews, received a written offer that he should be "compensated" with 50,000 Marks: ". . .
Be reasonable at last, it is to your advantage."(22)
But old Frau Solymosi was likewise "unreasonable," angrily kicked the Jews out of
her modest little house and made a report. Both bribery attempts allow us to recognize the
plan, hatched early-on, to plant a false Esther. Sometime around the middle of
June, the schächter left Tisza-Eszlár, after he had asserted with certainty several
times that in three days the body of Esther would appear. Thereby was staged the most foolish
fraud which International Jewry has ever undertaken in these kind of trials.
On the 18th of June 1882 -- therefore 79 days after the disappearance of the girl,
perhaps 20 km below Tisza-Eszlár, a female body was thrown on land by the current of the
Theiß. Raftsmen who were moored in the vicinity pulled the corpse, which had become
entangled in willow bushes, onto land and buried it without making a report of it to the
authorities. But the news (162) spread from here by a ranger
more quickly than was expected, from village to village and even reached the ears of
Bary. The latter had developed sharp ears. With the same resolve with which he
examined witnesses, he arranged for the district physician Dr. Kiß to go to the place
where the body was discovered on the evening of 18 June; Kiß presided over the
immediate opening of the grave; at a depth of 2.5 fathoms the body, which had been pulled
from the water, was in fact discovered; it was superficially inspected without being taken
from the grave. The thorough examination and autopsy was delayed until the arrival of the
Court of Justice. Guards were posted at the grave site. Already in the midday hours of the
new day, before any of the authorities had arrived, "crowds of Jews converged on the banks
of the Theiß from all directions of the compass, from far regions at distances of 15-20
miles, and triumphed over the most recent success of Israel, under loud curses at
Christians and especially at evil anti-Semites, like a swarm of ravens assembling above
the corpse of a mole. This scene was very interesting and would have been worthy of being
immortalized by the brush of a painter."(23) -- The Budapest and
Vienna Jewish papers teemed with telegrams, which bore the signature of Dr.
Heymann-Levy, one of the Jewish defenders.(24)
Still before anyone was able to view the body, which was guarded by armed police officers,
and before the judicial pronouncement had been made -- the first protocol, composed on the
morning of 19 June at 1 A.M. by the district physician, was still on its way to the Court --
"Jewish sentries, posted in every direction like telegraph poles, triumphantly trumpeted
the news that: Esther Solymosi's body had been discovered in unwounded condition. Great
was the joy, the jubilation, the malicious enjoyment, the mockery and contempt, which
was poured over the shamed friends of anti-Semitism, over whose presumed disgrace Israel
now thought itself able to celebrate its shameless orgies."(25)
(163)It is important and must be kept firmly in mind: The
Jewish news service "knew" that the body found at least 20 km distant from Tisza-Eszlár
was that of the fourteen year-old Solymosi!
On the 19th and 20th of June a new inspection was held at the place of discovery under
consultation of the court; the body, covered over with a crust of mud, was flushed with
water and a female person appeared, which had been carefully dressed with the garments
of the missing girl. Piece by piece, each was identified by Mother Solymosi as
belonging to her daughter; what appeared beneath the clothes, however, was not the
fourteen year-old girl. It is shocking to read how Frau Solymosi attentively regarded this
planted body, as if she were hoping to have her daughter before her again, but then tersely
and definitely declared: "That is not Esther!"
Separated from one another and under supervision, the siblings, the close relatives, the
neighbors, the pastor, the local teacher, and finally the mother was once again, in
turn, led past the body: Their statements all agreed: what was lying there was a
complete stranger!
The medical surveys paralleled these perceptions of the witnesses; at the scene of the
finding of the body appeared simultaneously the physicians appointed by the court: Dr.
Trajtler, Dr. Kiß, Dr. Horváth and Géza v. Kéri. These four expert witnesses took on
the job of making a protocol -- still on the 19th and the 20th of June -- concerning the
internal and external findings [from examination] of the body.
We learn the following important details from the exterior findings (Autopsy protocol of
the afternoon of 19 June 1882):
1. The hair appears to have been shaved off.
2. The face is hollowed, there is no sort of abrasions present, nor are there any
kind of signs of exterior wounds to be found.
3. The neck is not wounded.
4. The chest is emaciated.
5. The hands are strikingly small and beautiful. The nails are especially conspicuous
for their fine development and the fact that they have been carefully tended.
(164)
6. The feet are small and delicate. Their shape allows us to conclude that they have
always been shod. [i.e., that, unlike most peasant women, the subject never went
barefoot.]
The interior examination (Autopsy protocol in continuation of the morning of the 20th of
June, 1882) yielded, among other things, the important determination that the lungs
were covered on their surfaces with strongly projecting, bumpy air vesicles and were anemic.
In the upper apex of the right lung were tubercles and a cavity (cavern) the size of a musket
ball, filled with pus.
The expert witness physicians composed an expert opinion in response to the questions of the
examining judge Bary, which were important for further investigation. The result of
their examinations, which would indicate the direction of Bary's inquiries, can be finally
summarized with the setting forth of these comprehensive arguments:
1. The body is not the victim of death by suffocation in the water; it was
thrown into the water already dead.
2. The body is, at most, ten days old. (If one accepts the statements of Moritz
Scharf as a basis, Esther Solymosi had been murdered over eleven weeks
before!)
3. The body has not been in the water for more than three or four days.
4. The body is that of an eighteen or probably even a twenty year-old.
5. The body is not that of a girl, but of a person who has led a dissolute life.
6. The direct cause of death was consumption. [i.e., tuberculosis]
7. The body shows no traces whatsoever of external wounds which could have
caused bleeding. The loss of flesh on the right arm indicates that the body was dragged
by means of a rope.
8. The shape of the feet and hands, and the meticulous care of the same, shows that
this person followed no kind of rough labor in her lifetime, but belonged to a class
"which did not occupy itself with coarse manual labor."
On the basis of these findings, on whose composition four physicians had taken part,
(165) Bary determined his further investigation. He began with
the assumption that a corpse-smuggling as clever as it was shameless took place -- and he
had full success with this assumption! Already, on the following day, he had all the
raftsmen taken into custody; a great number of them were immediately released again because
they could not, from the beginning, be considered possible accomplices due to the position
of their vessels. One of the rafting business owners who had been held in custody was
Yankel Smilovics, a Jew. Having been cornered and not up to the methodology of the
judge, he resigned himself on 26 June 1882 to making statements with the following
contents: On 6 June Yankel Smilovics met another sponger, Amsel Vogel. The
latter opened up to him the possibility of "earning a lot of money" if he would take on the
job of taking a corpse down below Tisza-Eslár with his raft. As a further accomplice
the Jew David Hersko was involved -- the cloverleaf was complete!
On the 10th of June (on the 20th of June, the doctors declared that the body
was, at most, ten days old!) Smilovics took the ferryboat to Tisza-Eszlár, according to
arrangements made; there two Jews, Martin Groß and Ignatz Klein, were waiting for him
with a wagon, and handed over to him a female body dressed in a slip. Smilovics shifted his
strange freight over to David Hersko, together with the instruction that below
Tisza-Eszlár a peasant woman was waiting and would give him clothes for the corpse. --
Everything went according to plan. The body was dressed with the help of the "peasant woman,"
who later turned out to be the Jewess Großmann from Tisza-Eszlár, and was then cast into
the water. The non-Jewish raftsman Csepkanics was on the last of the rafts. Below
Tisza-Eszlár, he suddenly noticed how a body, which he did not recognize and which the
Theiß was driving down against his raft, disappeared under his boat and then surfaced again
and now was being taken by the wind toward the far shore. There the object remained hanging
in the willow bushes and now could be recognized as human.
The possessions of the slaughtered Esther had therefore been carefully preserved at the
scene of the crime. The mother of the child was actually able to identify every single piece
of clothing of her daughter on the 19th of June.(166) If we
visualize the witness statements of the young Scharf, the victim was undressed down to her
slip (". . .I saw that Esther lay in her slip on the ground, while her clothes were on the
table"). The slip was naturally deeply soaked through with blood and was therefore no longer
of use, if they did not want to betray themselves. In some way or other, a new slip must
have been procured; a Talmud-brain managed to dig up the information from one of
the statements made to the court by old Frau Solymosi: a certain Roth (a Jewess) came
to her and importuned her for a slip of Esther or even a strip from one of them; for
these things would be necessary (she told her) in order to get information concerning the
whereabouts of the girl from a fortune-teller! This is how this Jewish-Galician gang behaved
to this old woman!
Unfortunately it was not possible to determine the origin of the strange body; various
hypotheses have been proposed. If one examines all the clues which the statements of the
Jewish smugglers as well as the condition of the dead body have yielded, this body came
either from a dissection room or from a Jewish cemetary. It is known that the orthodox Jews
have the ritual custom of meticulously shaving off the hair of Jewesses not only at the time
of marriage but also after their death, and this had been done thoroughly with the body.
The body, externally and conspicuously well-groomed (cosmetic treatments) but otherwise
all the more strikingly uncared for in every respect, would support the final surmise --
that, in any case, this was not the body of a blooming, virginal fourteen year-old peasant
girl!
Actually, by the end of June 1882, the investigatory court was able to establish that
at the least the tracks of this recent crime were leading to the national capital city
of Budapest. Action was supposed to be taken, with the arrest of perhaps 30 of even
"highly respected Jews" -- among them a Jewish medical "authority" -- so that the final proof
of this monstrous, entangled Jewish criminal organization would thereby be supplied -- at
the end, even connections to Viennese Jews could be established -- but the Minister
President Tisza, who specially interrupted his vacation at his country home at the last
minute, (167) prevented the Justice Minister Dr. Pauler
from giving the necessary instructions to the court of Justice at Nyiregyháza. . .
Thus, these final connections remain just as unclear as the question of what happened to the
body of the girl after the butchery of 1 April. Yet even here we have at least a clue:
Still prior to the staging of the smuggled corpse, below Tisza-Eszlár fishermen drew a
headless, well advanced in decay and thus unrecognizable female body from the river.
The Hungarian magnate Ónody, resident in Tisza-Eszlár, was later able to determine that
these fishermen, as soon as the rumor of their discovery spread, were bribed by provably
Jewish parties not to hand over the body to the rangers, but to bury it at an exactly
agreed-upon location. But something of this must have leaked out, for the Nyiregyháza
Court of Justice decided to dispatch an exhumation commission to the relevant location on a
certain day. The Jewish intelligence service had smelled a rat, for even before the
commission reached the site, the Jews Heymann-Levy, Flegmann and Lichtmann had already
appeared. What they were up to at this extremely critical moment remains unknown; all that
was known was that the deputies of the high Court of Justice were standing before a freshly
excavated empty hole. . .
But the Jewish stage-managers were not content with this success, from now on they wanted to
"officially" -- i.e., journalistically -- refute the blood-accusation. In the year 1891
on Corfu, the correspondent of the Berliner Tageblatt [Berlin Daily], Dr.
Barth, took over this handsomely paid "mission," which, thanks to the fire-break of
the Kreuzzeitung, did not succeed. The same thing was tried in Hungary. The editor
of the Jewish Prague Politik [Politics], with the revealing surname of
Puffke-Lipnitzki, was given the task of writing a series of articles about
Tisza-Eszlár in the Cracow (likewise Jewish) Csas. In his book (page 179),
Representative Ónody formed this judgement of these effusions: "The series of articles is a
masterpiece of an exquisite sort, a masterpiece as only a brain refined by the shrewdest
malice of Talmudic morality is able to produce."
As the starting point of his arguments, Lipnitzki (168) makes
use of "information" as if he received it: "It is impossible to suppose of the Jews, that
they, in the midst of the 19th century, cleansed by the winds of the Enlightenment and
of cultural progress, could have committed such a murder as they are accused of: Esther
Solymosi probably has been murdered by the anti-Semites!"
There we have it -- constantly repeated as weapons in Jewish hands are: "Enlightenment,"
"culture" and -- as often as possible -- "humanitarianism," all for the purpose of imputing
to non-Jewish peasants the most hideous crimes!
Like his colleague Barth, this Prague "editor" appeared at the scene; with this
difference only, that the Berlin colleague was received by an archbishop with every
formality, but Puffke achieved access at the door of an "uneducated" peasant
woman! Puffke-Lipnitzki attempted to draw Mother Solymosi into conversation. He gave
her to understand that, if she were ready to make some statements desired by him, she could
"make some money." His shamelessness went so far that he "bid" 5 Fl.. for some stalks of straw
from the bed of her murdered daughter! The devilish intent was obvious: his "press" would
then have delightedly trumpeted to the entire world that the mother was selling as "souvenirs"
even the straw from the bed of her child for sinful money in order to enrich herself even
more by the death of her child -- we recall that Paul Nathan had already determined
"that in truth, the living conditions of Frau Solymosi have markedly improved. . ."
Notice of large reward to be offered to "truth-tellers" by Jews
But the old Solymosi woman, who, "directly at the entrance of the same man
(Puffke-Lipnitzki), recognizing with the instinct of a mother's heart who and
what kind of individual was confronting her,"(26) threw the
Jewish bearer-of-19th-century-culture out; for this, in his article she was then given
a very high recognition of her stainless character, by being described as "without honor
and an evil woman"! In order to be protected from further Jewish importuning, the property
of the Solymosis had to be kept under police surveillance. These scandalous events were
echoed even in Germany.
(169)On 4 July 1882, Dr. Henrici, who had
already aroused enormous interest(27) in a great number of
gatherings as one of the first anti-Semitic speakers (in 1881 he had called the
first racial anti-Semitic people's assemblies in Berlin), also spoke in Berlin in the
"Sozialer Reichesverein" [roughly, "Social National Union"]: "That little spot in
Hungary has become a turning point for the whole anti-Semitic movement, perhaps it will
form a boundary stone for Israel. . .In case these people of the ritual-murder are referred
[to court], all peoples have the most scared duty, to protect us from the gang which
slaughters us not only economically, but perhaps also in actuality. This little place
(Tisza-Eszlár) will perhaps become Israel's end. Cowardice and bloodthirstiness have been
characteristic traits of the Jews in all times. It would be a national suicide, if we
would not protest against the fact that members of the nation which in Hungary are standing
before the blood court [i.e., as accused ritual-murderers], are sitting in the robes of
office upon a German judicial bench and are allowed to pass judgement upon the
Germans. . ."
In another assembly, Henrici demanded, to thunderous applause, the immediate
removal from office of Jewish judges -- "even in Berlin what has come to light in Hungary
can happen! One need only examine once the statistics of those who have disappeared and
see at which time of the year most of the children were lost! (Shout: Passover!)
Come hell or high water, we will not yield or waver until we have pushed the foot from the
back of our necks, until we have cast the Jews, together with their bloody ritual-slaughter
knives down into the dust where they belong. . ."
In a petition directed to the government, police supervision over the Jewish populace,
but particularly over the synagogues, was supposed to be requested. In order to
enlighten the population and shake it from its apathy, a large number of handbills about
this blood-murder were circulated, since the "German" newspapers had refused to
accept the explanation relating to this!
(170)So strongly did these "extra editions" affect the nerves
of the "Chairman of the Jewish community of Berlin," the banking Jew and "Royal Advisor for
Commerce," Meyer-Magnus, that he complained to the Prussian Minister of the Interior
von Puttkamer. The text of the letter of reply from the latter should be reproduced
as simply a symbolic document of its time:
"Berlin, 13 July 1882
Ministry of the Interior
Sir
I most obligingly thank you for the delivery, by means of your kind letter, of the extra
edition of the morning of the 23rd which referred to the well-known case of the
disappearance of the Christian resident in Tisza-Eszlár.
I find myself in perfect agreement with you, Sir, in respect to the condemnation of
this sorry piece of work, abject alike in both form and content and I in no way underestimate
the danger which the circulation of such productions of the press can bring in their train
under prevailing conditions.
Incidentally, according to the investigation ordered by me in the case at hand, everything
has also been thoroughly correctly dealt with by the local police authority, in so far
as the latter has immediately made the application on its behalf with the Royal State
Prosecutor's Office. Already charges against the editor due to offenses against § 166 of
the penal code have been lodged by that office and at the same time the confiscation
of the extra edition has been applied for. . .I should like to take the opportunity to
assure you, Sir, of my best and deepest respect.
(signed) v. Puttkamer.
To the
Royal Confidential Advisor and Chairman
of the Board of Directors of the Jewish community
Herr Meyer-Magnus,
Esquire,
Hier-W. Bellevuestr. 8."
(171) But Meyer, Esq., "the Great" and his
dinner-jacketed band of swindlers could smile amusedly to themselves as they rubbed their
hands.
Yet soon they should again have opportunity to get angry -- this time more lastingly!
Leading men of the anti-Semitic movement, among them the dynamic Dr. Henrici named
above, and also Otto Glagau, its "culture warrior", had the merit not only of
having relentlessly uncovered the practices of the Jewish stock exchange hyenas and
foundation swindlers, but also of having clearly recognized the most monstrous crime,
blood-murder, and having pointed it out as fact to a peaceable citizenry, came together
for the formation of an anti-Jewish alliance, to which anti-Semites from Austria
and Hungary also belonged. This anti-Jewish alliance summoned the first anti-Semitic
congress in Dresden. Otto Glagau held the leadership. Max Liebermann von
Sonnenberg, who later became Reich deputy, at whose suggestion the facts of the case
of the blood-murder which occurred in the year 1900 at Konitz were published,
Dr. Amman, the founder of the "Sozialer Reichsverein", Dr. Hentschel,
court preacher and member of the Reichstag Stöcker, the founder of the
Christlichsoziale Partei [Christian Social Party] (1878), "a dazzling speaker in the
pulpit as well as in the people's assembly"(28), the future
member of the Reichstag Prof. Paul Förster, with his brother Bernhard the author of
the so-called "anti-Semitic Petition" of 1881, Ruppel, Pickenbach,
Ernst Schmeitzner, well-known through his antisemitische Monatshefte
[Anti-Semitic Monthly issues], the member of the Hungarian Reichstag, Istóczy,
whose Manifest an die Regierungen und Völker der durch das Judentum gefährdeten
christlichen Staaten [Manifesto to the Governments and Peoples of the Christian States
Endangered by Jewry] was adopted, and Ivan von Simónyi -- all these were to be
named as the leading men of this congress.
At their invitation the Hungarian Reichstag deputy Géza v. Ónody also spoke on the
10th of September 1882 in Dresden about the ritual-crime committed in his
hometown and about the doings of the Alliance Israélite Universelle in Hungary. The
portrait of the murdered girl, created by his countryman Anrányi according to the
statements of the mother and relatives, was (172) displayed
in the assembly hall. It is the same one which Ónody published in his book. Even ten years
later, this circumstance so enraged the Jew Nathan, that he described the girl as
a prostitute; he writes on page 39 of his book: ". . .it is claimed that it is the portrait
of a public beauty of Nyiregyháza, and really, whoever strolled through the broad
streets of that particular little Hungarian city, a native of the place probably pointed out
to him a tall girl with a short apron, with a loosely wound blue cloth about her bare neck
which, although she was not ritually slaughtered, and although she continually went about
her somewhat profitable trade, nonetheless was supposed to be the original of the
Esther of the portrait. Her name was Ludovika Marossek. . .This painted Esther
Solymosi [i.e., the one in the portrait], who was a prostitute, has the busts
of crowned heads around her(29), and upon this portrait gazed
apparently devoutly the heads of the party, worthy pastors and great men of mature age, some
of them in significant positions, who have the eyes of the public on them, and who make
a pretense of working for the 'moral' rebirth of society, and wish to solve problems of high
politics, these people worshipfully gathered before the portrait of a -- whore. . ."
A few days later Ónody spoke in Berlin in the first mass gathering of the anti-Semites
over Tisza-Eszlár. On 16 September 1882, the Deutsche Tageblatt gave the
following atmospheric report: "The powerful arousal into which the population of our
capital city has been transported by the ritual-murder of the unfortunate Esther
Solymosi, committed by the Jews, the stubborn silence of the Jewish-Progressive press
concerning the event, and finally, the news that the Hungarian Reischstag Deputy for
Tisza-Eszlár, Herr von Ónody, will appear on Thursday evening in order to make a thorough
report about the terrible crime by means of (173) official
materials at a large assembly, had enticed an enormous crowd of people to the local
assembly hall. For that talk turned out to be a great demonstration against Jewry. We
wished that our esteemed Jewish fellow-citizens had been able to hear the authentic
truth about the crime from the mouth of this unimpeachable man of honor. . ."
The appearance of Ónody in Germany -- as even Nathan had to concede -- had achieved
two things:
1. "The previously varying tale of the murder took on solid shape -- anti-Semitism
again surfaced" and
2. "Ónody had committed himself personally in Hungary as in Germany, and with him the
anti-Semitism of both nations, to [justice for] the ritual-murder."
With these successes, which even a Jewish "intellectual" stressed, the Hungarian could feel
satisfaction for the first time.
How had things been developing in his home country? In Hungary as well, the anti-Semitic
currents had been swelling. Whatever decision the court might make, the people were
convinced that they were being bled to death by the Jewish foreign body -- not only
economically but in the literal sense of the word. One knew what to expect from newspaper
reporting -- indeed, Jews and editors had already become identical concepts in Hungary!
But the Alliance Israélite, that parent company of World Jewry, must have given
a signal; for at the same time as anti-Semitic speakers were appearing in Germany and
fliers were being circulated, there suddenly assembled in Budapest on 5 July
1882, contrary to all other practice in secrecy and silence, a general meeting of the
Rabbis under the chairmanship of the Head Rabbis Menachem Hatz and Leopold
Lipschitz. No resounding "resolutions" were composed (an exception for such a meeting!)
but something totally cunning was cooked up! The Rabbis wrote letters -- this "quiet
propaganda" was already practiced at that time -- but not spontaneously to this or that
(174) person abroad -- but to very well-known international
"authorities," who almost without exception belonged to the theological faculty of
their universities, and they asked these men to render their expert opinions about the
possibility of ritual-murder and/or to "historically elucidate" this subject. With great
adroitness, they knew how to discover, next to the freemasons, their baptized racial
comrades among the "Christian" theologians! These scholars, to whom this request suddenly
came, had in all probability never been able to examine a ritually-slaughtered human body
which had been drained of all its blood, as their former colleague, D. Johann Eck
had done in the 16th century -- perhaps [this was the occasion when] they were first told
about what is meant by a ritual- or blood-murder -- with the exception of their baptized
[Jewish] colleagues!
Their letters of reply are consequently composed in an occasionally very evasive manner and
one soon gets the impression: the "colleagues of the Mosaic persuasion" should get the kind
of exposition which would not further upset them and besides: it is flattering and at the
same time an honor to be approached by a learned assembly of foreign Rabbis for a letter
of expert opinion, and therefore the bearer of an apparently quite well-known name
is not permitted to disappoint them in any way. These letters of reply, written for both
the above-named rabbinic Head Swindlers and also, really, for their agents, are to be
evaluated with this perspective in mind!
The theological faculty of the University at Amsterdam writes: "The theological
faculty owes it to the decision of the assembly of Rabbis, held on the 5th of July of
this year in Budapest, that your friendly invitation was also issued to it,
as well, to give its statement in relation to an old accusation made once again
against the Jews. . .agreeing with the judgement of all experts in the field, it also
is thoroughly of the conviction that a lawful instruction to use human blood acquired by
murder for ritual purposes is not contained anywhere in the religious books of the
Jews. . "
The theological faculty of the University of Copenhagen refuted "this foolish
invention, proceeding from blind fanaticism" by recalling (175)
"with what great severity the Mosaic Law forbids men the consumption of blood;
according to this law, anyone who would commit the above atrocity which is charged to
the Jews [in Tisza-Eszlár], would be excluded from the community of the Jews and incur
heavy punishment(!) Fully justified is the complaint and the indignation of the whole of
Jewry over the fact that this accusation has been raised against them - an accusation which,
as often as it has been raised, yet never has had the slightest basis in fact. . ."
The theologians of the faculties at Leiden and Utrecht are also "according to their knowledge
of the Mosaic and Talmudic laws," completely convinced that both [i.e, the mosaic and Talmudic
laws] do not in the least assent to a use of human blood, and still less do they
prescribe it." -- In such a manner were the expert opinions of the faculties procured!(174)
Unfortunately, a Paul de Lagarde in all innocence became involved in this Jewish
swindle maneuver and as a consequence had to let his name be abused even decades later by
Jewish rats! In his letter of reply from Göttingen of 7 October 1882, he even thanks
"the esteemed assembly of Rabbis for the confidence which it has shown me (P.D. Lagarde) by
this request." Further on, however, Lagarde makes it clear that he was unable to supply
the "desired historical elucidation" of the (ritual-murder) accusation, due to lack of
time. . ."Should it seem expeditious to the esteemed assembly of Rabbis, however, that I
appear as a witness (!) for it in any sort of judicial hearing. . .I am prepared to do
so."
The Ordinarius at the University of Straßburg, Nöldeke, obviously irritated, rants
from his summer holiday in the Black Forest (10 August 1882): "It is sad that there is
repeated cause for [having to] seriously refute the charges raised by malice and
ignorance against the Jews, that they use human or Christian blood for some sort of
religious celebration. The accusation is entirely groundless; of course such atrocities
are totally contrary to all the principles of Judaism (!) Jews, who would have committed
such a crime would have been excluded unconditionally from the religious community of
Judaism(176). . ." -- The same Nöldeke also then
rendered his "expert opinion" in the Xanten ritual-murder trial -- thus we are prepared for
that! Quite obviously, however, the "Licensed Theologian and titular Professor" August
Wünsche, as a baptized Jew and (of all things) headmaster at a girls' school in
Dresden(30), knew what was in the interests of the Jews.
At the end of his rather cordial letter (31 October 1882) to the Head Rabbi Lipschitz
in Budapest we read: "May a high court succeed in throwing light upon the
Tisza-Eszlár affair and soon prove the innocence of the accused Jews, so that
the evil spirit of the anti-Semitic movement may not draw new nourishment, to the
misfortune of the common life of Christians and Jews!"
With these "Christian" credentials [i.e., from the theological faculties of the various
universities], the Jewish taskmasters could be well-satisfied.!
These expressions of expert opinion, 22 in all, -- among them one also finds the opinions of
the Professors Delitzsch (a Jew!), and Strack of Berlin -- were carefully collected
and published(31) in Berlin in December 1882, thus
before the start of the ritual-murder trial in Hungary, under the collective
designation: Christliche Zeugnisse gegen die Blutbeschuldigung der Juden
[Christian testimony against the blood-accusation of the Jews].
It is clear that Judah knew how to make necessary capital from the contributions of its
honorary Christian colleagues. The Gießener University Professor Stade in his
letter of response actually anticipates these Jewish goals -- without, perhaps, having
been conscious of them -- when his letter reads: "The outcome of the affair in Tisza-Eszlár
may be what it will: this much is determined in advance, that it will be allowed to be
used neither against the Jewish religion nor against the character of the Jewish people.
Deeds such as those of which the ritual-slaughterer there is said to be guilty, are foreign
to the latter and loathsome to the former."
(177)In the time to follow, Jewish journalistic garbage was
poured in bucketsful over Ónody. The Hungarian magnate made short shrift of one of these
Jewish rats; to challenge a Jew [to a duel] would be to accord him too much honor. So Ónody
got the correspondent of the Jewish Wiener Extrablatt out of his hotel room with the
Karbatsche [a heavy-duty whip]. The press-Jew immediately preferred to depart with
the fore-noon train. . .
"But the other pens kept writing. . .These modest men were the correspondents
of the great (Jewish) Hungraian and Austrian papers, they were the organ by means of
which civilization gazed down. . .People there took the Karbatsche to be the most
powerful of weapons and they learned that the pen was still more powerful. . .The
Press passed a sentence of death and the anti-Semites felt that a new, larger power than
their own had moved in. These proud magnates had lost. . ."
So wrote Paul Nathan barely ten years later, and he had to know, of course, being,
finally, an "expert in his field"!
The same tactic of wearing-down was used on the examining judge Josef Bary and the
representative of the national press of Hungary, Verhovay in the intermission
[before the trial]. Even the Justice Minister Pauler did not remain unscathed. The
Minister President Tisza had adopted the habit of circumventing the Ministry of
Justice by sending his instructions directly to the state attorneys. . .Ónody, Bary,
Verhovay and Pauler held out. A cruder weapon had to be used on them.
Ónody was impervious to economic measures, but Verhovay, the editor of the national
paper Függetlenség, was on the verge of ruin. His friends gave him further help.
Bary, who had charge of the important documentary material and energetically kept on
with his investigations despite all interventions and intrigues, and did not weaken or
waver, could be finally be put out of the way, of course, with more radical methods. That
too was attempted. From the account of Ónody's comrade in the struggle, the
knight Georg von Marcziányi(32), we learn
(178) that already on the 14th of July 1882 an attack
upon Bary was planned.
Go to Tisza-Eszlár/Page 3
Back to Table of Contents
|