| Some good-natured persons who do not watch closely the course of events,
may not discover any thing very alarming in the occurrences which are daily developed
before our eyes. They fancy that they are secure in their personal rights, because they
live in a land where freedom is at home, and have nothing to dread from the malevolence of
irresponsible power. They will point with pride to the beautiful constitution, the work of
that august assembly over which the father of his country, the model of rulers,
Washington, presided, and they consider themselves the heritors of the wealth of liberty
and equality which he helped to secure, even more by his moderation and sound common sense
than by his bravery and success in the field and sagacity in the council of war. They aver
that, as all classes of the inhabitants of the land drew in common the sword in defense of
its independence of regal and priestly rule; as on the embattled plain or the heaving
ocean the blood of all flowed alike to beat back the invader who claimed the right to
govern by ancient prescription; as the treasures of all were freely offered during the
struggle which taxed heavily the resources and perseverance of the nascent nation in its
darkest hours of trial; as the worshippers of the One Eternal shared the same dangers and
fatigues which the followers of the Trinitarian doctrines underwent, and which were not
disdained by those too who in their folly deny the revelation of the Most High or even
doubt His existence: —as all this is undeniable and universally acknowledged, they will
aver that in nothing did the revolutionary fathers show their wisdom and foresight to a
greater extent than in laying it down as one of the fundamental principles in the charter
devised for the government of the new republic that "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
By this it was intended to secure all classes, whether they be numerous, counting their
adherents by millions, or few, confined perhaps within the space of a single household, in
the full enjoyment of their conscientious convictions, to worship or not, as they may feel
inclined, without any one being empowered to coerce them to enter his church, contribute
to its support; or do aught which they would not do voluntarily and of a perfect free
will. As the supreme legislature of the country was thus not permitted to designate any
portion of the people as inferior to the others on account of their religious
predilections, it would seem to follow that no one else has the right. All the laws come
from the constitutional source, the legislators elected by the people directly, or by the
States in their sovereign capacity; and since the wisdom of the nation assembled in this
manner is strictly enjoined not to prohibit the free exercise of religion, no matter what
its name, no limitation being conveyed in the clause before us, it would appear that the
intention was to preclude for all times the exercise of this dominion by all creatures of
the law and constitution, that is to say, that no officer of government, of whatever
degree or name, should impose any disqualification on a single man or set of men for
opinions honestly entertained, and for religious practices which cannot injure his peace,
or infringe on his civil rights. It must be indeed an unreasonable being who would ask more for himself in
the matter of freedom of conscience. If he can think what he pleases, worship or not as it
may suit his fancy, build churches or places of religious assembly, convents,
conventicles, monasteries, and seminaries, without let or hindrance, labor when he
pleases, or be idle when he deems proper to remain unemployed in obedience to his sense of
duty: one would imagine that he had ample scope to carry out whatever his conscience might
dictate to him, provided always that he trouble himself not about his neighbor. But herein
lies the difficulty: men are not always satisfied with carrying out their own ideas of
propriety, since they are frequently annoyed by what their neighbor thinks or does. They
imagine that his principles are a libel on theirs; the color of his garment, the shape of
his hat, nay, the latchets of his shoes are a constant source of vexation to them; and
therefore they cannot rest while such a contradiction to their fancy is within their
reach. If they could be induced to reflect that their neighbor may have the same cause to
be displeased with their thinking and outward appearance, and have an equally good reason
to follow his conviction as they have with regard to theirs: it is possible that they
might be induced to sit quiet under the infliction that some differ from them in the
essential matters which make up the individual or a class, without having their jealousy
or hatred excited at their neighbor's singularity as they conceive it to be. But this is
unfortunately not the case; for the more many are restricted by law and reason to the
supervision of their own conduct, the greater becomes their desire to intermeddle with
what does really not concern them; and it seems that no constitutional restraints, no
prudential considerations, no impulses of common sense, are able to keep them within the
bounds which we have indicated. They must meddle, they must be at mischief, they must show
their superior wisdom and sanctity; and in short they will contrive all possible devices
to let their antagonist, as they regard the one who innocently differs from them, feel
that he has offended those who cannot imagine that any thing can be right which they do
not understand, and of which they perhaps have never heard.
Religious persecution in all ages, if it was the effect of sincere
fanaticism, has had its origin in this substratum: it was first the offense at seeing
practices which were odious to the observer, and then applying the means to make things
otherwise. It requires at the same time no great skill to form a sort of public opinion to
sustain persecution. The vast majority of men never think; they take their mental coloring
from their superiors or class-leaders; and the sudden political changes without any
apparent cause, may thus be adequately accounted for in the fact, that the moulders of
public opinion either did honestly change from a sincere conviction, or pretended to do so
from a sinister, selfish motive of their own. Numbers being the source of power every
where, it is nothing remarkable, that they should be courted even by tyrants and
demagogues of all degrees to sustain them in their measures of infamy over which humanity
must weep, and which cause unclouded reason to sigh over the degeneracy of men's
intellect. However arbitrarily a ruler may act, he always endeavors to let the world know
something of his motives, in the hope that it may approve thereof; and falsehood is not
rarely resorted to in order to throw the mantle of apparent truth over the misdeeds of the
powerful. The love of praise is inherent in our nature, and the highest intellect is not
indifferent to the approval of the commonest laborer, and the most exalted disdain not to
stoop for the applause of the vulgar. Look at the public meetings before which orators and
statesmen exhibit themselves in England and America, propounding to them grave political
and commercial problems which it requires a well educated state-economist to understand,
and then note with what self-complacency the plaudits of the masses are received: and you
will agree with us that the wiliest demagogue is anxious for the support of the brute
multitude, that he may gradually frame public opinion to suit his purposes, while the true
and honest are not at liberty to despise the same means to resist the evil, which the
other may consummate if unopposed, by his own method. We can well believe the truth of the
story that Augustus, while about to die, asked whether he had not performed well his part
on the stage of the world, and that Nero mingled in the games of the circus and played on
the state to obtain the bravos of the crowd, which dared not to withhold its
applause from so formidable a player; both Augustus and Nero acted before an
audience the temper of which they thoroughly understood, and the one overcame them first
by acts of proscription and then of magnanimity, while the other terrified them into
submission by buffoonery to-day and tiger-like cruelty on the morrow. And yet Rome had
been free, kings had been banished, the decemvirs had been deprived of their usurped
power, nay, the greatest of the Romans, Caesar, had fallen beneath the daggers of Cassius
and Brutus, because he dared to put forth his hand to the regal diadem. The liberty which
had been achieved by disinterested noble patriots, which had been purchased by rivers of
blood and consolidated by centuries of watchfulness, was lost through the altered state of
public opinion, and snatched away by men to whom ambition was every thing, to whom all
means were fair, yea, treachery, murder, brutality of every kind, which conferred on them
power and the means of indulging their lustful desires.
In this country and England people are not played on, as was the case in
Rome, through public shows and exhibitions of lands and grain from the State treasury; but
other means, to which the heathen were strangers, are resorted to in order to acquire
power. Here and in England the church in its various phases which forms the nucleus of
power through its effect on public opinion, which is the seat of danger to liberty of
conscience and perhaps the permanence of free institutions of all kinds. It must not be
said that the thing is impossible; we grant it improbable; but to our knowledge there has
been so vast a change in the minds of the people regarding the rights of all within the
last ten years, that it is indisputable that, should the deterioration proceed in the same
ratio for the next fifty years, despotism, military and civil, may naturally succeed to
overthrow a rotten State which has ceased to be free except in name, just as was the case
in Rome when she submitted to the wily Augustus after slaying the truly great Julius
Caesar.
In Spain also the Inquisition was resisted as an incubus which Popes
desired to fasten on the people; but in the end princes and ladies, high civilians and
ecclesiastics rejoiced at the approach of a gala day, and sat in state while the burning
stake consumed the bodies of hecatombs of heretics perishing to glorify the name of the
G-d whom they adored. What arts must not have been employed to debase public opinion to
this degree; how many years were needed to transform the chivalric Castilian into the
menial of the Holy Office, that infamous institution which fattened on the blood of its
thousands of victims, and reveled on the sighs and tears of those it doomed to an untimely
death or to banishment from their beloved native country. Israelites too loved Spain; it
was not to them a land of captivity; they had grown great, learned, and renowned there,
since their temple was destroyed; they were the warriors, the poets, the dramatists, the
astronomers, the navigators, the financiers, the counselors, the nobles, and possessors of
the soil; they had well-nigh forgotten Jerusalem and its sad traditions; they were removed
from the ill-usage which weighed down their brothers in Northern Europe.
But by degrees the light of their prosperity waned, until the edict of
Ferdinand the cunning and Isabella the bigot doomed, it is said, eight hundred thousand
souls to all the horrors of an expatriation from the beloved soil, or a forced conversion
to a creed hateful to their soul; and all this was done for the alleged glorification of
the G-d of Mercy, because the presence of these heretics would pollute the land of their
sojournment. The heedlessness of these Hebrews was fearfully rebuked; and yet in their
wanderings they retained the language of Castile and Lusitania, and sighed for the shores
of the Douro and Guadalquivir, and wept for the fields of Catalonia and the vineyards of
Andalusia, and vaunted of their descent from a race superior to that of their brothers who
dwelt in northern more inhospitable climes.*
* Isaac Leeser is alluding here to internal Jewish prejudice of
Sephardim against Ashkenazim.
"The church is in danger," was the charm which enslaved the will
of the Spaniards and Portuguese; the emblems of their religion were therefore hailed at
the consummation of the myriads of sacrifices as in their fitting place near the gibbet or
the stake, or in the dungeons where the familiars plied their frightful trade of torture,
and where the church-demons presided over the infernal orgies, where all that is hateful
glutted itself on the sorrows and groans of the unresisting and helpless martyrs, whose
history is unwritten, and whose names even have not been treasured up for our edification.
Assuming then that the inquisitors were sincere, or not, as you may prefer, one thing is
certain, that they decoyed the people into an approval, thorough and hearty, of all their
enormities; they were committed, understand, reader, for the salvation of mankind, the
prosperity of the church, and the glory of the Prince of Peace, as though MURDER
in all its hideous forms could be needed to build up a system of universal love!
Nevertheless you will not find that the heads of the Catholics will condemn the iniquity,
and you will not look in vain to meet with defenders of the atrocities recorded in history
as committed for the propagation of Christianity in all periods for the last eighteen
hundred years.
In this country there was a hope, as we said in starting, that the
Constitution would forever disarm religious malevolence of all power to inflict injury,
and we still trust that it may be so. But we should not be surprised if a latent sentiment
inimical to Judaism were already existing, and that it would spread still farther. A cause
may be found first in the increasing numbers and prosperity of Israelites, thus attracting
to them a good deal of public attention, and then the many efforts made through various
channels for their conversion, both here and in England, which have resulted hitherto, we
are glad to say, in a miserable failure. But the attempt fixes the attention of strangers
to Judaism on us in an unpleasant manner; we become much too often the objects of
animadversion; and since comparatively few only have any knowledge of our people, except
what they conceive us to be by taking some itinerant Jewish gaberlunzie
[peddler], to borrow a Scottish word, as the real type of the identical Jews, of whom
their preacher speaks when he sketches the wicked Christ killers, who caused their god to
expire on the cross for the sins of mankind; it is no wonder that a deep-seated prejudice
has by degrees been implanted in the minds of many honest, though ignorant persons, who
become horrified the more they discover the Jewish countenance multiplied before them.
Those, who are zealots for their opinions, must naturally feel themselves called upon to
undertake something for the removal of the unbelievers, who, notwithstanding the many
overwhelming evidences of the truth of the new religion, continue to reject it, and even
glory in the crime of having put to an ignominious death the savior of the world. This is
the mildest manner in which we are viewed, and is the most moderate method of putting us
down or abating the nuisance, which increases sooner than diminishes by the slow process
of absorption, of which the leaders say so much, but of which so little is actually
realized.
Let it not be forgotten also that the opinion formed of Israelites is
based on the observation made on the crowd of needy adventurers, who travel or glide
rather through the highways and byways of the land in quest of gain, often we fear
unlawful, who in their material labors are perfectly indifferent to the duties of their
religion, and not rarely conceal it by a pretended conformity, which nevertheless does not
succeed to hide their hypocrisy from the eyes of the commonest observer. While by a bold
avowal of opinions and a careful conformity to duty they might challenge respect,
especially if their dealings were characterized by faithfulness
נשא ונותן
באמונה
as our law directs, Israelites could perchance obtain the esteem of all, though their hard
fate and narrow means should condemn them to acquire a living by going from house to house
to sell, buy, or barter; the opposite course, which so many, alas! follow, only secures
contempt and dislike, not alone to those who so richly deserve it, but to those too who
are ornaments to their religion and the human race.
From all dislike to the contrivance of means to injure the objects thereof
is but a single step; and hence it is nowise surprising to us that, the present crisis in
the affairs of the country has in various ways brought us unpleasantly before the public,
and has made us feel that notwithstanding the boasted progress of the age, we
are still in bondage, yes, this is the correct word, and have yet to dread
the decrees of those in power, who are not restrained by any feeling of humanity and
justice from inflicting injury on us.
To come to the point. On December 17th, Major General Grant issued from
Oxford, Mississippi a decree, which will be found in a subsequent part of this article,
expelling all the Jews from his department within twenty-four hours, and we learn that one
merchant at least of the highest standing in Paducah, Kentucky, has left his place of
residence and taken refuge at Cincinnati, outside of the military district just named. A
deputation, so we see, waited on the President of the United States about the close of
December, who in consequence ordered the commander-in-chief of the army, General Halleck,
to revoke General Grant's order, wherefore the Israelites can continue to live in Western
Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi, within the military lines of the Union. But an
attempt made by Mr. Lazarus Powell, Senator from Kentucky, to bring the matter before the
Senate, at first resulted on January 5th, when Congress re-assembled after an adjournment
of nearly two weeks, in laying the resolution over; and on the 9th the result was as
follows, which we copy from the congressional proceedings in the daily papers:
Mr. Powell (KY) called up the resolution censuring
General Grant's order, expelling the Jews.
Mr. Hale said the order had already been revoked.
Mr. Powell was glad of that, and commended the President
for his action in the case; but he wished the resolution to be passed, in order to show
the opinion of the Senate of such an order, leveled against a class of our citizens.
Mr. Clark (NH) thought the order was wrong, but he was
not willing to censure General Grant, now fighting in the field, unheard. He moved to
postpone the resolution indefinitely.
Mr. Wilson (MA) said that General Grant had issued an
order which no one thought right, and which had been promptly revoked, and there he
thought the matter ought to rest.
Mr. Hale moved to lay the resolution on the table, which
was agreed to—yeas 30, nays 7.
The Senate has thus said that General Grant acted properly in assuming
sovereign powers which the constitution did not confer on congress even; for else, why not
say that he has done wrong in exceeding his authority?
But in the House of Representatives the matter was not managed much
better, though the majority was not so large against right and justice. On the 7th the
following is recorded in the proceedings:
Mr. Pendleton (OH) introduced a preamble, reciting
General Grant's order of the 17th of December, excluding the Jews, as a class, from the
army lines, and saying that, in pursuance thereof, General Grant had caused many peaceable
citizens and residents in the said department to be expelled therefrom without any
allegation of misconduct, and with no other proof than that they were members of a certain
religious denomination.
And whereas, such a sweeping order made no distinction between the
innocent and the guilty, and is illegal, unjust, tyrannical, and cruel: therefore,
Resolved, That the said order deserves the sternest
condemnation of this house and of the President as Commander in Chief of the Army and
Navy.
On motion of Mr. Washburne (IL) the resolution was
tabled—yeas 56, nays 53.
We will not give full expression to all we think and feel on the subject;
it requires not a word from us to fire the heart of every Israelite, nay, of every friend
of humanity, with indignation that these things could be done in free America. We are not
surprised that, as the papers report, on the 8th, the day following, the Israelites of New
York were aroused at the outrage. What else could be expected? Should we sit down and
confess that the infamous act was right? That we deserved, as a class, to be treated with
medieval cruelty and banished at the pleasure of an irresponsible military despot?
Irresponsible we say, because neither Senate nor House of Representatives will even
censure him, as though the safety of the country depended on the retention by the general
of the Thirteenth Army Corps of his command, and not throwing it up, if the
representatives of the people were to express by their vote the conviction that he had
usurped an authority never confided to him? Is it just that those who have been chosen to
legislate for the country have not officially declared that they do condemn an act which
all enlightened men will say is only equaled by similar occurrences in the middle ages,
when priestcraft, aided by the ignorance of the masses, could perpetuate outrages which
the light of modern civilization, as was thought, has banished forever?
It is admitted that the President revoked the order; but suppose he had
not thought proper to do so, then it would have gone into effect, long before congressmen
could have found it convenient, or compatible with public safety, to institute an inquiry
to see whether the report were true; for it is not to be imagines that the honorable
gentlemen would have been moved to any expression of opinion until the official
announcement had reached them, say from the Secretary of the Interior, to whose department
we suppose it may belong, "that the General commanding, &c., with the assent of
the President, had expelled the Jews, without discrimination, from his district, and that
they were already scattered in all directions, abandoning homes, business, synagogues, and
the graves of those dear to them, to the tender mercies of a lawless soldiery."
Fortunately for the country, the President would not be the instrument of such cruelty;
but the majority in congress have no claim on our gratitude for their treatment, and
deserve rather the condemnation due for their disregard of their obligations as
conservators of the rights of the people, which ought to be safe under the guaranties of
the constitution. In order to let the general public know that we felt the insult offered
to us and justice, we sent the subjoined to the Philadelphia Public Ledger, where
it promptly appeared the next day:
ARE ISRAELITES SLAVES?
Messrs. Editors: Your New York correspondent of this morning states that
the Jews of that city are indignant at the strange proceedings in the House of
Representatives yesterday in laying Mr. Pendleton's resolution condemnatory of General
Grant's outrage against Israelites on the table. It is no wonder that such a transaction
should made the blood boil in the veins of the most phlegmatic. Has it come to this, that
a crime like that of the just named commander, vested with the limited authority
conferred on him by the President, who can remove him at pleasure, shall be passed by in
silence, while those whom he has aggrieved have no chance of redress, not even that of
making themselves heard through the mouth of such congressmen as are willing to take their
part?
It would be unnatural if Israelites should rest quiet under such an
infliction, which is analogous to the expulsions and persecutions they have had to endure
under princes and ecclesiastics elsewhere. But is it not strange, marvelous, that
congressmen, who have sworn to support the constitution, do not see that no greater
violation of its provisions was ever manifested than in the procedure of General Grant? Is
personal liberty merely to be held at the pleasure of a military official? Or, at best,
under the kind revocation of the order of banishment by the President, to whom free
citizens of the republic have appealed not to drive them from their homes?
Will not the enlightened and the brave patriots and friends of liberty, of
all creeds, unite with us Israelites to put down incipient tyranny, which sooner or later
will seek, unless checked, a wider field than is afforded by the small numbers of our race
in the Union? Think, Messrs. Editors, what an outcry would have been raised had a similar
measure been pursued toward any Christian denomination; and still, "Is Israel a slave
or a bondman born in the house" of a master? All thanks to Messrs. Powell and
Pendleton! And we will not honor them the less that their voices of inquiry was stifled by
the louder vociferations of an unthinking majority.
WALNUT STREET
January 8, 1863
Our readers abroad will hardly credit us that this could have happened in
this age and in the United States of America, and, what is more, that it should have met
with an apologist in the Secretary of the Federal Senate, who is the editor of the Washington
Chronicle. But so it is nevertheless; and we therefore insert his article in full,
that it may be seen that bigotry is not confined to Russia, or to the Roman States, now
happily reduced to a mere patch of land.
Top of Page
THE JEWS IN TENNESSEE (From the Washington
Chronicle)
[Portions of this article which Leeser found so offensive have been italicized by
the webmaster]
A resolution has been introduced into the Senate, censuring General Grant
for the following order, issued by him, banishing all Jews from his department:
GENERAL ORDERS, NO. 11
We are no advocates of class legislation. It always works injustice. Our
own country has, up to the present time, afforded an instance where this species of
tyranny has been carried to an exaction unparalleled in history, and we hope the day for
that sort of action has passed away forever. This order of General Grant cannot be
justified as it stands. It is too sweeping. But before it is wholly condemned, we must
recollect that General Grant has never before been guilty of wanton tyranny or cruelty,
and that it is probable he had what appeared to him good reason for issuing this order.
After the capture of Memphis by our gunboats, General Grant found himself
in command of a department comprising fifteen counties in the richest part of Tennessee.
On one side of them is the Mississippi River, and through their center runs the Mobile and
Ohio railroad. This country was full of cotton, but it was also full of guerillas. The
guerillas were mere banditti, who, being penniless themselves, had a great disinclination
to see any one else in the possession of wealth, and for that reason, as much as any, they
roamed about the country, burning all the cotton they could lay their hands on. The
people, who depended on their cotton to keep them from starvation, were anxious to sell
immediately; and at first, before our forces had thoroughly occupied the country, they
would sell at any price they could get—five, six, or eight cents a pound. As the cotton,
when hauled to the landing, was worth from twenty to thirty cents a pound, it will readily
be conjectured that the prospect of such enormous profits drew crowds of speculators to
this favored locality.
The principal risks to be met by cotton buyers were two: first, of
losing their money or their cotton; and second, of being made prisoners or shot. The Jews
have, since the very unhandsome trick played by Jacob on his brother, been notorious for
their fondness for illegitimate, or, at least, unusual modes of making money. Perhaps the
pharisaical complacency of the rest of the world, which has refused them free admission
into social, political, or commercial circles, has had something to do in sharpening their
natural proclivities. Be that as it may, they are the scavengers and the pioneers of
commerce. Wherever great risk promises great profit a Jew will venture. If he loses, he
will try again, for with all their covetousness the Jews are the boldest speculators in
the world. The state of the cotton trade in Tennessee, during the summer, attracted swarms
of Jews to Memphis, Columbus, Jackson, and other centers of the cotton region. Very few
Americans
ventured, and those who did were mostly secessionists. In order to save themselves, all
persons buying cotton were obliged sometimes to profess sympathy for the rebels. Very
frequently secession spies pretended to be buying cotton and more than once the
Jewish
cotton buyers were detected in correspondence with the enemy; so that it was
often impossible to distinguish between cotton buyers pretending secession, and
secessionists pretending to buy cotton. Thus it has come about that the Jews in West
Tennessee are looked on with suspicion by all commanders of posts, and their suspicions
have, at last, probably had some effect on General Grant. We must not forget to add that
the evil, if it be such, of allowing everybody and anybody to buy, and to use any species
of money, from gold and silver to Confederate shinplasters; a policy which never had the
sanction or approval of any military commander in the West.
Since the first occupation of West Tennessee, the cotton business has
undergone a great change. Cotton has risen from five to fifty cents a pound, and even
higher. Where, with a small capital of five hundred dollars, a man could, last summer, buy
ten bales of cotton, and double or triple his investment, he can now buy but one bale, and
make only reasonable mercantile profit. While this change has not affected the
more wealthy and respectable Jews, (for there are many such, and by none are the wretches
who make the Hebrew nation so unpleasantly notorious more heartily despised,) it has
driven those of small capital into the hundred other illegitimate channels of trade which
abound in the track of a large army. They hawk "notions," cigars, and fruit
about the camps; they sell whiskey to the soldiers; they loan money on small pledges; they
are eternally applying for passes and permits, and abusing the same for purposes of
smuggling and communicating with the enemy; as the cotton trade legitimizes all kinds of
currency, they sell contraband goods, such as boots and shoes, clothing, blankets,
medicines, to the enemy; they receive stolen goods from petty warehouse and wharf thieves;
it is the universal opinion of army correspondents and all who had opportunities for
extensive observation, that the Jewish peddlers who set up independent travelling sutlers'
stalls in every town and village where the army makes a halt, and scour the country, both
within and without the pickets, with their wares, purchase immunity and toleration from
each side, by giving all the information the possess about military movements on the
other.
There are the reasons why the prejudice which exists in all
communities against Jews is intensified in the army, and, harsh and unjust as this order
is in its operation on those Jews who actually reside within the Department of West
Tennessee, and have gained an honorable and respectable name by the legitimate pursuit of
commerce, we do not believe there will be found a dozen men in the army who will not
approve it. We are glad to see that it has been rescinded by General Halleck, but it is
right that the people should understand that, if there was no good reason, there was, at
least, some excuse for its promulgation.
Washington Chronicle
Top of Page
THE OCCIDENT REPLIES:
We will not stop to comment on an article so devoid of common sense, which does us a
moral wrong in the same degree as Grant attempted a physical one, by treating all
Israelites alike, whether guilty or not of the charges laid against them. But it will tend
to prove that no system of laws will destroy the spirit of persecution, and that both
fools and knaves are to be met with under every form of government. In the meanwhile the
editors of the daily press have been singularly silent, and have barely breathed a dissent
as far as has come under our observation; the matter did not concern them of course, the
parties threatened with such ill-usage were not Christians, not even Negroes, nothing but
Jews! Nothing but Jews! And these, every one knows, are the enemies of Christ and his
apostles. Perhaps the editors did not think so altogether, but still a little religious
prejudice was lurking in the back chambers of their hearts, and permitted them to look on
a little persecution of "those loved for their fathers' sake" as an infliction
which can be composedly endured. It may be thought that we write with bitterness; yes, we
do; we are conscious in every fiber of our heart that the world does not love us, and if
opportunity were given, the expulsions of ancient days, or even modern ones, would be
renewed. It is not so very long ago that similar things took place in Europe, so that
their recurrence here is nothing very wonderful, considering that the agents have actually
the same belief after all. Vigilance on our part is needed to arouse the mind of the
liberal of all classes to the danger that two worthy young men at Washington at once
replied to the scandalous piece in the Chronicle of the 6th; and as the subject
must be of the utmost interest to all our readers, we subjoin both replies, to let the
writers have an opportunity to have their good work embodied in our pages.
Top of Page
GENERAL GRANT AND THE ISRAELITES
Mr. Editor:— With surprise and regret this morning did I read an
editorial in the Daily Chronicle regarding the recent order issued by Gen. Grant,
of the Department of West Tennessee, concerning the expulsion of Israelites from within
the lines of the same. Although no public writer, I feel it my duty to reply to a portion
of the same. It must appear to every reasoning mind, at once, that the order was unjust
and tyrannical; as well as illegal, and would be well worthy the order of some foreign
despot, instead of the commander of an important military department under a Government
which guarantees to every citizen those sacred rights which are guaranteed by but few
countries, if by any other in the world. The order shows upon its face the biased opinions
of Gen. Grant, and has been condemned by most people as a gross outrage. To show that the
editor of the Chronicle has represented certain things which tend to prejudice
the public mind against the class of persons referred to in the order, is the object of
the writer.
The editor first pretends to make an apology for Gen. Grant in having
issued the order, or for condemning it; because Gen. Grant has never before been guilty of
wanton tyranny, &c. This is indeed but a very feeble excuse, and which at once shows
the cause is unjust. He then goes on to say "the Jews have been always notorious for
their fondness for illegitimate trading, or at least unusual modes of making money,"
and supposes that this has been the cause of depriving them "of admission into social
and political or commercial circles." As to the fondness of Israelites for
illegitimate trading, I do not think this mode of trading is inherited alone by these
people; I feel very confident in saying that this mode can be traced to many, aye, very
many of the same believers in the same faith as the editor of the Chronicle. By
this I do not by any means desire to justify the deed, and no matter whoever performed it,
should receive the proper punishment they are liable to. The Israelites, as a general
thing, are engaged in mercantile pursuits; there are very few cities or towns but more or
less of them are to be found so engaged; their industry and preference for making money in
this way, has often called forth unnecessary and unjust slanders on this race by
prejudiced and unprincipled people.
I do not know of any instance, and I do not think the editor of the Chronicle
can cite one, where the Israelites, as a race, (in this country), have been excluded from
free admission into social, political, or commercial circles. I know there are many
amongst them who have and still hold high positions in all three of the above named
branches of society. This fact must be well known to the editor of the Chronicle,
who, I believe, has long been a resident of a large city. Would space and time permit it,
instances could be cited. Styling them scavengers as well as pioneers of commerce is at
the same time a compliment and a slut, and is hardly worthy of remark, for he also
acknowledges that they have boldness and perseverance superior to any other race in the
world. The comparison is at once sufficient for the decision. The cotton trade, no doubt,
having been thought (and afterwards proved true) to be a good investment, many Israelites,
in common with others, embarked in the speculation; and were the matter thoroughly sifted,
others than Israelites would be implicated in the offences charged in the order, and for
which the same punishment should be inflicted, without regard to religious belief. Whether
all the persons who were in this business were Americans, Secessionists, or any other
class, I am unable to say. There is no doubt but what there were very many good Union
people who were also amongst them.
I have often met persons who were impressed with the idea that all the
Israelites were foreigners. I see the editor of the Chronicle seems to partake of
the same idea, if I understand rightly the sentence: "Very few Americans ventured,
and those who did were mostly secessionists." At this I am really surprised, as he
most certainly be aware, that the Israelites are composed of Americans as well as those of
foreign birth. The editor seems to infer that a spirit of jealousy has been excited
amongst the Jews in consequence of the more wealthy portion having been fortunate in their
speculations, and which has induced those of the less fortunate ones to embark in
different plans of making money, such as following the army, selling various articles to
the soldiers. He again desires to be understood that the Jews are the only ones who do
this. On this score I can say decidedly he is wrong; for I know that there are men of all
kinds of religion and character who have adopted this plan of making money. In business
circles it is well known that a good market attracts many vendors. The army being such, it
is perfectly natural that all who can will participate in the profits from this source;
and if this is called dishonest, the dishonesty must be charged on a large class of
people—gentiles as well as Jews. It is but very rarely that Jews have been implicated in
the many dishonest practices charged on them by the editor, such as dealing in stolen
goods, giving information to the enemy, and sundry other charges. I think they are only
imaginary for the most part. That there are many amongst them who are not perfect, and
acted contrary to law, I do not attempt to deny. I do say though they are no greater, and
probably not as great, in proportion to the number of their race, than amongst any other
people.
There are many merchants in the Department of West Tennessee of
Israelitish faith who have resided there for years, who are and have been firm Union men,
who bear as high reputation and as good character as any residents of that section of the
country, who have been placed in a very unpleasant and delicate situation by the
promulgation of this extraordinary and unjust order. It must be extremely gratifying to
the people of the country to know that it has received the immediate and just revocation
of the General-in-chief of the Army, and that the nation's highest power has taken steps
in regard to the same.
This reply has not been made with any prejudiced feelings; for the writer,
although a member of the Israelitish faith, is known by, and associates with, members of
both religions. He proscribes no man on account of his faith, but wishes to show (or at
least endeavor to do so) the public that the Jews as a race are not the degraded ones the
editor of the Chronicle represents them to be, are sensitive to a wrong, and are
willing to justify themselves whenever it may be inflicted.
W.B. Hackenburg
Washington, D.C.
Jan. 6, 1863
Top of Page
DEFENCE OF THE JEWS.
To the Editor of the Chronicle:
SIR:—During the reign of the First Napoleon, large deputations
of Christian citizens of France waited upon him, denouncing the Israelites en
masse, jobbers, brokers, contractors, and for holding the best places under
the Government. His answer was, and it should be the watchword of every
enlightened mind: "I know no Israelites; I only know them as
Frenchmen."
How noble and magnanimous would General Grant's conduct have
been had he acted in the spirit of that lofty, enlarged view, as taken by the
man of the century.
Now, not for a moment do I desire, or even wish to be understood
in that sense, to excuse or palliate crime, let it be Christian or Jew, much as
I love and revere the nation of which of which I am proud to be a member. I am
yet not so far gone in self-delusion or deceit as to challenge a world in arms
as to our purity, probity, legal honesty, &c.,—as individuals,—as a
nation, I most unequivocally do. Crime, the lust of power, and the covetous
desire after gain is confined to no sect, to no country; and why we, at this day
of emancipation and disenthralment, should be visited by those time-despised
prejudices that have disgraced the past, is a matter of serious regret and dire
apprehension.
While I do not, as already remarked, desire to countenance the
least infraction of law, or what might be construed as detrimental to the good
of the nation and its cause, I yet do most earnestly, as a matter of living,
vital principle, protest, and for the reasons following, to wit:
1st. Because as a nation (religious) we have shown as much
devotion to the Union we swore to sustain, as much adhesion to the Constitution
we swore to defend, as any other sect or nation, North.
2d. We have contributed as liberally and bountifully toward the
maintenance of this struggle, as far as the means allowed, as any other class.
3d. Because our brethren have been in every regiment, division,
and corps of the various armies of the Republic, doing this duty as men and
soldiers in whatever position placed, and the blood of hundreds has stained the
various sanguinary fields, attesting with their life their devotion to the good
cause of union and liberty.
4th. Because it stands as a precedent, as a landmark, whereby
still less conscientious commanders can unscrupulously hurl forth their bulls
against an unoffending and unnecessarily despised race.
For it matters not whether the American Senate or the press do
us justice: History will—for the dark ages have passed. You can no longer
enslave the mind; and the Jew, with an equal chance, will not only be a
competitor in the grand race for intellectual and physical wealth, but reach the
goal far in advance. My hope is in a verdict from the good common sense of the
American people, and there let it rest.
S. Wolf.
Washington, D.C. Jan. 6, 1863.
In addition to the little piece inserted in the Ledger,
we were anxious that other channels should be employed to call public attention
to the ill-usage of our people. We therefore wrote the following and took it in
person to the Philadelphia Public Ledger; nay. called twice again and
sent two messages besides; still, after promising to print it, the editors could
not find room for an honest complaint over a glaring wrong, while they had ample
space to report the doings of meetings of negroes, one held in South Carolina,
and one in an obscure and vicious quarter of this city, where decent persons can
hardly make their appearance. The mind of the times seems turned into one
direction, and every thing else sinks into insignificance before it. Knowing
this, we would not go about begging for a corner in any general publication, and
we therefore lay our views before the public in our own work, where we hope they
may do some good, although not to the great extent they could if inserted in a
paper of extensive circulation.
Top of Page
ARE ISRAELITES SLAVES?
Messrs. Editors— The report to which you gave publicity
last Friday, to the effect that Gen. U.S. Grant had expelled the Israelites from
his military district, sounded very much like fiction, though the proceedings of
Congress yesterday prove that the reported outrage is only too well founded in
fact. Is this then the reward which the sons of the Patriarchs are to receive
for their steady devotion to the Union and its interests from those in military
command, since this is the third act in the drama of oppression lately brought
to public notice? Do not hundreds of our comparatively small number fight in the
ranks of the Union army? Have Major Rosengarten, Captain Brickner, and
Lieutenant Wimpfheimer, all of this city, fallen at Murfreesboro, Manassas, and
Sharpsburg, in a contest which is designed by those in authority to give freedom
to the negro, only to bring expulsion from the Union territory to the
descendants of the Hebrew race, to whom sorrow and persecution are neither rare
nor merely of ancient date? I only mention the above three young men of our own
city, as they were officers and therefore prominent in my memory; but many
privates belonging here have also been slain, besides numerous others, officers
no less than privates, belonging to other places, and the full catalogue, could
the authentic lists be properly made out, would exhibit that in this fearful
contest, where brother's hand is lifted up against a brother's life, Israelites
have borne their full share, equally as in the revolutionary war, and have
suffered in a greater ratio than their fellow-combatants of other persuasions.
I had written thus far, when the minister of one of our
Synagogues entered my office to request me to attend the burial of a Hebrew
soldier belonging to the 71st New York regiment, who had died unknown and among
strangers at the Summit House hospital. There was before us one who in early and
vigorous manhood had left the earth and its cares, fighting for what he
conceived probably to be the liberties of the land of his adoption, since
his name betrayed him to have been a German Jew, a term of reproach to many a
thoughtless native of this country. In following his lonely bier, bitter
thoughts crowded on my mind, at the infatuation of mankind in believing
themselves engaged in a sacred cause, the defence of the dearest human rights,
when in fact they who have been the playball of a malignant fortune, ay, we the children
of Israel, are not yet received as equals into the family of nations.
Is there to be freedom for the colored races, who have never furnished a genius
of towering intellect to the world, while we who have produced for Israel and
all mankind the greatest of mortals, Moses the son of Amram, and for the
Christians the founder of their faith, Jesus of Nazareth, who, whatever claim of
divinity is made for him, was outwardly in his conduct and by descent from his
mother a son of Israel, are even now to be ill-used and stigmatized for adhering
to our faith? Why are tears shed for the sufferings of the African in his
bondage, by which his moral condition has been immensely improved, in spite of
all that may be alleged to the contrary, whereas for the Hebrews every one has
words of contempt or acts of violence? In churches our faith is assailed as
though we were enemies to G-d and man, and in political life every petty or
great tyrant, whether here or elsewhere, makes us feel the weight of his power,
whenever not checked by one greater than himself. O Liberty, how little has thy
essence yet entered the hearts of man! O how little art thou, Equality,
appreciated even by those who bear thee constantly on their lips!
The little scraps of information that I can glean from the
published accounts which have met my eyes, do not permit any one to appreciate
fully the evil which General Grant's ukase might inflict, nor the sins, if any,
which have provoked his wrath. Let us assume that the act of banishment should
affect but a dozen families only: still what right has a general or even the
legislature of the nation to banish any class of believers as such from any
district or portion of the land? Have we a constitution or not? Is there a law
above the arbitrary will of civil and military rulers or not? If there is, then
no one has the power to punish any class of believers, since religion is not
made subject to any one's supervision under the constitution, so far as I
understand it, and if I am wrong, I am willing to be corrected. But it may
perhaps be alleged that the Jews in General Grant's department have violated the
laws, or the articles of war; I can neither affirm nor deny this, not being
cognizant of any facts bearing on the subject, nor does the order as published
recite any reason for the edict. Yet be this as it may, if some Jews have
sinned, name them, call them before a military tribunal or civil court, punish
them to the full extent of the law or regulation, as malefactors, but not as Jews;
for in the latter capacity they ought to be good citizens, faithfully fulfilling
all the demands of the laws. In Europe we have always been distinguished for
peaceful submission to the duties imposed on us as subjects, for in few States
only were we till lately citizens; and I have yet to learn that here we are any
more obnoxious to political transgressions than men of other creeds. At all
events, the innocent should not have been confounded with the guilty, and the
edict of expulsion was therefore both unjust and irrational, whatever reason
there was for it, not to mention its being contrary to the laws of the country,
which has clothes U.S. Grant with an authority of which he makes so unworthy a
use.
It is true that the President has promptly revoked, as I see in
the telegraphic accounts from Washington, the mandate of the Western general;
but this is not a full satisfaction to our wounded and outraged feelings. The President could do no less than disapprove of an act which he has himself no
authority even under the "war power" to commit; but he ought to have
accompanied the dissent with such a declaration as would have restrained forever
all the subordinates of the government, of whatever degree, from offending so in
future. Where so much power is held in the hands of military commanders, where
the civil laws are overawed by the men of the sword, where as formerly in Rome "inter
arma silent leges," those who like us have no numerical strength to
enforce their rights, have an undoubted claim to ask additional guaranties from
the Executive, that their personal, civil, and religious privileges shall not be
infringed on, as has been done, by men who hold the whole region, where they
have command, in absolute subjection. Turn the question as you may, and you,
Messrs. Editors, must agree with me, that nothing less will or ought to satisfy
men who love freedom as the dearest thing on earth, next to their religion; for
the latter they have suffered through many, many ages, and for the former they
have shown themselves always ready to dare the most with the best and bravest of
their neighbors.
One thing strikes me as remarkable, and this is, that the papers
printed here have been silent as the grave on the shameful infringement of our
rights, and not a syllable has been uttered in the midst of the multifarious
comments on public affairs, few of which strike me as of greater importance.
For, once admit that any particular religious society may be singled out by name
for an indiscriminate diminution of their rights or banishment from any part of
the country, and as the expulsion from one district includes the right to do so
for the whole Union as the district of the commander-in-chief: and you expose
one persuasion after the other to a similar treatment, the moment a combination
for its suppression strong enough to make itself felt can be formed. How would
the Baptists or Methodists like to drink the same cup if presented to their lips
by Presbyterians or Catholics? And yet the case is a probable one, if the wrongs
over which we now complain be not promptly rebuked and their recurrence rendered
impossible.
I will not dilate any farther, though I could pour out my just
indignation over a large number of pages. These few words however are enough, I
trust, to open the eyes of our fellow-citizens, in the hope that they may aid us
to secure for ourselves and thereby for themselves unabridged the right of
worshipping G-d after the dictates of each individual's conscience, without
being subject thereby to any civil or military disability.
I am yours,
AN INDIGNANT ISRAELITE
Philadelphia, January 6, 1863.
Top of Page
|
