neve Wty ‘fx v5! ty ’ ty LS Se rae eae a — = = Tk elenl eet eetems nes Senne hos ~~, renee: seat 5 maw Sy = Sree eSer ees he. ~~ Picts ty <4" se evr SAM Kd > Wie a watt Det ena eet = =! Se eee ee “ont, detoig at ne TaSw hee MeL rae cate sez a 2. ~, a) Hsu eft tt te it sos oes anew” See SSS ehh =; . com Sa: Se = a Se no eee or nade oy =~ en “a ae ee Soe Soo ae So So ese <, egevteee ae \ , OX) BOSS Ey yy fel ony x SY} ‘) ee ; FUN OOK) Rn atin ye ties a Iitig aan seF 2 oe eatiaany See Fe ze Cebea eeuce cea Na Tote 5 oO. oe ye eS, ato 2 pa ee) sree on oe se ee Pre eins ee ee < ee 1, ay a EUR AleL #3 ARN ah : enicer iy’ 4) thy: 1) a ) Me es Fina a “* sett at Ser Ageia a Pe Aor ete io tint Pats “ ¥K) iM a = a rate lai Steerer CY FER) EL Wat Ave i fou 24 tt eth ish ™ nae Patel ae notes Plies vets Sa, Soot Pe eee ate 1, Pe Kea zt mb AOD ‘ ‘ Ce ASS Myers) CURA WR rh yiss iel : Anas Hr OT UUAR NN Wand th Cra TAN ite ie : i k ; A ery et yt ah) + My ee se EES eae PISI ey Kat hn Realy REE Oy Lanny ade ck PANY CES We ose ne ross Ors a Sa oh, ee 7 a. arta tns ~ nore Foes rs le aot ee = < ai < ES = =a ane aos ran re res pes s Sere aS LAY : ‘ a we Ron +4 , ” ; SHIN ANY hehe Mi ) aR NAVE NTO ART RECTUS CTH ALS OSU MUS Shh yet nt) ay) AO vas STI ah ef A DRE EES te ED ! BAECS T il hy NAY ayy POSIT DX ah shi r ho ARS, < ¢ ‘ K eae ree ae < ry) Aes - eso >. ah 7S ein ie. PES eh reece AN, See si Cs a get 2. fee steers Fle es ae SS SD ers Ps LER NORE 3 ANERE 3 My (ot) %) th ue es oo 5 egieole ss BALI hs it RASTA HAO FARINA BND TPR } SENAY : ' ; KENNY 4 : ) ; ao te) SURAT AE SE + ; AUN th a! nS. Weta ttanta ins EeKb ys b, ti x We a) ‘ i ann HENAN : Ws : ve % ree \ arn 5 ROE \ , WEEE thy KEES shady PEO ay aS,’ ees db As Sa , Met) YEAS ERENCES ELAN tah i) a) ‘ { we \ cy : * ARRAN TAUMRCC RAGAN ms i Kt aa SRN y : » a * os Ve ‘ ete P Sta ¥ MoV et tye stg oak ANd Ny Erpnabapaey yeah ia Yl i HOO oe, ea ore Spt pl ig hig oe eons Sore * AY & Hon KURA sn NSN 2; = eer = as q ey yh LAN I ed yy USDA NESE red (eR at a econ wy a B A280. Jo Ad noes AIVISLO A Eo Mi Leones Site | 195 5. The Jew's struggle for | religious and civil liberts THOMAS KENNEDY THE JEW’S STRUGGLE FOR RELIGIOUS AND CIVIL LIBERTY IN MARYLAND BY \y. E. MILTON ALTFELD BALTIMORE M. CURLANDER 1924 CoryrRiGHTED, 1924 E. MILTON ALTFELD TO MY MOTHER THIS WORK IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED g te ; Oe \ « ‘ _ . , ] . 6 “f { © 7 , Y “oe . le Bae ae » he "i e) é = i Le 7 @; ' 4 . "\ s wey i 4 ‘ > Fi . iw @ a we” Fy 4 , J) i, > } ihe Pade Fi he } iuee { if ) ae 8 ‘ A] a. yt } ‘ \ h s " p ’ ‘ ' i 7) i me | \ ’ Ae “- Shulee gs y Jey > ? 4 - ae ~ * ~* a - be 4 ¥. ‘a: ae . ' 7 -— ( ' ? kr uy a ‘ ‘i. / i ‘ | vy { . “t Pe i Fi ‘ \ ri . ‘y ' 4u.! : “9 « ee m] , r ’ Wie : - + POS te ip ‘ Best ee : e ( i : re) be bs ass ‘ ; 7 1% 4 \ - [aaa | ; i Nea eas i : ; * ‘ ¢ ‘ verte 4 i | ahs cai Md “ ye ans) ‘Diels outa i bist si uy Tx ” ao. ; ve Sb gi kt » res ce A io ) ale \ i 4 + ” , mu a , A” Me : be | é é ‘ A ' T¥ ' ‘ 1 ; j ' ‘ ] z " ‘ iy F) Ly : o * 4 " oa VEE A is I > A, ‘ ' i uy | ’ ai ¥ : a sete. _ »# rr j ‘i y =" ee 4 j t i ‘, tr At : ( i vee Mey) lee eA ¢t . ’ i F ) “y Na? ue i i" f is ae | i hm oe f ‘ ‘ Pod | is ae ¥ é By ' foe i | Late + Ae ] 7. i bl : Haine i Ae ry ‘ ; \ ~» i ,«* : py ae ‘ \ “ei a) , i” . ® " sue? PREFACE Glancing through old legislative records that I chanced to pick up while serving as a member of the House of Delegates in 1914, I became attracted to the subject of the ‘‘Jew’’ bill which agitated the citizenry of the State a century ago. Later, while scouting for news for the Baltimore American, I heard an impressive talk on the subject of early Jewish disabilities by Philip L. Sykes, a prominent member of the Baltimore Bar and at that time a student of the Johns Hopkins University. Many talks with Mr. Sykes on Jewish and communal subjects followed and his devotion to Jewish causes inspired me to pursue the subject further. When [I returned to civilian life from the World War in 1918 I devoted my efforts towards raising money for the purchase of a monument to be erected over the grave of Thomas Kennedy in Hagerstown. This project was success- ful and the monument was accordingly dedicated in the presence of Mr. Kennedy’s living descendants and state and eity officials. This man, although he knew not Jew yet knew the principles of humanity and brotherhood. If our people understood the tremendous effort put forth by Kennedy and the obstacles he had to overcome, surely they would arrange an annual pilgrimage to his grave. I desire to extend my thanks to the press of Balti- more for permitting access to their files; the Maryland Historical Society, Peabody Library, St. Mary’s County officials, Land Record Office Commissioner, Mrs. J. Findlay, oreat-grand-daughter of Thomas Kennedy, B. 8. Appelstein, Baltimore City Librarian; Charles Fickus, Prof. Jacob H. Hollander, of the Johns Hopkins University, Senator William Curran and especially Mr. Sykes for his helpful suggestions. Much pleasure was derived by me in gathering the data for this volume; if my readers receive a small portion of the enjoyment that was mine, in its preparation, I shall feel amply compensated for the labor that was entailed by this task. EK. M. A. Baltimore, April 2, 1924. Digitized by the Internet Archive In 2022 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/jewsstruggleforr0Oaltt CONTENTS CHAPTER I THE COLONY OF MARYLAND . II ‘‘A SET OF PEOPLE CALLED JEWS” III ISRAEL’S CHAMPION APPEARS . IV THE FIGHT FOR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY V FIRST JEWS TO HOLD OFFICE . VI A SPIRIT OF TOLERATION . VII DEBATES IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY . VIII THE PASSAGE OF THE JEW BILL INDEX PAGER a! | i in aly yy + P R as ee as a | oo i : aye dg mM . ea SUSE 7. AN y CAPENE } ' the ( i . Lu \ an . hal a SL Ws ane npr ahs rors C ' Wi ay bya vee \ e o) % iT - oy 1 Aree: rut | ass 4 ¥ are , i te 4 % ‘ at 44 9 A * Fy he Cd Fah ¥ Ghhe | ‘a 7 4 ¥ ELVA PE RDIIY OK La + iy Le, by) . Ayes . i. ‘1 inh “hi A a iy iy ‘i ph ty oe oe: 1 > -) bee nt A aiden th ‘uni oh vine ae hs i ok ails : pa oh arin). Ws Siig one ts ih TNT eager Sirk) PN a aR Ai vif ia wie’ picu% tab batt, iG i: me, ‘i A es Fe ney mes ys enter j 7 i ye ae +4 easy . eT ) I y 4 : fw f ‘ a eye rf ir. ands ae (eed / yy har an i ; + hed Rill ads a en z ay . 4 t “Tt by f e | th ] a . ~ "9 2 ya? ’ JPR »! 7 + ty ig ; ae ee: sa ath, hae hei ‘Hbel t ; ; 6 Aa ' , a | a =A ya Solagaleae ’ : lay i. \ ‘ Wy a i at ‘ CB ay ba rhs . we a ; 7 7 , PSS : Put ’ ? i rm C > ‘ i. Peedi . , 4 UMS F), ) a ‘Ee ry ’ Ay mee 7 ‘ am & hv Hy 4 b 4 104 . ; oy A ‘ ‘ : 7 ks ” , 7 [ 19 ; af ‘ é ei ’ a f i Z bh ‘ fl i a | m i * i Piet feb re iad oN ut ee ae CHAPTER I THE COLONY OF MARYLAND In 1633 the Ark and the Dove, carrying 200 adventurous souls sailed into the Chesapeake Bay. These men of daring and industry formed the province of Maryland. It was in a time when Catholics in England were not permitted to hold publie office, nor educate their children in their faith. Crom- well, as minister to Henry the VIII had given the order for the trial and execution of offenders. Hus had been burned, Savanarola put to death, the bones of St. Thomas a Becket exhumed and burned, Charles I executed, the ashes of Wycliffe scattered to the sea. In New England deserters were scourged and exiled. In Virginia the Episcopalians exacted legislation for the sup- pression of Presbyterians, Friends and Puritans. The historic Toleration Act passed in the Province of Maryland in 1649, was, therefore, an important step towards the freedom of conscience. The Act provided that ‘‘No one within the Province professing to believe in Jesus Christ should be in any way troubled, molested, or discountenanced for his or her religion or in the free exercise thereof.’’ Ban- eroft in speaking of the colony says: ‘‘Its history is the history of benevolence, gratitude, and _ toleration—here religious liberty obtained a home, its only home in the world. Every other country had persecuting laws, till through the benign administration of the government of Maryland no person professing to believe in Jesus Christ was permitted to be molested on account of religion.’’ The problem of religious liberty in the early years of the colony was confined to the various sects among the Christians. There had been no single influx of Jews such as took place in Charleston, Savannah, Newport and New York. Only a 1 2 THE COLONY OF MARYLAND few Jewish names appear in the early provincial records. Among them are: Mathias de Sousa (1639), Mathias de Costa, Isaac de Barrethe, Hester Cordia, David Fereira, and Jacob Leat. The first Jew in the colony of whose faith we have definite knowledge is Jacob Lumbrozo. Lumbrozo came to Maryland from Portugal. He was one of the first medical men in Maryland, and for a number of years was one of the important figures in the economic life of the community. Court orders bearing date of December 30, 1657, are issued to Lumbrozo for the recovery of a debt of four hundred pounds of tobacco. At least nine judgments and attach- ments issued from the physician during the next twelve- month. The manuscript records of the Maryland Land Office reveal some of the activities of Lumbrozo after 1633, during the latter part of his life. Letters of denization had been issued to him on September 10, 1633. This had the effect of changing his status from that of an alien who could only institute civil proceedings in the courts, to that of a semi- naturalized citizen, with the privileges of a native or English- born subject, including the right of land settlement. The very day after this newly acquired prerogative there are records showing his demand for lands ‘‘for his own transpor- tation and that of his wife Elizabeth.’’ Of singular interest is the will of Lumbrozo probated in the office of the Register of Wills at Annapolis. It is dated September 24, 1665, and is a document of considerable length. There is nothing in the record indicating an absence of his faith, simply reading: —‘‘I bequeath my sould to its Creator assuredly believing that he will in merey look upon it and restore it to Eternal rest and my body to the Earth to decent Sepulture.’’ Whether the wife of Lumbrozo was a Jewess will probably never be known. That her name was Elizabeth and that she arrived in the province in 1662 has been established. If she were a Jewess, it is reasonably certain that she must have come from England. The frequency of the name of Eliza- beth in many of the court and provincial records indicate THE COLONY OF MARYLAND B that she was not of his faith and that the marriage occurred after her arrival in the province. His references to a sister in the will by the name of Rebecca, living in Holland, establishes a definite connection with that country and reveals the possibility of South American immigration and affiliation with established Jewish colonization movements. Lumbrozo died in May, 1666, without issue. More interesting than the life of Lumbrozo itself, is his historic trial for questioning the divinity of Christ. The proceedings were brought under the Toleration Act of 1649, which lke the blue laws today, had apparently not been rigidly enforced. The proceedings taken from the records of the provincial court, Liber 8S. 1658-1662. Judgments, pages 159-160, are as follows: ‘‘At a Provincial Court, held at St. Marys on Wednesday, this 23rd February, 1658. ‘*Present—Josias Fendall, Esq., Governor; Philip Calvert, Esq., Secretary; Mr. Robert Clarke; Mr. Baker Brooks; Dr. Luke Barber. ‘‘Was called before the board, Jacob Lumbrozo, and charged by his Lordship’s Attorney for uttering words of blasphemy against our Blessed Saviour, Jesus Christ. ‘“‘The deposition of John Hoffsett, aged 44 years, or there- abouts, sayeth this 19th day of February, 1658: ‘““That, about half a year since, this deponent being at ye house of Mr. Richard Preston, and there meeting with Jacob Lumbrozo, he, this deponent, and the said Lumbrozo falling into discourse concerning our Blessed Saviour, Christ, his resurrection, telling ye said Lumbrozo that he was more than man, as did appear by his resurrection. To which the said Lumbrozo answered, that his disciples stole him away. Then this deponent replied, yt no man ever did such miracles as he. To which ye said Lumbrozo answered, that such works might be done by necromancy or sorcery, or words to that purpose. And this deponent replied to ye said Lumbrozo, yt he supposed yt, ye said Lumbrozo took Christ to be a necromancer, To which ye said Lumbrozo answered 4 THE COLONY OF MARYLAND nothing but laughed. And further this deponent sayeth nothing. ‘‘Jurat die et anno supradict. cor.. me, ‘* HENRY COURSEY.’’ ‘‘T, Richard Preston, Jr., do testify yt, about June or July last past, coming from Thomas Thomas’s, in company with Josias Cole and ye Jew Doctor, known by ye name of Jacob Lumbrozo, the said Josias Cole asked ye said Lum- brozo, whether ye jews did look for a Messiah? And ye said Lumbrozo answered, yes. Then ye said Cole asked him, what He was that was crucified at Jerusalem? And ye said Lumbrozo answered, He was a man. Then ye said Cole asked him, how did He do all His miracles? And ye said Lumbrozo answered, He did them by ye Art Magic. Then ye said Cole asked him, how His disciples did so ye same miracles, after He was crucified? And ye said Lumbrozo answered, that He taught him His art. And further saith 1X0) aad ‘‘This was declared before me, as in the presence of God, that it is true this 21st of February, 1658.’’ ‘The said Lumbrozo saith: that he had some talk with those persons, and willed by them to declare his opinion, and by his profession, a Jew, he answered to some particular demands then urged. And as to that of miracles done by art magic he declared what remains written concerning Moses and ye Magicians of Egypt. But said not anything secoffingly, or in derogation of Him, Christians acknowledge for the Messiah. “‘It is ordered, that ye said Lumbrozo remain in ye Sheriff’s custody, until he put in security, body for body, to make answer to what shall be laid to his charge concerning those blasphemous words and speeches, at ye next Provisional Court; and yt the persons be then present to testify. viva voce, in Court. “*Mittimus,—To ye Sheriff of St. Mary’s County, according to the order Supradict.’’ N. B. The reader will observe, that Ri. Preston, a Quaker, simply declares. THE COLONY OF MARYLAND 5 In consequence of the general pardon accompanying the proclamation in favor of Richard, the son of the Lord Proprietor issued a few days after the accusation, Lumbrozo was released from the custody of the Sheriff and the case never again came to trial. The antipathy and prejudice in the province was not directed against the Jew alone. The hand of Protestant was raised against Catholic in a disturbing and alarming manner. At times lovers of liberty doubted the wisdom of referring to the province as ‘‘The Land of the Sanctuary.’’ In the records of the High Provincial Court, a case is preserved which sheds much light upon the domestic, social, and religious history of the period. Father Fitzherbert, a Roman Catholic priest, was charged with practicing his religion and attempting to bring into the fold erring members. His defense under the Toleration Act was that ‘‘Preaching and teaching was the free exercise of every churchman’s religion.’’? The opinion of the board was that the priest ‘‘had neither exercised rebellion nor mutiny to utter words.’’ Toleration and coercion alternated frequently in the provinee. Maryland became Episcopalian in 1692 and church membership becoming prerequisite to citizenship in the colony. As in the present time, the Jews who came to the province flocked to the larger towns; this is reflected in the Annapolis charter granted in 1708. The charter conferred the right of suffrage on all persons who possessed a certain amount of property. The only formality required was an oath of loyalty to the city. In the year 1715 the Legislature passed an act providing that an oath ending ‘‘upon the true faith of Christian,’’ should be administered to all persons enjoying or who might subsequently enjoy any office or place of trust within the province. In 1716, a stronger religious test was enacted ; the oath was styled one of allegiance, abhorrence and abjuration. A Catholic who adhered to his faith could not readily take the oath; incidentally, the Jew was barred even more effectually. Ancient prejudices had a strong influence 6 THE COLONY OF MARYLAND over the minds of the rulers of the colony and the Catholics because of their large numbers felt their disabilities keenly. The Toleration Act of 1649 was sgmewhat modified by the Act of 1728, in that the death penalty for denying the divinity of Christ was not to be imposed until the third offense. The first offense conditioned that the guilty person was to be bored through the tongue and fined; and the second offense rendered one liable to be stigmatized by the burning of the letter B in the forehead. Until after the adoption of the Constitution this act remained in force, although there are no records of its actual enforcement. It must be said to the credit of the Catholics in Maryland that when they were in power they showed far more liberality in civil and religious matters than either the Puritans or Episcopalians. This is evidenced by the Act of 1676 render- ing perpetual the Toleration Act of 1649. The Catholics in Maryland were made to suffer terrible persecution following the Revolution of 1688 when William and Mary succeeded to the British throne following James II. In the year 1692 an act was passed establishing the church of England in Maryland. By an act of assembly passed in 1696 this law was repealed. His majesty dissented to this act. In 1702 an act was passed at Annapolis providing for the establishment of religious worship in the. Province according to the church of England and for the mainte- nance of Ministers. This act continued in force until the Revolutionary War. It also provided that all taxables should pay forty pounds of tobacco to the Minister of the parish. The act provided further that Protestant dis- senters should be exempted from~penalties or forfeitures on account of their dissenting. At the same time laws were passed ‘‘To prevent the growth of Popery.’’ In 1716 an act was. passed for the better security of the peace and safety of his Lordship’s Government and Protestant inter- est’’ this law proseribing Catholics altogether from office. There is no doubt that it was this measure which gave birth to the origin of the religious test and which prevented the Jews from holding office for many years. Ming fe yar he Pas oS vt un = res ae) mh os cn fim. ‘ ny: | ; i av) a a i y, THOMAS KENNEDY S$ MONUMENT HAGERSTOWN, MD. THE COLONY OF MARYLAND 7 Catholics were to be disfranchised completely for at the session of 1718 an act was passed which after complaining of the “‘inerease of professed Papists and apprehensive that Catholics’? would so increase in the province as well as in the City of Annapolis it provided ‘‘that all professed Papists whatsoever, be and are hereby declared incapable of giving their vote in any election of a delegate or delegates, unless they first qualify themselves by taking and subscribing the oath of abjuration and declaration. To prevent the increase of Catholics twenty shillings sterling was imposed as a duty on all Irish Servants brought to Maryland by land or water. This section was later repealed as to Protestants but an additional duty of twenty shillings current money was imposed on Catholics and to discover them the oath of abjuration was to be administered, and when lands were taxed to raise supplies for public expenses those of Catholics were taxed double the sum paid by Protestants. And to cap the climax, the finest sensibilities of the human heart and conscience were outraged by an act passed in 1715, by which the children of a Catholic widow, or one who intermarried with a Catholic could be torn from her arms, taken from her protection, and put under the guardian care of a Protestant, to be brought up in that religious faith. The act was persecution with a vengeance and will forever remain a blot upon the escutcheon of this fair State and when one considers the fact that these iniquitous laws were passed in the name of Christianity and for the support of religion one becomes reconciled to the mouthings of the bigots of our own day. The history of the province shows that for nearly sixty years the Catholics were held in religious bondage. The day of victory for our Catholic brethren came at last when America began her fight for Independence. No people in Maryland were more ardent and heroic in offering their blood and property during the War of the Revolution ; none were more patriotic or zealous in fighting for the principles of 1776. The religious test as to Catholics was abolished; the church of England was no longer the estab- 8 THE COLONY OF MARYLAND lished church and taxation for its exclusive support was abolished. There is little doubt that it was to satisfy the Catholies of Maryland that the 35th article of the declaration of rights was inserted, to wit, ‘‘that no other test or qualification ought to be required, or admission to any office of trust or profit than such oath of support and. fidelity to this state, and such oath of office as shall be directed by this Convention or the Legislature of this State and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion.’’ It can be presumed that had ‘‘no other test’’—no other religious qualification existed previously to the Revolution in Maryland no test would have been required, other than an oath of fidelity to the State. This is so as evidenced from the fact that religious tests were not required in any other State except Massachusetts. That the thinking men and enlightened minds of Maryland were happy to see proscription of the Catholics abolished and persecution ended is revealed by the fact that of the dis- tinguished men who signed the Declaration of Independence Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, was a Catholie and the second sovernor under the new constitution, Thomas Sim Lee, was also a Catholic. Some years later when the lovers of liberty and freedom made war upon the religious test which was to liberate the Jews of this State from the shackles of bigotry none were more ardent and loyal in the State than the Catholics. CHAPTER II ““A SET OF PEOPLE CALLED JEWS”’ The spirit of liberty which prompted the Declaration of Independence was abroad in the land but so deeply was the idea of the connection between church and State imbedded in the minds of the colonists in Maryland that they could not forego making Christianity the recognized religion of the State. Though there was no direct provision in the first constitution of the State adopted in 1777 against the Jew, it vouchsafed no rights to the Jew. While the Bill of Rights admitted in one breath that it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, in the other, it assured protection and religious liberty only to Christians. In another clause, it was provided that a declaration of belief in the Christian religion should be made by anyone desiring admission to any office of trust or profit in the State. A similar decla- ration was required by the first naturalization act passed in 1779. Several acts passed later conferred many of the rights of citizenship on persons who immigrated into Maryland; the restriction, however, in regards to holding office in the State, and the provision assuring protection to persons pro- fessing the Christian religion was still in foree. Not until this Commonwealth ratified the Constitution of the United States and Congress passed a uniform naturalization law under it could a Jew who lived here become a citizen of the United States. Though he could thereafter hold office under the United States Government, he was still ineligible to take part in the government of the State. The struggle for this right which lasted for more than a quarter of a century attracted the attention of thinking people through- out the entire country: the bitter and long-continuing 9 10 ‘(, SET OF PEOPLE CALLED JEWS’’ battle brought Maryland into ill-repute with her sister-states. The first attempt to remove this disability of the Jew was made in 1797 when Solomon Etting, Bernard Gratz and others, sent a petition to the Legislature setting forth that ‘‘they are a set of people called Jews and that they are thereby deprived of many of the invaluable rights of citizen- ship and praying that they be placed upon the same footing with other good citizens.’’ The committee to whom the petition was referred reported that the request appeared to be reasonable on its face; nevertheless, it involved an important constitutional question and it therefore submitted to the Legislature the propriety of taking the subject up for general consideration at the advanced stage of the session. In 1801 a similar petition was referred to a committee and apparently got no further. The following year the effort was renewed with the result that a bill was reported, but it was later rejected. In 1803 a bill was again reported and its consideration was postponed until the next General Assembly. When it was again taken up the bill met the same fate as the first one. It was plainly evident that to continue the effort at that time to remove the disabilities of the Jew would have been in vain. In each session there was a class of men to whom reason appealed not and to whom the pleadings for justice went unanswered. No further attempt to introduce the bill was therefore made until the year 1817. In the meantime conditions had changed. In 1810 an amendment was adopted to prohibit the levying of a tax in support of the Christian religion which the Constitution had theretofore permitted. The Jews, as the years passed, increased in number, and though there were perhaps lttle more than one hundred in the entire State in 1817, there were several prominent men who felt their disability keenly. They were humiliated at the fact that although one of their number could aspire to the highest office in the land yet he was denied the position of a village constable in the State where he lived and flourished. The Jews gradually became more important commercially and won the sympathy of some of the leading men of the State. ‘*a SET OF PEOPLE CALLED JEWS’’ 11 In this connection an interesting incident may be mentioned which carries us back to Revolutionary times, and is con- nected with the name of Jacob Hart, one of a number of pa- -triotic merchants of Baltimore. Whether he was the only Jew of the group is unknown. The incident is briefly re- ferred to as follows, in a letter written by Lafayette to Wash- ington, April 18, 1871: ‘‘To these measures for punishing deserters, I have added one which my feelings for the sufferings of the soldiers and peculiarity of their circumstances, have prompted me to adopt. The merchants of Baltimore lent me a sum of about £2,000, which will procure some shirts, linen, overalls, shoes and a few hats; the ladies will make up the shirts, and the overalls will be made by the detachment, so that our soldiers have a chance of being a little more comfortable. The money is lent upon my credit, and I become security for the payment: of it in two years’ time, when, by the French laws, I may better dispose of my estate. But before that time, I shall use my influence with the French court, in order to have this sum of money added to any loan Congress may have been able to obtain from them.’’ The following entry, ‘‘ Accounts of the United States with the Superintendent of Finance’’ (Robert Morris), serves to identify the merchants: ‘‘May 27 (1782) Jacob Hart and others for the Repayment of Money Loaned the Marquis de la Fayette at Baltimore, 7,256 dollars.’’ Further details appear from the following passages in the Journals of Congress, vol. VII, p. 86: Thursday, May 24th, 1781. On the report of the committee to which was referred the matter is found the letter from Major Gen. the Marquis de la Fayette. The committee recommended the following resolution : | ; ‘‘Resolved, That Congress entertains a just sense of the patriotic and timely exertions of the merchants of Baltimore who so generously supplied the Marquis de la Fayette with about 2,000 guineas, to enable him to forward the detach- ment under his command; That the Marquis de la Fayette be assured that Congress will take proper measures to dis- 12 ‘¢, SET OF PEOPLE CALLED JEWS’’ charge the engagement he has entered into with the mer- cehants.’’ Markens, in his ‘‘Hebrews in America’’ (p. 93), briefly refers to the incident, describing Hart as a Hebrew of German birth, who came to this country in 1775; he was the father- in-law of Haym M. Salomon, son of the patriot, Haym Salomon. A search through the directory of Baltimore, ‘‘The Balti- more Town and Fells Point Directory’’ of 1796, by Thompson & Walker, gives the following names of Jews, their occupa- tions and residences: Etting, Shinah, widow, boarding-house, 3 Baltimore st.; Etting, Solomon, merchant, 15 S. Calvert st.; Etting, Reuben, dwelling, Kast st.; Etting & Kennedy, milliners, 53 Baltimore st.; Jacob, Moses, dry goods store, 83 Baltimore st.; Jacobs, Samuel, tailor, 34 8. Calvert st.; Jacobs, Joseph, hack car- riage keeper, 10 8. Gay st.; Itzchkin, Philip, hack carriage driver, 203 Baltimore st.; Kahn, 50 N. Howard st.; Koffman, Abraham, inn keeper, 4 N. Gay st.; Levy, Jacob, broker, store and dwelling, 242 Baltimore st.; Raphael Solomon, inn keeper, Old Town, 4 Bridge st.; Robinson, Rachel, widow, Fells Point, Ann st.; Robinson, Ephraim, flour and grocery, store, 110 Baltimore st.; Solomon, Isaac & Levy, hardware store, 112 Baltimore st.; Solomon, George, drayman, 41 N. Gay st.; Wolf, Philip, butcher, Dutch Alley. While not numerous, yet to them may be attributed a con- siderable share of the early commercial and industrial growth of Baltimore. ’ In 1812 the Jews of Baltimore were prompt to answer the rallying ery for patriots to fight the British. The declara- tion of war by the United States against Great Britain pro- duced considerable excitement and the General Assembly pledged the lives and fortunes of its citizenship for the eause. Large sums of money were subscribed by citizens for the defense of the city and the small Jewish community was liberal in its contributions. A distinguished British statesman had declared that ‘‘ Baltimore was a depository of the hostile spirit of the United States against England.”’ ‘Ca SET OF PEOPLE CALLED JEWS’’ is: Admiral Warren had said: ‘‘Baltimore is a doomed town.’’ At the meeting of the Vigilance and Safety Committee formed in the Council Chamber of the City Hall on August 23rd, 1814, some of the Jewish people attended. Similar committees were formed in each ward. In the first ward there are four names and Solomon Etting, who was one of the public spirited citizens of the city, was the chairman. The Etting family had indeed been conspicuous for public spirited and communal work. In 1798 Reuben Etting had been Captain of the Monumental Blues. Writing of Solo- mon Etting, chairman of the First Ward committee, Prof. J. H. Hollander of the Johns Hopkins University, has said: ‘‘His interest in public affairs was keen and sustained; his intercourse and friendship with persons engaged in public life large and intimate, and his concern for the full emanci- pation of the Jews of Maryland intense. He was the author of the successive petitions for relief and the proposed consti- tutional amendments that besieged every session of the Gen- eral Assembly from 1816 to 1826. He was the moving spirit of the sharp legislative struggle that followed each effort and it was his personal friends, largely out of respect for him who led the successive contests.”’ An examination of the roster of the men who defended the city of Baltimore against the onslaughts of the British in- dicate many Jewish names. Some of these names are as follows: Mendes I. Cohen, private; Philip I. Cohen, private; Sam- uel Cohen, Jr., sergeant; Israel Davidson, Samuel Etting, private, wounded at Ft. McHenry; Samuel Solomon, Solo- mon Meyers, Jacob Moses. These Jews marched shoulder to shoulder with their non- Jewish comrades, as American citizens and patriots on the 12th of September, 1814, in the battle against the British, and by their valor, under the guidance of a kind Providence, insured once more and forever the independence of the United States of America. CHAPTER III ISRAEL’S CHAMPION APPEARS In Baltimore City, where the majority of Jews lived, dis- qualification to hold office or practice law was a poignant and distressing circumstance; it was a live topic of conversation both among the Jews and non-Jews. This situation had been repeatedly adverted to by the press of the State. The Jews in Baltimore were highly regarded by their fellow townsmen. They were considered worthy and de- sirable citizens. Their patriotic and unselfish spirit; their prompt recognition of communal wants, and their quiet and unassuming behavior endeared them to the people of Baltimore. Hence the inability of a Jew to hold a public office was bound sooner or later to. be a disturbing factor in local and state politics. Strange as it may seem Maryland was probably the only State in the Union which had such an intolerant provision in the State Constitution. But it remained for a man from Washington County— Thomas Kennedy by name—to battle valiantly and finally succeed in obtaining for the Jews of Maryland full civil and political rights. The liberation of the Jew from religious intolerance in Maryland became his life-work. Both in speech and verse he referred to the glory of the Israelite, although, as he frankly confessed, in his famous address in the House of Delegates in 1818, ‘‘that he had not. the slightest acquaintance with any Jew in the world.’’ Single- handed, at first, he proceeded to right ‘‘this fearful wrong’’ that deeply stirred his mind and pained his heart. Just how deeply he felt the discrimination and plight of the Jew can be gleaned from a letter written on May 28th, 1826, after the battle had been finally won in the General Assembly, and recently found among his personal letters: 14 ISRAEL’S CHAMPION APPEARS 15 ‘‘T have seen the first of my wishes as a public servant grati- fied by seeing the principles of civil and religious liberty established in the United States, and in seeing persecuted Children of Israel placed on an equality with their fellow citizens,’’ he wrote. ‘‘This was, indeed, my dearest wish, and, since I have had it gratified I am determined henceforth never to murmur in or out of office, but to submit content- edly to the voice and wishes of the people.”’ For eight long years Kennedy fought against inveterate hate and tremendous odds to put through his ‘‘Jew Bill,’’ as the measure came to be known. The justice of his cause, his burning eloquence, his passionate lyrics dedicated to the cause of freedom and liberty gradually attracted some of the leading men of the State, particularly John V. L. McMahon, John S. Tyson, H. M. Breckenridge and Col. Worthington who joined in the fight to help him break the shackles of bigotry and destroy the poisoned fangs of superstition. Kennedy was the son of William Kennedy of Paisley. Scotland. He was born in Paisley, Scotland, on November 29th, 1776, a momentous year in American history and a fitting one for this apostle of freedom. This historie old place with its ancient abbeys and monasteries situated on the beautiful banks of the Cart, is famous in Caledonian history. It was the birthplace of Tannahill, who filled the sweet air in the braes of Gleniffer with his music. The sweet songs of Ramsey, Ferguson and Burns and other Scottish poets. ‘‘The place where many a rural bardie sung, Whase name ou’r a’ the warl’ lang hae rung’’ filled his young mind with sweet hope and youthful en- ecouragement. The French Revolution undoubtedly had its effect upon him. He came to America when he was 20 years old, having left his home in Paisley on April 18, 1796. He embarked at Glasgow in the ship Britannia, bound for Georgetown on the Potomac River. His motive in leaving 16 ISRAEL’S CHAMPION APPEARS home seems to have been a romantic desire to live in the ‘land of freedom.’’ His ambition in life, he wrote a few years later, was to spend his days ‘‘In virtue’s service and in Freedom’s Cause.’’ His brother’ Matthew had already gone to America a good many years before. For twelve years no news had been received from him and his parents thought he was dead, but in 1795 a stranger brought a letter to his parents from him, giving a good account of himself and his prospects in America. His brother John sailed from Port Glasgow a few days before Thomas left and landed in New York the day Thomas landed at Georgetown. The voyage consumed thirty-eight days. As the Britanma cast anchor at Georgetown on the 28th day of May her guns were fired. This brought the inhabitants of the village down to the waterside. Kennedy was the first of the passengers to jump from the captain’s jolly boat upon the shore, ‘‘olad,’’ as he says in his journal, ‘‘glad, once more to tread on solid ground—and that too in the land of liberty.’’ As he landed a tall man accosted him and asked where the vessel was from. He understood the man to ask where he was from and answered ‘‘from Paisley.’’ The stranger then with ereat eagerness inquired of Mr. Kennedy his name. ‘‘And while he was speaking to me,’’ continued the journal, ‘‘I thought fortune had brought to me my brother Matthew whom I had not seen for eleven years, and on that suppo- sition J told him I thought I knew him and then let him know my name; but it was with difficulty I could persuade him I was his youngest brother (for the said person was indeed the same I supposed).’’ The mutual happiness caused by this meeting can ~be easier conceived than described. Thomas then went to his brother’s house, which was in Georgetown and became acquainted with his family, a wife and child. ‘‘After drinking some republican whiskey,’’ he later wrote, ‘‘I sat down to dinner and feasted on some wholesome fare, the product of Columbia and began first of all with luncheon made of Indian meal and well known by the name of poan.’’ In the afternoon he went through the village and the following Sunday crossed Rock ISRAEL’S CHAMPION APPEARS aig Creek to view the Federal city, Washington. Washington was then a wilderness. The only buildings completed were a row known as the ‘‘six buildings.’’ The President’s House and Capitol were begun but were not yet under roof. One grog shop was in a temporary shed near the White House and that was all of Washington just 112 years ago. Kennedy soon obtained employment as bookkeeper for a merchant in Georgetown and later for a contractor who built the bridges across the Potomac at Little Falls. Subsequently we find Kennedy working for the Potomac Navigation Company. Whilst in the employment of the last concern, he met Miss Rosamond Thomas of Frederick, who was visiting near the Great Falls. Kennedy was smitten with her charms and after a few years married her. In the year 1800 when Thomas Jefferson introduced an act to establish religious liberty in Virginia, Kennedy was inspired to write a poem, entitled ‘‘The Song of Liberty.”’ Referring to Jefferson, he sang: Acting in a noble cause, He abolished cruel laws; Set the mind and body free, He’s the son of Liberty. Few like Jefferson we find Among the sons of human kind. Friend of peace and honesty Is the son of Liberty.’’ Kennedy wrote many sentimental and love _ songs; numerous stirring and patriotic melodies on Liberty. Some of them were rough and unpolished lays, but all breathing his warm, liberal, passionate feelings. In his prologue of his first book of poetry published in 1800 he sang: ‘ yao ily de ye emen te ‘ i t iv {..s os i i : i : MD i Ps ee) ee ney ea f bb ) fad ne f . ) . i os ee or iirs R A a) r,.. } re Se PRL ae eA Ss 4 » ry 7.o . t a ? ; y ,\ - bd id é , oti f - 4 j i iy \ ‘2 < oie Oe 4 4. é aX, ‘9 if ) } Lo ' 7 é f 5 A ri > i i. a tds ; ; } ' , 1 i : ‘“ pal i Lai F i Ll 4 vy , ia 1 ' = 11 INDEX A Annapolis charter conferred suf- frage on property owners, 5 B Baltimore Hebrew Congregation, Federalist oppose incorpora- tion, 45 Memorial to incorporate, 44 Baltimore directory of 1796 lists Jewish residents, 12 Bible, Reading of King James version in schools, 64, 66 Bible school law declared consti- tutional in many states, 66 Bill of Rights gave religious lib- erty only to Christians, 9 Blue laws see Sunday observance Bowles, James H., Opposes Ken- nedy’s election, 32 Breckenridge, Judge H. M., speech on abolishing religious tests, 108-127 C Catholics, J. I. Cohen defends in letter to ““National Advocate,” 52 Prescribed from office and fran- chise, 6, 7, 151 Cemeteries see Etting burial ground; Jewish cemetery Charitable societies established, 56, 57 Children of Israel in Maryland by Kennedy, 23 Christian Church in New Orleans redeemed by a Jew, 186 Church and state forever separate, 67 Citizenship, Conferred on Jews by naturalization law, 9 Efforts of Kennedy to secure equality of, 14, 21, 23, 27 Membership in Episcopal church requisite for, 5, 151 209 Memorial before General Assem- bly of 1823, 28-31 Civil liberty, Committee of House of Delegates report on extend- ing, 70-78 Cohen, Benjamin I., Captain of Marion Corps, 174 Cohen, Jacob I., Defends Catholic attitude on religious tests, 52 Filled many public offices, 44, 47 Letter to KE. S. Thomas regarding Jew bill, 48 Constitution of the State gives right to amend its text, 192 Of 1867 prescribes oath of office requiring belief in God, 60 Pronounced perfect, 35 Constitution of the U. S. forbids religious tests, 143, 144, 167 Cordia, Hester, Early settler, 2 D Debates in General Assembly on civil and religious disabilities of the Jews, 69 de Cates Isaac, Early settler, de Costa, Mathias, Early settler, 2 de Sousa, Mathias, Early settler, Zz, Drury, Ignatius, Supports Ken- nedy in election contest, 32 E Established Church made church of the Colony, 6 Etting, Reuben, made U. S. Mar- shal, 54 Etting, Solomon, Death of, 55 Elected member of Baltimore City Council, 44 Life in Baltimore, 54 Petition for right to hold office, 10; 13 Ktting burial ground, 55 Evidence of slaves and persons be- lieving in God, 59 210 F Fitzherbert, Father, Charged with practising his religion, 5 Fereira, David, Early settler, 2 G Gabby, Joseph, Opposes Kennedy’s election, 32 Galloway, Benjamin, Opposes Ken- nedy’s election, 32, 33 Grant, President U. S., Keep church and state separate, 67 Gratz, Bernard, Petition for right to hold office, 10 HH Hall, T. B., Supports Kennedy in election contest, 32 Hart, Jacob, Loan to Lafayette, 11 Henry, Mr., Attempted expulsion from North Carolina legisla- ture, 124 I Immigration from Germany, 46 _ Irish servants, Duty of 20 shil- lings on, 7, 151 J Jew bill see Religious test Jewish cemetery, 54 Johnson, Reverdy, Fathers bill for toleration, 36 Judefind vs. Maryland, 63 K Kennedy, Thomas, Children of Is- rael in Maryland, 23 Committee report on Jewish equality in citizenship, 21, 23, 27-70 Comes to America, 16, 17, 41-43 Dedicatory address to his par- ents, 18, 20 Defeated for re-election, 32, 33, 34, 135 Death of, 39 Establishes Hagerstown Mail, 39 Inspired by French Revolution, 70 Inspired by Jefferson’s religious liberty statutes of 1785, 67 INDEX Monument erected by Maryland Order of Brith Sholom, 41 Poems of toleration, 58 Speech at 1818 General Assembly in favor of Jew bill, 79-107 At 1820 General Assembly in favor of Jew bill, 128- 132 At 1824 General Assembly in favor of Jew bill, 138-164 Sullivan calls attention to Jews ineligibility to office, 205 Kellar, Thomas, Supports Kennedy in election contest, 32 Kilgour vs. Wills on Sunday ob- servance, 64 L Leat, Jacob, Early settler, 2 LeCompte, Opposes abolishing re- ligious test for Jews, 133 Lumbrozo, Jacob, Trial for ques- tioning divinity of Christ, 3-4 M McMahon, John V. L., Defends Jew bill, 135 Maryland only state to exclude Jews from all offices, 103 Massachusetts excluded Jews from various offices, 103 Merrick, Joseph I., Opposes Ken- nedy’s election, 32 Mexican War, Volunteer regiment formed, 56, 57 Ministers may not serve in Gen- eral Assembly, 60 N Naturalization law of U. S. made Jews citizens, 9 New York State excludes Roman Catholics, 101, 102 Niles Register records passage of Jew bill, 204-206 O Oath of office prescribed by Con- stitution of 1867, 60 Office holding in State, Assembly petitioned for right, 10 Office under Federal government held by Jews, 9 INDEX Es Protestants oppress Catholics, 5-8; 150-153 R Religion, Practise not restricted by U. 8. Constitution, 65 Religious freedom urged by peo- ple outside the State, 36 Religious test; Bill to abolish, 77-78; 204 Vote on final passage, 37, 206-7 Breckenridge’s speech to abol- ish, 108-127 Committee report on, 70-78 Excluded by Revolutionary Con- gress from Constitution, 167 For Catholics, 153 Forbidden by U. S. Constitution, 104, 143, 144 Fox and Pitt express disap- proval of, 183 Kennedy’s speech to abolish, 79-107; 128-132; 138-164 LeCompte opposes abolishing, 133 Oath of 1715 and 1716, 5 - Originated in 1716, 6, 150 Tyson’s speech to abolish, 191- 203 Vote on permission to introduce bill to abolish, 135 Washington would 132 Worthington’s speech to abolish, 165-191 abolish, 211 Revolutionary War, Money sub- scribed, 12 S Sabbath not legally recognized, 62, 63, 64 Slaves, Evidence accepted, 59 Sullivan, Jeremiah, Calls Ken- nedy’s attention to Jews in- eligibility to office, 205 Sunday observance, 60, 61, 62, 63 T Toleration; Act of 1649, 1, 3 Made perpetual in 1676, 6 Modified in 1723, 6 Poems by Kennedy, 58 Tyson, John S., Speech defending Jew bill, 191-203 U United States Constitution forbids religious test, 104 W Washington, Mr. (Mont. co.), Would abolish all religious tests, 132 Washington, George, Letters to Hebrew congregations, 175, 177, 180 Washington (D. C.) in 1796, 17 Witnesses; Oath, 60 Slaves and persons believing in God, 59 Worthington, J. W. D., Speech de- fending Jew bill, 165-191 as ; f "hips of ath Pile 4 : a “ih & Weyl? We yan a at Meand Hoek ha ih Po 5.03 *, Ee Va cc A eae ee a 12: o raged 4at anita oy tat es a y tid / Y, ’ ‘ | ae »” my si? ‘ I ion $03 5 if? oF iv eo Dae A cad 4 “4 ok ¢ “4 : he ies i ' ’ . 4 ie} \ UP ’ G \ ’ ‘ , ‘ * ia ‘ 1 sey . L ar ; ay 474% “ é y oa A re ‘ i . Py j ; ¥ * gi ah i id ‘ 4 NO | gh . 4 om | n j - rely Wb el sa hs. rs we ‘ my 7 «Tht ; : - : A a “Tee : hut i pee Oey ¢) if sn abe i : } : sayy hen, * v, i ] ; rE (Bre &: Rte hah git ct al \ Lae Mi Mes shit, On ‘ ' ' f{ j ' | f 1 ¥ — Z P ry F * Pg Py ar hay * ; ' ay rf er, : aE Pb - ¥ /~ e ’ "age a4 ty We yet fi Palit Ve iy op et a py a vs 7% 7 af i] p ) - ) ¥ aN A aE