SKETCHES 
 
 OF 
 
 ANGLO-JEWISH HISTORY. 
 
SKETCHES 
 
 ANGLO-JEWISH HISTORY. 
 
 JAMES r ICC I OTTO. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 TRUBNER & CO., LUDGATE HILL. 
 
 1S75. 
 
 [All rights reserved .] 
 
PRINTED BY BALI.ANTYNE AND COMPANY 
 EDINBURGH AND LONDON 
 
/ 
 
 
 TO 
 
 SIR MOSES MONTEFIORE, BART., F.R.S. 
 
 &c. &c. &c. 
 
 THIS BOOK IS EESPECTFULLY 
 
 Djtucatelj 
 
 AS A HUMBLE TRIBUTE OF ADMIRATION AND VENERATION 
 FOR HIS UNIVERSAL AND HEROIC CHAMPIONSHIP 
 OF THE JEWISH CAUSE, 
 
 FOR HIS PURE AND LOFTY PHILANTHROPY, AND 
 FOR HIS UNIVERSAL BENEVOLENCE, 
 
 BY THE AUTHOR. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 -M- 
 
 It is singular that few enlightened and wealthy communities 
 know so little of their own early history, as the Jews of 
 Great Britain. Yet few races indeed present more vicissitudes 
 for description, or possess records offering a more interesting 
 and extended field for investigation. Perhaps the mart, 
 the exchange, the counting-house, may have absorbed, in 
 former times, and under especial circumstances, energies 
 which, if directed to literary pursuits, would have de¬ 
 served and commanded success. Certain it is that no 
 chronicler has narrated the earlier struggles of the Jews 
 when they returned to these isles after centuries of 
 banishment, and no writer has attempted to depict 
 the gradual rise and progress of the Jewish community in 
 London. Nay, the archives of the older Synagogues, which 
 are treasures of curious information, remained until the 
 present time buried in obscurity, their very existence being 
 scarcely known. Some few of the elder officials had a glim¬ 
 mering of their contents, but to the vast majority of even 
 the Jews themselves these books were as hidden and impene¬ 
 trable as the Yedas or the Zend Avesta. In addition to being 
 jealously guarded, they were written in the Spanish and Por¬ 
 tuguese languages, or in the Jewish-German dialect, which 
 rendered them thus necessarily understood but by few. The 
 author has had the privilege of being permitted not only to 
 
VI 
 
 PREFA CE. 
 
 inspect these valuable registers, but to study them closely, 
 with the kind assistance of the Synagogue officials ; and 
 months have been devoted to this labour. At the same time, 
 he made continuous and diligent researches in all quarters 
 where information on the subject that engrossed his attention 
 was likely to be obtained. Libraries, public and private, were 
 ransacked; friends good-naturedly unlocked ancient memories 
 of past events on his behalf, and placed the correspondence 
 of departed relatives at his disposal; eminent members of the 
 Jewish community volunteered valuable information. Great 
 care has been exercised to ensure accuracy; and it has been 
 sought, so far as practicable, to obtain a confirmation of all 
 statements and communications before any fact has been held 
 out to the public as authentic. 
 
 The result of the labours of the author appeared in 
 print in the Jewish Chronicle , in a series of papers entitled 
 “ Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History.” As these papers 
 were written pari passu with the progress of the researches, 
 they necessarily bear the character of journalistic essays, 
 rather than of a complete history. Whilst, therefore, the 
 work in question does not aspire to rank as a regular 
 history, the author claims to be the first Israelite who has 
 given a full and connected account of the vicissitudes passed 
 through by the Jews of Great Britain, from the days of the 
 Saxon kings until the middle of the present century. He 
 also claims to have brought to light a mass of original in¬ 
 formation, the very existence of which was all but unsus¬ 
 pected. These papers, therefore, must prove of greater 
 interest to Jews than to Christians. But though they were 
 written by a Jew for Jews, the author trusts that Christians, 
 whose faith was founded by members of the Jewish race, will 
 find in these chapters, in addition to that which is entirely new, 
 much that may be of interest also to them. He hopes that as 
 Christians learn to know better, they will also learn to like 
 
PREFA CE. 
 
 Vll 
 
 and appreciate better, Englishmen of the Jewish faith, whose 
 inner life has unreservedly been laid open before them; and 
 that the former may look with a less prejudiced eye on the 
 foibles of the latter. He trusts that Christians may respect 
 and esteem the many good qualities which their Jewish fellow- 
 countrymen possess, sympathise with them in their struggles 
 to elevate themselves, and heartily stretch forth to them the 
 hand of friendship. 
 
 The writer, by permission of the late Editor of the Jewish 
 Chronicle , now offers u The Sketches of Anglo-Jewish 
 History” to the public in a separate form. These articles 
 have been carefully revised, facts re-arranged in a closer 
 chronological order, important additions made, errors recti¬ 
 fied, and the general utility of the work has been consider¬ 
 ably enhanced. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 ; 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 
 l 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 
 CHAP. PAGE 
 
 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 
 
 I. THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND ... 25 
 
 II. THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON ... 32 
 
 III. STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES—KING CHARLES II. AND THE 
 
 JEWS . . . . ... 39 
 
 IY. THE ALIEN DUTIES ...... 46 
 
 V. ANECDOTES—CONVERSIONS — LEARNED RABBIS — NEW 
 
 SYNAGOGUES ...... 52 
 
 VI. HEBREW CAPITALISTS . . . .58 
 
 VII. SPECIAL LEGISLATION — JEWISH LOYALTY — CONTINUED 
 
 PREJUDICES—ENEMIES AND FRIENDS . . 65 
 
 VIII. COMMUNAL CHARITIES—INTERNAL LEGISLATION . . 74 
 
 IX. THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753 . . . 80 
 
 X. REPEAL OF THE NATURALISATION BILL—LITERATURE OF 
 
 THE BILL ...... 86 
 
 XI. POSITION OF THE JEWS—BARON D’aGUILAR . . 92 
 
 XII. JEWISH MARRIAGES ..... 100 
 
 XIII. ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES . . . 113 
 
 XIV. THE HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES OF THE BRITISH JEWS . 122 
 
 XV. THE EARLY DAYS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE . . 132 
 
 XVI. PROGRESS OF GERMAN CONGREGATIONS . . . 138 
 
 XVII, CONVERSIONS—JEWISH LITERATURE—THE GREAT SYNA¬ 
 GOGUE AGAIN ...... 143 
 
 XVIII. THE PORTUGUESE JEWS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 
 
 EIGHTEENTH CENTURY .... 149 
 
X 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAP. rAGE 
 
 XIX. AGAIN WITH THE PORTUGUESE JEWS . . • 157 
 
 XX. JOSEPH SALVADOR — HONORARY OFFICES AMONG THE 
 
 PORTUGUESE JEWS . 161 
 
 XXI. SWEDEN AND THE JEWS—PORTUGUESE RELIGIOUS AND 
 
 EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS—DR KENNICOTT . 167 
 
 XXII. CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES—THE JEWS OF PORTUGAL— 
 
 JEWISH OFFENDERS — THE JEWS AND THE LORD 
 MAYOR ...•••• I' 5 
 
 XXIII. A NOBLE PROSELYTE . . • • .183 
 
 XXIV. A NEW IMMIGRATION—ECCLESIASTICAL LOSSES AND OFFI¬ 
 CIAL CHANGES—CEMETERIES AND BODY-SNATCHING 190 
 
 XXV. CONVERSIONS ...... 196 
 
 XXVI. THE PURIM RIOTS—THE BERNAL FAMILY . . 205 
 
 XXVII. SAMUEL MENDOZA—THE SHECHITA—SYNAGOGUE DIFFER¬ 
 ENCES ....... 212 
 
 XXVIII. THE RICARDO FAMILY—THE ALIEN BILL — SYNAGOGUE 
 
 FINANCE . . • • • 219 
 
 XXIX. SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS—TWO JEWISH WORTHIES . . 225 
 
 XXX. FRIENDS AND VINDICATORS OF THE JEWS . . 234 
 
 XXXI. CONVERSIONIST ATTEMPTS—PRIVILEGE OF PRISONERS— 
 
 THE JEWS’ HOSPITAL—A BAAL SHEM . . . 241 
 
 XXXII. THE GOLDSMID FAMILY ..... 249 
 
 XXXIII. A SCHEME FOR IMPROVING THE CONDITION OF THE POOR 257 
 
 XXXIV. THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE IN THE NINEETENTH CENTURY . 264 
 
 XXXV. THE PORTUGUESE SYNAGOGUE IN THE NINETEENTH CEN¬ 
 TURY ....... 270 
 
 XXXVI. JEWISH VOLUNTEERS—WRITERS ON THE JEWS . . 275 
 
 XXXVII. RISE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY—THE DUKE OF SUSSEX—A 
 
 WEDDING AND A MURDER—A NOBLE-HEARTED JEW . 283 
 
 XXXVIII. THE CASE OF HARPER’S CHARITY—THE LAWS OF THE 
 GREAT SYNAGOGUE—UNION OF THE CITY ASHKENAZIM 
 CONGREGATIONS—IRREGULAR MARRIAGES . . 289 
 
 XXXIX. ISAAC D’lSRAELI AND HIS FAMILY . . . 295 
 
 XL. J. KING AND JEWISH WORSHIP—SIR MAURICE XIMENES— 
 
 MORDECAI RODRIGUEZ LOPEZ .... 302 
 
CONTENTS. xi 
 
 CHAP. PAGE 
 
 XLI. A CHIEF RABBI AND A HAHAM . . . .30/ 
 
 XLII. JEWISH WORTHIES — THE REV. SOLOMON LYON — EMMA 
 
 LYON—MICHAEL JOSEPHS—ARTHUR LUMLEY DAVIDS 313 
 
 XLIII. THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND IN LISBON—THE SHAARE 
 TICVA SCHOOL—AN UNLAWFUL MINYAN — GIFTS TO 
 THE SEPHARDI SYNAGOGUE . . . • 319 
 
 XLIV. MOVEMENTS IN THE PORTUGUESE CONGREGATION — 
 
 PARTIES IN THAT COMMUNITY—PROGRESS OF THE 
 SEPHARDIM—SIR MOSES MONTEFIORE . . 325 
 
 XLV. NEW ASHKENAZI INSTITUTIONS—SYNAGOGUE LIBERALITY 332 
 
 XLVI. TESTIMONIAL TO SIR MOSES MONTEFIORE—SYNAGOGUE 
 
 IMPROVEMENTS ..... 338 
 
 XLVII. SIMON SOLOMON — ISAAC GOMES SERRA — ABRAHAM 
 
 MONTEFIORE—NATHAN MEYER ROTHSCHILD . . 341 
 
 XLV III. BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST—MISSION OF SIR MOSES 
 
 MONTEFIORE ...... 347 
 
 / 
 
 XLIX. SOME MORE JEWISH AUTHORS .... 359 
 
 L. THE REFORM MOVEMENT ..... 367 
 
 LI. THE WEST LONDON CONGREGATION OF BRITISH JEWS . 374 
 
 Lil. THE CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS OF THE JEWS . . 386 
 
 LIII. REMOVAL OF JEWISH DISABILITIES . . . 394 
 
 LIV. THE JEWISH PRESS ..... 402 
 
 LV. CONCLUSION .••••* 410 
 
 LIST OF AUTHORITIES AND SOURCES WHENCE THE FACTS AND IN¬ 
 FORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS WORK HAVE BEEN GATHERED 415 
 
 417 
 
 INDEX • • • • * • * * 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OF 
 
 ANGrLO-JEWISH HISTORY. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The early history of the Jews in this country is necessarily 
 obscure and uncertain. 
 
 It has been surmised that the ancient Jews traded with the 
 ancient Britons, and that the former visited and even dwelt 
 in this island. This is pure speculation. Leaving on one 
 side legendary times, we find the presence of Jews in Eng¬ 
 land under the Saxon Kings fully attested. The first mention 
 made of the Jews in any document connected with English 
 history, is found in the canons of Ecbright, Archbishop of 
 York, which contain an ordinance that no Christian shall 
 presume to eat with a Jew or shall judaise, whatever that 
 may have meant. These canons were issued in the year 740 
 or 750 c.e., for the government of the province of York. We 
 see therefrom that not only there were Jews in England at 
 that period, but that they were deemed of sufficient import¬ 
 ance for the ruling powers to warn the guileless Christians 
 against their seductions. 
 
 It is related in the history of Croyland Abbey that in 833 
 Whitglaff, King of the Mercians, having been defeated by 
 Egbert, took refuge in that Abbey, and in return for the pro¬ 
 tection and assistance received, he granted a charter to the 
 monks of Croyland, confirming to them all lands, tenements 
 and gifts bestowed upon them by his predecessors and their 
 nobles, by Christians and by Jews. It is asserted that the 
 
2 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Jews were banished from England at the beginning of the 
 eleventh century and that they returned with William the 
 Conqueror. This statement has not been satisfactorily 
 proved; but certainly many Jews settled in this country 
 under his reign. He encouraged their immigration from 
 Rouen ; and he appointed a city, the name of which has not 
 been preserved, for their residence in England. Numerous 
 Jews subsequently took up their abode at Oxford. They be¬ 
 came possessed of most of the houses in the parishes of St 
 Edward and St Aldate there, which were from this circum¬ 
 stance called Great and Little Jewries. They also erected a 
 Synagogue. Some of their houses being frequented by 
 scholars for purposes of instruction, in course of time they 
 came to be distinguished by the name of halls, as Moyse’s 
 Hall, Jacob’s Hall, and Lombard’s Hall. 
 
 Under William the Conqueror, William Rufus, and Henry 
 I., the Jews were well treated, and increased in numbers and 
 in wealth. It is astonishing what sums of money, enormous 
 for those days, the Jews commanded. William Rufus, who 
 was far from being a devout Catholic, especially befriended 
 them. He even shocked the feelings of the enlightened 
 populations of the day, by holding public intercourse with 
 the enemies of Christ. He ordered a theological contest to 
 take place in London between Christian bishops and Jewish 
 rabbis, and he swore by the face of St Luke that if the rab¬ 
 bis conquered, he would become a Jew. The controversy was 
 carried on in fear and trembling by the bishops, but happily 
 the Jews were covered with confusion. At least so say 
 Christian historians. The reader may perhaps remember 
 the answer of the lion, when a man showed him the figure of 
 a brother lion subjugated by a hunter. It is you who have 
 painted the picture, the Jews may truly say to the Christians. 
 Indeed the Jews had the audacity of alleging that the sup¬ 
 posed victory had been won by fraud, and that in reality they 
 had themselves obtained the best of the argument. 
 
 Rufus was not in good odour with the Church, and he was 
 looked upon as little better than a Jew. He promised the 
 Israelites, of course for a “ consideration,” not to permit any 
 of their body to embrace Christianity. A certain Israelite 
 offered the King GO marks to induce his son Stephen, who 
 
INTR on UCTI ON. 
 
 3 
 
 had abjured the paternal faith, to revert to Judaism. Said 
 the King to the youth : “ Get thee hence quickly and obey, 
 or by St Luke’s face I will cause thine eyes to he plucked out 
 of thine head.” The hold youth, instead of obeying the im¬ 
 perious monarch, reproved him for not being a good Chris¬ 
 tian, and insisted on following his new religion; upon which, 
 it is said, the King allowed him to depart, returning to the 
 father one-half the sum paid. Rufus gave the priests still 
 greater offence by not filling up bishoprics as they became 
 vacant. He retained in his own hands the incomes of the 
 empty sees, which were sold to the highest bidders. Mean¬ 
 while the benefices were farmed out to Jews. It appears that 
 the latter were making great progress and even gaining pro¬ 
 selytes. The Church, alarmed at the ground won by the Jews 
 among Christians under the reign of Henry I., sent monks to 
 preach against the Israelites in various cities. At this period 
 the latter had only one burying ground in all England, and 
 thither they were constrained to carry their dead from all 
 parts of the country. It was called Jews’ Garden, and was 
 situated in St Giles’, Cripplegate, on the spot occupied by 
 the present Jewin Street in London. 
 
 The tranquillity and protection enjoyed by the Jews under 
 the first three Kings after the Conquest, soon came to an end. 
 Their hopes of enjoying a permanent and safe asylum in Eng¬ 
 land were frustrated. Their persecutions began, and increased 
 in proportion to their wealth. Enormous taxes and contri¬ 
 butions were laid upon them, and their payment was enforced 
 by cruel outrages and unendurable bodily torture. Crimes of 
 every kind, the most absurd and the most groundless, were 
 laid to their charge, and were eagerly believed by an ignorant 
 and fanatical population. Riots were excited against them 
 on the most frivolous pretence, or without any at all. Their 
 houses were periodically pillaged and burnt, and they them¬ 
 selves outraged and murdered. The history of the Jews of 
 those days presents an almost uninterrupted record of deeds 
 of blood and rapine, perpetrated too often in the name of re¬ 
 ligion, by the followers of a creed which theoretically preaches 
 charity and love to all men. In the ninth year of Stephen, 
 the Jews for the first time were accused of the crime of cruci¬ 
 fying a child at Norwich. The reason alleged for the sup- 
 
4 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 posed deed was that it was intended in derision of the 
 crucifixion of Christ. Similar atrocities were attributed to 
 the Jews at Gloucester and at St Edmondsbury. One of the 
 imaginary victims was canonised, and his tomb became a seat 
 of miracles as active as the shrine of our Lady at Lourdes. 
 Other charges at random were laid at the door of the Jews. 
 
 One day the complaint was that they had advanced money 
 to some adventurers who proceeded to Ireland against the 
 King’s orders. Another time it was that they had received 
 in pledge some of the holy vessels in the church of St 
 Edmondsbury. At each accusation treasure was squeezed 
 from the unhappy Jews. There was method in the madness 
 of their persecutors, for the offences of the Jews were never 
 detected unless the King’s coffers were manifestly empty. At 
 one time Henry II. extorted a large sum from them, banish¬ 
 ing those who did not comply with his requests. On a sub¬ 
 sequent occasion a tallage of a fourth part of their goods was 
 levied from them. When funds were required for the King’s 
 journey to the Holy Land, an especial tax was raised for the 
 purpose. The whole population of the kingdom was assessed 
 at £70,000, while the share of the Jews amounted to £30,000 
 according to some authorities, or to £60,000 according to 
 others. Individual Jews too were heavily fined. One Jur- 
 nett, a Jew of Norwich, was mulcted at different periods in 
 the then very considerable sum of 7525 marks. During this 
 reign the Jews were permitted to purchase ground for ceme¬ 
 teries outside all the cities in which they dwelt. 
 
 The accession of Richard I. to the throne was celebrated 
 by wholesale massacres of the Jews. The King, of whom 
 England is so proud, was a zealous Christian, and he enter¬ 
 tained a proper hatred against the Jews. He issued a 
 proclamation forbidding any Jews to enter the palace at 
 Westminster during the coronation. The Jews augured ill 
 from this beginning; and to endeavour to soften the King’s 
 heart, some of their principal men gathered from various 
 parts of the country. Attired with brave apparel and 
 loaded with rich gifts, they ventured to approach the gates 
 to wait for the arrival of Richard. The crowd behind, 
 swaying and surging in its excitement, pushed the Jews 
 within the prohibited precincts. The attendants forcibly 
 
INTR OjD UCTION. 
 
 5 
 
 dragged forth the hapless suppliants, and showered heavy 
 blows on their devoted heads. The mob beset them, fell upon 
 them, wounded some and killed others. A report was now 
 raised that the King had ordered all the Jews to be put to 
 death for disobedience to his commands. The populace be¬ 
 gan their work of destruction. The Jews were maltreated 
 and killed. Their houses were found to contain immense 
 wealth behind plain exteriors, and they were plundered and 
 burnt. The children of Israel had thriven notwithstanding 
 all ill-usage, and their silver had proved inexhaustible, like 
 the oil of the Shunammite. After numerous Jews had perished 
 with their families by sword and by fire, the King despatched 
 Ranulf de Granville, Lord High Steward, with some of the 
 chief nobility, to quell the riot. The mob paid no attention 
 to the King’s representatives. A considerable force was 
 sent to the city next day, when the work of destruc¬ 
 tion had been completed, and after the blood of Jews had 
 flowed in torrents. Killing was no murder in those days as 
 far as Jews were concerned. Some of the rioters were appre¬ 
 hended, but it was not considered worth while to punish 
 them, for their victims had only been Jews. Three men 
 w r ere hanged, one because he had robbed a Christian dwelling, 
 and the other two because by setting fire to the house of a 
 Jew, they had endangered the safety of the neighbouring 
 Christian habitations. A few Jews had sacrificed their faith 
 to save their lives. A certain Benedict who had submitted to 
 baptism, prayed the King to be permitted to return to his 
 former creed since he had acted on compulsion. The King re¬ 
 ferred the question to Baldwin, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 who with blunt good sense exclaimed : “ Why, if he is not 
 willing to become a servant of God, he must even remain a 
 servant of the devil.” Benedict, however, soon afterwards 
 died from the effects of the ill-treatment he had suffered. 
 
 The example of London was sooner or later imitated by 
 several country towns. Wherever intending crusaders ap¬ 
 peared, the Jews fell victims to popular fury. Fierce soldiers 
 and fanatic monks who had taken up the cross, preached 
 against the Jews. Autos da f6 were performed at Norwich, 
 Stamford, St Edmondsbury, Dunstable, Lynn, and York. 
 Cries of “ Death to the Jews ” rang throughout the length 
 
6 
 
 INTROD UCTION 
 
 and breadth of the land. At York especially a fearful tragedy 
 was perpetrated. The mob began as usual to follow their 
 pastime of plundering and burning Jewish houses. The dwel¬ 
 ling of Benedict, who had already succumbed in London, and 
 who was a native of York, was sacked and destroyed, and 
 his widow, children, and numerous relatives were slaughtered 
 like wild beasts. The popular frenzy increased, and the Jews, 
 with their portable treasures, took refuge in York Castle. 
 They had reason to suspect that the governor was secretly 
 plotting for their surrender, and that a considerable part of 
 the booty was to be the price of his treachery. During the 
 temporary absence of the governor, the Jews closed the gates 
 against him. The sheriff of the county happened to be at 
 York with a number of armed men. It was represented that 
 the Jews had perpetrated an insult on the King’s authority. 
 The sheriff was persuaded by the governor, and an order for 
 the attack was given. The mob joined the soldiers in the 
 onslaught. When the sheriff perceived the mad fury of the 
 mob and the storm he had raised, he repented the order, and 
 publicly revoked it. It was in vain. The rabble could not 
 be refrained. The Church joined in the assault. “ Destroy 
 the enemies of Christ! Destroy the enemies of Christ!” 
 shouted a canon of the Prsemonstratensian Order, as he 
 rushed to the front rank of the assailants. Daily the priest 
 was at his post, until a stone rolled from the battlements 
 over his head and silenced his zeal for ever. The Jews 
 fought with desperate valour. They offered large sums of 
 money for their lives, and for once Jewish precious metal was 
 refused. When they saw their inevitable doom staring them 
 in the face, a council was called. A rabbi, a man of great 
 learning, asked whether it was not better for the children of 
 Israel to render up their souls voluntarily to their Maker, 
 than to submit to the tortures to be inflicted b} r their enemies. 
 Those who were not willing might leave. With few excep¬ 
 tions the assembly assented. To find a parallel for such 
 conduct, we must refer back to the days of the siege of 
 Jerusalem. Every head of a family cut the throat of his wife 
 and children, and then cut his own. The survivors threw the 
 dead bodies over the heads of their enemies. They then burnt 
 their apparel, cast their treasures into the sinks, and set 
 
INTR OD UCTION. 
 
 7 
 
 fire to the castle. The rabbi was left to the place of honour. 
 He killed Joachim or Jacinus, one of the principal Jews of 
 York. Joachim was a friend of Benedict; with whom he 
 had been to London, and he had narrowly escaped from death 
 during the massacre of the Jews in the capital. Hie labbi 
 then met death at his own hands. The few remaining Jews 
 ran to and fro on the battlements amidst the flames, beseeching 
 for their lives, and offering to receive baptism. Their terms 
 were accepted, but no sooner were the assailants admitted 
 within the gates, than the poor wretches inside were all slain. 
 
 The King sent directions to his chancellor, the Bishop of 
 Ely, to inquire into the matter, and to punish the offenders. 
 These as usual escaped, some having fled to Scotland, others 
 pursuing their journey to the Holy Land, while those who 
 were captured were released on their own recognisances. The 
 governor of the castle was deprived of his office, and the 
 principal inhabitants of York paid a fine to the King, lhese 
 were the only penalties inflicted for a barbarous outrage that 
 cost the lives of 1500 peaceable individuals, whose only crime 
 was that they belonged to that race whence had spiung the 
 founder of Christianity ! 
 
 Kichard I. on his return from Palestine took the affairs of 
 the Jews into his own hands. They became subjected to 
 certain special regulations, and were to be regarded as private 
 property of the Crown. The King appointed itinerant Justices 
 to make inquiries into all the disturbances that had broken 
 out in his absence. They were to take an account of the 
 property that had been stolen from the Jews, and also of the 
 debts owing to all members oi the community on moitgage or 
 otherwise. In the same year were passed deciees foi the 
 registration of all the estates and possessions of the Jews. Lo 
 bond was to be valid unless executed in the presence of two 
 Jewish lawyers, two Christian lawyers, and two notaiies. 
 Special Justices were also instituted for the Jewish Exchequer, 
 Scaccarium Judceorum. Their office seems to have consisted 
 not only in collecting the funds payable by Jews to the na¬ 
 tional Exchequer, but in trying actions at law wherein a Jew 
 was concerned. Originally the office was entrusted to Jew ,-5, 
 and in the great Boll of the tenth year of Kichard I. we find 
 that Benedictus de Talemunt and Josephus Aaron, tw o Jew s, 
 
8 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 were termed Justiciarum Judceorum. Subsequently, Jews and 
 Christians were employed conjointly, but often Christians 
 alone. Their annual salary was fixed at forty marks, which 
 was the sum enjoyed by the barons, though doubtless their 
 perquisites were considerable. 
 
 The bonds or contracts between Jew and Christian were 
 called Starrs, from the Rabbinical Hebrew term Shetar, which 
 signifies a contract. Three copies were usually made of these 
 securities, one of which was deposited with the creditor, one 
 with a magistrate, and the third with a person of note. The 
 term Star Chamber, subsequently given to a court of law, is 
 probably derived from the name of the apartment where these 
 Starrs were deposited for safe keeping. 
 
 The foreign commerce of the Jews acquired considerable 
 importance under the reign of Henry II., and enabled them 
 to amass wealth, notwithstanding the periodical and syste¬ 
 matic spoliation which they underwent. The Jews were the 
 first to introduce into this country the use of bills of exchange. 
 It was not only in trade that the Jews surpassed the Chris¬ 
 tians. The former constituted the most enlightened portion 
 of the population of Europe. They were the principal factors 
 of civilisation. Ho educated classes existed in those days. 
 The priesthood, with a few honorable exceptions, were steeped 
 in fanaticism and ignorance. The higher classes consisted of 
 amiable and indolent bullies, who, under the pretence of 
 redressing wrongs, wandered about Europe, leading a very 
 questionable existence under the title of knight-errants, and 
 of robbers who, rejoicing in the names of earls and barons, 
 enriched themselves by preying upon their weaker neighbours. 
 The little learning that was found in the world dwelt mostly 
 among the Jews and the Moors. The Jews in Spain held 
 the principal chairs of mathematics in the Mahomedan Uni¬ 
 versities of Cordova and Seville. The Jews of that country 
 were pre-eminent in all the sciences then known, and their 
 brethren abroad drank also freely from the tree of knowledge. 
 Jews taught geometry, logic, and philosophy in the Univer¬ 
 sities of Oxford and of Paris. They instituted schools or 
 colleges in London, York, Lincoln, Oxford, Cambridge and 
 Norwich; and thither flocked Jew and Gentile to hear dis¬ 
 tinguished rabbis expound the principles of arithmetic, of 
 
1 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 Hebrew, of Arabic and of medicine. The celebrated Aben 
 Ezra visited England, it is believed, in 4919 a.m. , or 1159 c.e., 
 and here lie delivered some lectures and wrote two works in 
 Hebrew. The skill of Jews as physicians in the dark ages 
 has often been mentioned. King, baron and knight, were 
 glad to summon them to their side when sick or wounded. 
 The Jewish leech, by.the numerous cures effected through his 
 superior attainments, excited the envy and animosity of the 
 monks who professed to restore health through the aid of relics. 
 The Jews, it was rumoured, were acquainted with cabbalistic 
 secrets and with ungodly sciences ; their cures were carried 
 out by incantation and witchcraft, and in time the Jews to 
 their other virtues added that of being sorcerers. 
 
 It is probable that John Lackland before his accession to 
 the throne of England had had many dealings with the Jews. 
 He was accustomed to “borrow” from them, and he knew 
 full well their financial value. He was afraid lest they 
 should take alarm at the persecutions of his predecessors, and 
 betake themselves to other lands, with their gold and their 
 silver and their precious jewels. Whether John laid a crafty 
 plan to entice Jews into this country, and then wring from 
 them their hard-earned treasures ; or whether at first he really 
 did mean well towards them, and then his weak vacillating 
 nature was moved to cruelty by stern necessity, we are un¬ 
 able to say. Certain it is that in the beginning of his reign 
 he appeared determined to win their confidence and to attract 
 foreign settlers to these shores. He seemed to heap favours 
 upon them. He gave them the right of electing a presbyter 
 or high priest, or in other words a chief rabbi. When a 
 certain Jacobus or Kabbi Jacob was appointed to the office, 
 the King gave him a patent with a safe conduct, in which he 
 addressed the rabbi in affectionate terms and styled him clilec- 
 tus et familiaris noster. The King in the second year of his 
 reign also signed two charters, one extending to the Jews of 
 England alone, and the other comprising those of Normandy. 
 The Jews might dwell freely and honorably where they 
 chose. They might hold lands and be entitled to all their 
 privileges as in the time of Henry II. If a Jew died the 
 King would not disturb his possessions, provided he had heirs 
 who could answer for his debts and forfeitures. The oath of 
 
TO 
 
 INTR OD UCTION. 
 
 a Jewish witness was to be as valid as that of a Christian 
 witness. Actions at law, where Jewish interests were at¬ 
 tacked, were to be tried before a jury of Jews. All the King’s 
 subjects were hidden to defend the Jews and their chattels as 
 the property of the King. The Israelites paid the King for 
 these privileges a sum of 4000 marks. When in the fifth 
 year of his reign the citizens of London heaped indignities 
 on the heads of the Jews, John sent a sharp reprimand to 
 the Mayor, in which he stated that he attributed the late out¬ 
 rages to the fools and not to the wise men of the city, and he 
 ended by placing the Jews under the Mayor’s protection. 
 
 These measures of conciliation had the desired effect. Jews 
 came over from the continent, and relying on the King’s favour, 
 applied themselves to the pursuit of wealth. True, their 
 position was insecure, and the people scowled at them with 
 hatred and jealousy. But they looked upon the promises of 
 the King as their safeguard, and they were tolerably easy. A 
 sudden change came over John. He met opposition on every 
 side, and here were subjects for whom no one would lift up a 
 finger. The Jews became his victims. If formerly they 
 were scourged with whips, now they were scourged with 
 scorpions. A tallage of 66,000 marks was laid upon them, 
 which was an immense sum for those days. Nearly every 
 Jew, man, woman, or child, was dragged to jail and put to 
 torture. Estates were confiscated, and barbarous torments 
 were employed in dragging forth from them the secrets of 
 their wealth. In a great many instances the victims were 
 deprived of an eye. Abraham was the name of the unhappy 
 Jew of Bristol, who lost one tooth a day by refusing to give 
 up the sum demanded, until seven teeth having been torn 
 from his aching jaw, he saved his one remaining molar by 
 paying a ransom of 10,000 marks. Again and again John 
 extorted money from the Jews, and when he was unable to 
 reach them they were pillaged by the barons. The King 
 plundered the Jews because they were his property. The 
 barons robbed them because they w r ere the property of their 
 enemy the King. The warriors of the Magna Charta under¬ 
 stood so little the commonest principles of freedom, that 
 whilst they were in London to collect their forces they sacked 
 the houses of the Jews, and after carrying away all their 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ii 
 
 portable valuables they rased these dwellings to the ground, 
 and took away the stones to strengthen the city walls. 
 
 A favourite practice of King John had been to grant any 
 habitation or property belonging to a Jew, and by him 
 tenanted, to some minion of his, as it suited his whim or his 
 interest. For any man may give away his own, and the 
 Jews were only chattels of the Crown. However, the rights 
 of the King as derived from Jewish claims, pressed too 
 heavily on the debtors, and when the Great Charter was 
 signed, two clauses were introduced regulating these ques¬ 
 tions. If a man died indebted to a Jew, the latter was to 
 receive no interest until the heir became of age. The wife 
 was to attain her dower, and the children their mainten¬ 
 ance ; and the debt was to be liquidated from the residue 
 of the estate. Altogether the power of the creditor was 
 sensibly diminished. 
 
 Happier days for the Jews seemed to break in the early 
 days of the reign of Henry III. The Earl of Pembroke, and 
 afterwards his successor Hubert de Burgh, administered the 
 kingdom for the Koyal Minor with fairness and impartiality. 
 The Jews were treated as members of a common humanity, 
 and not as wild beasts to be hunted down and killed. Mea¬ 
 sures were adopted for their especial safety. Those who were con¬ 
 fined in prison were released. In each town where Jews lived 
 twenty-four burgesses were chosen to protect their persons and 
 property. The Israelites were exempted from the jurisdiction 
 of the ecclesiastical courts. The old Justices in the Exchequer 
 were dismissed for corruption, and others supposed to be more 
 immaculate were appointed. Finally, and that was a ques¬ 
 tionable measure, the Jews were ordered to wear a special 
 badge over their attire, consisting of two broad slips of linen 
 or parchment affixed to their breasts. This cannot be con¬ 
 sidered otherwise than as a mark of degradation. The reason 
 alleged for the regulation was that the Jews might be recog¬ 
 nised without difficulty, so that there should be no pretext for 
 their ill-usage. 
 
 Once more the Jews were encouraged by good treatment to 
 immigrate into this country. As we have said, the Jews un¬ 
 derstood the elements of trade better than their Christian 
 neighbours. By means of their superior knowledge, and by 
 
12 
 
 INTR OB UCTION. 
 
 their correspondence with their brethren in all the then known 
 parts of the globe, the former were enabled to undersell the 
 latter. The Christian followed the dictates of his pocket rather 
 than those of his conscience, and preferred purchasing from 
 the Jewish merchant any commodities he might need rather 
 than from his fellow-believer. The Jews by the operation of 
 this and other causes gathered fresh enemies. Hatred, jea¬ 
 lousy, fanaticism and ignorance surrounded them on all sides. 
 Some of their coreligionists were imprisoned on their landing 
 in England, by the Warden of the Cinque Ports, and their 
 effects were pillaged. They were eventually released by order 
 of the court upon consenting to enter their names upon the 
 Polls of the Justices of the Jews, and not to depart the coun¬ 
 try without permission. The ecclesiastical authorities took 
 umbrage at the countenance given by government to the Jews. 
 Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Hugh of 
 Wells, Bishop of Lincoln, issued an order prohibiting Chris¬ 
 tians to buy from Jews, or to sell them provisions, or to hold 
 communication with them, the latter being excommunicated for 
 their infidelity and usury. The Jews were not cultivators of 
 the soil; they did not grow corn or oats, and had these man¬ 
 dates been strictly obeyed they must needs have met with the 
 fate of Count Ugolino. There are indeed on record several 
 instances of Jewish families who dragged themselves about 
 the country, vainly applying for food, until one by one the 
 wretched children of Israel sank and perished from absolute 
 starvation. Happily all Christians did not implicitly follow 
 these inhuman injunctions. In the majority of instances 
 provisions were supplied to the Jews for love or money; pro¬ 
 bably for money rather than for love. Meanwhile they applied 
 to the crown for relief; and directions were dispatched to the 
 sheriffs of the different counties and cities to prevent the 
 prohibitions in question from being enforced. 
 
 Seven years afterward a change occurred in the direction of 
 affairs. The tolerance extended to Jews was changed for ex¬ 
 action and oppression. Their wealth offered too great a temp¬ 
 tation to a needy King. All their actions were distorted into 
 crimes; even their suing a religious corporation on its bond 
 was alleged as an offence, and led to an accusation of forgery 
 against the Jews. In the year 1230 they were constrained to 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 *3 
 
 give up to the crown one-third part of their movables. The 
 King generously gave them permission to build a Synagogue. 
 A magnificent fane was erected. As soon as completed, it 
 was seized and granted to the brothers of St Anthony of Vienna 
 to be converted into a church, which was annexed by Edward 
 IV. to Windsor College. At a subsequent period, another Syna¬ 
 gogue was appropriated by the Friars Penitent, and turned 
 into a chapel. Scarce a year was allowed to pass without taxes 
 to a grievous amount being extorted. The King was continually 
 in want of funds to celebrate a marriage in his family, to un¬ 
 dertake a journey, or to discharge a debt. Whenever any royal 
 festivities gladdened the land, it was the Jews who paid the 
 piper. The taxes against them were enforced by imprisonment, 
 by confiscation of their property, and by seizure of their wives 
 and children. Heavy sums were demanded as penalties for real 
 or imaginary offences. They were accused once more of crucify¬ 
 ing the children of Christians, and of stealing Christian infants 
 to perform upon them the covenant of Abraham. When the King 
 was distressed for lack of means on the eve of his marriage with 
 Eleanor of Provence, it was discovered that the Jews of Norwich, 
 who were wealthy, had circumcised a Christian boj r . Seven 
 Jews were brought before the King on this absurd and ludi¬ 
 crous charge, and were condemned to be drawn and quar¬ 
 tered, and, of course, to have their property confiscated. Some 
 years afterwards, in 1240, a similar offence was laid at the 
 door of another rich Jew of Norwich, named Jacob. A boy, 
 nine years old, declared he had been similarly treated when 
 he was five years of age. The Bishop of Norwich acted as 
 judge, and the Archdeacon and priests as witnesses. It may 
 be imagined how the Jew fared at the hands of so impartial 
 and merciful a tribunal. Notwithstanding that medical evi¬ 
 dence did not confirm the boy’s contradictory story, the sham 
 trial ended as might be expected, by the execution of Jacob 
 and of other Jews, and by the confiscation of their estate. 
 The Jews were, moreover, accused of plotting against the 
 State and of attempting to overturn the government. It was 
 alleged that they had collected together large quantities of 
 combustible materials at Northampton for the destruction of 
 London by fire. Upon these baseless and astounding charges 
 many Jews were burnt alive, and their effects seized. Matthew 
 
14 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Paris, the historian, who was an eye-witness to their suffer¬ 
 ings, concludes thus an account of the King’s extortions as 
 practised on that unhappy race : u Non taruen abrando vel 
 excoriando sed eviscerando extorsit.” 
 
 In 1234 and in 1236 heavy tallages were laid on the Jews. 
 The King and the people seemed to consider their wealth as 
 practically inexhaustible, and even as being gotten by super¬ 
 natural means. While the heir of a baron paid for his 
 barony only 100 marks, and the fee of a knight was 100 
 shillings, the daughter of Hamon, a Jew of Hereford, paid 
 to the king as a relief the sum of 5000 marks ! Aaron of 
 York, one of the richest Jews of England, had contributed 
 to the royal treasury within seven years 30,000 marks of 
 silver for the King, and 200 marks of gold for the Queen. 
 He compounded subsequently with the King to be free from 
 taxation by payment of 100 marks annually. The ordinary 
 currency then consisted of silver pence called easterlings, 
 while gold was exceedingly scarce, and usually imported 
 from abroad. The Jews were at different epochs accused of 
 clipping the coinage, but this seems so far from having been 
 their practice, that in the twenty-second year of this reign, 
 they presented £100 to the King, praying that all Jews found 
 defacing coin might be banished from the realm. 
 
 In the twenty-fifth year of the reign of Henry III. (1240 
 c.e.), the Parliamentum Judaicum was summoned. The King 
 sent writs to the sheriffs of each county, commanding them 
 to return before him at Worcester on Quinquagesima Sunday, 
 six of the richest Jews from every town, or two only from 
 such places where they were but few, to treat with him con¬ 
 cerning his own as well as their benefit. The hopes of the 
 Jews rose high on their being called to take part in the 
 King’s counsels. Perhaps their years of bondage were over, 
 perhaps better days were about to dawn for downtrodden, 
 persecuted Israel. Great was their disappointment and sore 
 was their trouble, when they found that supplies were the 
 burthen of his most gracious Majesty’s speech. He had 
 brought them together to think of the ways and means of 
 furnishing him with 20,000 marks. Six among them were 
 appointed collectors. They might assess the sum among 
 themselves as they pleased, but the cash must be forthcoming 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 *5 
 
 in two instalments within a stated period, otherwise their 
 persons would he answerable to the King. The required 
 amount was not delivered on the stipulated day, simply 
 because the funds could not be gathered ; and the unhappy 
 collectors paid the penalty of disobedience to impossible 
 commands. They were thrown into prison with their wives 
 and children until the whole sum was squeezed from the 
 Jews. 
 
 These chapters present a melancholy sameness. Our nar¬ 
 rative is a tune played on one string, spoliation. Almost 
 yearly did the King make fresh calls on the unhappy Jews 
 to provide for his personal necessities, until the barons 
 insisted on inquiring whither had disappeared the large 
 sums which the King had extracted from the Jews. The 
 King was constrained to allow one of the Justices of the 
 Jews’ Exchequer to be appointed by parliament. This Act 
 proved of no benefit to the Jews. Funds were needed to 
 repress incursions from Wales, and 8000 marks were de¬ 
 manded from them, under penalty of transportation to 
 Ireland. They were prohibited at the same time from 
 removing their families from their ordinary places of abode. 
 During the ensuing three years no less a sum than 60,000 
 marks was squeezed from the Jews. 
 
 A Jew known as Abraham of Berkhampstead had been 
 imprisoned for treating with contumely an image of the 
 Virgin, and for ill-treating his wife, who would not follow his 
 example. He was released by the aid of Richard Earl of 
 Cornwall, on payment of 700 marks. The Jews opposed 
 Abraham's liberation from jail, he being a man of ill-repute, 
 and bringing discredit on their race; whereupon the same 
 man, to revenge himself, laid information as to imaginary 
 plots on the part of his co-religionists, and what was more to 
 the purpose, he gave detailed accounts of their wealth and 
 where they stored their treasure. Then followed rigid inves¬ 
 tigations as to the value and nature of the property of Jews, 
 which ended in fresh calls being made on their purse. 
 
 The oppression suffered by the Jews became utterly 
 unbearable, and they were compelled to cry out in agony. 
 They were expected to coin gold, when in reality the com¬ 
 petition of the Caorsini or Pope’s usurers had materially 
 
IN TROD UCT10N. 
 
 16 
 
 detracted from tlie profits of money-lending. In vain did the 
 Jews crave for permission to depart, and seek an asylum 
 elsewhere. Proclamations were issued forbidding any Jew 
 to leave England without the King’s license. The principal 
 Jews were summoned before Richard Earl of Cornwall the 
 King’s brother—whose private coffers were well filled, and 
 they were threatened with confiscation and death unless they 
 supplied him with the sum demanded. Elias their presbyter 
 or high priest (probably Chief Kabbi), a venerable old man, 
 stood up and spoke warmly in expostulation. He prajed for 
 a safe conduct to quit the country, as his brethren had 
 determined to leave, rather than submit to impossible 
 demands. Their trade was ruined, they could scarcely 
 exist, they were beggared, and if they sold their skins they 
 could not gather the sums exacted. The poor rabbi, ex¬ 
 hausted by his own energy, was carried away fainting. Earl 
 Richard did not appear to press heavily on the Jews, and 
 was not himself harsh against them. Subsequently, on a 
 renewal of the King’s demands, they presented his Majesty 
 with a memorial addressing him thus : “ Sir King, we see 
 thou sparest neither Christians nor Jews, but studiest with 
 crafty excuses to impoverish all men. We have no hope of 
 respiration left us, the usurers of the Pope have supplanted 
 us. Permit us to depart out of the kingdom with a safe 
 conduct, and we will seek for ourselves such a mansion as we 
 can, be it what it may.” This speech was bold for a people 
 who had lived under the direst bondage and oppression. 
 The King received the memorial with a burst of anger. Pie 
 shrieked "complaints as to the debts that bound him, which 
 amounted to 200,000 if not 300,000 marks. u He was a maimed 
 or deceived King; he was but half a King. He was deceived 
 on every side. He must have money from any person or by 
 any means.” These undignified complaints of a weak King, 
 ended in his mortgaging the Jews to his brother Richard for 
 an advance of 5000 marks. They were evidently considered 
 as serfs, who could be transferred from one person to the 
 other as security for a loan of money. Again at a subsequent 
 period, Earl Richard advanced 6000 marks on their security 
 to the King, without pressing too hard on the Jews. 
 
 The Caorsini, as we have said, were the financial rivals of 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 i7 
 
 the Jews. The Caorsini were so called from the city of 
 Cahors in France, though in point of fact they were Italian 
 merchants in the service of the Pope. These benevolent in¬ 
 dividuals would advance money to the necessitous without 
 interest, and consequently they were not amenable to the 
 usury laws. Only they would make loans for exactly one-half 
 the period required by the borrower, extending the time as 
 much as desired on payment of a commission for damages of 
 fifty per cent, per annum or five per cent, per month. In 
 addition they charged to the debtor the expenses of the keep 
 of the merchant, his servant and his horse, for so Jong as the 
 principal remained unpaid. The Caorsini rolled in wealth, 
 the people cried out, and the government tried to expel the 
 disinterested money-lenders; but they were the servants of 
 the Pope, and no one dared lift up a finger against them. 
 Well might Jews chuckle at Christian notions on usury. It 
 was a truly edifying spectacle to perceive the Yicar of Christ 
 on earth, the representative of Him who preached lowliness, 
 poverty, and charity, and who said that it was easier for 
 a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich 
 man to go to heaven, amassing treasure at the expense of 
 the needy. The unhappy Jews who were permitted to follow 
 no other avocation than dealing in money, who were shut 
 out from all ennobling pursuits, who were made to pay with 
 silver for mere existence, for questionable protection, for the 
 very air which they breathed, were branded as usurers. His 
 Holiness the Pope sanctioned plunder and extortion by the 
 practices of which he benefited ; but he was infallible, and 
 all his acts were pious deeds. 
 
 The oppressions to which the Jews fell victims continued. 
 Westminster Abbey was rebuilt, and though heretics could 
 not be admitted within its precincts, their funds were as 
 useful as those of true believers ; so the Jews were made to 
 contribute to the pious work. The widow of an opulent 
 Jew of Oxford was constrained to give considerable sums, 
 and all Jews of means furnished compulsory assistance in 
 proportion. 
 
 The exactions practised on the Jews rendered them obnoxious 
 to the inhabitants of the towns where they dwelt. The Jews 
 actually disbursed the amounts requisitioned, yet large sums 
 
 B 
 
j 8 INTR OD UCTI ON. 
 
 were withdrawn from the district, and the whole neighbourhood 
 became impoverished. Many towns applied for charters ex¬ 
 empting them from the presence of Israelites. Members ot 
 that unhappy race wandered about the country with their 
 families, houseless and vainly seeking for shelter. In many 
 places they were treated with open violeuce. On the sorriest 
 pretext they became victims to every kind of cruelty and rapa¬ 
 city, and hundreds fell under the fury of an ignorant and fana¬ 
 tical mob. At Norwich, at Brentford, at Oxford, the Jews were 
 thrown into dungeons and their houses pillaged on the most 
 frivolous excuses. At Lincoln, a rumour was spread that 
 they had crucified a boy eight years old. He had been fat¬ 
 tened with white bread and milk—so it was alleged—lie had 
 been scourged, crowned with thorns, he had been made to 
 drink gall, and at last his side had been pierced with a spear. 
 This highly probable story found universal credence. The 
 Jews were tried on this charge after the fashion of the day. 
 That is to say r they were placed under torture,, until un¬ 
 speakable physical agony tore from them a confession of their 
 imaginary crime. The master of the house where the dead 
 child was discovered, was tied to the tail of a horse and torn 
 to pieces. Eighty-eight of the richest Jews of Lincoln were 
 dragged to London in chains as accomplices, and were 
 drawn and quartered, and their bodies hanged. on entirely 
 new gibbets. Twenty-three more Jews were consigned to the 
 Tower of London to wait for a similar fate. As for the 
 voung martyr it was proved that the earth would not leceive 
 his remains, and as often as they were interred they were 
 again vomited forth. So he was duly canonized, and his 
 tomb in Lincoln attracted crowds of devout pilgrims. 
 
 At Oxford the Jews met with another disaster. It was 
 alleged that during a procession of the chancellors, masteis 
 and scholars, accompanied by the clergy, to the relics of S. 
 Frideswide, an individual said to be a Jew snatched a cro^s 
 from its bearer, trampled upon it, and broke it in pieces. 
 We do not know whether . in those days Jews were 
 allowed to be present at religious processions, but at all 
 events, no Israelite would have been insane enough to expose 
 himself to certain death. But when accusations vere hi ought 
 forward against Jews, mere probabilities were not studied, and 
 
INTRODUCTION. lg 
 
 the wildest charges were made and believed, without the 
 slightest evidence. Fortunately they escaped a massacre 
 in this instance. They were ordered to provide funds for 
 the election of a cross of white marble with a gilt image 
 of the Virgin and Child, and also to give a silver cross to 
 be borne in future processions before the masters and 
 scholars. As the means required were not forthcoming, all 
 the Jews were arrested and sent to gaol; and as they pleaded 
 inability, all their property in the hands of third parties 
 was seized. The statue was completed after some delay and 
 erected before Merton College. 
 
 The Jews were mercilessly bandied about in a royal game of 
 financial shuttlecock and battledore. From the King they 
 were transferred to his son Prince Edward, and by him to some 
 Caturcensian merchants, until the Crown seized them again.. 
 Each temporary owner sought to enrich himself at their ex¬ 
 pense. In the civil wars that raged in the latter years of 
 Henry III., they as usual proved the severest sufferers. The 
 King seized their money to fight the barons : and the barons 
 stripped the Jews because they had assisted the king. After 
 the battles of Lewes and Evesham, the Jews of London, 
 Lincoln, Northampton, and Cambridge, were robbed of their 
 portable wealth ; and the richest among them were carried 
 away until released by heavy ransoms.. The populace, on 
 witnessing the ill-usage of the Jews, concluded that they 
 were not entitled to the protection of the law, and, imitating 
 their superiors, they pillaged and maltreated the Jews on 
 their own account. 
 
 The King recollected that the Jews were Crowm property, 
 and he awoke to the folly of allowing others to injure that 
 property. He gave permission to the Jews who had sought 
 safety in the Tower and elsewhere to return home. By his 
 orders Parliament restored to them their goods and chattels. 
 They agreed to pay to the King £1000 to be free from 
 taxes for a certain period, on condition that during that 
 time the King should neither undertake a crusade nor set out 
 for a foreign journey. The temporary lull in the persecution 
 of Jews lasted but little, and the rapacity of Henry III. be¬ 
 came greater than ever. A few individual Israelites were 
 especially exempted from chronic extortion by favour of some 
 
20 
 
 INTR 0D UCTION. 
 
 member of the Koyal Family. At tlie instance of the 
 Church the religious and personal liberty of the Jews was re¬ 
 stricted at the end of the reign. They were not allowed to 
 build schools, except where they already existed. They 
 were commanded to pray slowly in the Synagogues, so 
 that no Christian ears might be shocked by the sound of 
 prayers to the Lord of Israel. No Christian was to serve a 
 Jew or abide with him in his house, and no Christian 
 woman was to nurse or suckle the child of a Jew. Ho Jew or 
 Jewess should eat meat in Lent, or enter church or chapel, 
 or dwell in any place except where they resided before, with¬ 
 out the permission of the King. 
 
 Another heavy blow to the Jews proved the last statute 
 enacted by the King on their affairs. This law prohibited 
 Jews from holding any longer any freehold in any manor, 
 lands, tenements, &c., whatever the origin of the property 
 might have been. They were only allowed to retain the 
 houses where they dwelt. All their lands were taken away 
 from them. Those on which they had advanced money on 
 mortgage to Christians, w^ere returned to their owners on 
 receipt of the principal without interest. 
 
 After this the King levied new taxes, punishing with a 
 kind of fury the defaulters ; that is, those who were too poor 
 to satisfy his greed. Even the bitterest enemies of the 
 Jews, the Caorsini, and the monks, pitied the lot of the 
 wretched Jews, for their fate in the last days of Henry III. 
 was indeed bitter. The sums extracted by the King from the 
 Jews were enormous. Payments have been recorded to the 
 amount of 214,825 marks of silver, as well as £1000 and 
 some small sums in gold. In addition, the community on 
 repeated occasions were called upon to contribute a third or 
 a fourth of their total property, and private individuals were 
 continuously and heavily taxed. Considering the value of 
 money in those days, our Jewish readers will form some 
 notion as to the sacrifices borne by their ancestors in this 
 country. 
 
 The death of Henry brought momentary relief to the Jews, 
 but, alas! it was only momentary. Koyal proclamations 
 brought forth promises of protection to Jews and Christians, 
 to prove as usual empty words. Edward I. determined to 
 
INTR OD UCTION. 
 
 21 
 
 obtain from the Jews only the sums be required, so as to gain 
 popularity. The registers of the Jews were examined, a new 
 tallage was imposed upon them, and payment enforced with 
 the greatest severity. The goods and chattels of the Jews 
 were levied in satisfaction of the King’s demands ; and if 
 they proved insufficient, banishment or imprisonment fol¬ 
 lowed. These measures were so ruthlessly applied by the 
 clerical tribunal appointed to carry them out, that even the 
 King himself took compassion, and some Israelites were 
 released by his orders. In answer to popular complaints 
 against the Jews, the King, in the third year of his reign, 
 passed the so-called statutum cle Judaismo. It was enacted 
 therein that no Jew should practice usury; that no distress 
 for debt to a Jew should be so grievous as not to leave the 
 debtor the moiety of his lands and chattels ; that no Jew 
 should have power to sell any house, rent, or tenement with¬ 
 out the King’s leave. Jews might purchase houses in cities 
 as heretofore and take leases to farm land for ten years. They 
 might carry on mercantile transactions in cities, provided 
 they were not talliable with the other inhabitants of the city. 
 They might reside only in such towns as were the King’s own. 
 All Jews above seven years were to wear two tablets of vellow 
 taffety on their breasts; the order soon afterwards was ex¬ 
 tended to females, and all Israelites above the age of twelve 
 were to pay at once the sum of threepence to the King. 
 
 Efforts were made to convert the Jews to Christianity. 
 
 V 
 
 Dominican friars offered to preach before the stubborn Jews, 
 and the latter were ordered to go to church and listen to 
 reason. Until then, Jews adopting Christianity forfeited 
 the whole of their property. As an inducement, neophytes 
 at this period were allowed to retain one-half of their pos¬ 
 sessions, the remainder being allotted to the house of con¬ 
 verts established in Chancery Lane in the previous reign. 
 It does not appear that many Jews were tempted to embrace 
 a new dispensation, the followers of which seemed, in those 
 days, to pride themselves on their rapacity, their cruelty, and 
 their inhumanity. 
 
 The Jews remained subject to heavy tallages and fines. 
 Their money chests were examined by order of Government, 
 and their effects were seized and appropriated. Moreover, 
 
22 
 
 JNTR OD UCTION. 
 
 they were accused of various crimes, especially of clipping 
 and falsifying coins. As we have already said, when the 
 Jews were concerned at that period, accusation meant con¬ 
 demnation. On the most slender grounds two hundred and 
 ninety-four Jews, in London alone, were put to death in one 
 year. A new source of extortion now arose against that un¬ 
 happy race. They were threatened to be charged with coin- 
 ■clipping, unless they purchased silence. The King then 
 ordered that thenceforth no Jew should be answerable for 
 any offence committed before. A Jew so accused, however, 
 should pay a tax to the King. In the sixteenth year of 
 his reign the principal Jews of the realm were thrown into 
 prison one night, and were only restored to freedom on 
 payment of £20,000. At the same time popular clamour 
 •against the Jews became more and more widely spread and 
 violent. The clergy and gentry joined the people in de¬ 
 manding the expulsion of the Jews. Edward, to satisfy his 
 French subjects, had already exiled the Israelites from his 
 continental dominions. On his return to London he was 
 received with signs of joy and approbation for so noble a 
 deed. Before this feeling could subside, the King was in¬ 
 duced to sign a decree for the final banishment of the Jews 
 from England. The pressure must have been great to impel 
 so sagacious a monarch to kill the hen with the golden 
 eggs. It was commonly reported that the Jews had eaten 
 his people to the bones, and that they had caused great hard¬ 
 ships to the country. What the Jews had endured at the 
 hands of King, nobles, clergy, and people, nobody thought it 
 worth while to consider. This unhappy people had laboured 
 for centuries to enrich the King and the state. Tolerated 
 only because they yielded so much treasure, the children of 
 Israel were regarded as common property and common prey. 
 It would not be surprising if, under these circumstances, 
 some few of them had resorted to illicit practices to gather 
 those precious metals with which they purchased their very 
 existence. It is probable too that the populace shouted for 
 the expulsion of the Jews, in order to cancel the debts which 
 they owed to the hated Israelites. In return for this act 
 of grace, the King received from the commons one-fifteenth 
 of their goods, and the clergy, in token of their approval 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 2 3 
 
 of so much mercifulness, made him a gift of one-tenth of 
 their personalities. The decree of the King commanded that 
 all Jews with their families should quit England before the 
 Feast of All Saints. As a matter of generosity, Edward 
 permitted them to take with them a part of their chattels 
 and sufficient money to defray the expenses of the journey. 
 All their houses and the great mass of their property and 
 treasure were appropriated by the King. True, he promised 
 the Church liberal grants from the vast wealth he had plun¬ 
 dered, hut his words remained only empty promises. He be¬ 
 stowed dowries on three of his daughters who married at 
 that period; and the Court of Queen Eleanor became 
 renowned for the splendour and magnificence of its gold and 
 silver plate. We do not suppose that King Edward bore 
 any especial animosity against the Jews. He desired to 
 court popularity, and he found means which easily fulfilled 
 his object and enriched him in addition. The fable of hero 
 worship is now exploded. The so-called heroes of the Middle 
 Ages stand now in their true lights. We see them as they 
 were—insolent, rapacious, and unprincipled tyrants, whose 
 virtues, if they happened to possess any, were overshaded 
 by their crimes. 
 
 The people of England did not allow the Jews to depart 
 in peace. They persecuted them, ill-treated them, and 
 robbed them of the few coins that had been spared to them. 
 The King gave the principal Jews a safe conduct, which was 
 not always respected. They fell victims to numerous out¬ 
 rages. A story is told of the master of a vessel who took 
 a number of Jews on board. He stopped at Queenborough, 
 and went on shore, followed by the Jewish passengers. As 
 the tide was rising the master and crew returned to the ship, 
 leaving behind the Jews, unconscious of their danger. Too 
 late they entreated the mariner to save them. He laughed 
 and jeered, and told them to call on Moses who had led 
 them through the Red Sea. Consigning them to their fate, 
 he sailed away with their small remaining effects. The 
 master unfortunately boasted of his valiant feat, when, it is 
 said, he was arrested, tried, and hanged for murder. Ac¬ 
 cording to another version, however, he was rewarded by the 
 King. The number of Jews who quitted England in 1290 
 
24 
 
 INTR OD UCTION. 
 
 is differently estimated at 15,060 or at 16,511 persons. They 
 went principally to Spain, Sicily, Africa, and the east. Their 
 valuable libraries were appropriated by Convents, the richest 
 of them being those of Stamford and of Oxford. 
 
 One or two authorities have attributed the banishment of 
 the Jews to the fact that a Dominican friar, being enamoured 
 of a Jewess, became a convert to Judaism, and subsequently 
 sought safety in flight. This act, it is alleged, being re¬ 
 garded as a slur upon the Church, caused its high digni¬ 
 taries to bestir themselves, and thus they induced the King 
 to sign the edict for the banishment of the Jew r s. This 
 version is derived from a Jewish writer. However romantic 
 the story may be, it seems to us improbable and far-fetched; 
 and being uncorroborated by sufficient testimony, we cannot 
 think it deserving of credence. 
 
 For two centuries there must have been few, if any, resident 
 Jews in this country. In the course of time, however, their 
 commercial pursuits and their enterprising nature must have 
 brought occasionally some Israelites to these shores. During 
 the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Jews began to visit England 
 freely, and we hear of their presence in these realms. His¬ 
 tory tells us that Queen Elizabeth confided the care of her 
 health to a Jewish physician, Rodrigo Lopez; for in those 
 days Jewish doctors were in fashion with crowned heads, 
 just as French cooks have been in more recent times. A 
 conspiracy was organised against Rodrigo Lopez by jealous 
 courtiers. He was accused of an attempt to poison the 
 Queen, and his fate being resolved upon, it became easy to 
 justify legal murder by sham evidence. Probably individual 
 Jews were tolerated in England at that period in the same 
 way as they remained unmolested in Spain under Queen 
 Isabella. Some Israelites doubtless dwelt in England prior 
 to the advent of Oliver Cromwell, or under the Common¬ 
 wealth. We know that in 1650 a Jew, named Jacobs, first 
 introduced the use of coffee in this country by opening a 
 coffee-house at Oxford. It was only under the Protectorate 
 that organized efforts were made by Jews from abroad to 
 regain a footing in this country. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND. 
 
 Ho complete and authentic account of the circumstances attend¬ 
 ing the re-establishment of the children of Israel in this country, 
 during the seventeenth century, can be discovered. It appears 
 that negotiations were held at the time of the Commonwealth 
 between some foreign Jews and the British Government, with 
 reference to the re-admission of the former into this country. 
 Wild reports were circulated concerning the wealth of the Jews 
 in those days, and we find historians gravely asserting that 
 the Israelites offered to advance to Parliament £500,000, re¬ 
 quiring in return the cession of St Paul’s Cathedral, to be 
 converted into a Synagogue, and moreover, the Bodleian 
 Library at Oxford ! Parliament, according to the story, did 
 not seem at all scandalised at the demand for the grandest 
 national temple and the richest national library, but insisted 
 on increasing their stipulated price to £800,000. It is diffi¬ 
 cult to say whether there is any substratum of truth in this 
 statement, or whether it is wholly mythical. Certain it is, 
 that some correspondence did take place between the Jews of 
 Amsterdam and Oliver Cromwell, who gave them permission 
 to send over an agent to represent their interest. 
 
 Menasseh ben Israel was in this instance the champion 
 and representative of Judaism. He was born in Spain or 
 Portugal about 1604 ; and his family was connected with 
 that of the illustrious Isaac Abarbanel. His father, a rich 
 merchant, succeeded in effecting his escape into Holland with 
 his household. Menasseh was educated under Rabbi Isaac 
 Uziel, and pursued his studies with such success that, at the 
 age of eighteen, he was appointed preacher and expounder of the 
 Talmud, in the Synagogue of Amsterdam, in the place of his 
 ancient master. Before Menasseh was twenty-eight years 
 
26 THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND . 
 
 old, he published in Spanish the first part of his Conciliador , 
 of which a Latin version was issued on the following year by 
 Dionysius Yossius. This work was recommended to the 
 notice of biblical scholars by Grotius, who did not disdain 
 to consult Menasseh ben Israel on the thorniest points of 
 theology. 
 
 In 1656 Menasseh wrote his Apology for the Jews in Eng¬ 
 lish. At that time he had already printed sixty other books 
 in English, Hebrew, and Spanish. The Inquisition had con¬ 
 fiscated his paternal estates in the Iberian peninsula, and 
 during his latter years, he was constrained to exchange the 
 study of the mental treasures he loved so well, for the 
 merchant’s ledger, and, as some say, for the watchmaker’s 
 workshop. He died in Amsterdam, shortly after his return 
 from his mission to London, either in 1657 or 1659. He was 
 the author of numerous works of a philosophical, historical, 
 and critical nature; he was a profound Hebraist, an adept in 
 hermeneutics, and a graceful scholar. He was well versed 
 in several languages, ancient and modern; and he was inti¬ 
 mate with some of the great thinkers of the day. Grotius 
 valued his friendship, and Gaspar Barlmus said of him : 
 
 11 Si sapemus diversa Deo vivamus amici, 
 
 Doctaque mens pretio constet ubique suo, 
 
 Hsec Fidei vox summa mea est : Hoc credo Menasse, 
 
 Sic ego Christiades, sic eris Abramides.” 
 
 These liberal sentiments—uttered in the days when the 
 Holy Inquisition was periodically consigning to the flames 
 scores of Jews and heretics, and when to belong to the race 
 that gave a Messiah to the Christians was to be subjected to 
 degradation and persecution—caused considerable trouble to 
 poor Barlmus, who was fain to conceal as much as possible 
 his indiscretion. 
 
 We will not dwell on the various interviews of Menasseh 
 ben Israel with Cromwell before the Privy Council and the 
 eminent magistrates, the wealthy merchants, and the erudite 
 divines summoned to meet him. We will only repeat some 
 of the arguments employed in favour of his cause by those 
 who supported his proposals. The Israelites should be ad¬ 
 mitted “ because their brothers we are of the same father 
 Abraham; they naturally after the flesh, we believers after 
 
THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENG LANE. 27 
 
 the spirit. Because many Jews are now in very great straits 
 in many places, multitudes in Poland, Lithuania, and Prussia 
 by the late wars, by the Swedes, Cossacks, and others being 
 driven away from thence. Hence their yearly alms to the 
 poor Jews of the German Synagogue at Jerusalem hath 
 ceased, and of seven hundred widows and poor Jews there 
 about four hundred have been famished, as a letter from 
 Jerusalem to their friends relates. Also the Jews in Spain, 
 France, Portugal, and in the Indies under the Spanish crown ; 
 if they are professed Jews they must wear a badge of it, and 
 are exposed to many acts of violence and cruelties, to avoid 
 which many dissemble themselves to be Homan Catholics; 
 and then if in anything they appear Jewish they forfeit 
 goods if not life also. How some of these entreated Habbi 
 Manasseh to be their agent to entreat this favour for their 
 coming to England, to live and to trade here.” 
 
 Such was the unhappy condition, as described by Christians, 
 of the descendants of Abraham. Contemned, reviled, pil¬ 
 laged, murdered, neither their property nor their lives w r ere 
 safe except in a few places, such as Leghorn and Amster¬ 
 dam, when they humbly applied to be received on the 
 shores of Albion. Their “proposals” were unpretending 
 enough; they only prayed to be permitted to erect a Syna¬ 
 gogue wherein to worship the God of their fathers; to traffic 
 in merchandise, to be protected in limb and chattel, to bury 
 their dead. They begged also that any law existing against 
 them be repealed, and they proffered in order to save the State 
 from unnecessary trouble, that the heads of the congregation 
 should arrange all disputes or differences arising between its 
 members. 
 
 During the debate at Whitehall on the re-admission of 
 the Jews within the British realm, popular feeling seems to 
 have been engaged on both sides of the question, and it 
 found its vent in a number of pamphlets that were issued 
 from the press. Among the most strenuous opponents of 
 the return of the children of Israel was conspicuous the noted 
 Prynne—he who forfeited his position at the bar, as well as 
 his ears, for writing “the Histrio-mastix ” or “ Players' 
 Scourge.” On one occasion he was interrogated by the Hev. 
 M. Nye, the rector of Acton, who held totally different views 
 
28 THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND. 
 
 on the subject, as to whether he knew of any law against 
 bringing in the Jews? Upon which Prynne replied that 
 whatever might be the opinion of others, he was himself 
 certain that they could only be brought in by Act of Parlia¬ 
 ment. This consummation, he added, he would struggle 
 against and withstand to the utmost of his power, for he 
 would fain save his country from the disgrace of harbouring 
 clippers, forgers of money, and men that had crucified living- 
 children. Partly for this laudable purpose, and partly to 
 thwart Cromwell, whom he suspected, and probably justly 
 suspected, of favouring the Jews, he composed a small book 
 entitled : 66 A Short Demurrer to the Jew's, &c.,” wherein he 
 set forth all that could make the name of Jew odious. 
 Prynne displayed in this diatribe that partiality and virulence 
 of temper, accompanied with that want of judgment, which 
 are remarkable in all his -writings. He was answered by one 
 Thomas Collier, who, dedicating his effusion to Oliver Crom¬ 
 well, satisfactorily proved that the descendants of the Patri¬ 
 archs—notwithstanding all arguments to the contrary—ought 
 to receive a shelter in this country. 
 
 The Judges declared that there w r ere no laws prohibiting the 
 Jev r s from dwelling in England. Nevertheless, the repeated 
 conferences of the Privy Council, which lasted between the 
 4th and 18th December 1655, ended without producing any 
 immediate result. There must indeed at one time have been 
 a decision in favour of the Jews, for Evelyn says, under date of 
 the 14th December 1655 : 6i Now were the Jews admitted.” 
 Bishop Burnet, moreover, writes that, “ he (Oliver Cromw-ell) 
 brought a company of them (Jews) over to England, and gave 
 them leave to build a Synagogue.” On the other hand, the 
 Political Mercurius, a kind of journal published at the time, 
 and the Harleian Miscellany most distinctly aver that on the 
 18th December 1655, the Lord Protector dismissed the as¬ 
 sembly without having arrived at any conclusion, because the 
 Council w r ere of tw 7 o or three distinct opinions. The Harleian 
 Miscellany further adds : u Rabbi Manasses remained in Lon¬ 
 don some time, but he had received no reply to that date (1st 
 April 1656) wdiicli w r as, according to Holy Scripture, 14th or 
 15th Abib, the first month also called Nissan, when the 
 feast of Passover was to be kept. Many Jewish merchants 
 
THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND. 29 
 
 had come from beyond the seas to London, and hoped they 
 might have enjoyed as much privilege here, in respect of 
 trading, and of their worshipping the God of Abraham, Isaac, 
 and Jacob here in Synagogue publicly, as they enjoy in 
 Poland, Russia, and other places. But after the conference 
 and debate at Whitehall was ended, they heard by some that 
 the greater part of the ministers were against this, therefore 
 they removed hence to beyond the seas, with much grief of 
 heart that they were thus disappointed in their hopes.” 
 
 Who was the writer of the above passage we are not 
 told; but had he been a Jew he could not have spoken more 
 feelingly and sympathisingly. This, at all events, renders 
 clear one point, and that is, that there were other Jews in 
 England at the time in addition to Menasseh ben Israel. In 
 fact, we are distinctly assured by some authorities, that an¬ 
 other party of Jews came over contemporaneously to that of 
 the rabbi and physician, headed by cc one of their most 
 learned rabbis,” who is not named. Their ostensible object 
 was to establish a company to trade with the Levant. Their 
 real object was said to be to inquire into the pedigree of the 
 Lord Protector, and to prove him, if practicable, a descendant 
 of the Messiah. The same individuals are asserted to have 
 negotiated at a private interview with Cromwell, for the 
 purchase of the valuable library of the University of Cam¬ 
 bridge. They obtained permission to repair to that city, and 
 they examined and took catalogue of the most valuable 
 books. After a time they appear to have established them¬ 
 selves at Huntingdon, Cromwell’s birthplace, to inquire as to 
 his supposed descent from the Messiah. The research was 
 not conducted with sufficient prudence, and the subject of it 
 soon became known. Cromwell found himself exposed to 
 public raillery, and he commanded them to return to London, 
 where he summoned them before the Privy Council and 
 ordered them to depart the country. 
 
 Leaving aside the absurd fable of the Jews seeking for a 
 Messiah in Oliver Cromwell, or the still greater absurdity of 
 their looking for his descent from a Messiah, who, accord¬ 
 ing to Jewish belief, never existed, we gather from the 
 legend that separate attempts, in addition to those made by 
 Menasseh ben Israel, were effected by other Jews to obtain 
 
3 o THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND. 
 
 a footing in England. In what precise year the Jews first 
 openly commenced residing in the British Islands, we have 
 no means of ascertaining. Probably some few families 
 remained in England from the time of Menasseli ben Isiael, 
 though the Jews did not take up their abode in any number 
 in this country until the Restoration. The “ Merry Mon¬ 
 arch” proved himself a wise monarch in this one respect, for 
 he extended his mgis over the persecuted race, and displayed 
 a tolerance and foresight scarcely expected from a prince of 
 his character. One of the great bugbears of the opponents 
 of the admission of the new settlers, was the fear lest the 
 wicked Jews should seduce and corrupt good Christians and 
 turn them to their own faith. It must have been to guard 
 against the possible dangers of such occurrences, that we 
 find the most stringent enactments passed by the early law¬ 
 makers of the Israelites, under the severest penalties in their 
 power to inflict, against the reception of proselytes into the 
 community. This principle has been so rigidly adhered to 
 even to the present day here, that the spiritual guides of the 
 Jewish community have ever persistently refused to admit 
 strangers to the rites, privileges, and duties of Judaism. 
 
 Before the end of 1660 the Jews had attracted some 
 public attention, for whilst on the one hand, Thomas Violet, 
 a goldsmith, petitioned the King for their expulsion and the 
 confiscation of their property, on the other, an order of the 
 Lords in Council was presented to the House of Commons, 
 recommending to the House to take measures for the protec¬ 
 tion of the Jews. The narrow-minded goldsmith’s petition 
 did not have a successful issue, and the descendants of the 
 patriarchs were not molested. It has been asserted that as 
 early as 1656 there was a Jewish place of worship in London, 
 but we cannot find that this statement is borne out by facts. 
 On the contrary, considering the very limited number of 
 Israelites that could then have been discovered in this capital 
 and their precarious position, we are inclined to question the 
 accuracy of this assertion. 
 
 The earliest authentic record of a Jewish Synagogue in 
 London dates from 1662. The building, which was situated 
 in King Street, Aldgate, consisted merely of a house 
 temporarily fitted up for the purpose. The number of 
 
THE RETURN OF THE JEWS TO ENGLAND. 31 
 
 the children of Israel then existing in this country seems to 
 have been somewhat differently estimated. Dr Chamberlain 
 stated that there were thirty or forty families at most, whilst 
 one Thomas Greenhalgh, who visited the Synagogue in the 
 above year, narrated that he found therein upwards of 66 one 
 hundred men apparently of affluence, and the ladies were 
 very richly attired.” 
 
 The oldest congregation in London, it is known, is that of 
 the Sephardim or Spanish and Portuguese Jews. Its founders 
 came over from Holland, but also, to a limited extent, from 
 Portugal and from Italy. Indeed, when it became understood 
 that the Jews were tolerated in Great Britain, many of their 
 less fortunate coreligionists on the Continent crossed the 
 Channel to establish themselves here, induced partly by their 
 unsafe position at home, and partly from a desire to extend 
 their commercial transactions in a country which was already 
 acquiring a reputation for enterprise and industry. Ho 
 doubt the original immigrants hither from Amsterdam were 
 men of means, intelligence, and education, and they were 
 very careful to preserve the high standard of their body, 
 which accounts for the somewhat exclusive character of their 
 legislation. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON. 
 
 It lias been difficult to ascertain who were the first Jewish im¬ 
 migrants into this country, after the time of the visit of Me- 
 nasseh ben Israel. But Emanuel Mendes da Costa, an eminent 
 natural philosopher of the eighteenth century, bequeathed 
 among his papers a curious note. This document is neither 
 more nor less than a list of the names of the original 
 Jewish settlers in this country—a most interesting and 
 important document. It is impossible for us to ascertain 
 its accuracy; we can only say that its learned possessor 
 seemed to place entire faith in its correctness. Accepting, 
 then, the authenticity of the information, it confirms our 
 assertions that the re-establishment of the Jews in Great 
 Britain took place under the reign of the gay Charles, and 
 not under the protectorate of the stern Oliver, though the 
 exact year is not fixed. This list had been handed by Dr 
 Chauncey to Mr Mendes da Costa. It is evidently written 
 by a foreigner, possessing only a slight acquaintance with 
 the English tongue. At the same time the orthography of 
 the day is followed, in so far as any recognised form of 
 orthography is adopted. We will transcribe the document 
 literally:— 
 
 “The widow Fendenadoeswith her tow sons and tow servants, Leaden- 
 hall Street. 
 
 Sinor Antony Desousa, Boshapgat Street. 
 
 Sinor M’uell Rodregoes, Crechurch Laine. 
 
 Sinor Samuell Devega, in Beues Marks, great, jeweller. 
 
 Sinor Antony Rodregus Robles, Duck’s Plate. 
 
 Sinor Josep ) Deohnezous 
 
 Sinor Mihell ] Duck’s Plate, brothers. 
 
 Sinor Duart Henrycus. 
 
THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN IONDON. 
 
 33 
 
 Sinor Perera ) Brothers at a Plum- 
 
 Sinor Perear ) bers in Chrechurch. 
 
 Three mor Jewes. Merchants at the sam hous. 
 
 Sinor Dn. Diego Rodrego Aries, Fanchurch Street. 
 
 Sinor Dormedio and Sin Soloman, his son, St. tellen’s. 
 
 Sin. Soloman Frankies, Fanchurch Street. 
 
 Sin. Manuel de Costa Berto, Duck’s Plate. 
 
 Sin. Doctor Boyno, Phision to the Jews, Duck’s Plate. 
 
 Sin. Steauen Rodregoes, near Algat. 
 
 Sin. Franco Gomes, St. Mary Acts. 
 
 Sin. Moses Eatees, Chreechurch Lane, a Jewish Rubay. 
 
 Sin. Beniman Lewme, Chreechurch Laine. 
 
 Sin. Aron Gabey, Duck’s Plate. 
 
 Sin. Domingo Deserga, Duck’s Plate. 
 
 Sin. David Mier, Leadenhall Street. 
 
 Sin. Moediga, Clerk of the Synagogue. 
 
 Most have wifes and sarvants-.” 
 
 Some of the above names are easily recognisable through 
 their grotesque disguise ; others are more puzzling. We find 
 no such patronymics as Deohnegous (Dionisius ?), or Boyno, 
 or Henrycus, in the early records of the Portuguese congre¬ 
 gation. These Jewish visitors appear nearly all to have been 
 of Spanish or Portuguese origin, with two or three excep¬ 
 tions ; such as Solomon Frankies (Frankel), Beniman Lewme 
 (Levin), and David Mier. Neither can we state whether 
 they all remained in this country. Some of the Sephardic 
 names became well known in the community; of others no 
 trace is left, and it is not at all impossible that a few 
 families may not have found sufficient temptation to take up 
 permanently their abode in the British capital. 
 
 This would help to dispose of a statement attributed by 
 the learned author of the 66 Anglia Judaica,” to Hah am 
 Netto, that in 1663 the whole number of Jews in London 
 did not exceed twelve. 
 
 There must be some misapprehension in the matter, for 
 the learned Rabbi could scarcely have made a report so inac¬ 
 curate. Even in 1662 w 7 e have the testimony of Christian 
 observers, which we have already cited in our previous chapter, 
 to the effect that the Synagogue in King Street was well 
 attended, and that on one occasion upwards of one hundred 
 men were there worshipping their Creator. Twelve men 
 surely could never have formed or supported a Synagogue; 
 
 c 
 
34 
 
 THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON. 
 
 their presence would not have been known or felt in this 
 country, neither do we see any reason to disbelieve the allega¬ 
 tions of Christian eyewitnesses, who could have no reason to 
 exaggerate numbers or make wilfully false declarations. In 
 conclusion, we are able to ascertain by contemporary statis¬ 
 tics, that twelve children were born in the Jewish community 
 in 1663. Now in London, the births average about 139,000 
 yearly, in a population of say three millions and a quarter. 
 In the same proportion twelve births would represent a 
 population of nearly 280 individuals, which is much nearer 
 the mark, and which agrees with the statement made by 
 Thomas Greenhalgh. In conclusion, the individuals above 
 named, with their wives and servants, must, among them¬ 
 selves, have numbered a hundred. 
 
 During the same year, 1663, the Hebrews in London were 
 pained by the public conversion to Christianity of an Italian 
 Eabbi named Moses Scialitti. This individual was baptized 
 upon Trinity Sunday at St Margaret’s, Westminster, by the 
 Eev. D. Warmestre, Dean of Worcester, his sponsors being 
 George, Lord Bishop of Chester, and Samuel Collins, Doctor in 
 Physic, and his godmother, Lucy, Countess of Huntingdon, 
 daughter of Sir John Davies, the Irish Attorney-General. 
 The Eev. Paul, alias Moses, Scialitti, subsequently addressed 
 a letter to his former coreligionists, explaining the cause of 
 his adopting a new faith, and exhorting them to follow his 
 example, and to come within the true fold. His advice does 
 not appear to have gained many followers, and only three or 
 four conversions among the Jews occurred at this period. 
 One of these converts was a wealthy merchant named 
 Dupass, or more probably De Pass or De Paz, as the name 
 was originally spelt. 
 
 In the following year, in 1664, the Jews in England were 
 rapidly increasing in number, and a regular constitution was 
 drawn up and adopted in the congregation. The necessary 
 funds were secured by the imposition of a kind of income- 
 tax, consisting of a very small percentage, levied on all 
 goods bought or sold, and also by the addition of one 
 farthing for every pound of meat consumed by the com¬ 
 munity. Then two wardens and a treasurer were appointed, 
 and the first officials in the Portuguese congregation whose 
 
THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON 
 
 35 
 
 names liave been recorded were David Abarbanel Dormido, 
 MosseL BarnL Lousada, and Elias de Lima. When the con¬ 
 gregation was duly organised, it was found necessary to 
 procure the services of a spiritual guide to expound the 
 Jewish law, and to recite the prayers in Synagogue. There 
 being no one suitable in London, the services of a Rabbi 
 from Amsterdam were secured, and Haham Jacob Sasportas 
 was the first religious head of the Sephardim in our capital. 
 Haham Sasportas was a pious man, and, moreover, a great 
 talmudist. This gentleman was engaged to deliver Dinim 
 (decisions) daily, to teach Gemara, and to officiate as Hazan; 
 whilst his son, Samuel Sasportas, undertook the office of 
 supplying meat to the Jews according to religious custom. 
 
 The most important duty of the ruling spirits of the con¬ 
 gregation was the preparation of a code of laws to determine 
 the functions of honorary and of paid officials, the principles 
 which should regulate the conduct of different members of 
 the congregation towards each other and towards the outer 
 world; and finally, to provide for the management of the 
 Synagogue economically and religiously. The Roman Re¬ 
 public had shown its wisdom in its veneration for custom; 
 and no nation has followed with more implicit obedience and 
 reverence the decrees of immutable custom than the Jews. 
 In this especial case, however, written legislation was re¬ 
 quired, and the instances of the ancient communities of 
 Venice and of Amsterdam were imitated. 
 
 The task of the founders of the London congregation was 
 unquestionably an arduous one. They were persons of un¬ 
 blemished character, but their brethren might be expected to 
 gather thither from distant lands, tempted by the display of 
 religious toleration, or by the hope of realising a fortune. 
 There might be arrivals of ignorant fanatics from the wilds 
 of Poland, or of unlettered traders from Turkey, of men who 
 were unacquainted with Western manners and civilization. 
 The heads of the Jews were constrained to remember that 
 they were strangers in a foreign country, surrounded by a 
 population, which, if not openly hostile, at all events, eyed 
 them with distrust and jealousy, and where the slightest 
 offence against the laws of the land might entail misery and 
 expulsion to all of their race. Moreover, they dwelt in the 
 
THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON. 
 
 36 
 
 midst of easily-aroused Englishmen, and not of phlegmatic 
 Dutchmen, and in the bosom of a nation wherein reigned at 
 the same time the extreme of licentiousness and disbelief, 
 and the extreme of religious hypocrisy. The gay courtiers 
 of fair Albion worshipped as their divinities only Bacchus 
 and Venus. The gloomy saints prayed to a Lord of their 
 own selection, that he might smite all those whose theolo- 
 logical opinions were not in exact accordance with their own. 
 The lower classes were divided by a strong sectarian spirit, 
 each sect believing itself the only one chosen for salvation, 
 while all the others were doomed to everlasting punishment. 
 Popular pastimes were rough and cruel, and personal violence 
 was resorted to on the slightest provocation. Bull-baiting, 
 cock-fighting, and pugilistic encounters were the ordinary 
 diversion of the people, occasionally varied by the finding 
 and roasting of a witch at the stake. 
 
 It will be easily perceived how precarious was the position 
 of the new immigrants, and how guarded their every act 
 had to be, not to imperil their safety. It was in this spirit 
 of cautious prudence that the founders of the Portuguese 
 congregation approached their task. The laws they promul¬ 
 gated may be roughly classed into three divisions, viz.:—• 
 
 1. Those regulating the internal service of the Synagogue. 
 
 2. Those providing for the maintenance of the congrega¬ 
 tion, and the raising and administration of its funds. 
 
 3. Those finally laying down a basis for the social conduct 
 of Jew towards Jew and towards Christian. 
 
 It is these last that mainly deserve our attention, as 
 throwing some light on the spirit in which the Israelites met 
 the peculiar circumstances that surrounded them. A Jew 
 was not to be allowed to take legal proceedings against a 
 brother in faith, unless the question at issue had been 
 argued first before the Farnccssim (wardens). Should a 
 settlement not be arrived at, then only each party might be 
 at liberty to have recourse elsewhere. The Mahamad 
 (Council) was endowed with extensive powers, and practised 
 a mild and paternal despotism. No Jew was to be per¬ 
 mitted to hire a horse or rent a house from a coreligionist 
 without the consent of the ruling powers. Moreover, no Jew 
 should venture to print books in any language, be it English, 
 
THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON 
 
 37 
 
 Latin, or Hebrew, unless bis work had obtained the sanction 
 of the same authority. Too much knowledge was not con¬ 
 sidered beneficial in those days, and ignorance was deemed 
 safer than the handling of dangerous topics. 
 
 As may be imagined, the intercourse between Jew and 
 Gentile was hemmed in by many restrictions. It was strictly 
 forbidden to a son of Israel to raise any religious discussion 
 with a Christian, or to endeavour to convert him, or to admit 
 him to the covenant of Abraham, or to speak m the name of 
 the nation to a stranger, or to write defamatory libels con¬ 
 cerning him, or to intermarry with him. The Jews, finally, 
 were strenuously discouraged from infringing the laws of the 
 country; and it was decreed that u should any Jew be 
 arrested by justice for thieving', swindling, or any other evil- 
 doing, expecting that the nation would aid and abet him 
 in perpetrating these villanies, it is firmly resolved that 
 neither time nor money shall be expended in assisting him, 
 and that he shall be left to be chastised according to his 
 crimes.” 
 
 The punishment for infraction of any of these edicts con¬ 
 sisted either of fines, with deprivation of all Jewish rites 
 until their' payment, or of the application of Beracka , as 
 Herem (excommunication) was euphemistically designated. 
 This punishment will probably appear in our days as too 
 serious to be indiscriminate^ awarded to heavy and to light 
 offences; but in justice to the early Jewish settlers in Great 
 Britain, we must remind our readers that their chief men 
 possessed no other means of enforcing their decrees, that 
 they had neither soldiers, nor jailers, nor watchmen at their 
 disposal, and that they had to rely on moral means in the 
 absence of physical means of coercion. It was better to 
 appeal to the desire implanted in the human heart for reli¬ 
 gious consolation, and to its natural longing for the society of 
 members of the same race and creed, than to the dread of 
 the prison-house or the hulks. Finally, we must reflect that 
 the Jews had to maintain their high character for honour and 
 honesty; to avoid coming into conflict with the prejudices 
 and notions of their fellow-townsmen; and to eschew afford¬ 
 ing offence by word or deed to those who had admitted them 
 in their midst. The main object of the first Israelites in 
 
38 THE FIRST SYNAGOGUE IN LONDON 
 
 this country was to traffic in merchandise, and to live in 
 peaceful obscurity following the precepts of their faith. 
 
 We learn from chroniclers of the time, that the conduct of 
 the Jews was irreproachable, which confers no small praise 
 on the prudence of the immigrants and on the wisdom of 
 their chiefs. 
 
 The original laws or Ascamoth were first promulgated in 
 Spanish; subsequently they were written in Portuguese. 
 They were altered from time to time as the occasion re¬ 
 quired, but they were preserved in one or other of the above 
 languages until the year 1819, when they were rendered into 
 an English guise. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES.—ICING CHARLES II 
 
 AND THE JEWS. 
 
 So many years had elapsed since the Jews had publicly and 
 avowedly dwelt in Great Britain, that on their re-establish¬ 
 ment in this country, their persons and their ceremonies 
 were eyed with no small curiosity by the inhabitants of 
 London, to whom Jewish customs were necessarily as little 
 known, as are to us of the nineteenth centurv the rites 
 attending the worship of Buddha or Bramah. The Syna¬ 
 gogue in King Street became a kind of show-place, whereto 
 resorted substantial citizens, gay gallants and fashionable 
 ladies, who visited thither just as they went to see the 
 handsome Kynaston at the Cockpit Playhouse in Drury 
 Lane, or to hear the dignified Betterton at the Duke’s 
 Theatre in Lincoln’s Inn. Even Mr Secretary Pepys himself 
 considered the Jews’ Synagogue as worthy of his inspection, 
 for he tells us that he proceeded thither on the 14th October 
 1663, after dinner, with fair Mistress Elizabeth and Mr 
 Rawlinson. The garrulous secretary to the Earl of Sandwich 
 does not appear to have been edified by the spectacle that 
 there met his view. Thus he writes : u I saw the men and 
 boys in their vayles and the women behind a lattice out of 
 sight; and some things stand up which I believe is their 
 law, in a press, to which all coming in do bow; and at the 
 putting on their vayles do say something, to which others 
 that hear the priest do cry amen, and the party do kiss his 
 vayle.” From the date and the description given, we gather 
 that Secretary Pepys’ visit must have occurred in the after¬ 
 noon of the last day of Tabernacle (Simchath Torah), for he 
 continues : “ And anon their laws that they take out of the 
 press are carried by several men, four or five burthens in.all, 
 
40 
 
 STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES. 
 
 and they do relieve one another, and whether it is that every 
 one desires to have the carrying of it, thus they carried it 
 round about the room while such a service is singing.” The 
 absence of decorum must have been very apparent, for it 
 struck Mr Samuel Pepys, who in these words comments 
 upon it: u But Lord! to see the disorder, laughing, 
 sporting, and no attention, but confusion in all their service, 
 . . . . and indeed, I never did see so much or could 
 have imagined there had been any religion in the whole 
 world so absurdly performed as this.” 
 
 Doubtless, had the worthy secretary to the Navy lived at 
 the present time, he would form a very different opinion on 
 that point, and he would be satisfied with the improved 
 order that prevails in Jewish Synagogues during service ; 
 but in those days the noise and loud talk that so shocked 
 him were seemingly the ordinary accompaniments of divine 
 worship. The Synagogue authorities endeavoured to 
 remedy this evil by passing stringent enactments which, 
 in conjunction with a sense of propriety on the part of the 
 congregation, it is hoped may have had the desired effect. 
 It must be said, on the other hand, that the presence of a 
 concourse of curious sightseers was not at all likely to 
 jwomote the religious feelings of the congregants. Indeed, 
 the latter abuse became so great, that in 1665 a law was 
 made to the effect that no member should bring with him 
 any ladies, nor rise from his place to meet them, nor make 
 room for them, nor introduce any gentleman without the 
 express sanction of the Mahamad (Council), for it was the 
 desire of that body to preserve the sacred character of the 
 locality—a fact that at times both Jews and Christians seem 
 to have overlooked. 
 
 The original laws or Ascamoth of the Portuguese com¬ 
 munity were signed by the wardens and thirteen of the 
 elders. Among these signatures we remark such well-known 
 names—at least to the Sephardim—as Lousada, Gomez 
 Serra, Netto, Barzillai, Mendes, Nunes, and Azevedo. All 
 these patronymics are still in existence, either in this 
 country or on the Continent. It is a recognised fact that the 
 Spanish and Portuguese Jews were the first to adopt 
 
 surnames, while their Eastern brethren, and those of German v 
 
 7 j ? 
 
STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES. 41 
 
 were only addressed by tlieir own biblical names. In Spain 
 the Jews who occupied important and influential positions 
 found it advantageous to call themselves by the appellatives 
 borne by Christian families with whom they came into 
 contact. Thus it happens that numerous Christian Spanish 
 houses bear to the present day those cognomens that are so 
 familiar all over the world, wherever a Portuguese Synagogue 
 rears its head. This, however, may be explained, in some in¬ 
 stances at least, by the fact that there is a considerable stream 
 of Jewish blood flowing in the veins of some of the most 
 ancient families in the Peninsula. The Jews of Italy have 
 mostly designated themselves by names of cities, which may 
 be exemplified by such instances as those of Modena, Perugia, 
 Alatri, Piperno, &c. This custom has been also accordingly 
 adopted by the Jews of Germany, as Cleve, Worms, Neu- 
 megen, sometimes with some little modifications, as in the 
 cases of Berliner, Wiener, Danziger, &c. 
 
 The early members of the Portuguese congregation in 
 London were evidently not only in affluent circumstances, 
 but also were disposed to liberality in all that regarded their 
 faith. When the first balance-sheet of the expenditure for 
 communal purposes was prepared in 1665, there was found to 
 be a considerable deficit. This was at once made up by a 
 subscription, to which twenty-three members, each one 
 according to his means, contributed. Moreover, when it was 
 considered necessary to double the communal impost, the 
 additional burden was cheerfully accepted; and also a house- 
 to-house visitation was instituted to assist in raising funds 
 for the poor. Indeed, the requirements of the needy were 
 carefully attended to, as is customary among Jews. I 11 
 1666—the year of the great fire of London—was founded the 
 Hebra of Bikur Holim, or society for visiting the sick; a 
 code of laws was framed for its guidance, and an honorary 
 officer was appointed to direct the affairs of the brother¬ 
 hood. 
 
 Nor were the intellectual wants of the community neglected. 
 A school was established as soon as the first house of worship) 
 had been erected; the Babbi of the congregation, notwith¬ 
 standing the very modest salary he received, devoted several 
 hours daily to the religious instruction of the children ; and, 
 
42 
 
 STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES. 
 
 to impart greater efficiency to the system of education 
 
 pursued, a warden was ajDpointed to sujjervise the establish¬ 
 ment. 
 
 Hie community was evidently increasing in number and 
 wealth, for the temporary building wherein the children of 
 Israel addressed their prayers to the God of their fore¬ 
 fathers in time became too small, and in the year 1676 
 a new and larger Synagogue was inaugurated. The funds 
 required for the purpose seem to have been obtained partly 
 by especial contributions, and partly by the payment 
 in advance of five years’ impost. No contractor was 
 engaged for the construction of the sacred edifice, but a 
 number of tradesmen and workmen were employed under the 
 inspection of an architect. The exact site of this Synagogue 
 we are unable to verify at the present moment. It is 
 generally believed to have been raised on the same spot as 
 the previous temporary structure, but is stated by some to 
 have been situated in Ileneage Lane. Even this last 
 Synagogue could not have been very large, for in 1699, or 
 twenty-three years after its opening, it was found requisite 
 to erect another, which is the building in existence at the 
 present moment in Bevis Marks. 
 
 Thriving as the Jewish community was under Charles II., 
 its prosperity was not uninterrupted, nor was its political 
 position so secure as not to give rise to frequent anxiety. 
 
 . Amon £ its. internal concerns, its rock ahead was the 
 influx of foreign poor. Then as now, various expedients 
 weie tiied, and tried in vain, to check an organised immigra¬ 
 tion of paupers. Ordinances after ordinances were promul¬ 
 gated by the Synagogue authorities, but apparently with 
 little effect, to judge from the frequency with which other 
 enactments for the same object followed. In 1670 it was 
 found necessary to decree that all foreigners coming from 
 abroad for assistance, should depart within five days from 
 the slioies of England; that they should not be permitted 
 to enter Synagogue in the meanwhile, and that the Zeddaka 
 (poor fund) should allow them all it could spare. Soon 
 afterwards it was ordered that no foreigner should be admitted 
 as member of the congregation, or even be allowed to attend 
 divine service, until he satisfied the wardens as to his 
 
STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES. 
 
 43 
 
 possession of the means of subsistence. Nevertheless, poor 
 Jews from Holland and Poland continued to flock over, and 
 additional laws were made on the subject, probably with as 
 little result as the previous enactments. Members of the 
 congregation were strictly enjoined not to raise subscriptions 
 for any foreigners, nor to canvass in their favour, nor in any 
 way to encourage their presence. The success achieved by 
 these new measures is not recorded, but it cannot have been 
 great, otherwise further legislation in the same sense would 
 not have been continued. 
 
 The Jews, as we have seen, were far from enjoying a secure 
 position, and occasionally they were thrown into a fright by 
 being threatened with expulsion, and with confiscation of 
 their property. These storms happily subsided peaceably, and 
 it must be owned that the King persistently refused to give 
 countenance to the machinations of the enemies of the Jews. 
 In 1664 a petition was presented by Emanuel Martinez 
 Dormido, and two others, probably the wardens, on behalf 
 of the Jews for protection, and leave to trade in the kingdom. 
 The petitioners set forth “ that they had long traded there, 
 and behaved with due obedience to the laws; but Mr Kicault 
 and others threatened seizure of their estates, and say that 
 both life and estate are forfeited; the Earl of Berkshire says 
 he has a verbal order from His Majesty to prosecute them, and 
 seize their estates unless they come to an agreement with 
 him.” No doubt this was a speculative attempt on the part 
 of that shrewd nobleman to obtain a handsome sum from 
 the Jews on the plea of shielding them from persecution. 
 If so, the attempt failed, for the King in Council replied 
 that he had issued no such order, and that they might enjoy 
 the same favour as before, so long as they demeaned them¬ 
 selves peaceably, and obeyed the laws. 
 
 In 1670 the Jews had acquired sufficient importance to 
 induce the House of Commons to direct that an inquiry 
 should be made as to their number, and on what terms they 
 were permitted to reside here. The report, however, was not 
 published, and thus we have lost some valuable information. 
 
 An old friendship subsisted between the Jews and Charles 
 II. It is said that the Jews of Amsterdam had advanced 
 him 1,000,000 gulden (about £84,000) to assist him in 
 
44 STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES. 
 
 returning to England, and that he granted them a charter 
 permitting them to settle in this country. It is alleged that 
 a copy of this charter is still in possession of the Jews of 
 Amsterdam. Moreover, the presence of two Jews among 
 the retinue of the Queen may have had some influence in 
 inducing him to extend his protection to their brethren. 
 
 When Catherine of Braganza was on her way to become the 
 consort of the King of England, during her journey through 
 New Castile, she was attacked by erysipelas. The physician 
 of King John IV. of Portugal was sent for to heal her. His 
 name was Antonio Mendes, and he was a Jew. He gained 
 favour in the sight of the princess, who made him a 
 member of her household, and appointed his brother Andrea 
 Mendes to be her chamberlain. Catherine desired that 
 they should accompany her to England, and settle there. 
 The two brothers consented to this proposal. They subse¬ 
 quently summoned their third brother to establish himself in 
 England, and he acceded to their wishes. Then all three 
 threw off their assumed garb, and openly proclaimed them¬ 
 selves as Jews. Probably the royal lady may have been 
 somewhat shocked at finding herself attended by heretics, 
 but she does not appear to have dispensed with their assist¬ 
 ance on that score. Her Majesty, though not by any means 
 beautiful, possessed a youthful, innocent, and fresh counten¬ 
 ance, which was very captivating to a blast man of the world 
 like Charles Stuart; and not seldom her modest and simple 
 charms prevailed over the bold shamelessness of aCastlemaine, 
 the saucy effrontery of a Nell Gwynne, and the meretricious 
 smiles of a Louise de Querouaille. It is not at all improbable 
 that the Queen may have exercised her influence in favour of 
 the Jews. Antonio and Andrea Mendes appear to have taken 
 active part in the affairs of the Jewish community of England, 
 for we find their names mentioned more than once fn the 
 early records of the Spanish and Portuguese congregation. 
 Subsequently the Mendes family repeatedly intermarried 
 with that of Da Costa, as we shall see in its place, and 
 
 their common descendants became known by the two sur¬ 
 names. 
 
 The King evidently preserved a certain amount of good¬ 
 will tow aids the Jews, and the Jews seized every opportunity 
 
STRUGGLES AND SUCCESSES. 
 
 45 
 
 of demonstrating their loyalty and gratitude towards the 
 King. Sometimes the expression of their feelings took a 
 singular shape. 
 
 It is recorded that in the year 1678 Rabbi Jacob Jehudah 
 Leon, of Amsterdam, dedicated to His Majesty a small 
 pamphlet, entitled “ A relation of the most memorable things 
 in the Tabernacle of Moses and the Temple of Solomon, 
 according to Scripture.” This effusion was forwarded to the 
 King with a model of Solomon’s Temple constructed by 
 ltabbi Leon, and accompanied by an address wherein he says 
 “the holy vessels, garments, and utensils thereof are delineated 
 and set forth to the life, and which was graciously owned 
 with devout affection thirty years ago and upwards by that 
 serene Queen, your Majesty’s mother; so be pleased, most 
 noble prince,” &c. To us this appears a strange gift to 
 address to the protector and companion of the witty and 
 profligate Rochester and the accomplished and equally 
 profligate Buckingham ; to the royal lover of Nell Gfwynne, 
 the sauciest of orange-girls, of the handsome and rapacious 
 Lady Castlemaine, of the scheming Louise de Querouaille, of 
 La belle Stuart, and of various other equally meritorious 
 ladies. We do not know what reception the King gave 
 to this singular present. His Majesty was really good 
 natured, and no doubt the model was duly accepted, and his 
 sense of filial duty may possibly have caused him to prize an 
 object that had appertained to his royal mother. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE ALIEN DUTIES. 
 
 The Jews of England, it must be owned, ever obtained pro¬ 
 tection from the Stuart Kings against the persecution of 
 their too zealous subjects. In 1673 the Jews were indicted 
 for worshipping in public in their Synagogue, probably at 
 the instigation of persons of the same class as those who 
 institute proceedings against Sunday trading, in the belief 
 that they only serve their Maker when they inflict pain on 
 their fellow-beings. The consternation of the children of 
 Israel may well be conceived. To renounce their newly- 
 adopted country, or to renounce the worship of the Lord of 
 Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, seemed the alternative forced 
 upon them. There could be no hesitation as to their choice. 
 They petitioned King Charles, that during their stay 
 in England they might remain unmolested, or that time be 
 afforded to them to withdraw from the country. The King 
 appeared well disposed towards them, and on the 11th 
 February 1673, His Majesty decided in Council “that the 
 Attorney-General stop all proceedings, and that they receive 
 no further trouble in this behalf.” In 1685 a similar mis¬ 
 adventure occurred to the Israelites, for thirty-seven of their 
 merchants were suddenly arrested on one occasion in the 
 Royal Exchange, under the statute 23 of Elizabeth, for not 
 attending any church. Happily they were not at the mercy 
 of the fanatics who once more interrupted their tranquillity. 
 They dwelt not in a country where it was considered “ an 
 Act of Faith ” to broil alive a certain number of its citizens 
 because they happened to hold theological opinions at vari¬ 
 ance with those of the majority. The Jews addressed them¬ 
 selves to the new King, James II., beseeching his support 
 and countenance for the exercise of their faith. On the 13th 
 
THE ALIEN DUTIES. 
 
 47 
 
 November, the King in Council ordered u that the Attorney- 
 General do stop the said proceedings ; ” His Majesty’s inten¬ 
 tion being that they should not be troubled on this account, 
 but they should enjoy the free exercise of their religion 
 whilst they behaved themselves dutifully and obediently to 
 his government. This a23pears to have been the last time 
 when the Jews were avowedly molested on what is conven¬ 
 tionally termed religious ground. We say conventionally, 
 for there is no creed that enjoins harassing and tormenting 
 liuman beings belonging to another race, and least of all, 
 Christianity, which lays claim to especial mercy, charity, and 
 love for all mankind. 
 
 During the reign of James II., the question of the levy 
 of the Alien Duties was the question that, most of all others, 
 engrossed the attention of the Jews. The King had 
 granted them letters of denization, which relieved them 
 from the payment of the special tax on all goods exported 
 by foreigners. This proceeding was resented by the English 
 merchants, who were apprehensive lest the same duties 
 should also be remitted upon all merchandise imported. 
 The representatives of British commerce petitioned against 
 this measure, alleging 66 that the remission of duty inwards 
 or outwards would be injurious, and a means of the diminu¬ 
 tion of the revenue, and would throw the mysteries of our 
 artificers into the hands of foreigners, to the ruin not only of 
 the trading and working people at home, but also of the 
 several English factories abroad. The petition was signed 
 by Sir Mathew Andrews, Sir Benj. Newland, Sir Thos. 
 Griffith, Sir John Chapman, Sir Henry Tnlse, Sir Robert 
 Jeffrey, Sir Samuel Dashwood, Sir Benjamin Ayliffe, and 
 fifty-seven others. A similar address was also presented 
 apart by the Hamburgh Company, the Eastland Company, 
 and the merchants of the West and of the North of England. 
 Notwithstanding all these efforts, prompted by a rivalry of 
 calling, the petitioners were unsuccessful in their endeavours 
 to maintain the communal disabilities of the Jews. Nor 
 does it appear that the direful calamities foreseen by those 
 liberal-minded traders ever fell on British industry and 
 enterprise, which on the contrary attained considerable 
 development at this period. 
 
4 8 
 
 THE ALIEN D UTIES. 
 
 In the commencement of the reign of William III. the 
 Jews still received the royal countenance in the matter. Mr 
 Thomas Pennington, one of the officers of the Custom House, 
 acquainted the King, through one of the Lords of the 
 Treasury, that, though the clauses of exemption from pay¬ 
 ment of alien duties granted to the Jews in their patents of 
 denization by King Charles II. and King James II. non 
 obstante , the statutes were void at the demise of the first and 
 abdication of the last, and that His Majesty had neither 
 confirmed those non obstante clauses nor granted any new 
 patents of denization with similar clauses, yet the Jews 
 presumed to enter their goods since His Majesty’s reign in 
 their own names, paying only English duty, by which means 
 goods so entered became forfeited. His Majesty, in answer 
 to this, vowed that he would not abate the Jews of three¬ 
 pence of what was due to himself, which was a moiety, and 
 lie ordered Mr Pennington to enter an information in the 
 exchequer for £58,000. Nevertheless, the Jews had so much 
 influence at Court and among the Commissioners of Cus¬ 
 toms, that for a long time they baffled all the efforts of 
 their enemies. They succeeded in procuring an order of 
 Council, not only against the information brought by Mr 
 Pennington, but against all others that should be brought 
 against their nation on the same grounds. 
 
 In vain Mr Pennington addressed a short petition to the 
 Council, while the order was pending, praying that both 
 parties might be heard. In vain he urged time after time 
 that his petition might be considered. When the case came 
 on, the matter was passed without any debate. The petition 
 was brought forward of Antonio Gomez Serra, Phineas 
 Gomez Serra, Andrew Lopes, Antonio da Costa, Joseph 
 Bueno, Menasse Mendez, Antonio Correa, and several others, 
 making twenty merchants in all. Among other allegations, 
 it was urged in that document that the petitioners had been 
 lately arrested in His Majesty’s name by one Thomas Pen¬ 
 nington, for vast sums of money, being the value of all 
 goods exported and imported since lltli December 1688, 
 that the said Thomas Pennington had brought information 
 of devenencnt against them in the Court of Exchequer, 
 which greatly impaired their credit and stopped their trad- 
 
THE ALIEN DUTIES. 
 
 49 
 
 ing; that as to the duties inwards most of them were free 
 denizens, and therefore discharged from paying any more 
 customs than his Majesty’s natural-born subjects, and those 
 that were not denizens had paid duty; and that as to alien 
 duties outwards, they had been taken off by Act of Parlia¬ 
 ment in King Charles’ reign, and by proclamation in the 
 late reign, as greatly prejudicial to the exportation of the 
 woollen manufacturers, and it was never demanded. His 
 Majesty in Council assembled, on the 26th February 1689, 
 after due deliberation, was graciously pleased to order that 
 Sir George Trewby, his Attorney-General, do cause nolle 
 prosequi to be forthwith entered upon said information, or 
 any others brought against the petitioners upon the like 
 accounts, it being his Majesty’s pleasure that they enjoy full 
 benefit of their respective letters patent. 
 
 The triumph of the Jews was of brief duration. The 
 battle of the duties was not over. The English merchants, 
 with the proverbial tenacity of their race, which does not 
 know when it is defeated, renewed their efforts to place the 
 Jews at a disadvantage. They industriously spread rumours 
 that the Jews had obtained a decision in their favour by 
 openly bribing personages in high office, and that the whole 
 proceeding was very discreditable to the Government. They 
 addressed the King, holding forth that were the order in 
 question to be carried out, his Majesty would lose £40,000 
 by not prosecutiug for the forfeiture already past, and that 
 the duty thereby cut off for the future would amount to, at 
 least, £10,000 per annum ; that these sums would have to be 
 made up by the people of England; that the balance of 
 trade would be broken, and the Jews let loose to overrun 
 the trade of the English merchants both at home and 
 abroad; that most English merchants had estates in land as 
 well as stocks in trade, and paid taxes for them, whereas 
 rich Jews “ were past finding out,” and it would grieve the 
 English to pay any new taxes if Jews were illegally 
 exempted from payment of any ancient duties. The Com¬ 
 missioners of Customs represented these matters to the 
 Council, and exercised such pressure, that notwithstanding 
 all the efforts of the Jews, the foregoing order was super¬ 
 seded, to the great joy of the Christian merchants. The 
 
5 o THE A LIEN D UTIES. 
 
 King decreed, at a Council held at Hampton Court, ou the 
 14th October 1690, that the Lords Commissioners of the 
 Treasury do give directions to the Commissioners of Customs 
 and other officers for collecting all such duties as are by law 
 payable for goods of native product or manufacture of 
 this kingdom that shall he exported, notwithstanding the 
 order of the 22d January 1665, or any other direction to the 
 contrary. 
 
 This unfavourable conclusion of a prolonged struggle must 
 have proved a heavy blow to the Jews. As we have seen, 
 they not only forfeited thereby £40,000, but their future 
 commercial operations would be taxed to an amount esti¬ 
 mated at £10,000 per annum. We have no means of judging 
 as to the extent of the injury inflicted upon them by this 
 adverse decision. We are able, however, to form some idea 
 of the financial position of the Jews at this period, by re¬ 
 ferring to their assessment for communal purposes. Thus, 
 in the year 1677, no fewer than twenty members of the con¬ 
 gregation were assessed at £20 each for their share of the 
 halt year s communal impost. The largest contributor to 
 the fund was Solomon de Medina, the eminent merchant and 
 aimy contractor, who was taxed at £28. This income-tax 
 was calculated on the basis of 4s. for every £100 on all 
 merchandise bought and sold, 2s. for every £100 on goods 
 in transit, and Is. on bullion, plate, and jewellery; and it 
 was assessed on the half-yearly returns rendered by the mer¬ 
 chants themselves. Reckoning this impost at an average 
 rate of 2s. 6d. per £100, a payment of £20 for a period of 
 six months, would represent transactions to the extent of 
 £32,000 per annum, a by no means despicable amount for 
 those days. In the following year, Sir Solomon Medina 
 paid an impost of £50 for six months, the result of opera¬ 
 tions reaching to £80,000 per annum, which figure merchants 
 of two centuries since must have regarded as altogether 
 beyond the common range. This well-known individual, to 
 whom we shall revert more fully hereafter, was the first Jew 
 who received the honour of knighthood. 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that the commercial dealings of the 
 Jews were of sufficient importance in 1678, and a fortiori 
 ten years later, when their numbers had further increased, 
 
THE ALIEN D UTIES. 
 
 5 1 
 
 their trade must have assumed still greater proportions. 
 The check they received by the reimposition of the alien 
 duties, was surmounted in time, and that enterprising race, 
 notwithstanding its having been—to use a sporting expres¬ 
 sion—so weightily handicapped, in a few years, by dint of 
 superior energy, industry, and perseverance, showed again to 
 the front. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 ANECD 0 TES. — CONVERSIONS. —LEARNED RABBIS.—NE W 
 
 SYNAGOGUES. 
 
 The old penal statutes against the Jews of the time of 
 Edward I. long remained unrepealed, though apparently 
 allowed to fall into desuetude, and their existence was openly 
 adverted to by the enemies of the Jews so late as the reign 
 of the First George. One of these enactments forbade the 
 Jews to appear in public without a yellow badge, under pain 
 of forfeiting their lives. Amidst a series of laws, equally 
 rational and merciful, it was decreed that no Jew should sue 
 a Christian in his own name, but only in the King’s name, 
 and with the royal licence. The knowledge of this fact, 
 suggested to an ingenious Christian, who happened to be 
 indebted to an Israelite, a new way to pay old debts, with 
 a saving-clause for his conscience. Legal proceedings were 
 taken by the clamorous Hebrew, and the case came for hearing 
 before Chief Justice Jeffreys—the judge of “ bloody assize” 
 notoriety. The defence was simple enough. A Jew had no 
 right, according to the laws of England, to bring an action 
 against a Christian. The Chief Justice inquired of the 
 defendant whether he had any other plea to urge. 66 No, 
 my lord, I insist on this plea,” replied the honest debtor. 
 “ Then,” shrieked the judge, cc I tell you that even according 
 to your defence, you must pay his demand, for he did not 
 bring the action against a Christian, but against a Jew, and 
 one greater than himself.” 
 
 For once, perhaps, one of the greatest bullies that ever 
 sat on the judicial bench was right. But the sentence, just 
 in itself, was supported by arguments more offensive to the 
 plaintiff, than the allegations of the defendant. 
 
 Notwithstanding the eventual decision of William of 
 
ANECDOTES. 
 
 53 
 
 Orange in tlie matter of the alien duties, there is no reason 
 to doubt his favourable disposition towards the Children of 
 Israel. Indeed, it is asserted, that without the assistance of 
 the Jews of Amsterdam, the King could never have reached 
 the throne of England, for his intended expedition was at 
 a standstill for want of funds, until they advanced some very 
 large sums. If such was the case, the loans in question must 
 have been effected to the government of the republic, and not 
 to the Stadtholder personally; for we are informed by Lord 
 Macaulay, that soon after the Chief Magistrate of Holland 
 had ascended the throne of England, the English Parliament 
 voted a grant of £600,000 to repay the Dutch Republic for 
 the costs of the expedition. At all events, William must 
 have well known the great benefits that the presence of the 
 Jews had conferred upon Holland. He must have seen 
 with his own eyes the enterprise and the industry, the financial 
 genius and the honesty-—ay, the honesty, of that much 
 maligned people, to whom his native country was so greatly 
 indebted. He must have perceived how materially they had 
 helped in rendering that small strip of marshy land that 
 struggled for bare existence against the all-devouring sea- 
 waves, one of the wealthiest states in Europe, the flag of which 
 rode proudly over every ocean. Doubtless, King William had 
 to yield to pressure in the question of the alien duties. But 
 when the inhabitants of Jamaica petitioned his Majesty to 
 order the Jewish settlers to quit their homes, and leave their 
 property at the disposal of the patriotic natives, he most 
 positively declined to entertain their application. 
 
 Another instance also is recorded of the King’s prudent 
 forbearance towards the Jews. In 1689 two millions were 
 voted by Parliament for the conquest of Ireland. The diffi¬ 
 culty was how to procure the money. A new assessment 
 was made on real property; a poll-tax was levied, and extra 
 duties were laid on tea, coffee, and chocolate. All these 
 sources of revenue proving insufficient, it was proposed to 
 tax the Jews to the extent of £100,000. The Jews at once 
 petitioned the King, and declared that they could not afford it, 
 and they would rather leave the country at once than be ruined. 
 Wise statesmanship showed that such a tax would be little 
 better than confiscation, and it was eventually abandoned. 
 
54 
 
 ANECDOTES. 
 
 We may here observe that singularly enough, while few 
 English Jews selected the army as a profession, the sister 
 service found much favour in their sight. Our co-religionists 
 have furnished several distinguished naval officers to their 
 country. Among these we may name Commodore Chamber- 
 lain, who flourished at the time of William and Mary : and 
 in our own days we have known several Israelites holding 
 
 commissions in the British navy. 
 
 It has been remarked by some writers that in the reign of 
 King William III. and Queen Anne, there were many con¬ 
 versions of Jews to Christianity. Now we have grounds for 
 believing that the number of these conversions was much 
 exaggerated. Few names of note have been handed dovn 
 to us as appertaining to persons who forsook their ancient 
 religion at that period. We shall hereafter fully analyse 
 the subject of conversions from the old faith to the new dis¬ 
 pensation. We shall merely observe at present that obvious 
 reasons for the adoption by some stray members of a barely- 
 tolerated race of the external religion of the country which 
 tolerated them, will suggest themselves to all readers. 
 
 Some of the conversions were evidently of a hollow 
 nature, and cases are known of u converted” individuals, who, 
 before their death, desired to return to the old persuasion. 
 Among these we may adduce the example of Mr Dupass, to 
 whom we adverted in a previous chapter. This gentleman, 
 who was a Dutch merchant of means, had come to England 
 at the time of the Restoration, and had then embraced Chris¬ 
 tianity. As a reward for this act, he had been appointed a 
 clerk in the office of the Secretary of State, Sir Lionel Jen¬ 
 kins. Dupass became a court favourite, and married a wealthy 
 English lady. According to a writer, who is a bitter enemy of 
 the Jews, these latter persecuted him until he went to India, 
 and there he was driven to seek re-admission into Judaism. 
 Mr Dupass died in that country, and we are told that the 
 wicked Jews who held his property declined to give it up to 
 his widow until constrained by proceedings at law. 
 
 The influx of Jews from Lithuania and Germany became 
 greater and greater towards the end of the seventeenth century. 
 The aristocratic Sephardim, whose ancestors had banqueted with 
 sovereigns, and held the purse-strings of kings, looked with 
 
ANECDOTES. 
 
 55 
 
 some disdain on their poorer and humbler brethren—the ple¬ 
 beian Ashkenazim, who had dealt in worn garments or huck¬ 
 stered in petty commodities on the banks of the Vistula, or in 
 German Ghettos. The Portuguese did not allow the Germans 
 to have any share in the management of congregational affairs. 
 It was especially enacted that the latter, who probably were 
 neither very refined nor very cultivated, should not be allowed 
 to hold office in the Synagogue, nor vote at meetings, nor be 
 called to the Law, nor receive Mitzvoth (religious honours), 
 nor make offerings, nor pay imposts. The Germans, in point 
 of fact, were treated as belonging to a lower caste, and the 
 only functions that a member of that nationality was permitted 
 to fulfil were the useful, albeit lowly, duties of beadle, which 
 were actually entrusted to a German—a certain Benjamin 
 Levy. In time the Germans resolved to establish a Syna¬ 
 gogue of their own, as our readers will see in due course. 
 
 The Spanish and Portuguese Jews were fortunate in obtain¬ 
 ing the services of men of great learning and piety as Babbis 
 of their congregation. Among these we may name Babbi 
 Jacob Abendana, who was elected Haham, or Ecclesiastical 
 Chief, in 1680. He was distinguished by his profound know¬ 
 ledge of Hebrew, and he rendered the “ Cuzari” into a Spanish 
 dress. His brother Babbi Isaac Abendana settled soon after¬ 
 wards at Oxford, where he became professor of Hebrew. Pie 
 is said to have been an indefatigable writer, and he translated 
 the u Mishna ’’and the “ Commentaries of Maimonides ” into 
 Spanish. He also produced a work entitled, Discourses on 
 the Ecclesiastical Polity of the Jews,” which caused some 
 sensation among Christian scholars. 
 
 The most eminent Haham or Chief Babbi that the Sephardim 
 ever possessed in this country was unquestionably Babbi 
 David Nieto. He was a philosopher, physician, poet, mathe¬ 
 matician, astronomer, and theologian. Like many other great 
 men among the Jews, he showed that faith and science may 
 go hand-in-hand together, and, whilst being the spiritual guide 
 of his flock, he did not disdain to heal their bodily infirmities. 
 The Babbi was practising medicine at Leghorn, and had written 
 in his own language an erudite work entitled, u Pascologia, 
 demonstrating the errors that had crept into the calendar 
 from the Council of Nice to 1092, when he was summoned 
 
56 
 
 ANECDOTES. 
 
 to preside over the Spanish and Portuguese Congregation, 
 London. In the English capital he composed a hook called 
 the “ Matteh Dan,” which is a kind of supplement to the 
 well-known u Cuzari” of Rabbi Yehuda Halevy, and has for 
 its object a vindication of the Oral Law. He, moreover, 
 gave forth another work in Hebrew, the u Aish Dath”— 
 u Fire of the Law,” which was aimed at a Rabbi of heterodox 
 opinions, named Nehemiah Cheyon. The heresies of this 
 individual served as a theme for the lucubrations of another 
 Rabbi, Haliam Joseph Ergas. This work is said to be well 
 written, but conceived in an intemperate spirit. The print¬ 
 ing of these early Hebrew books was attended with great 
 difficulty, and reflected great credit on the energy and per¬ 
 severance of their authors; for there were no Jewish com¬ 
 positors in those days, and Christian workmen, being ignorant 
 of the Hebrew letters, committed numberless typographical 
 errors, requiring the revision of many proof-sheets. 
 
 Hebrew genius and learning were honoured in England 
 even during the early part of the 18th century. Among the 
 talented Jews who acquired a reputation with English sa¬ 
 vants we may distinguish Daniel Israel Laguna, who pub¬ 
 lished in 1720 a metrical version of the Psalms, under the 
 title of “ A Faithful Mirror of Life ;” a work that was 
 highly commended. Then another Portuguese Rabbi, Jacob 
 de Castro Sarmiento, attracted general attention for his pro¬ 
 found erudition, and his extensive acquirements in natural 
 science and philosophy. He was elected a member of the 
 Royal Society, and an honorary diploma was conferred upon 
 him by the University of Aberdeen; facts that speak well, 
 not only for the appreciative discrimination of Englishmen 
 of letters and science, but also for the spread of liberality 
 and religious tolerance. 
 
 During the first year of Rabbi Nieto’s residence in Eng¬ 
 land, an important event occurred'in his congregation. A 
 new Synagogue was inaugurated. The increase in the com¬ 
 munity had of late years been so rapid, that, in 1698, it was 
 resolved to raise a new place of worship. In that year the 
 wardens and elders summoned a meeting of the members, 
 and applied to them for the payment of the sums they had 
 subscribed towards a building-fund. On the 12th February, 
 
ANECDOTES. 
 
 57 
 
 1699, a contract was signed by six representatives of the 
 Synagogue, viz., Antonio Gomes Serra, Menasseh Mendes, 
 Alfonso Rodriguez, Manuel Nunes Miranda, Andrea Lopez, 
 and Pantaleao Rodriguez on the one part; and Joseph Avis, 
 carpenter, on the other ; for the construction of the new 
 Synagogue. It is related that the builder, who was a 
 Quaker, returned to the Portuguese authorities, on the day 
 of the opening of the Synagogue, the profit he realised on 
 the contract. He would not retain to his own use any of 
 the gold intended for the erection of a fane to God. The 
 cost was to be £2750, and the payment to be effected in 
 seven instalments. On the 13th November of the same 
 year, a lease was signed by the same gentlemen for the land 
 on which the Synagogue was to be raised—for sixty-one 
 years certain, and the remainder, viz., thirty-eight years at 
 the election of the Jewish representatives, was granted by 
 Lady Ann Pointz, alias Littleton, and Sir Thomas Pointz, 
 alias Littleton, for the site of Plough Yard, in Bevis Marks, 
 at £120 per annum. The leasehold, we may add, was 
 afterwards converted into a freehold property. 
 
 During the progress of the new building, the old Syna¬ 
 gogue was becoming too small for the congregation. It w T as 
 so crowded that the wardens were ungallant enough to ex¬ 
 clude the ladies from divine service, and they ordered that the 
 men should temporarily sit in the ladies’ gallery, the old 
 entrance thereto being bricked up, and another ingress being 
 opened from the men’s side. The new Synagogue was in 
 time completed, and was consecrated in the year 1702. 
 Curious to say, Queen Anne presented a beam to the new' 
 Synagogue, which is still to be found in the ceiling there. 
 Many of the original benches were brought thither from the 
 old Synagogue, and some of the brass candlesticks had been 
 conveyed over from Holland. With the exception of some 
 unimportant alterations in the shape of the windows and 
 other minor matters, the old edifice remains there unaltered 
 to the present day ; and it is there that the ancient Por¬ 
 tuguese community still assemble to pray to the God of 
 Israel. 
 
CHAPTER YI. 
 
 HEBREW CAPITALISTS. 
 
 The success achieved by Jews in commercial and financial 
 operations has been regarded at all times and in all coun¬ 
 tries as an especial grievance, by some at least of their 
 Christian neighbours. We will not discuss whether such 
 feelings as envy and jealousy may not have some share in 
 the half ludicrous, half bitter lamentations on the supposed 
 great wealth of the Jews, lamentations which are occasionally 
 wailed forth from some Gentile journal, more remarkable for 
 fiery zeal than tolerance or discretion. The greed, the love 
 of gold, of the Jews has formed the theme of many an in¬ 
 vective thundered against that unhappy race. Comparatively 
 few writers have rendered them the common justice of admit* 
 ting that the greed or love of gold of Gentiles has been quite 
 as great; and if a few Hebrews have occasionally realised 
 exceptional fortunes, it has been because they possessed ex¬ 
 ceptional foresight, perseverance, industry, and courage. 
 
 The eighteenth century has furnished several examples of 
 financial genius among the Jews. Among the men who 
 made their mark in their day and who gained a place in 
 history, we will mention first the “ Jew Medina,” who lived 
 in the reign of Queen Anne, and to whom we have already 
 adverted. It is recorded in British annals that in the year 
 1711 the Duke of Marlborough was attacked in Parliament 
 for receiving from a Jew a yearly payment of the sum of 
 £6000. The keen general, who hungered as sharply after 
 the precious metal as any Israelite, replied that the money 
 had been applied towards obtaining trustworthy information. 
 During the enquiry that followed, the curious fact was 
 brought to light that, since 1672, the Jews of Amsterdam 
 had handed over annually an amount of between £5000 to 
 
HEBREW CAPITALISTS. 
 
 59 
 
 £6000 to the commander of the Dutch forces, an office 
 vested in 1711 on the conqueror of Blenheim. These and 
 other discoveries made as to the Duke’s rapacity, were so 
 handled by his political opponents that the haughty John 
 Churchill fell for the time into disgrace. The Jew who ac¬ 
 companied the Duke of Marlborough in all his campaigns, 
 and who administered to the avarice of the great captain, 
 was Sir Solomon Medina, he who for years had been the 
 largest contributor to the funds of the Sephardic Congrega¬ 
 tion. This enterprising gentleman is the u Jew who at one 
 period held contracts to supply the army with bread. Sir 
 Solomon Medina amply repaid himself for the advances made 
 to Marlborough by forwarding expresses bearing intelligence 
 of some of the most glorious battles ever won by English 
 bravery ; and Bamilies, Oudenarde, and Blenheim contributed 
 as much to the wealth of the Hebrew as to the glory of 
 England. Sir Solomon Medina bequeathed a considerable 
 fortune at his death; and we believe his descendants 
 
 eventually left the pale of Judaism. 
 
 Menasseh Lopez was another member of the Portuguese com¬ 
 munity who acquired riches by superior sagacity and courage. 
 He was a successful dealer in stock, when one day rumours 
 of the death of Queen Anne were circulated. The tidings 
 produced a sudden panic in the capital. The train-bands 
 desisted from their exercises : eager crowds flocked in alaim 
 at the street corners, and the funds fell with suddenness. 
 Gentile speculators became intimidated, and did not muster 
 sufficient resolution to operate. Stock was openly offered at 
 rapidly diminishing prices, and no one had the boldness to 
 purchase, until Lopez and other Jews stepped forward to 
 buy all the government securities they could obtain. The 
 news in time was discovered to be false; public agitation 
 quietly subsided, and a rebound upward occurred in every 
 kind of stock. Lopez by his nerve and discernment cleared 
 very large profits on this occasion; and he became the pos¬ 
 sessor of a fine property. Of that other Menasseh Lopez, 
 sprung from the same stock, who came many years after¬ 
 wards, we shall speak in its proper place. 
 
 Pre-eminent among the Hebrew capitalists of last century 
 
6o 
 
 HEBRE W CAPITALISTS . 
 
 ranked Sampson Gideon, for that was the name by which the 
 great u Jew broker ” was known in the Gentile world. He 
 was the u greatest Homan of them all.” He was the 
 Rothschild of the day, the friend of Walpole, the pillar of 
 state credit. His operations were executed on a scale that 
 was then considered gigantic. During the crisis that fol¬ 
 lowed the South Sea Bubble, Gideon was anxiously looked 
 up to, but he was as firm as a rock, as impenetrable as a 
 sphinx. It is said that he rendered Sir Robert Walpole 
 considerable services at this time, not only in a private 
 capacity, but also in materially assisting the minister in 
 allaying public alarm, and in restoring general confidence. 
 It is noteworthy that the Jews, with their commercial in¬ 
 sight into the real nature of undertakings, held aloof from 
 the South Sea Scheme and its sequel which promised sudden 
 riches to all. When the whole nation was infected in an 
 astonishing degree with the spirit of stock-jobbing; when 
 Exchange Alley was crowded with statesmen and clergymen, 
 whigs and tories, churchmen and dissenters, sober merchants 
 and fashionable ladies ; when other employments and profes¬ 
 sions were utterly neglected; when new companies started up 
 every day under the highest auspices; when the Prince of 
 Wales was constituted Governor of the Welch Copper 
 Company, the Duke of Chandos headed the York Buildings 
 Company, and the Duke of Bridgewater formed another for 
 building houses, the Jews appeared to preserve their calm¬ 
 ness and perspicacity in a remarkable degree. They did not 
 allow themselves to be carried away by the universal passion 
 for gold, nor to be led into the vortex that dragged thousands 
 upon thousands into destruction. When the crash came, 
 and disappointment, rage and despair preyed upon numberless 
 victims, the Jews reaped the fruits of their caution. Insol¬ 
 vencies were exceedingly numerous, but not a single Hebrew 
 name is perceived in the list of bankrupts. 
 
 It is related of Gideon that in the panic that accompanied 
 the advance of the Pretender to London in 1745-46, he pur¬ 
 chased stock when everybody else was eager to sell. The 
 consternation was general. The King was trembling, the 
 prime minister was wavering, and the funds were offered at 
 
HEBRE W CAPITALISTS. 
 
 61 
 
 any price. Sampson Gideon went to Jonathan’s and bought 
 all the government securities he could obtain ; he advanced 
 every guinea he possessed, he staked his credit, and he held 
 as much stock as all the remaining speculators put together. 
 The Pretender soon after retired, and Gideon nearly doubled 
 his fortune ! Some months before the revolution, this enter¬ 
 prising financier had borrowed, to carry out some operation, 
 a sum of £20,000 from Mr Snow the banker. When 
 the Pretender was marching on the capital, Mr Snow wrote 
 to Sampson Gideon in tones alternately piteous and offen¬ 
 sive, requesting an immediate return of his advances. 
 Mr Snow not only really required the money in his 
 own bank in this emergency, but he was afraid of losing 
 it altogether. Gideon quietly proceeded to the Bank 
 of England, and obtained therefrom twenty £1000 notes, 
 which he rolled around a bottle of smelling-salts, and 
 forwarded to the dismayed banker. The latter, reani¬ 
 mated probably more by the sight of those crisp pieces of 
 paper than by the pungent scent of the stimulating agent, 
 addressed immediately a gushing letter to Gideon, vowing 
 everlasting gratitude. Sampson Gideon, it is well known, 
 was the ancestor of the Eardley family, on the female side, 
 and he purchased the Belvedere Estate at Erith, which re¬ 
 mained until late years in the possession of his descendant, 
 Sir Culling Eardley, Bart. Sampson Gideon espoused a 
 Christian lady, and his son, Sampson, was baptized and 
 raised to the peerage under the title of Baron Eardley. One 
 of the daughters of Lord Eardley was united in matrimony 
 to a gentleman bearing the not uncommon name of Smith, 
 and who was created a baronet in 1802. Mr Smith became 
 Sir Culling Smith, Bart.; he eventually styled himself Sir 
 Culling Eardley, and is the progenitor of the present repre¬ 
 sentative of the title. 
 
 One day in Heshvan, 5514 (1754), while the elders were 
 holding a meeting, a notary entered and delivered a com¬ 
 munication to the President. It was from Sampson de 
 Rehuel Abudiente, resigning his membership of the con¬ 
 gregation. The letter caused little surprise and was not 
 taken into consideration for three weeks, when the tendered 
 
6 2 HEBREIV CAPITA LISTS. 
 
 resignation was accepted. The withdrawal of Sampson 
 Abudiente was received without comment, for he had long 
 ceased to take part in Jewish affairs. Sampson Abudiente 
 had become a great man. No longer was he seen in the 
 Jewish quarters with his basket in his hand; no longer did 
 he wend his way to Synagogue on Friday evenings ; and his 
 seat in the house of prayer was tenantless. Sampson 
 Abudiente had grown into a power on ’Change. Sampson 
 Abudiente, whose sordid and mean attire had passed into 
 a proverb, was the friend and confidential adviser of the 
 Prime Minister of England. Sampson Abudiente was now 
 called Sampson Gideon. The strange foreign designation 
 had become distasteful to him, and he had adopted a patro¬ 
 nymic more suitable to English ears. But he had never 
 ceased to be a Jew, and it was not that he loved Judaism 
 the less, but that he loved wealth and worldly honours the 
 more. In former days he had desired to purchase a landed 
 estate and found himself surrounded by difficulties. It 
 was a disputed point whether a Jew could legally own landed 
 property. By using his great influence with Sir Robert 
 Walpole, he had obtained a special Act of Parliament 
 authorising the vendor to transfer to him, Sampson Gideon, 
 the rich acres he coveted. But this process was uncertain 
 and unsatisfactory. It was his ambition to be the founder of 
 a great family. He was anxious to secure his millions to 
 Ins’ children. To cut away all difficulties he brought them up 
 to the Christian faith. As it happened, his plan did not attain 
 the end he coveted. Poetical justice usually occurs only in 
 the third volume of a novel, or at the close of a melodrama, 
 for in reality it is seldom visibly carried out in actual life. 
 It is worthy of remark, that Sampson Gideon’s eldest son, 
 Lord Eardley, left no male issue; and, consequently, the 
 title became extinct, and the vast wealth accumulated by the 
 “ Jew broker ” went to enrich strangers. A baronetage by 
 the female side and a burdened estate are all that aie left 
 now of the financier’s ambitious dreams. 
 
 As we have already said, Sampson Gideon had never for¬ 
 saken Judaism, and until the time of his withdrawal from 
 the synagogue, in 1754, he continued to pay regularly his 
 
HEBRE W CAPITALISTS. 
 
 63 
 
 tax (finta) to the Portuguese congregation. He also was 
 employed as broker to buy or sell the communal funds when 
 needed. Even after his retirement he remained a Jew at 
 heart, and until his last day he retained a singular hanker¬ 
 ing after his race. When Sampson Gideon, in 1763, was 
 summoned to join the greater number, his will brought to 
 light in an unexpected manner the state of his feelings. 
 His executors forwarded a copy of his will to the authorities 
 of the Spanish and Portuguese Congregation, with a request 
 that orders might be given for the interment of the deceased. 
 The following paragraph was found in that document: u To 
 my executors——£1000 to be paid by them and applied to 
 and for the use of the Portuguese Synagogue in Bevis 
 Marks, London, in case I shall be buried in the Jews’ 
 burying-place at Mile End, in the cawcivet (regular low of 
 graves), with the right of a guebiv (member), and an Escccbct 
 (or prayer for the dead) said every Ivippur. The reply of 
 the Portuguese elders was brief and dignified, and to the 
 effect that orders had been given to the keeper of the 
 burying-ground at Mile End to let the grave be open accord¬ 
 ing to the desire of the deceased, and that his remains would 
 be° treated as those of any other member. Then Phineas 
 Gomes Serra, a gentleman belonging to one of the first 
 families of the community, came forward and stated that a 
 certain sum offered annually by him in the name of “ Peloni 
 Almoni ”—as anonymous donors were designated—in reality 
 was contributed by the late Sampson Gideon, who had thus 
 regularly kept up his payments as member. Here we have, 
 indeed, a strange phenomenon. A man who would be a 
 Jew, and w r ould not appear a Jew; who believed in Judaism, 
 and brought up his children to Christianity; who moved for 
 years solely among Christians; and yet who craved to be 
 laid in his last sleep beside Jews. Perhaps Sampson Gideon 
 when he entertained his lordly and honourable guests at 
 Belvedere House, Erith, was a less happy man than when 
 he trudged on foot to Synagogue. "W ho can tell the struggles 
 that tore his bosom between religious faith and worldly 
 ambition, between conscience and self-aggrandisement! Ho 
 better lesson on the emptiness of human ambition, on the 
 
6 4 
 
 HEBRE W CAPITALISTS . 
 
 vanity of human pride and greatness, can he furnished, than 
 is afforded by the career of Sampson Gideon. 
 
 According to Jewish custom, only a plain stone points out 
 to visitors to the Portuguese cemetery at Mile End, the site 
 of the grave of the great financier. And every year during 
 the evening of the solemn Fast of Expiation, a short prayer 
 is recited at the Portuguese Synagogue for the soul of 
 Sampson de Rehuel Abudiente. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 SPECIAL LEGISLA TION—JE WISH L 0 YAL TY—CONTINUED 
 PREJUDICES—ENEMIES AND FRIENDS. 
 
 During the first half of the eighteenth century the legislature 
 of the country commenced to take notice of the existence of the 
 Jews, and passed several enactments applying solely to the 
 ancient people of God. In the year 1715, it was represented 
 to both Houses of Parliament, that the severity of Jewish 
 parents was a great hindrance to the children being con¬ 
 verted to the Christian faith. It was firmly believed by 
 some well-meaning enthusiasts, that were Jewish youths and 
 maidens assured of not forfeiting their share of their father’s 
 fortune, they would forsake in crowds the old faith to adopt 
 the new dispensation. An Act of Parliament therefore was 
 passed, to the effect that if the child of any Jewish parent 
 became a Christian, or was desirous of embracing Chris¬ 
 tianity, he might compel such parent, upon applying to the 
 Lord Chancellor, to make due provision for him. 
 
 It does not appear that this law caused any especial 
 number of conversions. On the contrary, about three years 
 after this there was a groundless rumour that the Jews had 
 converted several Christians. We know that such an occur¬ 
 rence could not be; but a credulous individual, more fana¬ 
 tical than prudent, published a small anonymous pamphlet, 
 frantically inveighing against Jews and Judaism, and dedi¬ 
 cated this lucubration to u the reverend clergy, and particu¬ 
 larly the members of the Convocation.” The author observed 
 with “wonder and strangeness that amidst a multitude of 
 outcries for reformation, they had still left the greatest work 
 of all undone, namely, the suppression of the Jews, and until 
 that were accomplished, all other attempts would be to little 
 purpose.” The poor man, in a state of great alarm, thus 
 
 E 
 
66 
 
 SPECIAL LEGISLATION : 
 
 concluded, not without indulging in a sly hit against his 
 own clergy — u The suffering of the Jews to erect a new 
 Synagogue in the heart of the City of London is such 
 encouragement to Judaism, that enemies of the Church 
 of England say that if rabbis and priests of Jews had 
 but as ancient pretensions to church livings and ecclesias¬ 
 tical dignities as popish priests, our most spiritual Lords the 
 Bishops would be as energetic in expulsion of Judaism 
 as they were in King William’s time for the excision of 
 Popery.” 
 
 We hardly know which is the more entertaining: the 
 intense dread of the Jews experienced by the author, or the 
 simplicity with which he attributes to his own priesthood an 
 overwhelming desire for a monopoly of the loaves and fishes. 
 
 Some of the laws in question were framed to grant to the 
 Jews some slight instalment of the commonest rights. 
 
 In Great Britain, as in some other European kingdoms, 
 the Government has been usually in advance of the popula¬ 
 tion in their treatment of the Jews. In England, in France, 
 in Italy, the rulers fully acknowledged the title of the Jews 
 to the citizenship of their country, while the inhabitants eyed 
 them suspiciously as aliens. Indeed in most states the law 
 recognised the equality of the Hebrews to the remainder of 
 their countrymen, when society failed to admit it. 
 
 In the year 1723 the British Government carried through 
 Parliament an Act which, albeit apparently of small import¬ 
 ance, was yet of great significance, for therein it was pro¬ 
 claimed for the first time that the Jews were British subjects. 
 This Act determined that “ whenever any of his Majesty’s 
 subjects professing the Jewish religion shall present them¬ 
 selves to take the oath of abjuration, the words ‘ on the true 
 faith of a Christian ’ shall be omitted out of the said oath, 
 and the taking of it by such persons professing the Jewish 
 religion, without the words aforesaid, in the manner as Jews 
 are admitted to be sworn to give evidence in courts of justice, 
 shall be deemed a sufficient taking.” Here we have a be¬ 
 ginning of religious tolerance. The rights of individual 
 conscience are conceded, and the scruples of even a Jew are 
 respected. Moreover, we notice that the obnoxious words 
 had been previously left out on taking oaths in Courts of 
 
SPECIAL legislation: 
 
 67 
 
 Law, so that the Hebrews already possessed some privileges, 
 which on this occasion were extended and further sanctioned 
 by the legislature. 
 
 The next concession in this direction was in 1740, when 
 another Act of Parliament granted the rights of natural- 
 born subjects of Great Britain to those Jews who had already 
 resided in the American Colonies, or who had served as marines 
 during the war in British ships for two years. 
 
 No state, we may here remark, ever had cause to regret 
 its due recognition of Jewish claims. Loyalty is a quality 
 essential in the Hebrew race. The Jews have invariably 
 paid implicit obedience to the powers that be, as they have 
 always supported public order. In a republic, the Jew is a 
 moderate republican; in a monarchy, he is a consistent con¬ 
 stitutionalist. A Hebrew sans culotte would have been as 
 curious a phenomenon as a religious reformer in the chair of 
 St Peter. In this country, as elsewhere, the Jews, whenever 
 treated with common humanity, have been ready to shed 
 their blood and to expend their treasure on behalf of the 
 legal authorities. The attachment of the Children of Israel 
 to the House of Brunswick is notorious. Hot that they had 
 any ground of complaint against the last two Stuart Kings, 
 who, as we have already seen, displayed towards them a wise 
 tolerance. But Hutch William, and the House of Hanover 
 which succeeded him, represented the cause of progress, 
 liberty of conscience, and religious equality, while the last 
 James allied himself to bigotry and fanaticism and narrow¬ 
 minded despotism. The Jew, though quiet and orderly, is 
 no humble submissive slave; and the natural inborn love of 
 independence of his race will lead him ever to prefer that 
 form of government which is most in accord with his desires 
 and requirements. A Jew will not join any revolutionary 
 movement against constituted authorities, but he will be 
 more zealous in his allegiance towards those who are willing 
 to concede that amount of political and religious freedom 
 to which every sane adult is entitled. Thus it happened 
 that the Jews were constantly willing and ready in every 
 emergency to take up arms in defence of the British throne 
 in general, and of the Guelph dynasty in particular. The 
 Jews in 1745-4G honourably distinguished themselves in 
 
68 
 
 ■SPECIAL LEGISLATION ,: 
 
 ✓ 
 
 taking part in the common danger against an enemy who 
 represented a retrograde movement in civilisation. The 
 lower classes in the community enlisted themselves in the 
 city militia. Those of higher rank entered into associations 
 of all kinds, whilst those whose condition made them more 
 useful in following their own callings, every way promoted 
 whatever was thought serviceable to the Government. Public 
 credit was sinking, the run on the Bank of England was 
 unceasing, and the drain of specie was becoming so serious, 
 that a stoppage of the bank was generally apprehended. The 
 Jews imported specie, and brought it to that establishment, 
 which proceeding materially contributed to the restoration of 
 national credit. Many people, indeed, solicited the Jews to 
 let them have the gold and silver, so that they might have 
 the merit of taking it to the bank themselves. The situa¬ 
 tion was so critical, that it was not sufficient to bring in 
 supplies, unless a stop were put to the continual demand. 
 It is useless to pump water from a disabled bark unless the 
 leak be stopped. Some persons, whether actuated by malice 
 or panic it does not appear, exposed some bank-notes publicly 
 for sale at a discount. Twelve merchants, two of whom 
 were Hebrews, formed at once a union, each member of 
 which signed an undertaking to accept bank-notes in pay¬ 
 ment at par. This resolution saved the sinking credit of 
 the country, and the union was joined by numerous patriotic 
 traders, among whom figured all the principal Jewish com¬ 
 mercial and financial men. Moreover coin was scarce in the 
 Treasury, and immediate calls for it were pressing. Coercive 
 measures would have been simply destructive, for they would 
 have increased the alarm of the people, and occasioned a 
 renewed run on the bank. A subscription was opened in 
 the city by Government to borrow money on the land-tax. 
 The conditions of this loan were by no means favourable to 
 the lenders; nevertheless, the Hebrews came forward freely 
 and subscribed fully one-quarter of the required amount. 
 The conduct of the once persecuted race seems to have been 
 duly appreciated, for when it was resolved to present an 
 address to the King, a Jew was elected as member of the com¬ 
 mittee that was to head the merchants on that memorable occa¬ 
 sion, an honour that would not have been paid to the despised 
 
SPECIAL LEGISLATION 
 
 69 
 
 race unless its zeal and loyalty had gained general appro¬ 
 bation. In conclusion, two wealthy Israelites had armed two 
 vessels in the river for the purpose of privateering, and also 
 for loading goods for foreign markets. When it became 
 known that ships were required to prevent the enemy from 
 landing, the owners tendered the vessels, so fitted out at 
 their cost, to the Government, sacrificing their private ad¬ 
 vantage to the necessities of the country. Nevertheless, the 
 patriotism of the Jews was soon forgotten, for when, in 
 1753, the Naturalisation Act passed, the greater—or the 
 most noisy—part of the population was up in arms against 
 the obnoxious law, and peace was not restored until the 
 slight boon conferred on the Hebrews was revoked by 
 Parliament. 
 
 In the beginning of this century, when all England was 
 thrown in a fever of alarm by the anticipation of a never- 
 intended invasion by the u Corsican Ogre,” the Jews eagerly 
 enlisted themselves among the volunteers. In 1848, when 
 some silly and mischievous demagogues desired to convince 
 the country forcibly that prosperity, independence, and ample 
 labour would be magically bestowed upon all by the adoption 
 of the several points of the Charter, numerous Jews were 
 observed patrolling the streets with the special constable’s 
 badge round their arms and the emblematic staff in their 
 hands. Finally, when, a dozen years ago, England awoke to 
 its unprotected condition, Jewish young men stepped forward 
 by hundreds, and leaving the fascinating pursuits of pleasure 
 and the engrossing cares of business, stood arrayed side by 
 side with the flower of British youth, prepared to incur any 
 sacrifice on behalf of their native land. 
 
 We must not believe that the position of the Jews in 
 England during the first half of the eighteenth century was 
 especially enviable or brilliant. No doubt many Israelites 
 were gathering hither from the Continent; which, however, 
 is rather a proof of the inferiority of their condition in the 
 rest of Europe, than of the abstract goodness of their con¬ 
 dition in England. Though Government protected the Jews 
 from actual ill-usage, social prejudices against them broke 
 out occasionally, hampering their every movement, and sur¬ 
 rounding them with difficulties. In the year 1715 a Jew 
 
70 
 
 SPECIAL LEGISLATION. 
 
 applied to be admitted as broker in the City of London, 
 when a petition was presented against that application by 
 the brokers. It commenced thus : — “ Reasons offered 
 lmmbly to the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen against 
 a Jew (who is a known enemy to the Christian religion) his 
 being admitted a broker.” The reasons alleged were six in 
 number, and were in substance as follow:—1. That the 
 brokers were limited to 100, and that the Act of Parliament 
 made no mention of Jews or other foreigners. 2. That of 
 the Jews that were brokers, not above one-half were u of any 
 advantage to the merchants in any branch of trade what¬ 
 soever.” 3. That for drawing and remitting money to and 
 from foreign countries the Jews might be serviceable; but 
 that there were twice as many u Jew brokers ” as were 
 required, which was the cause that one-half of them became 
 addicted to stock jobbing, and had recourse to irregular 
 practices. 4. 6i That no branch of trade will not receive 
 detriment by admitting Jew brokers.” 5. That the Jews 
 were neither free of the City nor of any livery company, and 
 paid very little towards public support; whereas the peti¬ 
 tioners were house-keepers, freemen, liverymen, who paid 
 scott and lott, and had a right to the immunities and privi¬ 
 leges of Englishmen that Jews had not. 6. That Jews had 
 no right to immunities and privileges, as would appear from 
 the many statute laws in force against them, which were 
 printed in 1703, and dedicated to Convocation. 
 
 This curious document brings forward several interesting 
 facts cpncerning the Jews. In the first place, we perceive 
 that the pursuit of a broker was much in favour among the 
 Hebrews, and greatly resorted to by them. Then we observe 
 the numerous restrictions that hemmed them in in the battle 
 of life, and the prejudices that were rife against them; and, 
 in conclusion, we learn that many penal enactments still 
 existed at that period in the Statute-Book rendering the 
 property of that race insecure, and their lives barely safe. 
 This petition w T as not successful; for the Corporation of 
 London, with that liberality which has generally characterised 
 its conduct towards the Jews, took no notice of it, and granted 
 the application to the Hebrew broker. 
 
 Occasionally some voice from the crowd was raised against 
 
SEE CIAL LE GISLA TICK 7 * 
 
 the Jews at this period; and an anonymous pamphlet was 
 published a few years later, in which it was stated that “ the 
 Jews, by their corrupted charms and secret intrigues, though 
 they have no manner of right to live here, do boldly presume 
 not only to engross the principal part of our trade, but aie 
 now admitted, as some say, to shares in the East Indian, 
 African, Hudson’s Bay, and Hamburgh Society.” . From this 
 and other analogous sources we gather that, notwithstanding 
 so many adverse circumstances, the Jews, by their natural 
 sagacity and indomitable energy, had already acquired an 
 important position in British commerce; that they had 
 engrossed the Portugal and Barbary trade to themselves; 
 that they were running a close race for that of Spain ; that 
 they had got into their hands Barbadoes and Jamaica; and 
 that by their foreign relations they regulated the couise of 
 the Exchanges. AVe are also apprised that the Jews were 
 shareholders in many of the principal companies; but 
 that as all Jews had been declared traitors by an Act of 
 Edward I, they could own no property. Therefore they were 
 liable, at the King’s pleasure, to have all their funds seized. 
 All the joint concerns in which the Jews possessed any 
 interest were, moreover, subject to the same risk. We do 
 not learn that the Jews were ever practically despoiled in 
 this manner at this period; and their enemies take care to 
 inform us that the former played their cards so well, by pro¬ 
 fessing friendship with all religions, that they were growing 
 
 into favour with both laity and clergy. 
 
 The Jews, at the same time, were not without friends and 
 supporters. In 1736 a singular pamphlet was published. 
 It attracted much attention at that period. It is addressed 
 to “ the Rev. High Priest of the Church by law established,” 
 and it is signed by “Solomon Abrabanel, in Synagogue Lane, 
 Bury Street, the 12th day of the 12tli month of Adar.” In¬ 
 ternal evidence would lead us to the belief that this little 
 treatise was not written by a Jew, and it appears the pro¬ 
 duction of a practised writer. It is composed in a forcible, 
 half-jocose, half-satirical style, that reminds us of the diatribes 
 of the great Dean of St Patrick. We question whether a Jew 
 —even had he possessed the necessary abilities—would have 
 ventured at that time to make use of some of the bold ex- 
 
72 
 
 SPECIAL LEGISLATION. 
 
 pressions therein contained. There was, however, a family of 
 the name of Abrabanel in existence among the Israelites ; but 
 whether any member of this family lent his name to the pam¬ 
 phlet, we are unable to say. The essay is a representation of 
 the grievances of the Children of Israel under the penal laws, 
 and prays for the repeal of the Test Act. This slight work 
 ran through seven editions. We shall give some brief 
 extracts, as specimens of its language and line of reasoning. 
 u You avow that the Christian religion was never intended 
 to leave the rights of mankind in a worse condition than it 
 found them , and since His proposed that no religious opinion 
 shall be any longer a civil disqualification, we hope, sir, that 
 you will be our patron on the principle of universal charity, 
 and that as Paul gloried in being the apostle of the Gentile, 
 you will think it no dishonour to be the Bishop of the Jews, 
 and that we may say of you, Behold an Israelite in whom 
 
 there is no guile .You have laid hold of the 
 
 promise made to father Abraham , and have taken the 
 Kingdom of Heaven as your inheritance; you have con¬ 
 verted our moiety of the Bible to your own use; you have 
 seized upon Moses and Aaron , and the ten commandments , 
 which were our natural property, and placed them over the 
 communion tables; yet make this pretence of Christian com¬ 
 munion a reason for excluding us from the advantages of 
 the commonwealth, so that our law and our prophets can 
 afford us no protection though you have exalted them. Aou 
 have robbed us of our priesthood, Urim and Thummim, and 
 of our tithes also, yet give us nothing in exchange but dam¬ 
 nation, as if Satan could be such a tool as to take us when 
 we lost all.” After justifying the act of the Jews in con¬ 
 demning Jesus to death in incisive terms that cannot be 
 adverted to here, and dwelling on the equality of Jew 
 and Christian, the writer continues— a It is true we are 
 charged with too violent a passion for the mammon of un¬ 
 righteousness, but that we find the most sanctified Christians, 
 in respect of worldly lucres, as little scrupulous of taking 
 the profit to themselves as they are of throwing the scandal 
 upon us. We get what we can, and keep what we get, not 
 by any principle of religion, but of convenience, which 
 principle reigns in as full perfection amongst the saints at 
 
SPECIAL LEGISLATION. 73 
 
 Hackney, as among the Children of Israel in Bury Street or 
 Duke’s Place.” 
 
 The author then suggests that Jews should be appointed 
 tithe-collectors, for they would afford no more offence than 
 the generality of church officers \ he deplores the scant courtesy 
 shown by dissenters towards Jews; he gives a brief sketch of 
 the history of the Jews in England, and thus he concludes 
 his essay in a humorous strain—“ When a petition for the 
 Repeal of the Test Act shall be about to be presented, we 
 intend on that day to march in a solemn procession from 
 our Synagogue in Bury Street, with our priests and our law 
 and Aaron’s bells at the head of us. If this moving appear¬ 
 ance shall not have its effect, we must give up all hope of 
 being restored to our national rights. We hope you will 
 imitate the Apostle Paul, who unto the Jews became as a 
 Jew, that he might gain the Jews; and if you protect -the 
 Children of Israel in this emergent affair, we will promise 
 you, whenever you come amongst us, the first cut of the 
 Paschal Lamb, and the chief seat in the Synagogue.” 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 COMMUNAL CHARITIES—INTERNAL LEGISLATION. 
 
 During the earlier half of the eighteenth century, while the 
 Jews were surely, if slowly, strengthening their outward 
 position in this country, their inward or communal existence 
 was acquiring a vigorous development in proportion to their 
 increased numbers and importance. Comparative prosperity 
 did not cause the Children of Israel to forget the Lord of 
 their forefathers. They obeyed His precepts, and manifested 
 their reverence for Him by dedicating to Him various houses 
 of worship ; while they displayed their love for their suffei- 
 ing fellow-beings by founding a number of institutions foi 
 the relief of the unfortunate, the sick, and the aged. 
 
 In the beginning of that century, in addition to the 
 German Synagogue in Broad Court, Duke Street, and the 
 Portuguese S} T nagogue in Bevis Marks, we find recorded the 
 existence of a smaller house of prayer in Coleman Street. 
 A contemporary Christian writer adverts to it as a proof of 
 the spread of Judaism; but at the present day we are unable 
 to fix on its precise site, or state whether it belonged to the 
 one or the other of the two Jewish communities. We are 
 apprised by another authority that the German Synagogue 
 was by no means so imposing in appearance as the Synagogue 
 of the Portuguese, and that the new edifice wherein the 
 latter gathered to pray was about twice the size of the 
 Ashkenazi Schule. 
 
 The German Israelites were rapidly increasing, owing to 
 a considerable immigration ; and in 1722 they reconstructed 
 their Synagogue on an enlarged scale, and they consecrated 
 it with great solemnity. Even this new arrangement prov¬ 
 ing insufficient for their wants, in 1726 another Synagogue 
 was erected near Leadenliall Street, and became known as 
 the Hambro Schule. 
 
COMMUNAL CHARITIES. 
 
 75 
 
 The Portuguese remained content with their one grand 
 old building, which appeared enough for their congregation. 
 The Sephardim, if they did not raise new temples, probably 
 performed as good work in the sight of God, for they took 
 tender care of His forlorn creatures. Various noble institu¬ 
 tions arose for the education of the young, and for the lelief 
 of the poor, the sick, and the aged. In 1703 they founded 
 the Orphan Society, or “ The Gates of Light and the Father 
 of the Fatherless.” The object of the charity, as its name 
 purports, is to maintain, educate, and apprentice a number 
 of orphan boys, who are admitted by the votes of the sub¬ 
 scribers. 
 
 Then in 1724 another society was brought into existence, 
 which grants annually a dowry of £60 to one or more father¬ 
 less girls of the Portuguese congregation, and distributes 
 the small gifts of £1 to every poor woman lying in at the 
 hospital, and 5s. to every individual above ten years old 
 undergoing confined mourning. Subsequently, in the year 
 1730, a wealthy and generous personage, Isaac Da Costa 
 Villareal, made a liberal endowment for the education and 
 clothing of twenty poor female children of the same con¬ 
 gregation. The Villareal school—the pupils of which are 
 distinguished by their neat though old-fashioned garb is 
 under the management of a committee of ladies, who devote 
 much thought and time to the welfare of the future motheis 
 of Hebrew workmen. The family of Villareal, we may re¬ 
 mark, was one of the most ancient and honourable among 
 the Portuguese. The Villareals had occupied some of the 
 highest posts at the Court of Portugal, and when driven 
 from the banks of the Tagus by the implements of torture 
 and blazing stakes of the Inquisition, they brought away with 
 them a great name and a considerable fortune. In Euglanc 
 their blood became allied to Albion’s proudest aristociac}, 
 and we believe that it flows through the veins of at least two 
 
 members of the British peerage. 
 
 The condition of poor damsels seems to have receive con ~ 
 siderable sympathy, for six years after the establishment o 
 the Villareal school, another association was created tor the 
 purpose of furnishing marriage portions to the extent o 
 to destitute orphan girls of the Sephardic congregation. 
 
7 6 
 
 COMMUNAL CHARITIES . 
 
 It was in 1747 that first originated the Portuguese 
 u House of the Sick,” the Beth Olim , one of the most use¬ 
 ful and noblest foundations in that congregation. Therein 
 the sick are tended with care and skill, and their suffering 
 is alleviated by the visits of relatives and the knowledge 
 that, should God please to summon them to His Presence, 
 their last hours would be soothed by the countenance and 
 prayers of their brethren of the House of Israel. Under 
 that roof needy married women are assisted in bearing the 
 curse of Eve ; in that building, broken-down, decayed persons 
 of both sexes find an asylum for their old age; and finally, 
 in the surgery of the hospital gratuitous advice and medi¬ 
 cine are supplied to the patients who cannot be admitted 
 within its walls. 
 
 In 1749 the u Society of Good Deeds,” Mahasim Tobim 
 was established. The good deeds here assume a variety 
 of shapes. Poor boys of the Spanish and Portuguese 
 congregation are apprenticed to suitable trades. Small 
 sums are advanced to the industrious poor; rewards are 
 granted for satisfactory behaviour to servants and apprentices, 
 and outfits are provided for boys leaving the country. After 
 this a long pause occurs, and we hear of no new charitable 
 associations until 1778, when a union was founded, “ That 
 giveth Bread to the Hungry,” for distributing a certain 
 number of loaves weekly to the Portuguese poor. 
 
 We have so far seen how the Jews augmented in numbers, 
 and how they were provided for in sickness and in poverty ; 
 let us now inquire how they were disposed of after death. 
 When the first Hebrews had come over from Holland, they 
 had purchased for 999 years a piece of land at Mile End 
 to serve as a u Beth Haim,” a House of Life. This is the 
 cemetery of the Sephardic congregation. It has in recent 
 times been extended by the acquisition of an adjoining tract 
 of land. The hospital to this day stands in a corner of the 
 original estate. Until 1738 all the Jews in London in¬ 
 terred their dead in the same locality. At about that period 
 the Germans, who possessed their Synagogues and institutions 
 apart, began availing themselves of a separate place of burial. 
 We will here observe, that among the muniments of the 
 Spanish and Portuguese community is found a conveyance 
 
COMMUNAL CHARITIES. 
 
 77 
 
 of a certain space of ground in the city of Dublin, bought 
 in 1748, for the purpose of conversion into a cemetery; and 
 we believe that the same land is now employed for that 
 identical object by the Dublin congregation. 
 
 We are unable to ascertain positively whether any Jews 
 dwelt in Dublin in the above year, but indubitably some 
 Israelites frequently visited that city. It is related that a 
 learned rabbi came over from the Irish capital to confer 
 with the London rabbis, a fact that would encourage the 
 belief that there were on the banks of the Liffey resident 
 Jews. During the middle of the eighteenth century the 
 Jews unquestionably spread throughout the country, and 
 they established themselves in fewer or greater numbers at 
 Canterbury, Chatham, Cambridge, Bristol, Exeter, Edin¬ 
 burgh, Glasgow, Ipswich, Liverpool, Manchester, and Ply¬ 
 mouth. 
 
 Among the Portuguese community the elders continued to 
 exercise a paternal sway over the other members, which, how¬ 
 ever childish and irksome it may appear to us, in reality must 
 have proved beneficial, for it certainly helped to maintain 
 the high character of the congregation. It is evident—and 
 the fact is confirmed by Gentile writers—that the Spanish 
 and Portuguese Jews were held in greater repute, socially 
 and commercially, than their less fortunate German brethren, 
 which result may, perhaps, be partly attributed to the less 
 stringent rule of the German authorities. 
 
 The Sephardic governing body, at the period of which we 
 are writing, directed a number of enactments against a 
 variety of offences. It was prohibited to advance funds on 
 post obits, or otherwise to young men of expectation, who in 
 their turn were enjoined not to borrow cash from money¬ 
 lenders. Clandestine marriages were held up to reprobation. 
 Interference in parliamentary or municipal elections was 
 strongly condemned, and betting was strictly forbidden. 
 The betting to which the Israelites were addicted at this time 
 —let us hasten to state—does not appear to us in these 
 days of plunging as of a very formidable nature. The 
 young Jews of the day did not lay or take odds on turf 
 events, neither did they back the favourite pugilist for the 
 next encounter in the ring, nor the most strutting cock for 
 
7 3 
 
 COMMUNAL CHARITIES. 
 
 the following fight in the pit. They simply wagered as to 
 the day of arrival of the Dutch mail, an incident which 
 seems to have happened with sufficient irregularity to war¬ 
 rant its causing some excitement. 
 
 The infringement of these ordinances was naturally at¬ 
 tended by proportionate penalties. Herem , or excommunica¬ 
 tion, was no longer applied so freely as it was two or three 
 generations before. Money-fines, and mere exclusion from 
 Synagogue, seem to have had sufficient deterrent effect to 
 maintain a wholesome discipline. We perceive in one in¬ 
 stance that a certain individual had been debarred from 
 attending the Portuguese Synagogue at Bever’s Marks—as 
 some writers spelt the name—owing to an accusation under 
 which he laboured of being particeps criminis in an abduc¬ 
 tion case. The young lady was recovered, and returned 
 safely home to her parents, upon which the person in ques¬ 
 tion humbly petitioned the “Very Magnificent Gentlemen of 
 the Mahamad ” to open to him once more the gates of the 
 House of Prayer. The request of the petitioner was not 
 granted, probably because his innocence was not so clear to 
 the eyes of the Parnassim or Wardens as to his own. 
 
 We have already observed that the fear that Jews 
 should pervert Christians to their own tenets was one 
 of the principal bugbears raised by the opponents of the 
 admission of the Jews into England in Cromwell’s time— 
 wherewith to alarm the credulous and the ignorant. The 
 Sephardic authorities had always been strenuous in their 
 endeavours to avoid affording any umbrage to their Christian 
 friends. In 1751 the question arose again, as it had nearly 
 a century previously, and the Sephardic chiefs thought it 
 their duty to adopt new measures on the subject. They 
 addressed, at the same time, to the heads of the Ashkenazi 
 community, the following curious letter in English, which 
 we reproduce verbatim :— 
 
 London, 27 th December 1751. 
 
 Gentlemen, —Being persuaded tliat you will join with us in all things 
 that tend to preserve the present happy toleration, we take this opportunity 
 to acquaint you as worthy representatives of your congregation, of a grow¬ 
 ing evil among us, viz. : that of permitting proselytes, for which end we 
 have heard that two or three Christians have come hither from Norway 
 
COMMUNAL CHARITIES. 
 
 79 
 
 with that intention, and lest these practices should extend to English 
 proselytes, which is contrary to the express condition annexed to our first 
 establishment here, we have thought proper to forbid in our Synagogue 
 any from aiding and assisting them therein in any manner whatsoever, under 
 the penalties as we send you enclosed. We do not doubt that you will 
 also concur with us to endeavour to prevent the same from taking effect 
 amongst you in the manner that may be judged most expedient. We pray 
 God to preserve you for many years, and believe us to be, Gentlemen, your 
 friends and humble servants, 
 
 A. de Castro, for the Congregation. 
 
 We formerly remarked tliat we could find no trace of the 
 express condition above adverted to, and we can only confirm 
 our opinion on the subject. "Whether this condition be 
 traditionally understood or otherwise, certain it is that our 
 spiritual guides of all communities in London have stead¬ 
 fastly refused to admit converts from Christianity into the 
 covenant of Abraham. 
 
 The communication herein given was accompanied by a 
 copy of the resolutions voted on the subject by the Mahamad. 
 The two documents were duly acknowledged by the chiefs of 
 German congregations, who, perfectly agreeing in the view of 
 the case adopted by their Portuguese brethren, framed some 
 ordinances in an analogous sense. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753. 
 
 Xot many measures caused greater commotion in London, 
 or gave rise to warmer discussion, than an Act of Parliament 
 which merely proposed to grant a few, only a few, of the 
 privileges of Englishmen to a very limited number of 
 foreigners. Neither the Repeal of the Corn Laws, nor the 
 introduction of Free Trade, nor the passing of the Reform 
 Bill caused more excitement in their day than the question 
 as to whether or not some scores of Dutch or German Jews 
 were to be allowed to go through costly proceedings to acquire 
 the right of holding property in England. 
 
 I 11 the year 1753 the House of Lords passed a bill, per¬ 
 mitting those Jews who had resided for three years in Eng¬ 
 land, and not absented themselves therefrom for more than 
 three months at one time, to be naturalised by Parliament. 
 The bill having received the sanction of the Upper House, 
 was despatched to the lower and more popular assembly, 
 usually supposed to be the more liberal of the two. On the 
 16th of April the bill was read for the first time, and a 
 number of violent debates ensued, in which was exhibited 
 more passion than patriotism, more sound than sense. The 
 ministry was under the guidance of Mr Pelham, who, with 
 his brother, the Duke of Newcastle, held the complete con¬ 
 trol of public affairs. Reports of Parliamentary proceedings 
 were not then permitted to be avowedly published. No 
 public journal ventured to print the speeches of British peers 
 or commons, but the sayings and doings of the Parliament of 
 Lilliput, during the earlier half of the eighteenth century, were 
 made known to the public through various periodicals and 
 magazines. Among the names of the orators of that famous 
 legislature, readers of the present day would scarcely recog- 
 
THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753. 
 
 81 
 
 nise personages who had made their mark in the history of 
 these realms. Who would discover in Hurgo Castrolet the 
 witty and polished Earl of Chesterfield, or in Hurgo San- 
 thepo the accomplished Eark of Stanhope : though, through 
 the thin disguise of Sir Retrob Walelop , it is not difficult to 
 detect the future Earl of Orford. 
 
 We cannot consequently read in their entirety the debates 
 that occurred on this question. But we know that an exag¬ 
 gerated and factitious importance soon became attached to 
 this bill, as if the very fate of the whole country depended 
 on its issue; and that an amount of fallacies w T as uttered on 
 the subject, and a degree of ignorance displayed, that would 
 fairly astonish an ordinarily educated individual of the pre¬ 
 sent generation. 
 
 A petition, signed by above one hundred merchants and 
 traders of the City of London, was presented to Parliament 
 in favour of the bill during its discussion. This petition was 
 followed by another in the same sense, to which subscribed 
 upwards of two hundred persons, consisting of merchants, 
 traders, manufacturers, shipwrights, and commanders of ves¬ 
 sels, many of whom were said to be “ people of the greatest 
 fortune, judgment, and abilities.” It was urged in that 
 document, among other reasons, that the passing of this 
 measure would “ increase the shipping and encourage the 
 exportation of the woollen and other manufactures of this 
 kingdom, of which persons who profess the Jewish religion 
 have for many years last past exported great quantities.” 
 
 The City member, Sir John Barnard, spoke vehemently 
 against the bill, prophesying a thousand calamities should it 
 be allowed to become law; and the Corporation of London, con¬ 
 trary to its customary liberality and toleration, strongly opposed, 
 with all its powerful influence, the intended enactment. Sir 
 Crisp Gascoigne, the Lord Mayor, presided over meetings of 
 Aldermen and Liverymen, and exhorted the citizens to resist 
 the poor little concession about to be made to the Jews. 
 Petitions—presaging the direst consequences from such dan¬ 
 gerous generosity—were drawn up and eagerly pressed upon 
 the House of Commons. Counsel was heard and evidence 
 was examined. Notwithstanding all opposition, Government 
 courageously persevered in its action. The bill was com- 
 
 F 
 
82 
 
 THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753. 
 
 mitted : it passed through all its various stages with some 
 modifications, and within five weeks it received the royal 
 sanction. 
 
 The Act in question was entitled u An Act to permit per¬ 
 sons professing the Jewish religion to bh naturalised by Par¬ 
 liament, and for other purposes therein mentioned.” The 
 bill was at best of limited advantage to the Jews, for it was 
 of a permissive kind, and only the wealthy could have set 
 in motion the machinery necessary to obtain the desired 
 naturalisation. Then the privileges of Jews were curtailed, 
 for they were placed under special civil and political dis¬ 
 abilities, and they were debarred from purchasing or inherit¬ 
 ing u any advowson or right of patronage or presentation 
 or other right or interest whatsoever in any benefice, prebend, 
 or other ecclesiastical living or promotion in school or hos¬ 
 pital.” 
 
 It is difficult in our time to understand how a boon so 
 grudgingly bestowed upon an inoffensive race, and of so 
 slight a nature, could have attained so high a degree of un¬ 
 popularity. Reports exaggerating its effects were industriously 
 spread throughout the length and breadth of the land. The 
 enemies of the Jews joined hands with the enemies of the 
 ministers, and actively circulated a number of fables so 
 wildly absurd, so palpably improbable, that nothing but 
 violent party spirit, gross ignorance, and blind prejudice 
 could have induced any reasonable being to place belief in 
 them. 
 
 It was alleged by the opponents of the measure that the 
 naturalisation of the Jews was not consistent with the Chris¬ 
 tian religion, and was repugnant to the constitution of Great 
 Britain. That it would diminish the consumption of ham, 
 bacon, and brawn, and thus materially injure the trade in 
 those commodities. That it "was an act against the will 
 of God ; it was flying in the face of prophecy, which 
 declares that the Jews should be a scattered people, 
 without country or fixed habitation, until they should be 
 converted from their infidelity, and gathered into the land 
 of their forefathers; that the Jews would become so nume¬ 
 rous as to exclude all Protestants from the home or any 
 other trade. That so many rich Jews would come over to 
 
33 
 
 THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753. 
 
 England that they would purchase all the lands in the king¬ 
 dom, and influence elections, so that no one would he chosen 
 unless in their interest ; that they would become members of 
 Parliament themselves, and reach the highest posts under 
 government. That a number of poor Jews would flood the 
 land and devour it like locusts; that they would deprive of 
 bread the natives who earn their livelihood by work, or else 
 bring such a mass of pauperism into the country as to greatly 
 impair its resources, spread misery, and seriously augment 
 taxation. That Jew brokers, usurers, and beggars, would 
 flock hither, robbing the real subjects of their birthrights, dis¬ 
 gracing the character of the nation, endangering the consti¬ 
 tution of Church and State, and proving an indelible reproach 
 to the established religion of the British realms. That the 
 Jews would multiply in number, increase in wealth, and gain 
 power to such an extent as to acquire great personal import¬ 
 ance, introduce universally their customs, and render Juda¬ 
 ism the fashionable religion of the English. That they 
 would engross all the foreign commerce of the realm, and 
 that the Spaniards and Portuguese would be greatly offended 
 at the refuge afforded in England to a people whom they 
 had driven away from their kingdoms, where they would not 
 be tolerated. That the Jews were more ready than any other 
 people on earth to betray intelligence ; and that should a 
 Jew be found in the councils of the country, or in any branch 
 of government wherein he could arrive at a true state of affairs, 
 it would be in his power to betray the counsels and secrets of 
 the nation to every court in Europe. That to harbour a Jew 
 was, in the words of Innocent III., when he expelled that race 
 from Pome, to receive u mus in pera, serpens in gremio, 
 ignis in sinu.” Finally, that by bringing the Jews into 
 England, with them would be brought the curses that have 
 pursued them through all countries and for so many ages, and 
 the same part would be acted as that of Julian the Apostate, 
 when he invited them to gather in his empire and erect a 
 temple. 
 
 It was impossible to stem the torrent of popular fanaticism. 
 In vain it was represented by reflecting and outspoken men, 
 in reply to these ludicrous, contradictory, or malicious mis¬ 
 representations, that the Act would produce a very incon- 
 
8 4 
 
 THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753. 
 
 siderable effect, that the number of Jews that could avail 
 themselves of its provisions must necessarily be very re¬ 
 stricted, and would exert no perceptible influence in the 
 destinies of Great Britain; that rich Jews desired to be 
 naturalised, not to be enabled to sit in Parliament, enjoy 
 posts of honour and profit, or obtain possession of all the 
 estates in England, but to labour no longer under a stigma, 
 to be treated by Protestants with the same respect as they 
 displayed towards each other, and to be suffered to live 
 in peace, in case some few of them purchased lands; that 
 in the actual state of public feeling, scarcely any wealthy 
 Jews would venture to settle in England, and that in point 
 of fact, new emigrants of that class from distant countries 
 ceased to arrive, preferring to proceed to Holland, where they 
 were welcomed, and to France, where the laws, promulgated 
 under Kings Henry III., Louis XIY., and Louis XY., 
 secured them some immunities and rights. 
 
 In vain it was repeated that commerce and manufactures 
 would be greatly benefited by the establishment here of a 
 number of industrious traders, who not being manufacturers 
 themselves, but exporters and importers, would necessarily in¬ 
 crease and encourage English production. That should a 
 Jew ever become member of Parliament, he would give his 
 vote on that side of the question which should appear to him 
 most advantageous to the society of which he would then be 
 member; that should the subject under discussion be one 
 connected with trade or finance, he would be especially 
 qualified to illustrate and point out the merits or defects 
 of the proposal under debate, and that it would 'be no 
 easy matter to puzzle his understanding with sophistical 
 arguments. That the Jews were the most peaceful sect in 
 England; Sampson Gideon was the father of the poor, and 
 his charity was as boundless as his fortune ; the generous and 
 noble members of the Mendes family with Franks, Salvador, 
 and others, were famed far and wide for their beneficence and 
 largeness of mind, and when the nation had been in need, 
 they had proved its friends indeed, and had furnished the State 
 with ample funds. In conclusion, it was asserted that Jews, 
 being induced to take up their abode in England, might the 
 more easily receive the Gospel; and one of their defenders thus 
 
3S 
 
 THE NATURALISATION BILL OF 1753. 
 
 ended an emphatic appeal in their favour —“ No doubt they 
 (the Jews) labour under most unhappy prejudices, but for these 
 they must answer to their Maker. Suppose our Saviour him¬ 
 self now was to appear where the Orthodox court is established, 
 and was to preach against the temporal kingdom which has 
 been erected upon the simple principles of His gospels, don’t 
 you think it probable He would be taken into the hand of the 
 Corregidor, and be made a spectacle as an auto-da-fd? ” 
 
 In time the scanty concession to the Jews became more 
 and more generally disliked. As the controversy grew hot 
 between their supporters and enemies, the popular clamour 
 arose with greater intensity and fury. The opponents of the 
 measure grew in number and in violence. An outcry against 
 it was heard throughout the country, and the hostile majority 
 soon silenced the friendly minority. Reproaches were heaped 
 on the heads of the Ministry who had introduced so hateful 
 an enactment, and the two brothers who held the helm of 
 the affairs of the State were alarmed at the effect this clamour 
 might have on the next election, which was approaching. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 REPEAL OF THE NATURALISATION BILL—LITERATURE 
 
 OF THE BILL. 
 
 The Ministers, frightened at the storm they had raised, be¬ 
 came as eager to annul the unpopular measure as they once 
 had been eager to make it law. At the very opening of the 
 parliamentary session in 1754, the Duke of Newcastle, im¬ 
 mediately after the customary address to the Crown had been 
 voted, abruptly presented a bill for the repeal of the obnox¬ 
 ious Act, which, he said, had been used by the disaffected as 
 a handle to produce general discontent. The work of the 
 previous session was undone with far more speed than it had 
 been done. All were ready with more or less ardour to 
 throw stones at the very enactment which the majority of 
 them had supported but a brief year before. At first the 
 clause in the bill disabling all naturalised Jews from purchas¬ 
 ing, inheriting, or holding any advowson, or presentation or 
 right to any ecclesiastical benefice or promotion was allowed 
 to stand separately. Subsequently it was argued that such a 
 clause remaining unrescinded might imply that Jews being 
 especially debarred from the possession of any ecclesiastical 
 right of presentation, might be considered as having the power 
 of purchasing and inheriting lay property in the kingdom. 
 This illusory advantage was more than ought to be accorded 
 to miserable Jews, and the whole Act of Naturalisation was 
 revoked without exception. A few only among the Peers 
 had the courage to oppose such unworthy and pitiful sub¬ 
 mission to external pressure. Among these was honourably 
 distinguished Earl Temple, a nobleman of high abilities, who 
 in an eloquent discourse, powerfully though vainly espoused 
 the cause of the unfortunate Jews. 
 
 In the Lower House members of all parties vied with 
 each other, and with members of the Upper House, in dis¬ 
 playing their detestation of this ill-fated Act. The British 
 
REPEAL OF THE NAT URAL ISATI ON BILL. 87 
 
 Parliament hastened to obey the voice of the people as if it 
 had been the voice of God, and not the voice of interested 
 agitators and ignorant fanatics. On the very first day of the 
 session, Sir James Dashwood, an influential member of the 
 Opposition, gave notice that immediately after the Address to 
 the Throne had been voted he would propose a measure of 
 very great importance. After that proof of loyalty to his 
 Majesty had been given, Sir James Dashwood rose again, and 
 having dwelt on the just and general indignation caused 
 by the Act of the preceding session in favour of the Jews, he 
 asked that a certain early date should be fixed for taking that 
 Act into consideration. It was inconsistent with the rules of 
 the House to fix a date for the purpose, but the general 
 motion was seconded by Lord Parker, who was his political 
 opponent, and it was unanimously accepted. 
 
 Meanwhile the Lords had hastened to frame a bill, which they 
 transmitted to the Commons, who saw no objection to it with 
 the exception, of the preamble, which excited a strenuous op¬ 
 position. It was thus worded —“ Whereas an Act of Parlia¬ 
 ment was made and passed in the twenty-fifth year of His 
 Majesty’s reign intituled an Act to permit persons professing 
 the Jewish religion to be naturalised by Parliament and for 
 other purposes therein mentioned; and whereas occasion has 
 been taken from the said Act to raise discontents and dis¬ 
 quiets in the minds of his Majesty’s subjects, be it enacted,” 
 &c. This introduction, which happened to represent the 
 truth, was stigmatised as a reflection upon the former op¬ 
 ponents of the bill in particular, and the body of the people 
 in general. Sir Roger Newdigate moved the substitution to 
 the previous form of the following words — u Whereas great 
 discontents and disquietudes had from the said Act arisen.” 
 A violent debate ensued. Mr Pelham and Mr Pitt resisted 
 the amendment, which was rejected. The bill, as originally 
 drawn up, was in due course read a third time, and obtained 
 the royal approbation. 
 
 This humiliating concession did not satisfy the nation, 
 which seemed to look upon the Jews as so many ogres ready 
 to devour with an insatiable appetite the inhabitants of Eng¬ 
 land, and to seize upon their goods and chattels. An attempt 
 was made to repeal the Act of 1740, which allowed those who 
 
88 REPEAL OF THE NATURALISATION BILL. 
 
 liad resided for seven years in any of liis Majesty s colonies 
 to become free denizens of Great Britain without taking tlie 
 Sacrament. A sudden alarm was conceived at the danger¬ 
 ous tendency of this law. In the House of Commons motions 
 were made for the production of papers concerning the work¬ 
 ing of the Act. It was ascertained that though theoretically 
 many Jews were entitled to claim this privilege, practically 
 very few availed themselves of their right, which could only 
 be attained with much trouble, and at a considerable cost. 
 Nevertheless Lord Harley moved for leave to bring in a 
 bill to repeal that part, and Sir James Dashwood and the 
 Earl of Egmont spoke in the same sense. The eloquence of 
 Mr Pelham and of Mr Pitt prevailed, and the majority saved 
 Parliament from the disgrace of persecuting the weak to 
 curry favour with the strong. 
 
 The Naturalisation Bill, like all questions which greatly 
 excite the popular mind, produced a special literature of its 
 own. It was attacked and defended, censured and praised, 
 abused and commended. Not only the then existing organs 
 of the press took the one or the other side of the controversy, 
 —it was mostly the other side,—but a number of persons in 
 private or public life rushed into print, sometimes to enlighten, 
 more frequently to bewilder or further prejudice the public 
 mind. The Gentleman's Magazine , the Westminster Journal , 
 the London Evening Post , distinguished themselves for the 
 bitterness of their invectives against the Jews. The General 
 Evening Post and the Public Advertiser had the courage to 
 open their columns to those who dared speak the truth to an 
 ignorant multitude. 
 
 There was little variety in the arguments employed by the 
 opponents of the Act of 1753, but their language had the 
 merit of diversity of expression. Some writers exercised con¬ 
 siderable ingenuity in culling the most forcible terms of 
 abuse to be found in the vernacular, and applying them to 
 the Children of Israel. The expressions of forgers, clippers, 
 blasphemers, murderers, were amenities commonly showered 
 on their devoted heads. One gentleman, more penetrating than 
 the rest, discovered that not only the Jews were unclean 
 in person, that they squinted, and were awkwardly built, but 
 that there was a demoniacal leer in their eyes which marked 
 them from the rest of mankind. 
 
REPEAL OF THE NATURALISATION BILL. 89 
 
 Others spoke far more moderately and reasonably, and 
 supported their view of the case without heaping a volley of 
 insulting epithets on an unoffending race. A generous indivi¬ 
 dual went even so far as to assert that good qualities might be 
 possibly found in Jews, and that he had actually heard of the 
 existence of one truly good Jew. This Israelite was Benjamin 
 Mendes da Costa, a man endowed with a large heart, and 
 whose unbounded charity in its most extended form had en¬ 
 deared him to Jew and Gentile. Mr Da Costa, we will 
 add, took an active part in communal matters, and we shall 
 have hereafter frequent occasion to refer to his name. 
 
 Among the supporters of the bill, we often perceive an 
 apologetic deprecating tone, as if they were ashamed of 
 the cause they were defending. In some instances the 
 attempted advocacy was carried on in such an hesitating or 
 questionable manner, as to render it difficult to ascertain 
 whether the writers were blundering friends or malignant 
 enemies. We have heard the story of an Irishman, who 
 on recommending a friend to a position of trust in a ware¬ 
 house, asserted that his companion was incapable of stealing, 
 for he was always in a state of such complete drunkenness as 
 to render him absolutely unable to commit a theft. 
 
 A parity of reasoning was followed by a certain person 
 who alleged in favour of the measure that it might very 
 safely be passed, for the Jews, who were a very subtle and 
 deceitful people, were hated and detested by all who pro¬ 
 fessed themselves Christians, whether Protestants or Papists ; 
 and they knew so well the feelings they inspired, that they 
 would take good care to stay away from England, notwith¬ 
 standing all concessions made to them. Another writer, 
 before breaking a lance on behalf of the Jews, observed that, 
 after all, the devil was not so black as he was painted, 
 and that Israelites probably would not prove to be so totally 
 devoid of conscience, principle, and honour as they were 
 represented. Some men, however, with a liberality and 
 freedom of thought not often met with in those days, 
 espoused the cause of the Jews on its own merits, in 
 language elevated and refined, and with arguments drawn 
 from Christianity itself. One of the warmest supporters 
 of the Jews deserves honourable mention, for he suffered 
 
9° 
 
 REPEAL OF THE NATURALISATION BILL. 
 
 in person for the nobleness of his sentiments. A clergyman 
 of the Established Church, the Rev. Josiah Tucker, M.A., 
 Rector of St Stephen, Bristol, and chaplain to the Bishop of 
 that diocese, ably and temperately vindicated the Jews from 
 the numerous foul and baseless calumnies hurled against 
 their devoted heads. Whereupon the generous mob seized 
 the minister who had preached Christian charity and tole¬ 
 ration towards the race that had produced the founder of 
 Christianitv, and maltreated him until he with difficulty 
 escaped with bare life. 
 
 Some wit and coarse humour were brought to bear in the 
 controversy, mostly on the side of the opponents of the 
 Naturalisation Bill. It was so easy to make butts of the 
 victims to the persecution of ages. The following lines, 
 which are a fair specimen of the satire then in vogue, were 
 circulated in some of the periodicals of .the day :— 
 
 “ Thus step by step a nation is undone. 
 
 And prodigals lose what their fathers won. 
 
 A Jew, a Turk, or devil may come here 
 And naturalise ; it will not cost him dear.” 
 
 The dreadful menace herein implied has been realised, and 
 we are happy to say that, albeit Jews and Mussulmans have 
 acquired the rights of Englishmen, we do not perceive any 
 signs of immediate ruin in the prospects of the British Empire. 
 
 Those who were alarmed at the possibility of the Judaisa- 
 tion of the English nation anticipated the most serious and 
 melancholy consequences from the passing of the bill. A 
 number of squibs were composed, representing the condition 
 of England a hundred years thence ; and as most of our 
 readers have the opportunity of judging how far the facetious 
 prophecies therein contained have hit the mark, we will cull 
 some samples of those witticisms of last century. u From 
 the Hebrew Journal , published by authority.—‘ This is to 
 inform the public that the good ship Rodrigue , alias Salvador , 
 Emanuel de Fonseca, commander, 1100 tons burthen, 50 
 guns, Jewish built, a prime sailor, having excellent accommo¬ 
 dation for passengers, is now lying at Mr Caneo’s dock, 
 at Limehouse, ready to take in those Christian families that 
 may be inclined to transport themselves into any part of 
 Turkey, as choosing to live under a Mahommedan rather 
 
REPEAL OF THE NATURALISATION BILL. 
 
 9 1 
 
 than a Jewish government. It is proposed that this ship 
 shall return, loaded with a proper number of foreign Jews, 
 against the next sessions of Parliament. All Christians, 
 therefore, who are disposed to leave the once Christian 
 kingdom of Great Britain, are desired to apply every first 
 Sunday in the month to Mr Lopez d’Almeida, who is never 
 absent from his counting-house, in the Old Jewry, on that 
 day; at Solomons’ Coffee-House, near the Custom House ; 
 the Francos’ Head Tavern, in Fenchurch Street, or Sampson’s 
 Coffee-House, in Exchange Alley, where attendance is given 
 every day in the week, the Jewish Sabbath excepted.’ ” 
 
 u On Wednesday last, died at the seat’of His Grace the 
 Duke of Hebron, in Barkshire, Sir Nadab Issachar, Attorney- 
 General. He was esteemed a sound lawyer, an able poli¬ 
 tician, and a friend to the Sanhedrin. He is succeeded in 
 his office by Moses da Costa, Esq., of Lincoln’s Inn.” 
 
 “ On Monday last a dispensation passed the Great Seal, to 
 enable Abraham Levi to hold a living in the Synagogue 
 of Pauls, together with the rectory of the Babbi in the 
 diocese of Litchfield.” 
 
 u Last night the bill for naturalising Christians was thrown 
 out of the Sanhedrin by a great majority.” 
 
 66 At two o’clock this morning, died at his house in 
 Grosvenor Square, the Bight Hon. the Earl of Balaam, 
 Baron of Zimri, and Knight of the most Noble Order of 
 Melchisedek. He married Miss Bathsheba. . . . His lord¬ 
 ship’s remains are to be interred in Westminster Abbey, 
 and we hear that he has left an estate of £100,000 per annum.” 
 
 The humour herein displayed is not of a high class, but it 
 tends to show the kind of fears that were entertained in all 
 good faith by numbers of persons of average intelligence 
 120 years ago. If the writer were now to arise 
 from his grave, he might experience some temporary con¬ 
 sternation in beholding a Jew, an observing Jew too, dis¬ 
 pensing even-handed justice in the High Court of Chancery. 
 But on glancing round him, with the single exception of 
 that one point, in which, curiously enough, he came near the 
 mark, he would no longer be dismayed at the possible 
 encroachments of the Jews, and would return in peace to his 
 long sleep. 
 
CHAPTER XL 
 
 POSITION OF THE JEWS—BARON D’AGUILAR. 
 
 The ill effects of the repeal of the Naturalisation Act soon 
 became apparent. The Jews in general, notwithstanding the 
 wealth possessed, and the consideration enjoyed by a small 
 number of their body, were looked upon more than ever as 
 aliens, as interlopers, as suspected foreigners. It was regarded 
 as a doubtful question whether even English-born Jews were 
 entitled to any of the rights of Englishmen. In the face of 
 the several enactments of the Legislature, which had ap¬ 
 parently settled the question in the affirmative, new doubts 
 were raised and many politicians obstinately denied that an 
 Israelite could possibly be considered as a Briton. A spirit 
 of persecution against the Jews became manifest, and a 
 tendency to reduce their scanty privileges was visible. Thus 
 when a rich Jew, named Elias de Pass, bequeathed the sum 
 of £1200 for the erection of a Hebrew College, the Govern¬ 
 ment refused to allow a proper application of the legacy. 
 The authorities discovered that to raise a Hebrew College 
 was to encourage superstition, which was contrary to law. 
 In accordance with an old Act of Parliament, the bequest of 
 £1200 was seized, and without the slightest reference to 
 the testator’s desires, the sum was devoted to the Foundling 
 Hospital. This unjust and arbitrary act of Government, 
 created a considerable impression at the time, and proved a 
 check—happily only temporary—to the destination of sums 
 for religious or charitable objects. 
 
 Let us now endeavour to ascertain what was the state of 
 the Jews of England when George II. reigned, and the great 
 Mr Pelham governed. Their number then, in this country, 
 was estimated at between six and eight thousand souls. The 
 population of the British islands at that period was reckoned 
 
POSITION OF THE JE WS. 
 
 93 
 
 at about 8,000,000 of inhabitants. The increase of the Jews 
 during the last 120 years in English soil is by no means 
 extraordinary, for while the general population has quad¬ 
 rupled, the Jews have perhaps quintupled in number. Con¬ 
 sidering the important and incessant immigration from 
 the Continent that flowed in during the second half of the 
 eighteenth century and the first quarter of the nineteenth, 
 the result, probably, scarcely equals that attained by the 
 inhabitants of the British Isles, with whom the tide has 
 largely streamed outward. 
 
 In 1753, according to an authority avowedly hostile, there 
 were only twenty opulent families among the Jews ; then 
 followed about forty brokers, some of whom were not deemed 
 among the most honourable in their profession. Finally 
 came a train of hawkers, pedlars, traffickers in every imagin¬ 
 able commodity in every imaginable way. It was repre¬ 
 sented that not more than ten Jewish houses of business of 
 any great note were in existence. Some able and learned men 
 were recognised among the Hebrews, some being physicians 
 and some merchants. The Jews were said not to practise 
 agriculture or manufacture; nor to serve in the army or 
 navy. It was commonly reported that Jewish property, 
 to the extent of £2,000,000, was invested in English stock, 
 a considerable portion of which sums, however, belonged 
 to foreign Israelites. One Jew was reputed to possess 
 £200,000 in the funds. 
 
 According to more friendly—and probably more accurate 
 —writers, many affluent families, some of which were very 
 rich, flourished among the Jews. They were not allowed to 
 possess landed property, and the first of the nation, Sampson 
 Gideon, was constrained to obtain an express Act of Parlia¬ 
 ment in his favour, permitting the seller to convey to him a 
 certain estate. 
 
 Herein we are enabled to furnish a list of the principal 
 Jewish merchants of the day, some of whom rivalled in the 
 extent of their transactions the foremost English houses 
 in the City of London. Abraham and Jacob Franco, Francis 
 Salvador, Joseph and Jacob Salvador, Benj. Mendes da 
 Costa, Aaron Franks., Levy and Beuben Salamons, Isaac 
 Lamego, Gonzales and I)a Costa, Pereira and Lima, Jacob 
 
94 
 
 POSITION OF THE JE WS. 
 
 Fernandez Nunes, Moses Lamego, Abraham Osorio, Daniel 
 Mendes Seixas, Moses Franks, Isaac Levy, Joseph Treves, 
 Abraham Fonseca, Jacob Levy Sonsino, Judah Supino. 
 
 It has been averred that wealth, when not invested in real 
 property, seldom remains for above a century in the hands of 
 one family. The fact certainly receives full confirmation in 
 the present instance. Not only not one of the above Jewish 
 firms is now to be discovered, but even their very names— 
 with two or three exceptions—have disappeared from the face 
 of the earth. The descendants of the Francos have long for¬ 
 saken the God of their forefathers, and changed their appel¬ 
 lation. The name of Salvador, once the representative of 
 generosity, kindliness, and courtliness, is only known now in 
 connection with a building on an old site in the city. The 
 patronymics of the other Portuguese merchants are recol¬ 
 lected in the congregation merely from their being painted 
 on the walls of the vestry-room; and few now living have 
 ever heard of the hospitable and charitable house of Franks. 
 
 Some of these great merchants, we are aware from other 
 sources, left large fortunes ; and though we may not accept 
 literally the fact that there were a hundred other Hebrew 
 firms with means as considerable, we may safely affirm that 
 this picture of the Jews is not distant from the truth. It 
 
 was calculated that full one hundred families would each 
 
 « 
 
 expend annually between £1000 and £2000, and that estimat¬ 
 ing the number of Jewish families at 1000, excluding the 
 poor, their average outlay might be fixed at the moderate 
 rate of £300 for every Jewish household, which would produce 
 a total of £300,000 distributed annually by the Jews through¬ 
 out the land. The Jews paid all duties and taxes and 
 assessments. In addition, they supported their own poor. 
 They clothed and fed them in health, relieved them in sick¬ 
 ness, buried them in death. The foreign commerce of the 
 Jews was reckoned at £1,500,000 yearly. The trade with 
 Jamaica was principally in Hebrew hands, and in that island 
 about two hundred Jewish families resided and had been 
 naturalised. 
 
 Many of the above-named Hebrew merchants possessed a 
 high reputation for integrity, benevolence, and largeness of 
 heart. Foremost in their ranks shone conspicuously Ben- 
 
POSITION OF THE JE WS. 
 
 95 
 
 jamin Mendes da Costa, to whom we adverted in a previous 
 chapter as the “ one truly good Jew,” who in his own resplen¬ 
 dent virtues would have sufficed to save the whole nation 
 from obloquy. The family of Mendes da Costa was one of 
 the most ancient and honourable among the Portuguese Jews. 
 The noble figures of grand old Alvaro da Costa, of the gifted 
 Antonio Mendes, physician to Queen Catherine of Braganza, 
 and of the courtly Andrea Mendes, her chamberlain, rise 
 before our eyes; and we cease to wonder that the family of 
 Mendes da Costa should have enriched the Jewish commu¬ 
 nity with so many eminent men. Emanuel Mendes da 
 Costa was another distinguished member of that family. He 
 was the grandson of Alvaro da Costa, who had wedded the 
 sister of Antonio Mendes, and who quitted Portugal in 1692. 
 After spending ten years at Rouen in Normandy, the Portu¬ 
 guese merchant immigrated with his family into England— 
 then a land of promise to the hunted, persecuted Jews. 
 Here the old stock took root, and spread forth a number of 
 branches in various directions. Alvaro’s son Abraham or 
 John Mendes da Costa, married his cousin, a daughter of 
 Dr Mendes, and became in 1717 the father of Emanuel, who 
 shone as a botanist, a naturalist, a philosopher, and as col¬ 
 lector of anecdotes of literati, and of valuable notes and MSS. 
 Emanuel Mendes da Costa contributed many valuable papers 
 to the Philosophical Transactions and to other scientific 
 publications. It was in the library of this gentleman that 
 the list of the original Jewish settlers in this country was 
 found. The collection of printed books and MSS., and 
 engravings and drawings of natural history, which had cost 
 Emanuel Mendes da Costa many years to gather, was of 
 great value. At his death it was brought to the hammer, 
 and dispersed among numerous purchasers. 
 
 Several other members of the community also enjoyed 
 great personal consideration. Much prejudice, however, was 
 still rife against the Jews, and with the exception of a 
 favoured few, who were admitted into the higher ranks of 
 society, the great bulk of the ancient people were eyed by 
 the British vulgus as outcasts and Pariahs with whom it was 
 discreditable to consort. We have read a letter written by a 
 gentleman at Isleworth to a friend in town, in which he 
 
9 6 
 
 POSITION OF THE JE WS. 
 
 says that he would have found the country very pleasant had 
 he not had the mortification of seeing the finest seats in 
 possession of the Jews. Since the last Act—the Naturalisa¬ 
 tion Bill—they had grown very familiar. The Jews had 
 come between the wind and his nobility, and he did not like 
 it. Let us give the concluding paragraph in the missive in 
 his own words — u M—s LI—t (Moses Hart) and A n 
 F—s (Aaron Franks) at the last vestry held here, mingled 
 with the rest without opposition, though two clergymen and 
 Justice B— were present. No less than a coach-load of 
 them (Jews) last Thursday assembled at a clergyman’s 
 house very near us to play cards.” Had the writer lived at 
 the present day, he would be far more startled and shocked 
 at the spectacle of a Jewish Member of Parliament making 
 eloquent speeches to an attentive House, a Jewish Lord 
 Mayor admitting within the City precincts a foreign poten¬ 
 tate, and a Jewish judge presiding over one of the highest 
 courts in the realm. 
 
 Among the not numerous Israelites who moved on nearly 
 equal terms with the aristocracy, we may mention Mrs 
 Judith Levy, daughter of Moses Hart, founder of the first 
 German Synagogue in London. She was the widow of 
 Elias Levy, a wealthy financier, and sister-in-law to Isaac 
 and Aaron Franks. This lady, who lived to a great age, 
 enjoyed an income of £6000 a year, and dwelt in great 
 splendour. She frequented many of the nobility’s routs, and 
 played half-guinea quadrille with the Countess of Yarmouth, 
 Lady Holdernesse, Lord Stormont, and other persons of 
 quality. She was exceedingly charitable and warm-hearted, 
 and she distributed to her indigent relatives upwards of 
 £1000 per annum. Her greatest delight was in rendering 
 happy those that surrounded her. She died when ninety- 
 seven years old, in January 1803, at her house in Albemarle 
 Street, and she was interred with Jewish rites at Mile End. 
 She left no will, and her fortune was inherited by John 
 Franks, who was remarkable for benevolence, and who fol¬ 
 lowed her noble example, dispensing substantial relief to 
 hundreds of Jews and Christians without distinction of 
 creed. 
 
 Notwithstanding all drawbacks, wealthy Jews came occa- 
 
POSITION OF THE JEIVS. 
 
 97 
 
 sionly to settle in England. In the year 1756 Baron 
 d’Aguilar arrived in London with his numerous offspring, 
 consisting of twelve sons and daughters, and he was said to 
 have brought with him an immense fortune. Moses Lopez 
 Pereira was descended from an ancient Portuguese family. 
 He first visited London in 1722, and then proceeded to 
 Vienna, where he farmed the tobacco and snuff duties. 
 Being successful in his undertakings, he gradually became a 
 great favourite of the Empress, and was appointed her 
 treasurer. The Emperor Charles VI. conferred upon him the 
 title of Baron d’Aguilar, which, according to a writer, had 
 formerly existed in his family. Baron d’Aguilar died in 
 1759, and his eldest son, Ephraim d’Aguilar, succeeded to 
 his title and to a large share of his riches. Young Ephraim 
 was then only twenty years old, and two years before, in 
 1757, he had become naturalised, and had wedded the 
 daughter of Mr Moses Mendes da Costa, a lady who brought 
 him the princely dowry of £150,000. The Baroness died 
 in 1763, leaving several young children, who inherited the 
 whole of their mother’s wealth. The eldest of his daughters 
 became the wife of Admiral Keith Steward, who was pos¬ 
 sessed of great property in Scotland; and the second bestowed 
 her charms and her fortune upon Dr Ewart, Physician- 
 General to the establishment at Bengal. For some time 
 D’Aguilar took part in the communal life of his co-religionists, 
 and we find his name in the list of the treasurers of the 
 Synagogue. Several of the minutes of the proceedings of 
 the Mahamad bear the signature of Ephraim d’Aguilar—a 
 neat and clerkly handwriting, not at all like the production 
 of an ill-regulated, badly-disciplined mind. D’Aguilar was 
 elected Warden in 1765, when he declined to serve, and 
 refused on technical grounds to pay the fine. Eight days 
 were given him to accept or submit to the penalty. He 
 evidently complied with the law, and later on he was again 
 made Warden. 
 
 In 1767 Ephraim d’Aguilar married the relict of Mr Ben¬ 
 jamin Mendes da Costa. She was a very good and accom¬ 
 plished lady, and was possessed of £10,000 and £1000 per 
 annum, which sums were happily settled upon her for her 
 6ole use. For some years the young Baron lived in great 
 
 G 
 
 I 
 
9 8 
 
 POSITION OF THE JE WS. 
 
 style in a mansion in Broad Street Buildings, which, had 
 "been built by his father-in-law, Mr Moses M. da Costa. He 
 kept several carriages, and maintained a retinue of twenty- 
 four servants. The loss of a large estate in America, and 
 other causes, induced him suddenly to change his mode of 
 living. On the expiration of the lease of his house, he 
 renounced the character of a gentleman, and became rude, 
 slovenly, and careless of his person and conduct, totally 
 withdrawing himself from his family connections and the 
 gay world. 
 
 Baron d’Aguilar budded out into one of those eccentric 
 characters that appear inexplicable to the philosopher and 
 the psychologist. He affected an appearance of poverty, 
 albeit he was in affluent circumstances. He parted from 
 his wife, and for twenty years forgot her existence. He 
 suddenly recollected her, and visited her one day. Subse¬ 
 quently, he frequently dined with her, and finally he took up 
 his abode altogether with the lady, apparently to render her 
 life a burden. His pleasure appeared to be to give her pain. 
 He tormented her and distressed her in every way in his 
 power. He locked her up for three days, and the Baroness 
 was constrained to flee through the window. She had long 
 discovered the difference between her second and her first 
 husband, the “one truly good Jew,” and she had recourse 
 to legal proceedings in her own defence. The lady had the 
 whole court in her favour, and thenceforward she was freed 
 from any further persecutions from her tyrannical spouse. 
 
 The Baron purchased several houses in various parts of 
 London, while he resided in Shaftesbury Place, Aldersgate 
 Street. He converted some ground into a farmyard, near 
 Colebrook ltow, Islington; he filled it with domestic ani¬ 
 mals, which he declined to feed and refused to sell, until 
 they were converted into living skeletons. Withal, incre¬ 
 dible as it may seem, he was really benevolent and charitable. 
 His donations to the poor were numerous, and his good 
 deeds were performed unostentatiously. He opened an asy¬ 
 lum in his own establishment for the destitute poor, especially 
 females, and many unhappy beings were saved by him from 
 distress or destruction. Charity covers a multitude of sins, 
 and let us hope it redeemed his transgressions. He died on 
 
99 
 
 POSITION OF THE JE JVS. 
 
 the lGtli March 1802, in Shaftesbury Place, after ail illness 
 of seventeen days. He would light no tire in his house, 
 notwithstanding the severity of the weather, and it was 
 thought he perished for want of proper care and treatment. 
 His remains were interred in the Sephardic Cemetery at 
 Mile End, whither they were followed by a few mourners in 
 half-a-dozen coaches. Much valuable property was discovered 
 in his dwelling after his death. Among other objects were 
 discovered a quantity of cochineal and indigo worth £10,000, 
 and jewels estimated at £30,000. The present General 
 d’Aguilar is descended from one of the elder sons of 
 Ephraim d Aguilar. Among the Sephardic Congregation 
 tlieie are still living the representatives of a younger son, 
 who remained stanch adherents to the old faith. ° ? 
 
 Baron d Aguilar was a most singular character—a com¬ 
 bination of vice and virtue, of misanthropy and benevolence, 
 of cruelty and kindness, of avarice and liberality. He was 
 a Harpagon, with a good deal of the Cheeryble and a tinge 
 of the Squeers in his composition. In his earlier days he 
 associated with his co-religionists. Subsequently he com¬ 
 pletely disregarded Jewish observances, and ceased to follow 
 Hebrew rites. He neglected to give his daughters any reli¬ 
 gious education, and he married them without the pale of 
 their race. The history of Ephraim Baron d’Aguilar, if it 
 does not adorn a tale, will, to the thoughtful mind, assuredly 
 serve to point a moral. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 JEWISH MARRIAGES. 
 
 From the settlement of the Jews in England down to our 
 own time, that is, to the passing of the Registration Acts in 
 the reign of William IV., the question as to the validity of 
 Jewish marriages has been one of vital importance to the 
 community. Abstract questions as to whether foreign Jews 
 were legally admissible into the kingdom, and entitled to 
 dwell therein without an Act of Parliament, had always 
 afforded matter for ingenious speculation to the lawyers of 
 the time. Practically it mattered little whether it was held 
 with Prynne in his celebrated “ Demurrer,” that as the Jews 
 were banished by an Act passed in the reign of Edward I., 
 they could only be readmitted by its repeal; or whether it 
 was maintained with Lord Coke in his cc Institutes,” that the 
 statute 66 De Judaismo ” imposed such onerous disabilities 
 upon them that they migrated from England of their own 
 accord. We do not believe in the correctness of Lord Coke’s 
 version, and we have already laid before the reader a brief 
 account of that event, as gathered from the best authorities. 
 It was, however, all important to the Jews that the State 
 should recognise the validity of marriages performed amongst 
 themselves according to the rites of their religion, as upon 
 such recognition depended the legitimacy of their children, 
 the right of inheritance, the devolution of property, and even 
 their individual status in a court of justice. 
 
 By the ancient common law of England, which had been 
 revived after the Restoration, there were three modes of 
 entering into matrimony—(1) By public solemnisation in 
 fade ecclesice; (2) By clandestine celebration; and (3) By 
 consent of parties, called consentual marriages. The civil 
 marriages before justices of the peace, which prevailed dur- 
 
JE WISH MARRIAGES. 
 
 IOI 
 
 ing the Commonwealth, had been abolished, and the Begis- 
 tration Acts placing Jewish marriages on an equality with 
 those performed in church did not yet exist. It would 
 have been an act of profanity for Jews to wed in church, 
 and an act of indelicacy as well as profanity to have 
 had the marriage service read clandestinely by a parson. 
 It was essential to the Jews that marriages performed 
 according to the rites of their religion should be recognised 
 as valid by the courts of law. Yet, by the law as adminis¬ 
 tered in the temporal courts, no marriage was held valid 
 unless celebrated by a clergyman in holy orders, episcopally 
 ordained. No ceremony in church was then necessary, but 
 any person once ordained by virtue of his orders—which no 
 degradation could extinguish—was enabled to unite a couple 
 behind a hedge, in a field, or in a tavern, in a prison, or in 
 a drawing-room. The evils arising from the solemnisation of 
 secret marriages had become so glaring as to attract the 
 attention of the Legislature. The sons and daughters of 
 noble or wealthy houses were daily seduced in their affec¬ 
 tions, and inveigled into matches laden with shame and 
 infamy. A band of profligate miscreants, the refuse of the 
 clergy, men abandoned to all sense of decency and decorum, 
 frequently prisoners for debt and crime, hovered about the 
 verge of Fleet Prison to intercept customers, and united 
 couples for life, without license or question, to the scandal 
 of religion and the disgrace of their cloth. Young and 
 inexperienced persons of both sexes w r ere tempted by the 
 facilities offered to them by wretches without honour or 
 principle, to indulge in a passing fancy or a questionable 
 inclination, and so wreck for ever their chances of happiness 
 in this world. The conjugal infidelities, the misery, the 
 sin, the crimes, caused by these practices, were seriously 
 undermining the morality of the country. Never, not even 
 in the profligate times of Charles II. and his minions, had 
 the nuptial knot been so little respected. Marriage itself 
 was falling into disrepute. A work was published in defence 
 of the holy tie that joins together two human beings for 
 better and for worse, and therein it was actually alleged that 
 it would be a pity to abandon altogether the old practice of 
 marriage, for it did occasionally serve to good purposes. A 
 
102 
 
 JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 remarkable case of a scandalous nature was presented before 
 the House of Lords as an appeal from an inferior court, 
 and Lord Chancellor Hardwicke determined to terminate 
 these abuses. To that effect he framed a bill, which even¬ 
 tually became law, after passing the ordeal of warm debates 
 and undergoing many modifications. Of the nature of the 
 provisions of Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage Act we will speak 
 hereafter. 
 
 Before this period the Ecclesiastical Courts were the only 
 tribunals in matrimonial questions, and remained so until 
 their jurisdiction was abolished, when the present court of 
 marriage was established. The legality of Jewish marriages 
 could only be tried in these courts, while their validity would 
 merely incidentally arise in the Courts of Common Law. By 
 the Ecclesiastical Courts consentual marriages were regarded 
 as complete in substance, but not in ceremony. As a mat¬ 
 ter of discipline, it was enjoined in such courts that the 
 ceremony should be performed by some one in orders, in 
 proof of a consentual marriage. As regards property, legiti¬ 
 macy of children, and disabilities of coverture, the temporal 
 courts held that a consentual marriage gave no rights. Ho 
 cases relating to the marriages of Jews can be found earlier 
 than the reign of George II. But the question as to the 
 validity of a Jewish marriage must have been considered as 
 early as the reign of William III. In 1695, when England 
 was engaged in a death struggle with Louis the Great of 
 France, and when funds were sadly needed to pay soldiers 
 and feed sailors, an Act obtained the sanction of Parliament 
 granting duties to the Crown on all marriages, and levying a 
 tax upon bachelors. 
 
 Though the Common Law Courts did not hold any one to 
 be married unless the ceremony had been performed by an 
 individual in holy orders, yet as Jews, Papists, and Quakers 
 did marry according to their own rites, Parliament resolved 
 that Jews and others should pay the marriage-tax. With a 
 consistency equalled only by its liberality, the Legislature 
 declined to recognise such persons as legally married. The 
 money of the Jew would certainly be received, but then the 
 rights of a civilised being, not to say an Englishman, would 
 be withheld from him. So it was enacted that if Jews lived 
 
JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 103 
 
 together as man and wife, they should he subjected to the 
 tax. At the same time there was inserted in the Act one of 
 those ingenious saving clauses which gladden the heart of 
 the lawyer and perplex the mind of the judge. It was pro¬ 
 vided in this Act a that nothing contained in it should be con¬ 
 strued to make good or effectual in law any such marriages 
 of Jews or pretended marriages, but they shall be of the same 
 force and virtue as they would have been if this Act had 
 never been passed.” What force or virtue was attached by 
 law to such a marriage ? That question the Legislature left 
 undecided. In this position of affairs it happened that the 
 first recorded case referring to a Jewish marriage came before 
 an English tribunal. That was the once famous suit of Da 
 Costa v. Villareal, which, it is stated, caused considerable ex¬ 
 citement in the courts, and doubtless acquired great notoriety 
 in its day in the Jewish community. Both parties were mem¬ 
 bers of the highest families in the Portuguese Congregation. 
 
 Mrs Catherine da Costa Villareal was the daughter of 
 Moses or Anthony da Costa, an opulent merchant, who had 
 attained the dignity—unusual for a Jew—of director of the 
 Bank of Eugland. This Moses or Anthony da Costa had 
 contracted a union with his cousin, Catherine Mendes, who 
 was born in the royal palace of Somerset House, and who 
 was named Catherine because the royal Catherine herself, 
 the dark-skinned but not unpleasing consort of the fickle 
 Charles, had stood her sponsor. Catherine da Costa Villa- 
 real, a lovely bride at eighteen, a wealthy and beautiful 
 widow at twenty-one, had no lack of admirers. The lady, 
 on being free, promised Jacob Mendes da Costa to espouse 
 him at the termination of her widowhood of twelve months, 
 provided her father consented. The gentleman was her first 
 cousin, and the brother of the Emanuel Mendes da Costa of 
 whom we have already spoken. At the expiration of the 
 stipulated period, Mrs Villareal, availing herself of the 
 privileges of her sex, flatly refused to maintain her promise. 
 Mr Da Costa, actuated by love either for the person or 
 purse of the lady—her purse, we may remark, was un¬ 
 commonly weighty—proceeded against her in the Ecclesias¬ 
 tical Court to constrain her to fulfil her engagement. The 
 cause was tried in the Court of Arches, that is, the Court of 
 
104 
 
 JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 1733. It was 
 objected by the lady’s counsel, that as the persons were not 
 Christians, and that the alleged promised marriage was to 
 be performed according to the rites of the Jews, and not in 
 foro ecclesi(E , the Court of Arches had no jurisdiction. The 
 Court, however, decided that if it had full proof that the 
 parties had bound themselves to each other in marriage, and 
 that at the end of the time agreed upon Mr Da Costa had 
 demanded, and Mrs Villareal had refused, a fulfilment of 
 her promises, the Court possessed authority to enforce it, 
 though the parties were not to be married in church. 
 
 When the case came on for hearing, the Court ruled that 
 as the lady’s promise was conditional, and not absolute, it 
 was not binding upon her, and dismissed the application. In 
 vain the baffled suitor addressed himself to the Court of 
 King’s Bench to obtain compensation for his wounded feel¬ 
 ings. The action he brought against the lady for breach of 
 promise was unsuccessful. Lord Hardwicke, the future Lord 
 Chancellor, and then Chief-Justice of King’s Bench, gave 
 judgment that the sentence of the Court of Arches was con¬ 
 clusive evidence that Mrs Villareal was not bound by such 
 promise, and nonsuited the plaintiff, who was left without 
 further remedy. When Lord Hardwicke had decided that a 
 woman’s promise was not binding upon her conscience unless 
 accompanied by indisputable legal forms, Mrs Catherine da 
 Costa Villareal married Mr TV illiam Mellish, a gentleman 
 belonging to a family of great commercial standing, and 
 who had himself filled some high functions under Govern¬ 
 ment. Subsequently this lady not only embraced Chris¬ 
 tianity herself, but brought to the baptismal font the two 
 children who had been left to her care by her first husband, 
 a girl and boy of tender years, who were named Elizabeth 
 and William. Elizabeth grew up as comely as her mother 
 and a coronet rested on her brow as the wife of Lord Galway, 
 to whom she bore several children. 
 
 Four years after this decision, Mrs Andreas, a Jewess, 
 sued her husband in the Consistory Court of the Bishop of 
 London for restitution of conjugal rights. Before the Court 
 could deciee the restitution prayed for, it was necessary to 
 prove that Mrs Andreas possessed marital rights. The 
 
JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 i°5 
 
 learned doctor of law who appeared for Mr Andreas ob¬ 
 jected that as the parties had been united according to the 
 forms of the Jews, and not of the Church of England, the 
 Court could take no notice of such marriage, and Mrs Andreas 
 could not establish a case against her husband in the 
 Ecclesiastical Court. But the court held that the parties 
 were duly bound according to Jewish forms, and the lady 
 obtained the desired redress. Let us hope that circumstances 
 may not have caused her afterwards to repent of her success. 
 
 Such was the state of the marriage laws in the country in 
 general, and among the Jews in particular, when Lord 
 Hardwicke in the year 1753 introduced his celebrated Act. 
 This important measure completely revolutionised the com¬ 
 mon law of England as affecting marriages, which hitherto 
 had rested on the old canon law of the church. Before this 
 Act was passed a marriage was valid by the mere consent of 
 the parties, or by the presence of a priest in orders at any 
 time or place. The inconveniences and hardships, both to 
 married persons and their children arising from the existing 
 law were glaring ; and of the frightful abuses and immorality 
 caused by it we have already spoken. Lord Hardwicke’s Act 
 struck at the evil from its very root. Consentual marriages 
 and suits to compel celebration of the same in facie ecclesice 
 were abolished in England, and all marriages were declared 
 null and void unless performed by a priest in orders, under 
 banns or license, according to the liturgy of the Church of 
 England. No alteration of the law was made in Scotland, 
 where Gretna - Green marriages flourished until within 
 memory of the present generation. The disorders resulting 
 from the state of the law north of the Tweed have long 
 proved favourite themes for the imagination of novelists, and 
 recently they were powerfully depicted in Mr Wilkie Collins’ 
 tale and drama of u Man and Wife.” 
 
 In the greater part of the British Islands, the trade of 
 Fleet or hedge parson became extinct. Considerable hard¬ 
 ship was however inflicted on Dissenters and Roman Catho¬ 
 lics, for the law constrained them to marry according to the 
 prescribed service, or renounce wedlock altogether. If the 
 Jews had not been exempted from the operation of this Act, 
 no valid marriages could have been contracted by them. 
 
io6 
 
 JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 The influence of the Jews was brought to bear on the 
 Government, and their exertions were successful, while Dis¬ 
 senters obtained no immunity, albeit some of their body sat 
 in the House of Commons. The same Lord Chancellor who 
 had brought in the Naturalisation Bill, again befriended the 
 Jews with characteristic enlightenment. In a specially intro¬ 
 duced clause, the eighteenth, it was declared that nothing in 
 the Act should extend to any marriage among persons pro¬ 
 fessing the Jewish religion, when both parties were of that 
 faith. Though by this enactment marriages between Jews 
 were not expressly declared valid, they were excepted from 
 the operations of the Act which abolished consentual mar¬ 
 riages. Hitherto the marriages of Jews, not being performed 
 by a clergyman in orders, had been deemed consentual 
 marriages, and as such had been acknowledged by the 
 Ecclesiastical Courts. The exemption of the Jews from Lord 
 
 by 
 
 implication a statutable recognition of the validity of Jewish 
 marriages. 
 
 O 
 
 Hardwicke s law was hereafter held by such courts to be 
 
 For nearly forty years after the passing of this Act, no cases 
 relating to Jewish marriages seem to have arisen, but between 
 1790 and the commencement of the present century several 
 very important cases appeared before the English courts. In 
 1794 the suit of Yigevena and Silverra v. Alvarez was instituted 
 in the Prerogative Court, to decide who should be entitled 
 to the property of a deceased Israelite. The claimant repre¬ 
 sented himself to be the legitimate son of the person whose 
 property was disputed. The question turned on the legiti¬ 
 macy of one whose parents had been wedded according to 
 Jewish law. It was objected that persons coming before 
 the Ecclesiastical Courts to claim any right by marriage, 
 must show the marriage to have been in conformity with the 
 rites of the Christian Church. 
 
 To this it was replied, “ that the peculiar and fundamental 
 tenets of the Jews were averse to the use of such rites, and it 
 was unreasonable to maintain that their marriages according 
 to their own rites should not be valid ; that the Jews had 
 
 always existed as a separate community, and were entitled 
 to have their marriages tried by their own law.” The judg¬ 
 ment of the Court, delivered by Sir William Wynne, solemnly 
 
JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 107 
 
 declared the legal effect of Lord Hardwicke’s Act upon Jewish 
 marriages. u There is no case,” enunciated the Judge, “ in 
 which a Jew has been called upon to prove his marriage. If 
 there had, I conceive the mode of proof must have been con¬ 
 formable to the Jewish rules. The Marriage Act lays down 
 rules for all marriages excepting those of Jews and Quakers. 
 There is no comparison between Jews and Dissenters. Jews 
 are anti-Christians, Dissenters are Christians. Here the 
 parties are alleged to be married according to the rites and 
 ceremonies of the Jewish Chnrch, which I hold to be suffi¬ 
 cient.” 
 
 Lord Stowell acted in the well-known cases of Lindo v. 
 Belisario and Goldsmid v. Bromer on the doctrines here 
 established, that Jews were entitled to try and prove their 
 marriage according to their own code. These cases are most 
 interesting, not only because the judges of the Consistory 
 Court of the Bishop of London referred a question of law to 
 a Jewish Beth-Din (Ecclesiastical Court), but also because, 
 when the evidence of custom was conflicting, the judgment 
 of a Beth-Din was deemed conclusive by a Christian Eccle¬ 
 siastical Court. 
 
 In the year 1793, Miss Esther Lindo, a minor, was pre¬ 
 vailed upon to consent to a clandestine marriage with Mr 
 Mendes Belisario. The young lady met by appointment her 
 lover at the house of his brother ; then Mr Mendes Belisario, 
 before two credible Jewish witnesses, asked Miss Lindo 
 whether she understood the purport of the proceedings, and 
 on receiving an affirmative reply, he placed a ring on her 
 finger, repeating at the same time in Hebrew the formula 
 used in the celebration of Jewish marriages. There was no 
 Ketuba (contract), Khupa (canopy), nor the seven nuptial 
 blessings. It was a Mekadisli or irregular Jewish marriage, 
 recognised by Jewish law if contracted in accordance with its 
 ordinances. Immediately after the ceremony the newly 
 united couple separated, never again to enjoy each other’s 
 society. Miss Lindo was an orphan and much younger than 
 her alleged husband. When her guardian learned what had 
 taken place, he resolved that the marriage should never be 
 completed. On the question being referred to the Portu¬ 
 guese Beth-Din, they pronounced the ceremony to be a doubt- 
 
108 JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 ful betrothment, without declaring whether it constituted the 
 relationship of husband and wife. To further secure the lady 
 against the enterprises of her husband, the aagis of the High 
 Court of Chancery was thrown round her. That Court, which 
 disposes of the substance of so many orphans, accepted her 
 as a ward. Lord Loughborough, then Lord Chancellor, pro¬ 
 hibited Mr Belisario from having access to her, and ordered 
 that Mr Abraham de Mattos Mocatta, her guardian, should 
 institute a suit in the Consistory Court to test the validity 
 of the marriage. A suit of jactitation of marriage w r as there¬ 
 upon commenced in the Court of Consistory, and the case 
 was tried by Lord Stowell, one of the greatest jurists that 
 ever adorned the bench. Consentual marriages amongst 
 Jews being recognised, and the Ecclesiastical Courts having 
 held that Jewish marriages were to be tried by Jewish law, 
 Lord Stowell had to decide whether there had been between 
 Miss Lindo and Mr Mendes Belisario a valid marriage. 
 With that diffidence which characterises great minds, Lord 
 Stowell entered into the investigation with doubt, being, as 
 he said, fearful that in applying the principles of Jewish law 
 he might run the risk of mistaking those principles, and 
 that his decision might affect a very numerous and respect¬ 
 able body of people, as he designated the Jewish community. 
 The question was reduced to this issue : whether a Mekadish 
 without being followed bv consummation constituted a valid 
 Jewish marriage. Various Jewish authorities, ancient and 
 modern were consulted, the opinions were taken of Mr 
 Julian, Mr Almosnino, and Mr Delgado, the members of the 
 Portuguese Beth-Din ; of Mr Is. Jimenez, ex-Chief Rabbi of 
 the Portuguese Congregation at Hamburg, of the Rev. S. 
 Lyon of Cambridge, and of other learned rabbis. The certi¬ 
 ficate of the Beth-Din of 1776 was handed in as evidence 
 proving that a Mekadish between a certain Benjamin Hen- 
 riques and a lady had constituted a valid marriage. Autho- 
 * rities as usual disagreed. The rabhis took opposite views on 
 the question. Maimonides w r as at variance with the Talmud, 
 and the Hebrew text of the great philosopher and the Latin 
 text of his translator again differed. 
 
 Lord Stowell w T as perplexed. The difficulties of the case 
 will remind the reader of a celebrated instance in modern 
 
JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 109 
 
 days, where a similar question was solved in three distinct 
 ways by three British courts of law. Much interest was at 
 one time felt in these islands as to whether Miss Theresa 
 Longworth possessed legally the right of designating herself 
 the Hon. Mrs Yelverton. It will be recollected that an 
 irregular Scotch marriage had taken place between the lady 
 and Mr Yelverton. On her applying to the tribunals of her 
 country to obtain public recognition of her position, it was 
 ruled by a Scotch court that she was not married in Scotland, 
 by an Irish court that she was married in Ireland ; and by 
 the highest English court, the House of Lords, that she was 
 not married either in England, Scotland, or Ireland. 
 
 Ho wonder that Lord Stowell and the Jewish Beth-Din 
 were puzzled. Lord Stowell, who evidently only sought for 
 further light, proposed to the Beth-Din a number of ques¬ 
 tions relating to Jewish marriages for their decision. After 
 carefully considering the replies of the Beth-Din, the court 
 delivered judgment. In the opinion emitted by that body, 
 it was stated that the law of Moses did not prescribe any 
 formal ceremony of marriage, but there were legal institu¬ 
 tions to which the Jews adhered in practice, and which must 
 be considered as having the force of law, and there were the 
 laws derived from the institutions of the rabbis; that as con¬ 
 summation had not taken place, Mr Belisario had no right 
 to demand of the lady to perform the duties of a wife ; that 
 there had been only a betrothment, that the contract was de¬ 
 terminable at will, and the wife might decline to continue to 
 be his partner. 
 
 Lord Stowell, on delivering judgment, adverted to the 
 necessity for a court of law, when dealing with Jewish 
 rites and ceremonies, to consider not alone the law of Moses, 
 but the laws of the recognised rabbinical authorities. His 
 Lordship thought that the finding of the Beth-Din must be 
 considered as a judicial opinion, and not that of an indi¬ 
 vidual ; as an authoritative opinion, not only conveying know¬ 
 ledge, but also sanctioned by the qualifications of probity, 
 learning, and judgment, which must have recommended the 
 individuals to the stations entrusted to them. Lord Stowell 
 then confirmed the decision of the Beth-Din, and declared 
 Miss Lindo not to be the wife of Mr Belisario. The wifeless 
 
I IO 
 
 JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 husband appealed from this decree to the Court of Arches, 
 where iu 1796 Lord Stowell’s judgment was confirmed by 
 Sir William Wynne, the judge of that court. The unhappy 
 man, who was sincerely attached to the lady, continued for 
 some years to struggle against these adverse decisions, hut 
 his efforts were necessarily hopeless. 
 
 The first petition for divorce among Jews was filed in 
 1794 before Lord Stowell. The plaintiff in that suit was 
 Baroness d’Aguilar, who instituted proceedings against her 
 husband, Baron Ephraim d’Aguilar, charging him with 
 cruelty and adultery. In our preceding chapter we gave a 
 brief sketch of the strange career of this worthy. When his 
 wife escaped from his power, she was seventy years old and 
 infirm in health. The sympathies of the court were enlisted 
 in her favour, and the levity displayed by the respondent was 
 sternly reproved by the judge. The marriage had been con¬ 
 tracted in 1767, according to Jewish rites, and Lord Stowell 
 now decreed its dissolution. Objections were taken on the 
 ground that the marriage had not been performed in church, 
 but Lord Stowell in giving judgment declared forcibly the 
 civil rights of the Jews. “ The marriages of the Jews,” said 
 he, 66 are expressly protected by the Marriage Act, and per¬ 
 sons of that persuasion are as much entitled to the justice of 
 the country as those of any other. Jews have the same 
 rights of succession to property and of administration as other 
 subjects, and they come to the Ecclesiastical Courts to have 
 such rights secured. Many of them are possessed of consi¬ 
 derable property, and they have the same rights to transmit 
 it as others. It would be hard, therefore, if they had not the 
 same mode of securing the legitimacy of their children, and 
 consequently if the same rights of divorce did not belong to 
 them.” 
 
 Hardly had the excitement in the community attending 
 this case and that of Lindo v. Belisario subsided, when pub¬ 
 lic attention became engrossed in the story of Miss Goldsmid 
 and Mr Bromer. In 1798, Miss Maria Goldsmid, a daugh¬ 
 ter of one of the most influential families among the Jews, 
 with all the susceptibility and inexperience of sweet sixteen, 
 was captivated by the charms of Mr David Bromer, one of 
 her father’s clerks. This enterprising gentleman, who visited 
 
X 
 
 JE WISH MARRIA GES. 
 
 hi 
 
 the family of the young lady, succeeded in inducing her to 
 agree to marry him clandestinely. For this purpose Mr 
 Bromer accompanied Miss Goldsmid in a coach to the 
 “ Shakespeare Tavern,” Covent Garden, where two Jewish 
 witnesses, named Levy and Hess, were in attendance. Be¬ 
 fore these persons the bridegroom placed the mysterious 
 golden circlet on the bride’s finger, pronouncing at the same 
 time the Hebrew words constituting the ceremony of Kedu- 
 shim. Meanwhile arrived Mr George Goldsmid, the lady’s 
 father, who broke up the young couple’s happiness by taking 
 away the bride. Moreover, Mr Goldsmid brought a suit of 
 jactitation of marriage in the Consistory Court of London, 
 to declare the marriage invalid. It was proved that the 
 ceremony at the tavern was defective, owing to the disquali¬ 
 fication of the witnesses. Such disqualification might pro¬ 
 ceed from certain degrees of consanguinity to either of the 
 parties who marry, or from nonconformity with the cere¬ 
 monies of the Jewish religion. Evidence was given to the 
 effect that the mother of Levy, one of the witnesses, and 
 the mother of Bromer, the bridegroom, were sisters ; and 
 that Hess, the other witness, did not conform with the prac¬ 
 tices of the Jewish religion, for he profaned the Sabbath and 
 ate forbidden meats. 
 
 Lord Stowell decided that, according to precedent, the 
 validity of the marriage must be tested by Jewish law. The 
 Beth-Din of the German Congregation declared the marriage 
 to be void on the above grounds, and the Portuguese Beth- 
 Din concurred with that judgment. It was urged on behalf 
 of Mr Bromer that the law enunciated by the Beth-Din was 
 most unreasonable. Lord Stowell declined to discuss the rea¬ 
 sonableness of Jewish law, which must be taken as it is found. 
 He considered that the Beth-Din was a tribunal of great autho¬ 
 rity on matters of Jewish law ; at the same time he did not 
 think the law so unreasonable, for its object was to render 
 clandestine marriages almost impossible, and such marriages 
 are admitted to be evils in all civilised countries. Conse¬ 
 quently Lord Stowell pronounced against the validity of the 
 marriage. 
 
 In the reign of George IV., Lord Hardwicke’s Act was 
 modified and amended, and the exemption in favour of the 
 
I 12 
 
 JE WISH MARRIA GRS. 
 
 Jews was re-enacted. That law remained in vigour until the 
 passing of the Marriage and Registration Acts in the reign 
 of William IV., which now regulate all marriages under these 
 Acts; the marriages of Jews properly solemnised are placed 
 on an equality with those celebrated in church. At the same 
 time an Act was passed declaring good all Jewish marriages 
 previously performed, so as to remove doubts with reference 
 to the validity of consentual marriages in the temporal courts. 
 The history of Jewish marriages illustrates the history of the 
 Jews struggling in the courts of law for a recognition of 
 their civil rights, as the history of the Oaths Bill embodies 
 the history of their struggles in Parliament to obtain their 
 political rights. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 If union be strength, organisation is certainly power. Daring 
 the first half of the eighteenth century, whenever the Jews 
 had occasion to address themselves to the Government of 
 the country, each man was his own representative. The Jews 
 as a body possessed no recognised medium of communication 
 with the outer world. When questions arose affecting Jewish 
 interests, desultory steps were taken—when taken at all—by 
 isolated individuals, and often failed for want of concerted 
 action. Sometimes an influential capitalist was applied to in 
 order to intercede with Government on behalf of his less 
 fortunate hiethren. Sampson Gideon among others rendered 
 his race many a service by availing himself of the favour his 
 wealth gained for him in high places, to obtain a hearing for 
 the Children of Isiael. TVh may add that Jewish financiers 
 have ever been ready and willing to uphold the cause of their 
 faith j and m lattei times, we all know how the illustrious 
 houses of Goldsmid, Montefiore, and Rothschild have warmly 
 espoused the defence of their oppressed and down-trodden 
 race in the days of its sore trouble and anguish. 
 
 In the year 1745-46 some political events occurred which 
 taught the Jews the necessity of concentrating their forces, 
 so as to attain the best results from them. It has been 
 alleged that the Irish are the only nation who have never 
 ill-treated the Jews. To this statement it has been replied 
 that the Irish have seldom possessed the opportunity. For 
 oui pait, we have no desire to endorse any such ungene¬ 
 rous remark, and we are glad to acknowledge any acts 
 of friendship and kindliness towards the Jews, without too 
 minutely investigating all the causes that might have con¬ 
 verted present good into potential evil. It may be that a 
 
 H 
 
11 4 ORIGIN OF THE BO ARE OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 certain affinity exists between the Irish and the Hebrew 
 character. At all events, the Irish in 1745, unlike the 
 English in 1753, did not consider that the naturalisation 
 of the Jews would either Judaise their country or straight¬ 
 way bring it to spiritual and material perdition. On the 
 18th November 1745, Mr Morgan introduced into the Irish 
 House of Commons a bill for the Naturalisation of persons 
 professing the Jewish religion. At the same time was pre¬ 
 sented a bill to accept the solemn affirmation of Quakers 
 instead of an oath. The bills were speedily carried through 
 their several stages, and passed on the 25th November, but 
 they were thrown out by the Peers. Mr Morgan, nothing 
 discouraged, again brought forward the Jewish Naturalisa¬ 
 tion Bill on the 18th March 1746; and the Irish Commons, 
 to show their determination, carried it through in three days 
 without a dissentient voice. It was in vain. It was thrown 
 out again by the same power, but only by a small majority. 
 There were very few resident Jews in Ireland at that time, 
 and so this result was not of great practical moment. Never¬ 
 theless, the congregation at Bevis Marks, considering the 
 principle at stake, was much annoyed at this disappointment. 
 It was believed that, had proper measures been adopted, the 
 votes required to secure success in the Upper House might 
 have been obtained. As other movements in the same direc¬ 
 tion were anticipated, “a Committee of Diligence” was 
 appointed by that community to represent the interests of 
 the nation, and to seize every opportunity to establish its 
 freedom. The duties of this committee were to watch over 
 the affairs of the Jews, to grasp at every chance for improv¬ 
 ing their condition, and to protect them against any danger. 
 To enable the committee to carry out this somewhat exten¬ 
 sive programme, considerable faculties were given to that 
 body. They were free to act as best seemed in their judg¬ 
 ment ; they were empowered to engage the assistance ot men 
 of law and of letters, and they were promised sufficient funds 
 to satisfy lawyers and writers. They were recommended to 
 keep a minute-book, but they were politely told that they 
 need not show it to their constituents. The gentlemen who 
 were elected by the elders to fulfil these responsible func¬ 
 tions were five in number. They were Benjamin Mendes da 
 
ORIGIN OF THE TO ARE OF DEPUTIES. 115 
 
 Costa, Daniel J. Rodriguez, Jacob Fernandez Runes, Jacob 
 de Moses Franco, Jacob Mendes Pacheco. The noble and 
 universally-respected Benjamin Mendes da Costa, to whose 
 virtues we have more than once paid a befitting tribute, was 
 elected president. Doubtless the committee did bestir them¬ 
 selves, though unfortunately success did not crown their 
 efforts. Another attempt was made by the persevering Mr 
 Morgan in favour of the Jews in the Irish House of Com¬ 
 mons. In December 1747 the Jewish Naturalisation Bill 
 was once more agreed to by that branch of the Legislature, 
 to be rejected, as before, by a stubborn Upper House, not¬ 
 withstanding the exertions of the Committee of Diligence. 
 But we need not wonder at it when we consider that a whole 
 century of progressive enlightenment has not softened down 
 the prejudices of caste, and that in England the same 
 attempts had to be repeated again and again, to meet the 
 same repulses, until the torrent of public opinion came and 
 swept off all further resistance. 
 
 The proceedings of the committee were not regularly 
 chronicled. That they were not idle is evident from the 
 fact that the elders of the congregation were called upon to 
 liquidate the expenditure incurred by their delegates, and 
 which amounted to some hundreds of pounds. The functions 
 of this body appear to have expired in due course. 
 
 In 1760 another body was created, destined to attain a 
 far different and more vigorous existence, and from that 
 period the political representation of the Jews may be said 
 to date. An institution that has since grown and become 
 powerful, thus acquired a name if not a local habitation— 
 an institution that has flourished and increased in import¬ 
 ance until it has become a Jewish parliament, reflecting 
 the views of most of the principal congregations in the 
 kingdom. 
 
 George III. had ascended the throne of England, when 
 the elders of the Portuguese community appointed seven 
 delegates to offer their respects to his Majesty. These 
 gentlemen were authorised to act on behalf of their co¬ 
 religionists in other matters too; but they were instructed 
 not to seek new privileges or advantages without consulting 
 with the elders. The persons named as “ Deputies of the 
 
n6 ORIGIN OF THE FOARD OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 Portuguese nation ” were Jacob de Moses Franco, Benjamin 
 Mendes da Costa, Jacob Nunes Gonzales, Moses de Joseph 
 da Costa, Joseph Jesurun Rodrigues, better known as Joseph 
 Salvador, Isaac Jesurun Alvarez, and Isaac Fernandez Nunes. 
 Mr Jacob Franco was elected president; but on account of 
 his advanced age, his attendance at meetings was excused. 
 Mr A. de Castro, secretary to the congregation, fulfilled the 
 same duties to the committee. 
 
 The first meeting of the Deputados was held on the 19th 
 November 1760, and the urgent affair on hand, that of the 
 presentation of an address of congratulation to his Majesty, 
 was satisfactorily settled. To Mr Salvador were intrusted 
 the preliminary steps for procuring an audience for the 
 Jewish deputation, and he was perfectly successful in his 
 mission. The Duke of Devonshire, Lord Chamberlain of 
 his Majesty’s household, received Joseph Salvador most 
 affably, and assured him of his great respect for the Jews. 
 Two days afterwards, a deputation, consisting of Benjamin 
 Mendes da Costa, Joseph Salvador, and two other members 
 of the committee, waited upon his Grace of Devonshire with 
 the address for the King. This kind of composition seldom 
 contains any novel conception or originality of thought. 
 The document in question stated that 66 the Portuguese 
 Jews most humbly begged leave to condole with his Majesty 
 on the demise of the late king, whose sacred memory would 
 ever be revered, and to congratulate his Majesty on his 
 accession to the throne of these kingdoms; humbly craving 
 the continuance of his Majesty’s favour and protection, which 
 they hope to merit by an unalterable zeal for his Majesty’s 
 most sacred person and service, and by promoting to the 
 utmost of their abilities the benefit of his Majesty’s realms.” 
 
 The Duke of Devonshire, with the sanction of the Duke 
 of Newcastle, presented the address to his Majesty. When 
 the deputation returned to pay their respects to the Lord 
 Chamberlain on the 23d November, his Grace assured them 
 that his Majesty had been pleased to accept, with great 
 pleasure, the respectful expressions of the Hebrew com¬ 
 munity ; his Majesty felt a regard for the Jews; he was 
 aware of their good qualities, and he would always bear them 
 in his favour and his estimation. 
 
ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES. 117 
 
 Meanwhile, the German Jews, who had borne no part in 
 these festive proceedings, complained that they had had no 
 opportunity of testifying their loyalty to the Eoyal Family. 
 In truth, hitherto the somewhat haughty Sephardic Jews 
 had looked upon their pushing, thriving, and rising German 
 brethren with a rather doubtful eye : very much in the same 
 way, perhaps, as a marquis of ancient descent regards from 
 his paternal acres the ambitious and self-asserting manu¬ 
 facturer, who buys all the land around him, and erects a 
 mansion as fine as that of the nobleman. Nevertheless, the 
 application of Aaron Franks, who, as we already know, was 
 one of the most influential members of the Ashkenazi com¬ 
 munity, was treated with due consideration. A meeting of 
 the Deputados was summoned, and Mr A. Franks and Mr 
 Levy Salomons were invited to attend. These two gentle¬ 
 men were told that the address had been presented in the 
 name of the Portuguese nation; that the Dutch (German) 
 nation might do likewise, or they might join the Portuguese 
 in offering their condolences and congratulations to the 
 Dowager Princess of Wales. Mr Franks and Mr L. 
 Salomons asked that both nationalities among the Jews 
 should henceforth act in concert in all public matters, to 
 which proposal it was replied that the Dutch possessed no 
 public body with whom to communicate. It was then stated 
 by Franks that his community would also elect a secret 
 committee. 
 
 Joseph Salvador then proceeded with A. Franks to wait 
 upon Sir Wm. Irby, the Chamberlain to her Eoyal High¬ 
 ness, to inquire when they might present their services to 
 the Princess. On Thursday, December 11, 1760, Joseph 
 Salvador, with A. Franks and H. Isaacs, had the honour 
 of kissing the hands of her Eoyal Highness, and of the 
 Duke of York and the Princess Augusta, by all of whom 
 they were received with the greatest affability and condescen¬ 
 sion. The courtiers also treated the Jewish deputation with 
 considerable kindness and regard. No doubt the Jews were 
 strangers at Court, and were eyed with some curiosity, such 
 as might be excited now in fashionable salo?is by the presence 
 of a couple of Chinese mandarins or a few secretaries of the 
 Japanese mission. But the Jewish delegates were lionised 
 
n8 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 \ 
 
 and petted, and took tlaeir departure with all the gratification 
 that usually falls to the lot of flattered deputations. 
 
 The names of the members of the secret committee of 
 the Germans were duly communicated to the Portuguese. 
 The representatives of the Duke’s Place Synagogue. were 
 Aaron Franks, Haphtali Hart, Moses Franks, and Michael 
 Adolphus; while the congregation in Magpie Alley (Hambro 
 Synagogue) chose as its agents Henry Isaacs, Levy Salomons, 
 and Abraham Elias. 
 
 The Portuguese Deputies became now a fixed institution. 
 Ample faculty for action was accorded to them. Leave 
 was granted them to expend from time to time such sums 
 as might be needed. They were desired to keep records of 
 their proceedings, which, as in the case of the Committee 
 of Diligence, they were not bound to show. Joseph Salvador, 
 who acted as honorary secretary, entered into correspondence 
 with the Germans, and a definite understanding was arrived 
 at between the two sections of British Jews. The Portuguese 
 Deputies formally passed the following resolution, which was 
 duly notified to their German brethren : u December 14, 
 1760. Resolved that whenever any public affair should occur 
 that may interest the two nations, we will on our parts 
 communicate to the Committee of the Dutch Jews Syna¬ 
 gogue what we think proper should be done, and we desire 
 the same gentlemen may do the same, and make a minute 
 thereof.” To this document were appended the signatures 
 of the Portuguese Committee, and of Aaron Franks and 
 Henry Isaacs on behalf of the Germans. 
 
 Such, then, is a brief sketch of the origin of the body 
 now known as the London Committee of Deputies of the 
 British Jews, a body which has been graced by the presence 
 of most of the greatest and best men that have risen in 
 Israel for upwards of a century, and which has been for 
 many years, and was until lately, presided over by one of 
 the most eminent and noblest philanthropists ever bestowed 
 by a merciful Providence on a suffering race. 
 
 It would be impossible to attempt to give here even the 
 most succinct account of the proceedings of the Committee 
 of Deputies. An intelligible record of its transactions would 
 be in itself sufficient to fill the pages of a volume. Within 
 
ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 *19 
 
 the space allotted to us we can only furnish a general idea 
 of the kind of work performed by the British Deputies, barely 
 touching upon the principal events brought before that body, 
 from the day of its creation until the middle of the present 
 century, 
 
 The immediate cause of the assembling of the Portuguese 
 Deputies was to present a loyal address to the Crown. To 
 testify to the fidelity and attachment of the Jews to the 
 throne of Great Britain, whenever a suitable occasion arose, 
 became one of the practices of the Deputies. In England, 
 as in France, the monarch never dies. The records of the 
 Deputies present a series of addresses of congratulation and 
 condolence to the reigning sovereigns of Great Britain on 
 their accession to the throne, and on every auspicious and 
 inauspicious event that happened in their lives. u The first 
 gentleman of Europe,” the (( Sailor King,” and the exalted 
 lady upon whose brow now rests the diadem of the vast 
 empire where the sun never sets, all duly received the 
 humble homage of the Jews. 
 
 There is a simple faith in the divine right of kings 
 apparent in the language with which our ancestors addressed 
 royalty that is quite refreshing in the present day of cynic¬ 
 ism and rationalism. 
 
 Assuredly we should not now advert to the reign of 
 George IY. in the following strain: u The mild and 
 paternal rule of our late sovereign has indelibly impressed 
 on the minds of his people feelings of veneration and 
 duteous affection, and placed his cherished memory among 
 the fond recollections of departed happiness, and to none of 
 his loving subjects is his name more endeared than to the 
 members of the Jewish communitv, who dwell with delight 
 and gratitude on the protection and favour they have enjoyed 
 during his glorious reign.” This Johnsonian period was 
 penned as late as 1830, on the demise of the august indi¬ 
 vidual of whom it has been written :— 
 
 “ A noble, nasty course be ran 
 Superbly filthy and fastidious ; 
 
 He was the world’s first gentleman, 
 
 And made the appellation hideous.” 
 
 Though the Committee of Portuguese Deputies had been 
 
120 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE BO ARE OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 established to protect English-Jewish interests, that body 
 soon became the recipient of requests of assistance from their 
 less fortunate brethren abroad. From 1760 to 1874, from 
 the Jews of Jamaica to the Jews of Roumauia, the repre¬ 
 sentatives of the Portuguese, and subsequently of the British 
 Jews, under whatever designation they may have been known, 
 have always been looked up to by distressed Israelites in the 
 four quarters of the globe for support and help in every 
 emergency. Oppressed Jews from the tropical clime of the 
 Antilles ; tortured Jews from the Biblical city of Damascus ; 
 starved and ill-treated Jews from the gorgeous land of 
 Ahasuerus ; vilified and pillaged Jews from the wild plains 
 of the Danube, — have all in turn piteously lifted up 
 their voices to London for aid. It must be said that the 
 Deputies have never hesitated to succour their afflicted co¬ 
 religionists so far as lay within their very limited powers. 
 They have usually laudably exerted themselves on behalf of 
 the harassed Children of Israel, albeit we cannot conscien¬ 
 tiously say that they have invariably attained a conspicuous 
 success in their undertakings of this nature. We may 
 assume that all commendable zeal on their parts has been 
 displayed, and that the failures have been caused by the 
 limited sphere of action of the Deputies. In truth, with 
 reference to foreign affairs, they have confined themselves to 
 seeking the intervention of the Foreign Office, which has been 
 granted or declined, according to circumstances. Whether 
 the Deputies might have found other available means of action 
 at hand is a question we need not here discuss. The creation 
 of that institution was for a specific purpose, and the expe¬ 
 diency of extending its general scope was a matter for the 
 consideration of its members. 
 
 The Deputies had not been appointed many months when 
 they were called upon for their good offices by the Jews of 
 Jamaica, who had been ill-treated on some occasions. The 
 first intercession of the Portuguese Deputies on behalf of 
 their brethren was successful, and renewed security was 
 promised to Jewish life and property in that colony. The 
 Jewish inhabitants of Port Mahon, in the island of Minorca, 
 who complained in 1766, among other hardships, that they 
 were not permitted to erect a synagogue, were not so fortunate. 
 
ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF DEPUTIES. 
 
 I 2 I 
 
 The Deputies, after waiting on the Duke of Richmond, Colonial 
 Secretary, found themselves constrained to tell their co¬ 
 religionists, that sufferance was the badge of their tribe, 
 and all they' could do for the Jews of Minorca was to give 
 them some excellent advice. It may interest some readers 
 to learn that the then Duke of Richmond was the brother of 
 the beautiful Lady Caroline Lennox, who in 1740 escaped 
 from the window to wed Henry Fox, the father of Charles 
 James Fox; and of the lovely Lady Sarah Lennox, who 
 might, had she so chosen, have worn the royal diadem of 
 England on her brow, as queen to the fascinated George III. 
 
 The meetings of the Deputies were held at very uncertain 
 intervals, and for many years they were, 66 like angels’ visits,” 
 few and far between. From this period the Deputies do not 
 appear to have been called together again until the 11th 
 November 1778. When they met at that time the congre¬ 
 gation in Magpie Alley nominated as Deputies of their nation 
 Isaac Isaacs, Aaron Norden, and Joseph Gomperts. These 
 German representatives did not form part of the body, and 
 only attended when they were especially invited. The 
 minutes, too, had hitherto been kept in Portuguese, and 
 it was now for the first time that they began to be reported 
 in English. 
 
 It is curious to observe that at this period Joseph Salvador 
 applied to know how he was to act towards Baron d’ Aguilar, 
 who, having been elected Deputy, took no notice of the com¬ 
 munications made to him. The Baron, however, did attend 
 one or two meetings later on, in 1783, but he soon withdrew 
 from the Deputies, as he did from Israel. 
 
CHAPTEB XIV. 
 
 THE HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES OF THE BRITISH JEWS. 
 
 When the political representatives of the Portuguese com¬ 
 munity reassembled in the year 1789—a year memorable for 
 the new principles fraught with evil and fraught with good 
 that were proclaimed before a wonder-stricken world—not 
 one single member of the original Deputados was left alive. 
 The last to disappear was Joseph Salvador, who had suffered 
 great reverses of fortune. Another generation of men had 
 sprung up, who u knew not Joseph,” and for the first time 
 we perceive the names of E. Baruch Lousada, of David 
 Samuda, of Daniel de Castro. The meetings of the Deputies 
 continued to be held at the residence of the president, and 
 Moses I. Levy was elected to that office. The representatives 
 of the German synagogues were Eleazer Isaac Keizer and 
 Lyon de Symons for the Duke’s Place Synagogue, and Joseph 
 Gompertz and Eleazer Philip Salomons for the Fenchurch 
 Street or Magpie Alley Synagogue, as it was variously 
 called. 
 
 It may be noted that the delegates of the Ashkenazi 
 Congregation really formed no part as yet of the Sephardic 
 deliberative body. They attended meetings when it was 
 thought needful to summon them, which was probably left 
 to the discretion of the president. On great occasions, too, 
 Nathan Solomons, the rosk or principal of the New Syna- 
 £ 0 £ue in Leadenhall Street, was called in for consultation. 
 These gentlemen, nevertheless, by their energy and zeal, 
 soon acquired great influence in Jewish affairs, and there¬ 
 after played an important part in them. When the next 
 address of congratulation was voted to George III., on his 
 recovery from one of his fitful attacks, Mr Levy, the presi¬ 
 dent of the Deputies, and Messrs Gompertz and De Symons, 
 
HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 123 
 
 were deputed to express the joy of the Jews at his Majesty’s 
 restoration to health. The Hebrew representatives met a 
 most courteous reception at the hands of the authorities, as 
 they had done on former occasions. 
 
 There is little worth reporting in the transactions of the 
 Deputies at this period. In the last decade of the eighteenth 
 century they seemingly came together on only one occasion 
 —in November 1795. A bill had been introduced in the 
 House of Commons, entitled the Sedition Bill, and the 
 Jewish community were doubtful as to the interpretation of 
 a certain clause. The Deputies bestirred themselves; they 
 made respectful representations to Government, and event¬ 
 ually the questionable clause was abandoned. 
 
 In 1801, Moses I. Levy retired on account of ill-health, and 
 Naphtali Basevi was named president. 
 
 In 1802 a question arose which threatened to create a bad 
 feeling between the two sections into which the Hebrew com¬ 
 munity in London was divided. Happily moderation and 
 good sense prevailed, and the branches of the family of Israel, 
 agreeing to differ in certain unimportant details, continued 
 their harmonious intercourse, which even became closer and 
 closer. It was proposed by the Germans to merge together 
 by Act of Parliament all the Jewish charities in London. 
 This scheme was abandoned in deference to the opposition 
 manifested thereto by the Portuguese community, through 
 their representatives, the Deputies. These proceedings— 
 which throw considerable insight into the respective positions 
 of Sephardim and Ashkenazim—will be duly set forth by us 
 in their proper place, our object in this chapter being limited 
 to recording the acts of the Deputies. 
 
 In 1805 we find a prosecution was ordered against the 
 printer of the St James’ Chronicle for the publication of 
 some offensive letters against the Jews, signed u Catharticus.” 
 An apology, though somewhat tardy, was obtained, and thus 
 the matter terminated. 
 
 It was at this time that the Committee of Deputies began 
 to acquire greater development and importance. The Portu¬ 
 guese themselves saw the necessity of placing the institution 
 on a broader basis, just as the Conservatives were foremost 
 of late years in granting extended suffrage; and the follow- 
 
124 
 
 HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 ing letter was forwarded to the principal German congrega¬ 
 tions in Great Britain :— 
 
 “ We, the undersigned, appointed by the elders of our 
 Portuguese Jew nation by the appellation of Deputados , for 
 the purpose of watching all Acts of Parliament, Acts of 
 Government, laws, libels, addresses, or whatever else may 
 affect the body of Jews, are desirous of acting with complete 
 unison in all public concerns, therefore deem it necessary to 
 assume the liberty of soliciting that your congregation in 
 concert with the others will be pleased to appoint such 
 gentlemen as you may think proper under the same deno¬ 
 mination, that we may request their attendance as occasion 
 requires, and have the pleasure of joining in all transactions 
 that may concern us as one body. Should you think proper 
 to comply with our recommendation, we beg you will transmit 
 us the names of the gentlemen so appointed.—Signed B. 
 Brandon, N. Basevi, Moses Lindo, jun., Jacob Osorio, Moses 
 Mocatta, and Jacob Mocatta.” 
 
 Thus, at last, the barriers of exclusiveness were thrown 
 down, and all Jews of the British Empire acquired political 
 equality, as they had ever been civilly and religiously equal. 
 We do not know whether the response to this invitation was 
 as hearty as it deserved to be, for no meetings were held 
 until 1812. Then for the first time the 66 German” Jews 
 took their seats in the national representative body side by 
 side with their Portuguese brethren, and voted on equal 
 terms. The first German members of the Board were Moses 
 Samuel, Samuel Samuel, M. Levy Newton, Joseph Cohen, 
 N. Hart, Levy Salomons, M. Salomons, Gabriel Cohen, G. 
 Levien ; and they represented the three German synagogues 
 in the city. 
 
 One of the earliest acts of the renewed and reinvigorated 
 assembly was the election of a deputation to wait on some 
 respectable Quaker to ascertain the sentiments of the Society 
 of Friends on a pending bill in Parliament referring to the 
 rights of marriage-, baptism, and burial. The result of this 
 mission was not recorded. 
 
 In 1820 the name of Bothschild was first brought into 
 connection with the Deputies. When an address was about 
 to be presented to the throne, on the accession of George 
 
HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 I2 5 
 
 IV., on the death of his father, Mr Joseph Cohen enlisted 
 the influence of his kinsman, Mr N. M. Rothschild, who 
 introduced to the Right Honourable Nicholas Vansittart, 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer (afterwards Lord Bexley), two 
 members of the United Deputies, viz., Mr Moses Lindo, 
 jun., president, and Mr Joseph Cohen, vice-president and 
 hon. secretary. The address was eventually presented 
 through Viscount Sidmouth, Secretary of State for the 
 Home Department, by Messrs M. Lindo, jun., J. M. da 
 Costa, sen., Samuel Samuel, Naphtali Hart, M. L. Newton, 
 and Joseph Cohen, and it was received with every mark of 
 approbation. 
 
 In April 1828 we perceive for the first time the appear¬ 
 ance among the Deputies of the great philanthropist Sir 
 Moses Montefiore. Three gentlemen were elected members 
 of the Board, and they were Messrs Moses Montefiore, C. 
 C. Michols, and Myer Salomons. On the 28th April a 
 meeting was held to consider a bill then under discussion 
 in Parliament, for repealing so much of several Acts as 
 imposed the necessity of receiving what is called the sacra¬ 
 ment of the Lord’s Supper as a qualification for certain 
 offices. Now there was an opportunity for endeavouring to 
 obtain a removal of the disqualifications pressing upon the 
 Jews. A petition was ordered to be prepared by the solicitor 
 to the Board, Mr Pearce, and a sub-committee, consisting 
 of Messrs M. Lindo, jun., Joshua Van Oven, and Moses 
 Montefiore, were elected to present it to the House of Lords, 
 to protect the interests of the Jews. 
 
 The next meeting took place on February 5, 1829. Mr 
 Isaac Lyon Goldsmid attended, and reported the steps he 
 had adopted since the introduction of the bill on the previous 
 April for the relief of Dissenters. He stated that the words 
 “ upon the faith of a Christian,” in that bill, placed the 
 Jews in a much worse position than before. He also 
 informed the meeting that he had had occasional interviews 
 with several members of both Houses, and he read various 
 letters addressed to him by Lords Holland, Lansdowne, and 
 Suffield, Messrs Gurney, Baring, Martin, and others, con¬ 
 taining assurances of their aid and support in any measure 
 that might be submitted to Parliament for the relief of the 
 
HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 126 
 
 Jews. Mr Goldsmid then intimated that he had reason to 
 calculate on further powerful influence through Mr Moses 
 Montefiore. It was considered by the meeting that the time 
 appeared propitious for the advancement of the civil interests 
 of the Jews of the United Kingdom, and it was determined 
 to take steps in that direction. The epoch for triumph, 
 however, had not yet arrived, and years elapsed before the 
 Jews obtained a recognition of their civil rights. 
 
 From this period the history of the United Deputies of 
 the British Jews becomes intimately connected with the 
 history of the prolonged struggle for the removal of Jewish 
 disabilities. Not to tread over the same ground twice, we 
 will reserve our account of the part borne by the Deputies 
 in those momentous questions until we relate the details of 
 the long and arduous fight. The Deputies were not idle. 
 They appointed sub-committees, drew up petitions, presented 
 them to various authorities—from the Archbishop of Can¬ 
 terbury to the Chancellor of the Exchequer; held many 
 consultations with Mr I. L. Goldsmid (Baron de Goldsmid), 
 and his son Mr F. H. Goldsmid (Sir Francis Goldsmid), 
 with Mr D. Salomons (Sir David Salomons), and many 
 others. The Deputies exerted themselves with creditable 
 energy, and had the appearance of doing a great deal. But 
 as we are the chroniclers and not the panegyrists of 
 that body, as we desire to treat the subject with all im¬ 
 partiality, we are bound to state that we fail to perceive 
 that the efforts of the Deputies contributed, to any great 
 extent, to the removal of Jewish disabilities. Probably 
 their endeavours deserved success ; assuredly they did not 
 command it. With all the respect inspired by the illus¬ 
 trious names that have graced that assembly, we must 
 confess that it was not the Deputies of the British Jews, in 
 their corporate capacity, that endowed their brethren with 
 civil and political life. No; that series of glorious achieve¬ 
 ments was accomplished by a few solitary individuals who 
 bore the brunt of the battle—and conquered. It is to the 
 unceasing exertions of a Goldsmid, a Montefiore, a Rothschild, 
 a Salomons, a Van Oven, that the Jews owe their emancipa¬ 
 tion. It is to these and other equally high-minded men, who 
 made heavy sacrifices in time and in fortune, that Israel is 
 
HISTOR Y OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 127 
 
 deeply indebted, and not to a number of gentlemen, who in 
 their corporate capacity displayed much timidity, and acted 
 as if they were fettered by a dread of responsibility and by a 
 lack of funds. 
 
 In April 1835, on the resignation of Moses Mocatta, the 
 president, the Deputies honoured themselves, and conferred 
 a great benefit on Israel, by electing to the vacant post one 
 who was destined to play so beneficent and commanding a 
 part in Jewish affairs, viz,, Moses Montefiore. At the same 
 time, it was considered that the institution needed a thorough 
 remodelling. A sub-committee was delegated to investigate 
 the question, and its scheme for an amended system of 
 Jewish representation was accepted at a full meeting of 
 the Deputies. The name of Committee of Deputies of the 
 British Jews was then adopted. The Portuguese Congre¬ 
 gation was empowered, according to the new rules, to elect 
 seven deputies ; the Great Synagogue was to appoint an 
 equal number, and the Hambro and Hew Synagogues in 
 proportion to their standing were to be satisfied each with 
 four deputies. The expenses were to be defrayed, one-third 
 by the Portuguese Synagogue, and a similar share by the 
 Great Synagogue; while the remainder was to be borne by 
 the other two German congregations. Provisions were made 
 for the admission into the new body of such other Jewish 
 congregations as might desire the privilege; and the Deputies 
 were authorised to take such measures as they might deem 
 proper, in all cases tending to promote the welfare of the 
 Jews. 
 
 Mr Moses Montefiore was elected president, and Mr D. 
 Brandon was requested to act as honorary secretary. One 
 of the first acts of the Deputies was to forward circulars to 
 all the synagogues in the kingdom, inviting them to send 
 deputies to the Board. The Western Synagogue approved 
 the constitution, and elected as their representatives Messrs 
 John Levy and S. Ellis. The response from the country 
 congregations was by no means as favourable as might have 
 been anticipated; want of funds and want of public feeling 
 combined in causing them to hold back. Another attempt 
 was made in 1838 to induce those communities to join the 
 London synagogues, and strengthen the Jewish representa- 
 
128 
 
 HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES, 
 
 tive body, but with little success. The answers were far 
 from encouraging. Edinburgh declined to appoint deputies; 
 Birmingham came to no decision ; Sunderland chose a deputy, 
 but soon after withdrew him on the score of poverty. Liver¬ 
 pool took time to consider the subject; Gloucester merely 
 acknowledged the circular; Yarmouth was not in circum¬ 
 stances to comply with the request; and Chatham refused 
 altogether. 
 
 On the 31st August 1835, an Act was passed prohibit¬ 
 ing marriages of consanguinity, an Act which laid the 
 foundation for much misery, and which perpetrated as 
 flagrant an injustice as ever was committed by a legislature. 
 For Jews especially to be forbidden from performing cer¬ 
 tain acts, sanctioned by Jewish law, is an unquestionable 
 interference with the rights of conscience. It is to be re¬ 
 gretted that the Deputies did not display more vigour and 
 energy at the proper time, when, not impossibly, Jews 
 might have been exempted from the action of this obnoxious 
 law. As it was, the Deputies proceeded on the principle of 
 shutting the stable door after the flight of the steed. A year 
 after the passing of Lord Lyndhurst’s Act, the eyes of the 
 Deputies were open to its consequences, and a sub-committee 
 was nominated to move in the matter, but, as might be ex¬ 
 pected, without success. At this time, too, the Act for the 
 Begistration of Marriages became law; this Act regulates 
 the marriages of Jews, and it is known as the 6 and 7 
 William IY. We spoke of it at length in our chapter on 
 Jewish Marriages. 
 
 It may interest some members of the present generation 
 to learn that the deputation elected to prepare an address of 
 congratulation to Queen Victoria on her accession to the 
 throne in 1837, consisted of Messrs Moses Montefiore, 
 Abraham Mocatta, Solomon Waley, Louis Lucas, Hananel 
 de Castro, Solomon Cohen, John H. Helbert, and Daniel 
 Mocatta. 
 
 In the year 1838 the transactions of the Board had 
 increased so much that it was considered desirable to 
 appoint a salaried secretary. The gentleman selected for 
 that office was the late Sampson Samuel, who after a very 
 brief period declined to receive the small salary allotted to 
 
HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 129 
 
 him ? but continued to afford tlie Deputies for a long time 
 afterwards liis able and zealous services gratuitously. It 
 must be mentioned, however, that subsequently Mr Samuel 
 was presented by the Deputies with a testimonial in the 
 shape of a silver tea service. In the same year Baron L. 
 de Rothschild was elected deputy for the Great Synagogue, 
 and Mr David Salomons for the New Synagogue. Mr 
 Salomons, in the temporary absence of Mr Moses Montefiore, 
 was named president, but after fulfilling those functions for 
 one or two meetings, he resigned, whereupon the honour 
 was conferred upon Mr J. G. Henriques. 
 
 Contemporarily with these events some changes were 
 effected in the constitution and by-laws of the Board. One 
 of the new regulations was to the effect that the Committee 
 of Deputies of British Jews constituted itself the sole medium 
 of communication between the Jews and Government. This 
 unfortunate clause gave great offence to Mr I. L. Goldsmid, 
 who addressed a letter to Mr Ansell, the secretary of the 
 Great Synagogue, containing a formidable bill of indictment 
 against the Board. The sins laid to the charge of the Board 
 were rather of omission than of commission. 
 
 Mr I. L. Goldsmid had devoted money and time from 
 night to night to carry through the House of Commons 
 three different bills for the relief of Jewish disabilities, while 
 he had found among the most influential members of the 
 Board of Deputies a certain unwillingness to devote personal 
 exertions, and a total refusal of pecuniary assistance. Mr 
 Goldsmid, after enumerating all the privileges enjoyed by 
 the Jews, and which the Deputies had not obtained, declared 
 that he could not consent to intrust his political interests 
 to the Deputies. He would feel the deepest concern in 
 separating himself from a body with which his father and 
 family had been connected for so many years, and hoped 
 the obnoxious regulation would be rescinded, and a declara¬ 
 tion made that no persons by becoming or continuing 
 members of a synagogue were precluded from taking, either 
 separately or in concert, measures with respect to the civil 
 rights of the Jews. 
 
 The communication containing these remarks caused great 
 impression when read before the Deputies. Whether from 
 
 1 
 
130 
 
 HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES 
 
 alarm or pure good-nature, we are unable to say, the 
 Deputies hastened to invite Mr I. L. Goldsmid and his son, 
 Mr F. H. Goldsmid, to a conference. It was then alleged 
 by the Deputies that the clause in question did not bear the 
 construction placed upon it by Mr Goldsmid; but u to 
 make assurance doubly sure,” the obnoxious expressions 
 were altered to meet Mr Goldsmid’s views. Mr I. L. 
 Goldsmid was at this period elected a deputy for the Great 
 Synagogue in conjunction with Mr S. I. Waley, but he 
 declined to accept the office. In 1839, Mr David Salomons, 
 who had carried on for some years, unassisted, his struggles 
 on behalf of Jewish civil rights, found it expedient to request 
 the support of the Committee of Deputies. The Court of 
 Queen’s Bench, he stated, had decided in favour of his con¬ 
 struction of the Act with reference to the aldermanic gown. 
 The Court of Exchequer Chamber had reversed that decision, 
 four judges having given judgment for, and seven against, 
 him. The last resource was an appeal to the House of 
 Lords. Several Peers, and among them Lord Brougham and 
 Lord Cottenliam, had promised him their countenance. He, 
 Mr Salomons, had incurred great expense to try that im¬ 
 portant question, and he was not willing to go further. He 
 considered that the Board should now take up the question, 
 and appeal to the highest jurisdiction in Great Britain. The 
 Board of Deputies, however, was far from adopting the same 
 view of the question as Mr Salomons. His proposal was 
 discussed and declined, on the ground that it would be more 
 expedient to seek relief by legislative amendment. 
 
 A memorable epoch now occurred in the annals of the 
 Committee of Deputies of the British Jews. We use the 
 expression “ memorable,” because the Board took a leading 
 part in a moment of the highest importance, and towards this 
 assembly the eyes of all Israel were turned with an eager, 
 beseeching look. A piercing, deep cry of anguish from the 
 far East had caused a thrill of pity and horror through the 
 hearts of Western Jews. Some of their innocent brethren 
 in a semi-civilised country had been barbarously tortured to 
 force from them a confession of a crime which they had 
 never perpetrated. 
 
 On the 28th April 1840 a meeting was held at the resi- 
 
HISTORY OF THE DEPUTIES. 
 
 1 3* 
 
 dence of Sir Moses Montefiore, to which were invited several 
 gentlemen of eminence, in addition to the members of the 
 Board. There were gathered Sir Isaac L. Goldsmid, Messrs 
 Isaac Cohen, David Salomons, A. A. Goldsmid, Dr B. Yan 
 Oven, Dr Loewe, several members of the Portuguese Con¬ 
 gregation, and last, and assuredly not least, Monsieur Cre- 
 mieux, the celebrated French jurisconsult, and vice-president 
 of the “ Consistoire Central des Israelites Francis.” M. 
 Cremieux was afterwards Minister of Justice in Paris under 
 the Government of 1848, and in our days was the colleague 
 of M. Gambetta. The heart-rending account of the per¬ 
 secution of the Jews of Damascus for the supposed mur¬ 
 der of Father Thomas was communicated to the meeting in 
 the plain, unvarnished language in which those unhappy 
 Israelites besought and implored the help of their more 
 fortunate coreligionists in Europe. 
 
 Certain resolutions suited to the urgency of the case in 
 hand were unanimously and heartily adopted at the meeting. 
 As, however, the history of the affair of II Pccclvs Towuccso 
 appertains to the history of Judaism, and not to that of any 
 especial institution, we will defer giving a succinct relation 
 of that tragic occurrence till its proper time and place. 
 
 Here we must part company with the fortunes of the Lon¬ 
 don Committee of Deputies of the British Jews, heartily 
 desiring to it prolonged existence and renewed vitality. In 
 questions of general importance the acts of the Deputies will 
 be embodied in the records of the acts of the Jewish public ; 
 while in internal questions the more modern proceedings of 
 that body will be sufficiently remembered by our Jewish 
 readers, or might form part of polemics which we have no 
 wish to revive. 
 
CHAPTER XY. 
 
 THE EARLY DAYS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 The spectacle presented by the struggles of the first German 
 Jewish settlers in this country differs as widely from that 
 offered by their Portuguese brethren as a Flemish interior 
 by Cuyp—plain, homely, rough, and yet clearly displaying 
 in the figures delineated some of the qualities that make up 
 a nation s greatness—differs from the representation by 
 Rubens of an imposing municipal gathering at the Hague, 
 adorned with a crow T d of richly - attired personages. Yet 
 both paintings only bring forth the various virtues of one 
 race, and describe various phases of the same national life. 
 
 The original immigrants into England from Germany and 
 Poland were undoubtedly placed at a great disadvantage as 
 regards the Spanish and Portuguese settlers. These latter 
 were usually men of wealth, of polished manners, of old 
 lineage, whose ancestors anciently had figured at courts, and 
 who in modern times had constituted an aristocracy of com¬ 
 merce in Holland. The former were persons whose fore¬ 
 fathers for ages had been subjected to every kind of degrad¬ 
 ing persecution, and had been debarred from pursuing any 
 ennobling avocations; persons who themselves had neither 
 been endowed by their fathers with worldly goods nor with 
 liberal knowledge, nevertheless, to their credit be it said, 
 these German Israelites, uncouth, illiterate, narrow-minded 
 and poor, as the greater part of them must have been; 
 friendless, without resources, and ignorant of the English 
 language, as they unquestionably were; by dint of strict 
 frugality, of unceasing activity, of indomitable energy, of 
 considerable innate if uncultivated abilities, succeeded in 
 acquiring more or less considerable fortunes, and in raising 
 themselves to positions of trust and honour. 
 
EARLY DAYS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 i33 
 
 For a long time prejudice against them lingered in the 
 breast of the proud Sephardi, even until after the traits that 
 had inspired this ungenerous feeling had ceased to exist. 
 The question became then merely a question of caste. Many 
 old-fashioned Portuguese Jews at one period held themselves 
 socially aloof from their Ashkenazi brethren, and would no 
 more have given to one of the latter their daughter in mar¬ 
 riage than a Brahmin would have affianced a dusky child of 
 his to a Sudrah. As the German community advanced in 
 enlightenment and grew in wealth and numbers, the barriers 
 separating them from the older established branch of their 
 race in England were gradually thrown down. When the 
 former section of the English Jews had outstripped the 
 latter in material advantages and external influence, it would 
 have been too palpably absurd for the minority to affect a 
 superiority, which no longer existed, over the majority. All 
 distinctions gradually disappeared. From the beginning of 
 the present century concord and amity have reigned among 
 the Jews of Great Britain, who have united in working to¬ 
 gether for the moral and intellectual advancement of their race. 
 The one blot in the harmony existing in Israel that formed 
 the solitary, though important exception, to the good feeling 
 reigning amoug the Jews, will be duly'recorded in its place. 
 
 The German and Polish Jews, at the time of William III., 
 as we related in a former chapter, that is to say, as soon as 
 they were in sufficient number in this country, became desir¬ 
 ous of establishing for themselves a place of worship, en¬ 
 tirely independent of their Spanish and Portuguese brethren. 
 So early as the year 1692 they were wont to assemble for 
 prayers—which they intoned in their own manner—in a 
 house in Broad Court, Mitre Square, where for a period of 
 about thirty years they held divine service. These immigrants 
 from the banks of the Oder and the Vistula were tolerably 
 numerous, albeit almost destitute of means. 
 
 Probably not half-a-dozen men in affluent circumstances 
 flourished in their midst. The richest among them was 
 named Moses of Breslau in the Synagogue, while to the 
 outer world he became known as Moses Hart. 
 
 He was a remarkably shrewd and able man, and the Eng¬ 
 lish Government of the day learned to appreciate his talents. 
 
i34 EARL V DA YS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 Hart was connected by marriage with Benjamin Levy, who 
 at that period was a great financier, and also a promoter 
 of the East India Company. 
 
 Mr Levy is said to have procured the charter for that great 
 corporation, and to have his name inscribed second in their 
 books. Mr Hart increased in wealth, and when Lord Godol- 
 phin was High Treasurer in the reign of Queen Anne, a place 
 under Government was conferred upon him, whereby he ob¬ 
 tained great honour and affluence. In 1720 he built for 
 himself a handsome house at Isleworth. In the year 1722, 
 the community having altogether outgrown their temporary 
 house of prayer, Moses Hart, actuated by a feeling of reli¬ 
 gious zeal, generously contributed a liberal sum which mate¬ 
 rially helped to raise a special and permanent edifice dedicated 
 to divine worship. This was inaugurated on file eve of Hew 
 Year in 1722. The lineaments of Moses Hart have been 
 handed down to us in a picture presented by Mr Joshua Yan 
 Oven to the Great Synagogue. From the left wall of the 
 vestry-room, near the door, Moses Hart eyes the visitor with 
 quiet curiosity. A shrewd countenance surmounted by a 
 flowing periwig, according to the fashion of the day; yet a 
 countenance by no means vulgar or commonplace. Moses 
 Hart moved among people of quality, and no doubt he had 
 acquired an air of distinction. He appears to have lived to 
 a great age, for in 1/56 he desired to be excused from further 
 attending Synagogue affairs, on the score of his failing 
 health ; as well he might indeed, for he must then have been 
 very aged. 
 
 The first wardens elected for the Synagogue were Lazarus 
 Simon, Isaac Franks, and Abraham Franks; Myer Polak 
 was appointed treasurer. The rate of expenditure was by 
 no means regulated on an extravagant scale, and the salary of 
 the first reader was fixed at the very moderate sum of £30 
 per annum; while the services of the second reader were 
 valued at exactly one-half that amount. The Germans, fol¬ 
 lowing the example of the Portuguese congregations, as soon 
 as they had acquired sufficient importance as a separate body, 
 proceeded to draw up a code of laws for their internal guid¬ 
 ance. These regulations throw not a little light on the 
 usages and customs of the Ashkenazim of 1722. 
 
EARL V DA YS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 135 
 
 A curious practice obtained in those days of throwing 
 sweetmeats upon a bridegroom when he was called up to 
 the law, though we are unable to say whether to inure the 
 happy man to the sweets of married life, or, on the contrary, 
 to offer him some compensation for that bitterness of spirit 
 which is not unfrequently induced by the connubial con¬ 
 dition. The practice was found indecorous, and was strictly 
 prohibited. We believe, however, that even in compara¬ 
 tively modern times it was occasionally followed in German 
 congregations when the bridegroom went to the law on 
 Simchat Torah —on the rejoicing of the law. The sense of 
 refinement or propriety on the part of the worshippers does 
 not appear to have been very great, for they were strictly 
 enjoined not to chew tobacco in synagogue, nor to attend 
 divine service wearing slippers or caps. Gentlemen having 
 frequent occasion to undertake journeys to the Continent 
 were not to be elected treasurers. Travelling was insecure 
 in those days, and it was impossible to say what mishap 
 might occur to an official who exposed himself to such risks. 
 Marriage was considered to add to the qualifications for 
 teaching, as no bachelor was allowed to remain an instruc¬ 
 tor of youth for more than three years. The authority of 
 the Rabbi was considerably restricted. He was not per¬ 
 mitted to place any one in Herem or excommunication, with¬ 
 out the sanction of the Parnassim or wardens, nor to perform 
 marriage or pronounce divorce, nor to interfere in any quarrel. 
 The civil authorities were evidently desirous of curtailing the 
 power of the ecclesiastical authorities, and the latter were made 
 entirely dependent on the former. Though we are by no 
 means advocates of absolute ecclesiastical power, we question 
 whether a spiritual guide, who is the humble servant of the 
 delegates of his flock, can fulfil conscientiously his mission, 
 and whether he can preserve his own dignity and maintain 
 a high tone of religious feeling in his congregation. We 
 believe that the restrictions placed on the actions of the 
 Chief Rabbis were the cause of much mischief during the 
 last century, and eventually induced the resignation of one 
 of them—the learned Rabbi Hirsch. The pastor who was at 
 the head—at least nominally—of the German community 
 when the Moses Hart Synagogue was opened, was called Rabbi 
 
136 EARLY DAYS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 Uri Phaibul, and it would appear that his post was Ly no 
 means a bed of roses. No fewer than ninety-seven ordi¬ 
 nances and regulations were promulgated at the beginning 
 by the rulers of the Great Synagogue, and from time to 
 time these were modified or new laws introduced. 
 
 In the year 1735 the sale of the offices of bridegroom of 
 the Law and of the Sabbath of Genesis (Hatanim) was dis¬ 
 continued, and those distinctions were conferred by election 
 or rotation. It is curious to remark that the then doctor of 
 the congregation—a gentleman who received £30 per annum 
 
 was accustomed to take his seat among the wardens and 
 to vote in all matters brought before the Council, as if he 
 were one. of the leaders of the community, and not one of its 
 most inadequately-salaried officials. 
 
 As the German congregation increased in numbers, not 
 only the house of worship became crowded, but also the 
 House of Life, as the Jews poetically term the cemetery for 
 our dead. In 1748, Moses Hart, Aaron Franks, and H. 
 Franks were appointed a sub-committee to buy some land 
 for a cemetery. This object they carried out in due course, 
 and we find that in the following year the sum of £174 was 
 paid for the purchase of ground for the purpose. This land 
 was situated in the Alderney Eoad, Mile End Road, and it 
 has long since ceased to receive the dead. 
 
 In 1745 the earliest German charitable institution was 
 called into being. It was entitled Akenosath Berith , and it 
 furnished a small gratuity to necessitous German women in 
 childbed, providing at the same time a Mohel to perform 
 the covenant of Abraham. 
 
 In the year 1 / 58 the Chief Rabbi of the German Congre¬ 
 gation, Rabbi Hirsch, the father of Hr Solomon Hirschel, 
 was in receipt of £250 per annum, £150 of which was con¬ 
 tributed by the Synagogue in Broad Court, also called the 
 Synagogue of Moses Hart, and £100 by the Hambro, or, as 
 it was termed, Wolf Prager’s Synagogue. Considering the 
 value of money in those days, and the limited means at the 
 disposal of the community, the stipend of the “ German” 
 Chief Rabbi was not to be despised. Indeed many a worthy 
 and hard-working minister of the Church of England would 
 gkdty GVCH now attain a benefice productive of that amount. 
 
I 
 
 EARLY DAYS OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. 137 
 
 The ground on which the Great Synagogue is erected 
 belongs to the Corporation of the City of London. In 1760 a 
 perpetual lease was granted by the Court of Common Coun¬ 
 cil to the authorities of the Synagogue at a very moderate 
 annual rental, the lease being renewable every fourteen years 
 on payment of a line of £30. It is only at the present 
 moment that the leasehold is being converted into a free¬ 
 hold, by the payment of a final sum to the Corporation, 
 which we understand to be very reasonable. Thus hence¬ 
 forth the chief German Synagogue, like the chief Portuguese 
 Synagogue, will stand on property belonging to its own 
 community. 
 
CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 PROGRESS OF GERMAN CONGREGATIONS. 
 
 The Jews have not, as a rule, displayed against each other 
 that fraternal hatred which so frequently breaks out between 
 members of the same sect or race. But there is a certain 
 episode in the chronicles of the Great Synagogue which dis¬ 
 plays a feeling much resembling hate on the part of the 
 authorities of that congregation, against some of their 
 brethren. In the year 1761 the German community in Lon¬ 
 don was acquiring a considerable development in number and 
 resources. The two synagogues then open were becoming 
 insufficient for the rapidly-increasing worshippers, and pos¬ 
 sibly some of these were not altogether satisfied with their 
 ruling powers. At all events certain members of the exist¬ 
 ing synagogues united with some freshly-arrived immigrants 
 to establish a new house of prayer. The indignation mani¬ 
 fested by the heads of the Duke’s Place Synagogue appears 
 to have been warmer than the circumstances warranted. 
 A meeting was held on the 19th August 1761, in which the 
 wardens and elders of the German community arrived at 
 the following resolution: “ Whereas certain persons un¬ 
 worthy of our countenance and protection have formed them¬ 
 selves into a society calling themselves a congregation at 
 Buckler’s Hall; we do hereby strictly charge our priest, now 
 and hereafter, that he does not directly or indirectly, or other 
 in his name or with his knowledge or permission, officiate 
 either publicly or privately in the service of marriages, 
 burials, circumcisions, or other acts of priesthood, for any 
 person whatever belonging to the said society. And to pre¬ 
 vent any persons from unwarily joining with that society, 
 we order that this resolution be read publicly two Sabbaths 
 successively in our synagogues, that none may plead igno- 
 
PROGRESS OF GERMAN CONGREGATIONS. 139 
 
 ranee thereof. And we further order that a copy of this 
 resolution he forthwith delivered to the Mahamad (Council 
 of Wardens) of the Portuguese Synagogue, desiring their 
 concurrence in supporting and maintaining with us the good 
 order of our respective communities.” 
 
 The new congregants were by no means alarmed at the 
 opposition of the older establishments, and pursued their 
 plans without heeding the harmless thunderbolt that was 
 hurled at their heads. In June 1762 the first stone of the 
 New Synagogue was laid with great ceremony at Buckler’s 
 Hall (since Sussex Hall), facing Cree Church in Leadenhall 
 Street, and a considerable sum of money was collected on 
 that occasion. The holy edifice was duly completed and was 
 consecrated with much pomp. The relations between the 
 New Synagogue and the parent congregation were then, and 
 continued for many years to he, on an unsatisfactory footing. 
 Jealousy, which equally affects the infant in arms and the 
 experienced man of the world, caused Duke’s Place to look 
 askance on Buckler’s Hall, while the latter regarded the 
 former with unconcealed resentment for its attempts at ex¬ 
 tinguishing its existence. During last century, and even 
 subsequently, the New Synagogue possessed its own inde¬ 
 pendent Rabbi. But all rivalries have an end; with the 
 rise of a new generation all past animosity was mutually 
 forgiven and forgotten, and when the Great Synagogue in 
 1792 found itself for a lengthy period without a spiritual 
 chief, it did not disdain to engage the services as Dayan of 
 the Rabbi of the New Synagogue. We will, moreover, do 
 the Duke’s Place Synagogue the justice of recording that 
 even when the ill-feeling between the ancient and modern 
 congregations was at its height, no formal Cherem or ex- 
 communication was pronounced. 
 
 The foundation of the New Synagogue withal did not in¬ 
 flict any material injury on the old places of worship. On 
 the contrary, it stirred up a spirit of emulation among the 
 members of the principal German congregation, who in 1763 
 resolved to enlarge their house of prayer. An adjoining 
 piece of ground was at once purchased. At a meeting held 
 in August of that year many gentlemen came forward with 
 
i4o PROGRESS OF GERMAN CONGREGATIONS. 
 
 liberal donations, and fifteen generous persons subscribed 
 among themselves a total of £2000 towards the requisite 
 fund; a most liberal sum, considering the relative value of 
 money and other surrounding circumstances. 
 
 It w T as not uncommon at this period for Christian visitors 
 to attend Jewish synagogues, and descriptions of Jewish 
 festivals occasionally found a corner in the periodical litera¬ 
 ture of the day. Thus we learn “ that on Saturday the 6th 
 October 1764 the Jews kept their annual day of fasting 
 and humiliation in order to atone for their sins of last year, 
 as instituted by Moses in the 16th chapter of Leviticus. It 
 was observed so strictly that there was not an Israelite to 
 be seen in the streets from six o’clock in the previous even¬ 
 ing until seven on that night. Many of them were in syna¬ 
 gogue all that time, and none of them during that interval 
 did eat, drink, or take a pinch of snuff.” 
 
 We are not informed in which particular synagogue the 
 writer witnessed this impressive sight, which evidently struck 
 him, but we have no doubt that all other Hebrew places of 
 worship would have presented on that sacred day an equally 
 solemn spectacle. We are apprised by the same source that 
 the Feast of Tabernacles was also celebrated with similar 
 devotion, and that the Jews strictly fulfilled the enjoined 
 ordinances by taking their meals during the whole period of 
 that holiday not in their houses, but in u tents or tabernacles” 
 erected for that purpose in their yards. The Succoths or 
 tabernacles were then, as at present, decorated with fruits and 
 flowers, and all friends entering were hospitably pressed to 
 take some refreshment. 
 
 A profound veneration for the ceremonies commanded by 
 the precepts of their law is a remarkable feature in the 
 Jewish character, a feature that has been neither obliterated 
 by persecution nor by emancipation, by the depth of ignorance 
 nor by the height of civilisation. It has been said of the 
 Jews, by one evidently not too well disposed towards them, 
 that, u however deficient they may be in other respects, they 
 at least strictly keep up the outward prescribed forms of 
 their religion, which we wish could be said of numbers that 
 profess one preferable.” However questionable this praise 
 may be, it pays at least a just tribute to one undoubted 
 
PROGRESS OF GERMAN CONGREGATIONS. 141 
 
 Jewish virtue, which is thus acknowledged by those who 
 display no special love towards Judaism. 
 
 Eabbf Ziwy Hirsch, as we have already stated, w r as so 
 hampered and trammelled in his acts by the control exercised 
 over them by the wardens and elders of his community, and 
 he found his position so little to his taste, that in 1764 he 
 resigned his post. Eabbi Ziwy Hirsch proceeded then to 
 Berlin, and he subsequently became Chief Eabbi of that city. 
 When this learned man quitted the English shores he had 
 already an infant son, named Solomon, who was destined 
 thenceafter to occupy the honourable position of Chief Eabbi 
 of the German Jews in London, under the title of the Eev. 
 Dr Hirschel. The latter gentleman therefore could boast of 
 being an Englishman by birth, of which title we believe he 
 was very proud. 
 
 After the retirement of Eabbi Hirsch, Eabbi David Tabil 
 Schiff Cohen was called upon to direct the religious affairs of 
 the Great Synagogue. He was appointed to his functions in 
 February 1765. His portrait may be seen to the present 
 day in the vestry of that congregation. A dark and some¬ 
 what heavy countenance with a black beard, and a square, 
 massive jaw, indicating a certain strength of will. Above 
 this picture we behold another canvas, whence the mild eyes 
 of a predecessor, Eabbi Uri Phaibul or Phaibush, look down 
 with benignant repose on the visitor. 
 
 One of the early duties devolving upon Eabbi Tabil Schiff 
 was the dedication of the rebuilt and enlarged synagogue in 
 Duke’s Place. This ceremony was celebrated with much 
 splendour in August 1767, before a crowded congregation. 
 Christian friends of the Jews have always expressed admira¬ 
 tion for the mode in which Jewish divine service is con¬ 
 ducted, and the chanting of Hebrew prayers usually im¬ 
 presses them favourably. Mirabeau says in his Letters from 
 England that the psalmody of the English synagogue sur¬ 
 prises one by the sweetness and agreeable simplicity of its 
 modulation. On the occasion of which we are speaking, 
 several Christian visitors attended, and described themselves 
 as having been much edified at the proceedings. The 
 solemnitv was adverted to in a flattering manner in the 
 periodical press of the day, and it was stated in a contem- 
 
142 PROGRESS OF GERMAN CONGREGATIONS. 
 
 porary publication that “ the prayer for their Majesties and 
 Royal Family, which was always read in their liturgy in 
 Hebrew, was at this time pronounced by the Chief Rabbi in 
 English, and was followed by Handel’s coronation anthem, 
 performed by a numerous band of eminent musicians. The 
 procession and other ceremonies in the synagogue were accom¬ 
 panied with several anthems and choruses by the same per¬ 
 formers.” 
 
CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 CONVERSIONS—JE WISH LI TER A TURE— THE GREA T 
 
 SYNAGOGUE AGAIN. 
 
 To convert a Jew to Christianity has been for ages the 
 supreme ambition of certain enthusiastic and no doubt sin¬ 
 cere, albeit mistaken, Christians. To save a soul from ever¬ 
 lasting perdition must clearly be good work for those who 
 follow the very uncomfortable and uncharitable tenet that 
 all who differ from them in their theological views, or even 
 in their definition of such views, are to be condemned to 
 suffer the perpetual tortures of the fiery city in the sixth 
 circle of Dante’s “ Inferno.” Among the individuals who have 
 held these opinions we will mention a certain Edward Gold- 
 ney, an affluent merchant, who flourished nearly 120 years 
 ago. This gentleman bestirred himself zealously to save the 
 Jews from the fate awaiting them in the nether world. He 
 wrote a friendly epistle addressed to them, and dedicated to 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury. Therein he recommended the 
 Primate to show great courtesy and hospitality to the Jews, 
 and to entertain their principal men to sumptuous banquets, 
 prepared according to Jewish law, in the expectation perhaps 
 that good cheer and choice vintages might soften the obdurate 
 Hebrew heart. It does not appear that his Grace acted upon 
 the suggestion at the time, nor have we heard that the plan 
 has been tried at any more modern period. Mr Goldney, who 
 was not a Lessing, had more than one interview with Rabbi 
 Aaron Hart, believed to be related to Moses Hart, the 
 founder of the Great Synagogue. The aged Rabbi, who is 
 described as a man of venerable aspect, declined to discuss 
 the question with Mr Goldney. He merely observed that 
 his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather were Jews, 
 
144 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 and that lie continued in the religion to which he had been 
 horn, as he would, had his creed been any other. The reply 
 did not satisfy Mr Goldney, who considered it “ a poor, low, 
 mean answer from a gentleman of his years.” The Gentile, 
 however well-intentioned, evidently did not possess a very 
 brilliant intellect; and he did not understand that the Jew 
 desired to avoid a controversy that would lead to dangerous 
 ground. An Irish prelate, the Bishop of Clogher, also made 
 some efforts to lead away the Jews from the old faith to 
 the new dispensation. But it does not seem that these 
 endeavours were attended with success, even according to 
 the construction of their authors. That some Jews have 
 swerved from the religion of their ancestors is an undoubted 
 fact, and, as we have already said, we shall treat at length 
 the subject of Jewish conversions in a future chapter. 
 
 While the Jews in England were increasing in numbers 
 and wealth, rumours reached them from the far East, denot¬ 
 ing in one remote spot an exactly reverse condition of affairs. 
 That there have been Jews for many years in the interior of 
 India is a well-ascertained fact; and we have ourselves beheld 
 native Jews scarcely to be distinguished in form and feature 
 from pure-blooded Hindoos. A traveller from East India, on 
 his arrival in London in the year 1764, communicated some 
 curious information to the periodical press. A republic of 
 Jews then existed at Patna, capital of the kingdom of Beliar. 
 These Israelites, who formed a state within a state, had once 
 numbered 60,000 families, and had constituted a powerful 
 and semi-independent community ; but at the time of which 
 we are speaking they had dwindled to 4000 families. They 
 still possessed, near the Nabob’s palace, a synagogue, in 
 which their records were preserved, engraved in copper-plates 
 in Hebrew characters. These Jews professed to be able to 
 trace their history from the time of Nebuchadnezzar. They 
 stated that they appertained to the tribe of Menasseli, a part 
 of which, by order of that haughty conqueror, had travelled 
 to the most eastern province of his empire, and thence had 
 proceeded southward, ultimately reaching the banks of the 
 Ganges. The journey from Babylon had been performed by 
 20,000 souls—men, women, and children—and it had taken 
 three years to accomplish. Their records, which had been 
 
CONVERSIONS. 
 
 i45 
 
 kept in Hebrew, had been translated into the ordinary language 
 of the country. We see no reason to question the accuracy 
 of this “ traveller’s tale ; ” and we entertain no doubt that 
 descendants from that community still exist in India, though 
 we are unable to say whether there be at present a Jewish 
 congregation at Patna. 
 
 At about this epoch the British Jews were becoming better 
 known, and more respected among their Gentile fellow-coun¬ 
 trymen, and they even made some endeavours to introduce 
 in England an appreciation for the noble and grand literature 
 of ancient Israel. It was partly in furtherance of such views, 
 and partly as a recognition of the tolerance of the British 
 people, that in the year 1760 an individual, named Solomon 
 da Costa, presented a valuable collection of about 200 Hebrew 
 MS. volumes to the trustees of the British Museum. Many of 
 these books bore on their covers the royal arms of England, 
 and the Jewish community of Amsterdam had intended to 
 offer them to Charles II. as a token of their gratitude for his 
 benevolence toward their race. In consequence of the king’s 
 death, the plan was naturally abandoned. It was destined 
 for Mr Da Costa, who had become the possessor of the books, 
 to increase their number, and to tender this acknowledg¬ 
 ment to the English nation, at the same time that he fur¬ 
 nished additional scope for the student of the sacred language 
 and literature. The letter of the donor accompanying the gift 
 is still preserved at the British Museum, and is couched in 
 the hyperbolical and somewhat inflated style, so much affected 
 in the East. To afford our readers some idea of the style 
 of this singular communication, we will quote the opening 
 paragraph :— 66 Go, I pray thee, see the presence of those 
 in whom there is wisdom, understanding, and knowledge ; 
 behold they are the honourable personages appointed and 
 made overseers of the great and noted treasury called by the 
 name of the British Museum. The Lord preserve them ! 
 Amen. Saitli the man Solomon, son to my Lord and Father, 
 the ancient honourable, devout, meek, and excellent Mr 
 Isaac Da Costa, surnamed Atliias, of the city of Amsterdam, 
 of the people scattered and dispersed among all nations ; of 
 the captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Spain.” The collec¬ 
 tion was much prized for its literary worth, and also as a 
 
146 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 proof of the good feeling of the Jews towards the people of 
 England. 
 
 At the same time original composition was not neglected 
 among the Jews of England during the second half of the 
 18th century, and various Hebrew works issued from the 
 several presses at the disposal of both Ashkenazi and 
 Sephardic congregations. Native writers do not seem to 
 have compared favourably with foreigners in this respect. 
 The two principal works of those days were the production 
 of foreigners, published in England. In 1766 was brought 
 out a volume of poems b} r Ephraim Luzzatto, an Italian, 
 which are stated to breathe the spirit of pure poetry, and to 
 be penned in a correct and classical diction. Then a few 
 years later on, in 1771, a learned German, named Levysohn, 
 who was then studying surgery under the celebrated John 
 Hunter, wrote a philosophical treatise, entitled Maahmar 
 Hatorah Vehachochma: an essay on the Law and on Science. 
 Levysohn’s book, albeit displaying considerable ability and 
 erudition, was not well received by some of his brethren, 
 who regarded him in the light of a dangerous innovator. 
 Levysohn returned to his native city, Hamburg, where he 
 became an eminent physician, and it is said that he dis¬ 
 covered the use of chocolate, and acquired considerable 
 affluence. In his later days he expended much money in 
 collecting books, and was known as the possessor of a valu¬ 
 able library of Hebrew works, which he bequeathed to the 
 Beth Hamedrash in Hamburg. Levysohn, we will remark 
 in conclusion, lived and died a zealous Jew. 
 
 Among the productions of English Jews of that period 
 the most valuable seem to have been the Kehilath Yahacob, 
 a vocabulary of the Hebrew language, by Jacob Rodrigues 
 Moreira. The author was an accomplished Hebraist, and 
 the work has been pronounced one of the best of the kind 
 ever published in England. 
 
 The great Synagogue was far from being a wealthy body 
 a hundred years since, and it had to carry on a continual 
 struggle to support itself and its institutions. Legacies must 
 have been very acceptable, and the amount of £3500 left in 
 1769 to the Dnke ? s Place Synagogue by Lazarus Simon, one 
 of its oldest members, no doubt proved a great boon. Of 
 
CONVERSIONS. 
 
 147 
 
 that sum, the interest of £1000 was directed to be applied 
 to clothe and afford a small gratuity to six destitute men 
 and as many destitute women; while the interest of another 
 £1000 was to be handed half-yearly to the overseers of the 
 poor, fourteen days before the holydays. A question arose 
 many years afterwards, in 1808, as to whether needy candi¬ 
 dates for habiliments to the extent of £5 yearly, might be 
 strangers. It was then decided by a committee appointed 
 for the purpose, that only decayed members and their 
 widows were entitled to enjoy Lazarus Simon’s bounty. 
 Notwithstanding this and other resources, the financial 
 position of the congregation remained in an unsatisfac¬ 
 tory condition. In 1772, a committee of four gentlemen— 
 viz., Aaron Franks, Naphtali Franks, Moses Franks, and 
 Aaron Goldsmid—were empowered to grant a mortgage on 
 the Synagogue and buildings to Edward Holms, a builder, 
 for a balance of £1300 due to him, probably for work 
 executed, and further to borrow from him a sum of £400 on 
 the same security at £4 per cent. Again, in 1789, it was 
 found necessary to raise £2000 to construct a new ark, a 
 new reading desk, and new seats in the Synagogue. And 
 this, too, happened only two years after the generous dona¬ 
 tion of Mrs Judith Levy, who had presented to the Syna¬ 
 gogue the munificent sum of £4000. This lady, as our 
 readers will recollect, was the charitable and wealthy 
 daughter of Moses Hart, and her object was to bestow 
 the amount required for the enlargement and repair of 
 the Synagogue. It is said, that when the lady heard that 
 a loan had been raised, she expressed considerable annoyance 
 that application for further funds had not been made to her 
 to enable her to complete the good work. Through these 
 and through other loans, all honourably discharged, the 
 earliest German Jewish congregation in London strove to 
 reach, and eventually attained, through the energy and zeal 
 of its members, to the eminent position it has so long 
 deservedly occupied. 
 
 In the year 1770, the Great Synagogue possessed a singer 
 so sweet voiced, that strangers went to hear him as a musical 
 feast. His name was Myer Lyon, and he was engaged in 
 1667 as chorister at the modest salary of £40 per annum. 
 
1 4 $ 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 Myer Lyon’s services were valued so little that in 1772, the 
 congregation being in debt, his salary, like that of all other 
 Synagogue officials, was reduced, and his pittance fell to 
 £32 per annum. In 1770, the Kev. Charles Wesley, the 
 hymn writer, and brother to John Wesley, paid a visit to 
 the Duke’s Place Synagogue, which is thus recorded in his 
 journal — u I was desirous to hear Mr Leoni sing at the 
 Jewish Synagogue. ... I never before saw a Jewish con¬ 
 gregation behave so decently. Indeed, the place itself is so 
 solemn, that it might strike an awe upon those who have 
 any thought of God.” 
 
 Myer Lyon, the humble chorister, rose to be Leoni the 
 opera singer. He possessed a tuneful head, and he com¬ 
 posed light songs and sacred melodies. He adapted some 
 Synagogue airs to church hymns; but he preserved strictly 
 his religion, declining to appear on the stage on Friday 
 nights and Festivals. Leoni did not remain very long 
 behind the footlights, and in his latter days he returned to 
 the Synagogue choir. The German congregation of Kingston, 
 Jamaica, having applied to the Great Synagogue for a reader, 
 Leoni offered himself in that capacity. He occupied for some 
 time the vacant post at Kingston, and we hear no more of 
 him in England. 
 
CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 THE PORTUGUESE JEWS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 
 EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 It is a necessity imposed upon us by the nature of our 
 undertaking to imitate occasionally the romancist, who, 
 after having guided one set of characters through a series 
 of perilous adventures, halts and takes up the thread of 
 the story at some preceding period, to follow the fortunes 
 of another set of characters. We have traced the foundation 
 of the Great Synagogue from its humble beginning as a 
 Minyan Room, to its development into an important and 
 numerous congregation, in many respects inferior to no 
 other Jewish community in Great Britain. Let us now 
 turn back and inquire how the ancient body of Spanish and 
 Portuguese Jews progressed during the 18th century. It 
 has been said that happy is the nation that has no history. 
 This proposition is scarcely accurate in every instance; and 
 in the case of the Jews, if understood literally, would argue 
 a stagnation and want of vitality by no means to be desired. 
 Yet with respect to the Sephardim during the first half of 
 last century, the axiom is not far from the truth, for their 
 records glide along with a flow of smooth and uninterrupted 
 prosperity. No perils, no persecutions for conscience’s sake, 
 no struggles against insufficient means or poverty. The 
 budget of the Synagogue usually displayed a surplus. The 
 impost or tax on the commercial operations of its members 
 frequently brought in as much as £2000 a year, and some 
 members contributed singly £100 or even £200 a year, as a 
 small per centage on their transactions. They were rich 
 men, and with some limited exceptions, the principal Jewish 
 merchants belonged to this congregation. Yea, there were 
 persons of enterprise and financial genius among the Portu¬ 
 guese Jews, men whose names commanded almost unlimited 
 
THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 I S° 
 
 credit on ’Change, and whose descendants have acquired 
 fame in the world of finance, in the forum, in the senate. 
 But if the annals of the Portuguese congregation register 
 few very striking events, they nevertheless hold forth a mass 
 of matter equally interesting to both Jew and Gentile. We 
 glean therefrom many facts throwing a light on congrega¬ 
 tional history, and we gather much curious information 
 illustrating the manners of the time or the character of the 
 ancestors of families, occupying in the present day important 
 positions among the aristocracy of wealth, or title, or intellect 
 in the United Kingdom. 
 
 The most exciting occurrence that had happened for some 
 years among the Portuguese, was a fire in the Synagogue. 
 On one Friday evening in the year 1738, the buildings 
 surrounding the house of prayer were discovered to be 
 ablaze. The alarm was soon given, and notwithstanding 
 the imperfection of the appliances of the period for extin¬ 
 guishing fires, the lambent flames were soon subdued into 
 smouldering cinders by the united exertions of firemen, 
 soldiers, and watchmen. The roof of the Synagogue itself 
 was injured, and a portion of the buildings attached to it, 
 and many of the surrounding houses were reduced to utter 
 ruin. Upwards of forty poor families were left totally 
 destitute. A subscription was at once set on foot to furnish 
 food and clothing to the unhappy creatures whom the calamity 
 had deprived of their little all, and also to reward the firemen, 
 soldiers, and others who had saved the main body of the 
 Synagogue itself from being devoured by the flames. The 
 damages caused by the fire were not repaired immediately, 
 and it was not until the year 1749 that the Synagogue 
 buildings were entirely reconstructed, at a cost of £1700. 
 Hitherto the Bevis Marks Synagogue had been tenanted by 
 the Sephardi congregation on a lease entered into with Sir 
 Thomas and Lady Pointz in 1698, and which had not yet 
 expired. It was left to one who was ever foremost in 
 initiating good work, to secure the property to his com¬ 
 munity. TV henever any undertaking of a noble, generous, 
 or philanthropic nature was to be established, his name 
 would assuredly be found at its head. Benjamin Mendes 
 da Costa in the year 5507 (1747), announced to the Elders 
 
THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 151 
 
 that lie had purchased the remainder of the lease of the 
 Synagogue and its appurtenances, which he desired to 
 transfer to the Wardens for the benefit of the holy con¬ 
 gregation of the Gates of Heaven. The elders gratefully 
 accepted the offer, hut resolved that a subscription should 
 be opened, so that any zealous Israelite who so wished 
 might have an opportunity of participating in the pious 
 work. The lease was obtained at 28J years’ purchase 
 calculated on the rental of £135, and it was vested in a 
 committee consisting of Gabriel Lopez de Britto, David 
 Aboab Ozorio, Moses Gomes Serra, David Franco, Joseph 
 Jessurun Rodriguez, and Moses Mendes da Costa. It was 
 not until many years afterwards that the leasehold was 
 converted into a freehold tenure. 
 
 We have before remarked that the only fault that might 
 be laid to the charge of the government of the Portuguese 
 congregation, wise and temperate as it usually appeared, was 
 the too paternal discipline with which it ruled its members, 
 and the too stringent regulations with which it sought to 
 bind their action. The prohibition from performing many 
 things which to us appear very harmless, though no doubt 
 caused by reasons which had their weight at the time, often 
 savours of despotism and intolerance. Once a certain Moses 
 Netto humbly begged permission to publish a translation of 
 the prayer-book in English, which permission was at once 
 refused. Nevertheless, some version of the Hebrew prayers 
 found its way into an English guise, though we are unable 
 to say whether it was through Netto or some one else. 
 Thereupon it was thundered forth from the Tebah (pulpit) 
 that all Yehidim (members) were strictly enjoined not to 
 have so dangerous a book in their possession, and that any 
 one perusing, buying, or selling it, would be condemned to 
 a penalty of £5. Catholics, it is well known, are discouraged 
 from reading the Bible in a modern language, the reason for 
 which is obvious to the thinker. But why Jews, who have 
 nothing to fear and nothing to conceal from the knowledge 
 of Jew or Christian, should have placed under a ban that 
 which should have been their pride to proclaim before the 
 world, it is not easy to explain in our more enlightened 
 days. The punishments for disobedience would seem to 
 
152 
 
 THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 have been occasionally harsher than the nature of the offence 
 demanded, and sometimes they verged on the absurd. On 
 one occasion, a refractory individual was condemned not to 
 shave for six weeks, — whatever infliction that may have 
 been. He had not obeyed some order of the Mahamad 
 (Council of Wardens), and he had six weeks allowed him 
 to submit: failing to do which he would not be allowed 
 to occupy his seat in the Synagogue, or take any part in 
 the service, or pay his poll tax, and in case of death he 
 would be buried u behind the board,” which means in 
 unconsecrated ground. We are not to be understood to 
 censure the efforts made to maintain proper discipline by 
 the rulers of the Portuguese congregation. Such a volun¬ 
 tary body, like a public school, could only have been kept 
 in order by a wholesome discipline. But care should have 
 been taken not to pull the cords too tightly lest they 
 snapped. What we desire to state is, that paternal govern¬ 
 ments, however well-intentioned, often commit grievous 
 mistakes, and that the petty restrictions and vexations and 
 arbitrary regulations formerly enforced by the authorities 
 of the various London Jewish congregations, have contri¬ 
 buted to the withdrawal from the community of many whose 
 secession has proved a serious loss to Judaism. 
 
 The questions of labour, of the poor, and of emigration, 
 appear to have vexed the minds of the chiefs of the Sephardi 
 community during last century, just as they bewilder at 
 present other important bodies. Notwithstanding the pre¬ 
 sence of many persons in affluent circumstances among the 
 Jews, the poor unfortunately have always been in greater 
 numbers than the totality of the Hebrew population war¬ 
 ranted. A hundred years ago the Jews possessed no middle 
 class. There were perhaps 150 to 200 families that might 
 be considered rich, about two-thirds of which belonged to 
 the Spanish and Portuguese congregation. Then we should 
 And at most as many families engaged in small retail trade, 
 and finally we should see a floating mass, at least five times 
 as numerous as the other two classes together, consisting of 
 hucksters, hawkers, journeymen, and others, either verging 
 on pauperism or steeped hopelessly in its abyss. To en¬ 
 deavour to diminish the strain of pauperism by emigration, 
 
THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 T 53 
 
 the Sephardi congregation in 1734 appointed a committee 
 to apply for grants of land in Georgia, which the British 
 Government was freely distributing to intending emigrants 
 under certain conditions. This committee remained stand¬ 
 ing for some years, but we do not gather that it led to any 
 practical results. Three years afterwards the committee 
 reported that some lands in Carolina had been offered to 
 them, and that they were negotiating on the subject. In 
 1745 this committee was still in existence, and obtained an 
 extension of powers and an allowance to cover expenditure. 
 After this time we hear no more of it, and it is fair to 
 assume that had it achieved anything worth recording, it 
 would have been recorded. Then again, the plan was 
 mooted of emigration to Nova Scotia, and in 1749, poor 
 families were exhorted to proceed thither. But even a bribe 
 of three years’ zedaka (relief to the poor) failed to induce 
 any of them to exile themselves to those distant climes. 
 Finally, in the same year a proposal was made to raise a 
 fund of not less than £150, to assist deserving young men 
 of the congregation in earning their livelihood. This scheme 
 also went the way of other good intentions, and pauperism 
 showed no sign of abatement. 
 
 The Jews during their numerous emigrations since their 
 dispersion from the Holy Land have usually carried with 
 them two languages, the Hebrew and the language of their 
 last adopted country. Thus it happens that Spanish con¬ 
 tinued for several generations to be the mother tongue of 
 the Jews scattered in the Ports of Italy and the Levant, 
 while German has long been the vernacular of the 
 Israelites dwelling in Poland, in Russia, and in Hungary. 
 In England, too, the Jews in the last century, when they 
 were still living apart from their fellow-citizens, conversed 
 for generations in the idiom of their ancestors. The Portu¬ 
 guese Jews not only kept all their Synagogue books and 
 records in the language of Camoens, but also their private 
 correspondence was carried on in a similar manner. Some 
 knowledge of English they must naturally have possessed, 
 but probably it was not very perfect. It was not until the 
 year 5495 or 1735 that it was judged expedient to teach 
 English to the children at the public schools. For this 
 
T 54 
 
 THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 purpose was opened what was termed “a Writing-School,” 
 wherein the language of Shakspeare was to be taught to the 
 sons of the poor. A grant of £20 per annum was given 
 from the Synagogue funds, and the amount was sub¬ 
 sequently increased to £30, and it was continued until 
 Moses Lamego made the generous gift that bears his name. 
 This beneficent individual, to commemorate the death of his 
 only son, presented to the Synagogue in the year 5517 
 (1757) the sum of £5000 in Bank reduced annuities, the 
 interest of which was to be distributed as follows. The 
 interest of £4000 was to be paid yearly to the treasurer of 
 the Orphan Society, called Shaare Ora Veaby Yetomim , and 
 that of £1000 was to be applied to the salary of an English 
 master of the Hes-Haim Schools. The name of Hes-Haim, 
 we will explain, was formerly the generic term applied to 
 the schools of primary instruction. When these ceased to 
 exist in their ancient form, and the society of Shaare Tickwci 
 (Gates of Hope), for the support of a Spanish and Portu¬ 
 guese Jews’ Charity School, was established in its place, the 
 interest of that £1000 was handed over yearly to the 
 governors of the new institution. 
 
 Before the foundation of the u Writing School,” the 
 primary instruction imparted to the children of the poor 
 of this congregation was of a purely religious, or of an 
 attempted religious, character. Hebrew was the Alpha and 
 Omega of their studies. The institution of Hes-Haim was 
 divided into three divisions, the lowest of which was in¬ 
 tended for the youngest children, and was styled the Aleph 
 Beth School. In the other two sections the boys were 
 gradually taught Hebrew prayers, the rudiments of grammar, 
 translations from the Bible, and finally Bashi, to enable 
 them to enter the Medrash (College). The progress of the 
 pupils even in these limited studies does not appear to 
 have been very profound, for we frequently perceive pro¬ 
 posals for reform in the management of these schools. In 
 the year 1770 new and more stringent regulations were 
 framed for the schools. The daily working hours were 
 increased, and one evening a week was to be devoted to 
 additional instruction. To provide for the higher branches 
 of Hebrew studies, Benjamin Mendes da Costa, with his 
 
THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 T 55 
 
 usual noble generosity, had since the year 5494 (1734) 
 founded a Yesiba, or college, entitled Mahand Pephael , 
 which he liberally endowed. He handed over to trustees 
 a sum of £3900 in South Sea Stock, which was afterwards 
 changed into long annuities. The produce of this invest¬ 
 ment was to furnish £5 a month to be distributed among 
 the students of the Yesiba, this allowance commencing at 
 two shillings and sixpence each a month, and increasing 
 according to their merit and other circumstances. A certain 
 amount was to be expended in rolls to be given to the 
 younger children of the public schools. Finally, the re¬ 
 mainder of the income, to the extent of £6 per annum, was 
 to be laid out in purchasing books for the Yesiba and the 
 public schools. The Haham, or Rabbi, of the congregation 
 was to preside, and receive one guinea a month for his 
 attendances. The Yesiba of Mahane Rephael is now in¬ 
 corporated with the Medrash, and the students of this 
 institution enjoy the fruit of the noble gift of the pious 
 founder. The beneficence of Benjamin Mendes da Costa 
 seems to have been never ending, and in the year 1762 he 
 endowed another Yesiba, in conjunction with a pious indi¬ 
 vidual named Isaac de David Levy. A sum of £30 a year 
 in long annuities was given by the liberal donors to be dis¬ 
 tributed among the students of the Yesiba or College of 
 Assifat Haberim, who were to attend two evenings a week, 
 to read Arambam (Maimonides) and his Commentators. In 
 the days of which we are writing, neither wealth nor muni¬ 
 ficence were wanting; and when any member of the Spanish 
 and Portuguese congregation accumulated riches, one of his 
 first thoughts was to show his gratitude to Providence by 
 apportioning some of his gains to the service of religion or 
 education, and to the relief of the sufferings of his less 
 fortunate brethren. 
 
 Benjamin Mendes da Costa was one of those rare philan¬ 
 thropists whose every thought was directed to the welfare of 
 others. So long as he lived, he distributed £3000 a year 
 in charity to the poor of all creeds. 
 
 In 1764 he was summoned to receive his reward in another 
 state of existence. 
 
 By a codicil of his will he desired his benefactions to be 
 
15 6 THE FOR TUG UESE JE WS. 
 
 continued, during the lives of the indigent families who 
 received his bounty. Moreover, he directed that all private 
 bills and bonds in the hands of his executors at his decease 
 should be destroyed, and the debtors released from any 
 obligation towards his estate. His generous principle was, 
 that all who borrowed must be in need. Mere words must 
 necessarily fail in rendering justice to the goodness of such 
 a man. 
 
CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 AGAIN WITH THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 Jacob Israel Bernal was a well-to-do West India merchant, 
 coming from a good and honourable stock, though not rank¬ 
 ing in the first line of Hebrew capitalists. In 1744 he was 
 elected to the Synagogue office of Gabay (Treasurer), but to 
 the surprise of his colleagues, he resigned his functions in 
 the following year. When the reason of this act became 
 apparent, the astonishment of the Elders considerably in¬ 
 creased. Jacob Israel Bernal had applied for leave to marry 
 a German Jewess. For a member of the Portuguese con¬ 
 gregation, and especially a gentleman occupying the honour¬ 
 able post of treasurer, to desire to wed a “ Tudesco ” woman 
 (German female), was an unexampled occurrence, upon which 
 the Maliamad or Council of Wardens could not venture to 
 pronounce an opinion ! The important question was referred 
 to the consideration of the elders. This body, after mature 
 deliberation, granted to the petitioner permission to wed 
 Jochebeth Baruh, as the lady who captivated him was 
 styled. But the Elders, to mark the sense of their dis¬ 
 approbation of so unequal a union, and to discourage for the 
 future such ill-advised connections, imposed upon Mr Bernal 
 some rather humiliating conditions. Xeitlier the members 
 of the Beth Din, nor the Hazanim (ministers) were to be 
 present at the solemnisation of the marriage : the bridegroom 
 was not to be called up to the Law in that capacity, no 
 offerings or “ mesheberach ” were to be made for his health, 
 and no celebration of any kind was to take place in Syna¬ 
 gogue. Nous avons change tout cela . Happily, at present, 
 prejudices of this nature have long ceased to exist, and the 
 chief distinction between the German and Portuguese Jews 
 is that they pronounce Hebrew differently. Mr Bernal from 
 
153 
 
 WITH THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 that time forth mixed little in congregational affairs, and he 
 must naturally have experienced some feelings of displeasure. 
 Years afterwards his eldest son was admitted as a yahid or 
 member, and the Bernal family long continued to be strictly 
 observing Jews. We shall have occasion to refer again to 
 them. Meanwhile we will observe that by the espousal of 
 Miss Grace Osborne, daughter of Mr Bernal Osborne, 
 to the Duke of St Albans, the ancient blood of Judah has 
 become allied with the blue blood of the Stuarts—through 
 the descendants of Mistress Eleanor Gwvnne, the sauciest of 
 orange girls—whatever honour that may reflect on the old 
 lineage of the former West India merchants ! 
 
 The Portuguese congregation, in its desire to serve the 
 interests of members of limited means, consented for many 
 years to grant life annuities on payment of adequate sums. 
 When we employ the term adequate, we use it only as a 
 figure of speech, for in point of fact the principals paid to 
 the Synagogue were quite inadequate to cover the risks in¬ 
 curred. The laws of life insurance were imperfectly under¬ 
 stood in the middle of last century, and, moreover, the Syna¬ 
 gogue only undertook these operations to benefit the parties 
 with whom it dealt. But in the long run the granting of 
 life annuities proved a too obviously losing concern, and they 
 were gradually discontinued. The * applicants for this kind 
 of indirect assistance were usually the widows of deceased 
 officials, or members in somewhat straightened circumstances, 
 or their surviving relatives, mostly females, to whom it was 
 wished to secure a modest income. 
 
 The subject of butchers’ meat is neither very lofty nor 
 very inspiring, but as we must daily consume this commodity 
 in' more or less quantity, the subject acquires considerable 
 importance. The history of both German and Portuguese 
 congregations records a continual series of laments against 
 the representatives of the Jewish slaughter-house. Here we 
 have accusations of unlawful practices on the part of the 
 killers; there we have complaints of irregularities in the 
 sale of meat. At other times fault is found with the quality 
 of the article vended, or with the price charged. Some of 
 the evils seem to be of an incurable nature, for the Jews 
 hear of them now as their ancestors heard of them a century 
 
WITH THE PORTUGUESE JEWS. 
 
 i59 
 
 since. The Portuguese authorities incurred a vast deal of 
 pains to have the Mosaic laws enforced on the one hand, 
 and to avoid harsh or unjust measures against killers and 
 inspectors on the other. Committees were appointed and 
 inquiries set on foot at different periods, entailing consider¬ 
 able expense on the congregation, without attaining results 
 of a lasting nature. In 1756 a committee was elected to 
 investigate the abuses alleged to have been introduced into 
 the slaughter-house. It was formally stated that the flesh 
 of improperly killed animals (Terefa) was commonly disposed 
 of to Jews. Haham Netto, Joseph Salvador, and other 
 members of the congregation, actively bestirred themselves 
 on the subject, and assisted materially in bringing the truth 
 to light. A number of persons connected with the trade, 
 Jewish officials appertaining to the various London con¬ 
 gregations, and even Christians, were duly examined. Some 
 of the allegations were unfortunately found to be true, and 
 the ecclesiastical authorities pronounced their opinion. Even¬ 
 tually the shochet or killer was dismissed, and several reforms 
 were introduced in the establishment; but, from the subse¬ 
 quent renewal of similar complaints, it does not appear that 
 the evil was uprooted. 
 
 The Portuguese congregation was wont to receive frequent 
 applications for assistance from its less fortunate brethren in 
 all parts of the world. Like the rich man, who is often sur¬ 
 prised by the discovery of hitherto unsuspected relationship 
 with affable and shabbily-attired strangers, the Bevis Marks 
 Synagogue found itself the object of considerable solicitude 
 from various quarters. The holy cities of Palestine, New¬ 
 port in Rhode Island, Bohemia and Moravia, Persia, Venice, 
 and various other places, advanced claims to the benevolent 
 support of Bevis Marks. Funds were regularly remitted to 
 Jerusalem, Saphet, and Tebariah, and, moreover, a duly 
 accredited Shaliah (emissary) from the Holy Land was 
 never dismissed empty-handed. Upwards of £800 w^as 
 collected to relieve the distress of the Jews of Bohemia 
 and Moravia, and arrangements were made with the two 
 German congregations for the proper application of the 
 fund. A smaller amount was sent to the Israelites of 
 Persia. The Jews of Newport were courteously informed 
 
i6o 
 
 WITH THE TOE TUG UESE JE WS. 
 
 that a multiplicity of other calls for help prevented their 
 request being acceded to. The Jews of Venice were very 
 fortunate. We do not know exactly what was the nature 
 of their needs, but they seemed to find favour in the eyes of 
 the Elders, who, while declining to disburse any of the Syna¬ 
 gogue funds, opened a private subscription on their behalf. 
 Considerable sums of money, amounting to some thousands, 
 were remitted to that city in the year 1737, and they were 
 to be repaid in ten instalments, spread over a number of 
 
 vears. At first the interest on the loan was forwarded 
 
 %/ 
 
 regularly, but the punctuality was short-lived. Letters from 
 Venice were received, pleading total inability to pay. That 
 congregation was in embarrassed circumstances, and in fact 
 was going from bad to worse. A correspondence between 
 the two congregations was long kept up; and the Jewish 
 community of Venice not only did not cover the advances 
 already made, but even applied for further advances, which 
 we need not say were courteously but firmly refused. An 
 arrangement was eventually entered into between debtor and 
 creditor, and for many years certain instalments were paid 
 more or less regularly by Venice. Gradually the matter 
 was forgotten; the original lenders died and the borrowers 
 too. The glories had departed from the Queen of the 
 Adriatic, and the Jewish community had suffered with the 
 rest of the inhabitants. So the claim has never been com¬ 
 pletely settled, and exists to the present day, though it 
 would be impossible to ascertain what amounts are owing, 
 or to whose representatives. 
 
CHAPTER XX. 
 
 JOSEPH SALVADOR—HONORARY OFFICES AMONG THE 
 
 PORTUGUESE JEWS, 
 
 A visit to the vestry-room of the Spanish and Portuguese 
 Synagogue, Bevis Marks, must cause to the reflecting mind 
 a sensation of awe and solemnity not unlike that experienced 
 in wandering over a cemetery. The walls of the Council 
 Chamber and of the neighbouring lobby are covered with 
 inscriptions of the names of the pious individuals who 
 in past generations bestowed their benefactions on the con¬ 
 gregation. The men whose names figure in golden letters 
 in those panels, once graced the room with their presence, 
 and therein discussed the affairs of the nation. Many of 
 them were personages famed for their wealth, their phil¬ 
 anthropy, their public spirit. And where are they all 
 now ? Xot only have they passed away, which is 
 merely saying that they followed the ordinary laws of 
 nature, but their very names and their very existence are 
 only dimly recollected in our day. Few of the leaders of 
 the Sephardi community of a century and a half, or even a 
 century ago have left descendants in the congregation. 
 Some of the most ancient families have wandered from 
 the pale of Judaism, and now rank among the untitled 
 nobility of Great Britain. Others have become victims to 
 the inexorable decrees of fate, which seem to have pressed 
 on the Portuguese Jews with more than usual severity, and 
 have disappeared from the face of the earth. 
 
 Among the most distinguished families of that con¬ 
 gregation during the eighteenth century we must men¬ 
 tion the family bearing the name of Jessurun Rodrigues. 
 They had originally come over from Holland, bringing with 
 them considerable sums of money, which they invested 
 
 L 
 
162 
 
 JOSEPH SAL VAPOR. 
 
 principally in commerce, and tliey ranked as merchant 
 princes among the Jews. The most noted scion of that 
 lineage was Joseph Jessurun Rodrigues, to whom we have 
 already adverted by the appellation of Joseph Salvador, 
 under which guise the world knew him. He took a 
 leading part in the affairs of his Synagogue, and he was 
 ever to the fore when the sufferings of poor humanity 
 were to he relieved. He was president of the congregation, 
 and one of the most efficient members of the original Com¬ 
 mittee of Portuguese Deputies. Notwithstanding the exten¬ 
 sive financial and mercantile transactions in which he was 
 engaged, he devoted a portion of his time to the improve¬ 
 ment of the condition of the needy. He not only gave 
 largely to all existing institutions; he was ever seeking new 
 plans for conquering the hydra-headed evil of pauperism. 
 Now he would help to establish a new society, like that in¬ 
 tended to assist Jewish young men in earning their liveli¬ 
 hood by hard work, and which, unfortunately, was unsuccess¬ 
 ful. At another time he would be found asking permission 
 of the Wardens to enter into a speculation on behalf of 
 some deserving families in humble circumstances. He was 
 always a liberal donor to the necessitous. Joseph Jessurun 
 Rodrigues was a partner in the well-known house of Francis 
 and Joseph Salvador, which, after the death of Sampson 
 Gideon, repeatedly negotiated loans for the British Govern¬ 
 ment. We cannot tell at precisely what period the name of 
 Salvador was first adopted, but certainly it must be in the 
 early part of last century, though it does not occur in the 
 synagogue registers until about 1760. 
 
 Personally, Joseph Salvador, to style him by the most 
 familiar designation, was popular, and enjoyed considerable 
 repute among Jew and Gentile; albeit, when he appeared in 
 a theatre on one occasion, after the passing of the Naturali¬ 
 sation Bill in 1753, he and his party were hooted, and were 
 constrained to withdraw, to the utter disgrace of the civilised 
 and Christian audience. The principal part of his career 
 was accompanied by unbounded prosperity. He had vastly 
 increased the wealth he had inherited, and he was the first 
 Jew who had been appointed Director of the East India Com¬ 
 pany. He constructed a handsome house in White Hart 
 
JOSEPH SAL VAPOR. 
 
 163 
 
 Court, Bishopsgate-street, which bore until recent times, if 
 it does not still bear, his name; and in the N.E. corner of 
 one of the cellars may yet be seen the foundation-stone, with 
 an inscription laid upon it by his daughter, Judith Salvador. 
 He also was the owner of a country residence, with an 
 extensive park, at Tooting. Joseph Salvador was less for¬ 
 tunate in his latter days. Misfortunes began to befall him. 
 He lost heavily in consequence of the earthquake at Lisbon, 
 he holding much property in various shapes in that city, 
 though this did not appear to affect him much. It was the 
 failure of the Dutch East India Company that brought ruin 
 on him, and that proved almost a calamity to many of the 
 rich Portuguese Jews of England and of Holland. This disaster 
 was a great blow to those communities, from which they 
 found it difficult to recover. As for Joseph Salvador, he 
 never raised his head again. All his available property in 
 Europe little by little disappeared ; and his last days were 
 spent in obscurity. The family were still possessed of some 
 tracts of land in America, which were in charge of a steward. 
 A nephew of Joseph Salvador, Francis, determined to under¬ 
 take a voyage to the new continent. It is said that Mrs 
 Joshua Mendes da Costa, a daughter of Joseph Salvador, 
 gave up a part of her marriage-settlement to furnish funds 
 for the expedition. Francis started to retrieve the family 
 fortunes. In due course letters came, advising his safe 
 arrival to the new continent, and announcing his intention 
 of seeking his property. He never wrote again. A long 
 silence ensued, and then it was reported that the unhappy 
 Salvador had been murdered and scalped by Indians ! 
 
 It is related that in 1802 an American arrived in Amster¬ 
 dam and waited upon Mrs Texeira de Mattos, Salvador’s 
 eldest daughter, and offered her 10,000 dollars to sign a deed 
 giving up all claim on the American property. The lady de¬ 
 clined the transaction. In 1812 the stranger once more re¬ 
 turned and repeated his offer. He alleged that he was the 
 grandson of Salvador’s former steward; that the land in 
 Mr Salvador’s time had been a tract of barren forests and 
 utterly valueless; that now it was covered with villages and 
 towns, and that he had himself a good holding title thereto. 
 Finally he added that, during the War of Independence, 
 
164 
 
 JOSEPH SAL VADOR. 
 
 British subjects had forfeited all their rights to property in 
 the United States, and that she could advance no claim what¬ 
 ever to the land. Under these circumstances Mrs Texeira 
 de Mattos, who was eighty years of age at that time, and 
 who had not the slightest idea as to the State or part of the 
 Union in which the demesne was situated, accepted the sum 
 tendered, and signed the required assignment, which thus 
 conferred a valid selling title on the descendant of the 
 steward. The last male representative of the family of Sal¬ 
 vador or Jessurun Rodrigues was a member of Lloyd’s, and 
 is believed to have died about 1830. In this manner termi¬ 
 nated that ancient and honourable lineage. 
 
 The correspondence that passed between the London Con¬ 
 gregation of Spanish and Portuguese Jews and their foreign 
 brethren scattered over the Old and the New World, enables 
 us to form a fair idea of the general position of that denomi¬ 
 nation of Jews during the eighteenth century. The principal 
 congregations of that Minhag were those of London, Amster¬ 
 dam and Leghorn. These were the most independent, the 
 wealthiest, and probably the most numerous. All the others, 
 or the greater part of them, were more or less struggling 
 against a number of adverse circumstances. The London 
 congregation, though the youngest of the three above-named, 
 enjoyed a considerable reputation for liberality, affluence and 
 devotion to Jewish interests; so that Jews in distress ad¬ 
 dressed themselves to this body on the appearance of every 
 difficulty. We are not speaking now of solicitations for 
 ■financial help, which point we have already touched in our 
 last chapter. W e aie referring at present to the applications 
 for moral help, which were constantly arriving in London. 
 We know the kind of letters that fame for charity brings 
 to a private individual. The Bevis Marks Synagogue was 
 regarded as the protector of the Jewish weak,° a°nd the 
 redresser of Jewish wrongs in the four quarters of the globe. 
 The Jews of Jamaica were constantly writing to request the 
 intervention of the Jews of Bevis Marks on their behalf. 
 For instance, in 1736 the former were groaning under severe 
 and special taxation, when the latter prepared a petition in 
 favour of their brethren, filled it with a number of signatures 
 of Jewish and Christian merchants, presented it to the King, 
 
JOSEPH SAP PAH OP. 
 
 i 6 5 
 
 and succeeded in obtaining a removal of the grievances com¬ 
 plained of. Then in 1753 the Jews of Barbadoes submitted 
 their internecine quarrels to the authorities of the London 
 Portuguese Synagogue, who paid very little attention to that 
 storm in a teapot. The Jews of Barbadoes were very plainly 
 told that in those days when the passing of the Naturalisa¬ 
 tion Bill had created an hostile feeling against the Jews, it 
 was very unbecoming and ill-advised for them to dispute 
 among themselves about trifles, and they were recommended 
 to settle their differences quietly at home. Afterwards the 
 Jews of New York appertaining to the congregation of 
 Sheerit Israel sought in London a Reader or Hazan , and 
 eventually received a minister at the hands of their English 
 brethren. It would take us too long to repeat even a quarter 
 of the demands of this nature made upon the chiefs of the 
 Bevis Marks Synagogue, who appeared always ready in every 
 emergency to lend countenance and support to their brethren 
 abroad. 1 
 
 As will easily be understood, the Jews of last century 
 dedicated all their attention to Jewish affairs. There was 
 no other scope for their ambition. The Jew could not 
 figure in the Municipal Council, in the forum, in the Senate. 
 The only office to which he could aspire was office in the 
 synagogue, and consequently this honour was greatly coveted. 
 Among the Portuguese Jews the Wardens, or Parnassim, 
 inspired considerable awe. When these officials were in¬ 
 ducted into their charge they would take a solemn oath 
 before the Ark to administer justly and without favour the 
 laws of the congregation, and to respect all its customs. 
 Gentlemen elected to these posts had to deposit £100 to 
 contribute towards Synagogue expenditure, as the com¬ 
 munal taxes and offerings were discharged by members twice 
 a-year—at Passover and at New Year—and sometimes the 
 payments were in arrear. The treasurer, or Gabay, was 
 required to advance £600 for the same reason; but all these 
 amounts were duly returned at the expiration of the period 
 of office. As at one time there was some little difficulty in 
 finding suitable Hatanim (bridegrooms of the law), a society 
 of pious individuals was formed to offer themselves for the 
 office whenever required. The fine for non-acceptance of 
 
i66 
 
 JOSEPH SALVADOR. 
 
 the post of Wardens, or Hatanim, was £40, which sum in 
 the latter case was divided between the ministers and the 
 teachers. One of the duties of the Mahamad, or Council of 
 Wardens, was to adjudge in matters at issue between the 
 congregants of the synagogue. Multifarious were the ques¬ 
 tions submitted to the decision of that body, and they 
 ranged from the price of a warming pan to cases of breach 
 of promise. Usually the Wardens satisfactorily adjusted 
 such small claims as now would he brought before a County 
 Court; but when it was found impossible to settle any 
 question, or the defendant declined to put in an appearance, 
 written leave was granted to the plaintiff to sue in the civil 
 courts of the country. 
 
 There was and there is still in the Portuguese Synagogue 
 a special office called that of Pamass of the Cautivos (Warden 
 of the Captives). At present this is merely an honorary 
 title, and means only the first step in synagogal dignities. 
 Formerly there was real earnest labour attached to the post. 
 The synagogue was constantly receiving applications for the 
 redemption from captivity of Jewish prisoners. Now it was 
 to rescue some Jews that had been taken prisoners by Moorish 
 Corsairs, and confined in chains at Tetuan. Now it was to 
 save other Jews imprisoned at Malta ; at one time to ransom 
 Israelites undergoing duress at Tripoli; on another occasion 
 it was to liberate Hebrews who had been taken prisoners by 
 the Turks in their wars against the Persians. There was an 
 especial fund set apart for this purpose, and it was regularly 
 drawn upon. Usually the sums required were remitted to 
 Leghorn, whence there was a considerable trade in the hands 
 of Jewusli houses with Levantine and North African ports. 
 Jewish prisoners, w r e must add, were not considered worth a 
 king's ransom, for we percieve that £80 were forwarded in 
 1768 to Leghorn to buy off fourteen prisoners at Malta. 
 Probably the Jew r s ,of Leghorn contributed something to¬ 
 wards this benevolent object; but it appears clearly that a 
 Jew’s head was not so valuable in those days as a Jew’s eye 
 w r as popularly represented to be. 
 
CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 SWEDEN AND THE JEWS—PORTUGUESE RELIGIOUS AND 
 EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS—DR KENNICOTT. 
 
 It is probably not generally known that Sweden, a country 
 that not long since indulged in special legislation against 
 the Jews, a century and a quarter ago invited Jews to settle 
 in and to enrich the State with their capital, their labour, 
 and their industry. After the signature of the treaty of 
 Nystad with Russia in 1721, Sweden, by the cession of 
 several important provinces to the former power, lost much 
 of its political influence, and sank into a second-rate nation. 
 During the reign of Frederick of Hesse Cassel, the Court of 
 Stockholm was the scene of continuous intrigues between 
 the French and the Russian party. Great attention was 
 bestowed upon the arts of peace; agriculture and commerce 
 were encouraged; and the great Linnaeus gave a new im¬ 
 pulse to science. Various schemes for the promotion of 
 trade were proposed. The legislature sanctioned, among 
 other projects, one for the establishment of a fishing com¬ 
 pany on an extensive scale, and at the same time gave per¬ 
 mission to wealthy Portuguese Jews to take up their abode 
 in Sweden and all its dependencies. This last concession 
 had been granted unasked and unsought; and the event was 
 duly communicated to the authorities of the Portuguese 
 community in London. This congregation, through its pre¬ 
 sident, Joseph Jessurun Rodrigues (Salvador), wrote a most 
 becoming reply to their correspondents in Stockholm, who 
 were a mercantile firm of eminence. This document states, 
 under date of the 2nd May 1746 66 that the gentlemen of 
 the States and the very venerable gentlemen of the Senate 
 were sincerely thanked for their condescension in favour of 
 the Jews, but that the continued kindness of the king and 
 
i68 
 
 SWEDEN AND THE JEWS. 
 
 parliament (of England) did not allow them (the Jews) to 
 leave the United Kingdom. They thought that unless 
 some unforeseen accident occurred, few Israelites from Eng¬ 
 land and Holland would proceed to Sweden, but more 
 might go from Italy and France; and they suggested that 
 the Swedish Government should take measures to inform the 
 Jews of those countries of his Majesty’s good will towards 
 them. No great result, however, could be expected until his 
 Majesty ceased to make a distinction between the rich and 
 the poor, between financiers and hawkers.” English Jews 
 of Poituguese extraction were not tempted to leave the com- 
 paratively hospitable shore of Great Britain to visit the cold 
 climes of the Scandinavian Peninsula, for a very moderate 
 degiee of benevolence is enough to attach the Jews to the 
 soil in which they dwell. Moreover, it does not appear that 
 they formed any permanent settlement in Sweden during last 
 centuiy. Subsequently to this period, less liberal monarchs 
 and less enlightened legislatures placed renewed restrictions 
 on the presence of Israelites. After the fall of Napoleon, 
 and when the reaction came against the wide principles 
 advocated by the French, the Jews were regarded with un¬ 
 qualified aversion. It was only in recent times that they 
 
 first obtained toleration, and eventually gained their civil 
 rights. 
 
 We have already adverted to the existence of Jews in 
 Ireland in the middle of last century, and to the purchase 
 by the Portuguese congregation of a piece of ground at 
 Dublin to serve for the purposes of a cemetery. This pur¬ 
 chase was effected in the year 1748, through a Mr Jacob 
 Phillips. 
 
 After much correspondence, the Wardens of the Portu¬ 
 guese Synagogue authorised Mr Phillips to draw upon them 
 for the required funds, which he accordingly did when all 
 the conditions had been arranged, and transmitted to them 
 the title deeds. There does not appear any reason why the 
 Portuguese should have desired to acquire the ground be¬ 
 yond a general wish to benefit their race, for the Hebrew 
 residents m Dublin were of German extraction, and the 
 German communities in London would have been, strictly 
 speaking, bound to assist members of their nationality in the 
 
SWEDEN AND THE JEWS. 169 
 
 Irish capital. On this occasion the Portuguese Jews of 
 London looked to no such distinction. They possessed the 
 means, and they performed a pious action. The only 
 acknowledgment they required was a mention that the burial 
 ground had been bought with the money of the Sephardic 
 Congregation of London. We gather also that about this 
 epoch there w r ere Jews dwelling in other parts of Ireland; 
 for it was stated that in several cities of that island there 
 were men who professed to be licensed to kill Jewish meat, but 
 that the only Shochet or slaughterer legally qualified was to 
 be found at Cork. Whence it seems that there were more 
 Jews in Ireland in those days than we imagine. 
 
 Let us now take a glance at the religious condition of the 
 Bevis Marks Community. After the death of the illustrious 
 IJaham David Netto, which occurred about 1728, the guid¬ 
 ance of the spiritual affairs of the congregation was entrusted 
 to his son, Haham Isaac Hetto. This learned rabbi came to 
 London in the year 1747, probably from a residence at Leg¬ 
 horn, his father’s birthplace ; and he was much esteemed for 
 his urbanity and scholarship. For some years he seemed to 
 give satisfaction to his flock; and under him there were two 
 Dayanim or minor rabbis named Isaac del Yalle and Jacob 
 Coronel. Haham Isaac Netto appears to have been a man 
 of amiable disposition, rather than of commanding intellect. 
 He preferred the retirement of private life to the turmoil of 
 public affairs, and in 1755 he found it advisable to resign his 
 sacred functions. The reason he assigned for this act was 
 that his own personal affairs necessitated his whole time and 
 attention. But his conduct has been attributed to the fact 
 that an opinion he once had emitted, having been considered 
 as not sufficiently orthodox by some of the authorities of the 
 congregation, these persons were induced to consult the heads 
 of the older congregation at Amsterdam. The answer was 
 in the main in conformity with the decision of Haham Hetto. 
 But doubts on the one side caused dissatisfaction on the 
 other, and the Haham thought it best to regain his inde¬ 
 pendence. At all events the parting took place in a most 
 friendly manner. The Babbi continued to dwell in London 
 till his death; he felt much interest in educational affairs, 
 and was frequently consulted on congregational and religious 
 
SWEDEN AND THE JEWS . 
 
 T70 
 
 matters. The two members of the then acting Betli Din 
 were his pupils, who followed in his footsteps and appealed 
 to him in any difficulty. For some years no other Haham 
 was elected. It was not until 1765 that his successor w T as 
 appointed in the person of Rabbi Moses Cohen de Azevedo, 
 one of the disciples of Rabbi Hetto, and who was Rabbi of 
 the Beth Din and Hebrew teacher in one of the schools. 
 The ruling pow r ers of those days accustomed to the dictates 
 of Spanish and Portuguese etiquette, were vastly particular 
 in laying down the law in small matters as in great matters. 
 The more easy-going gentlemen of the present generation 
 will hardly be able to repress a smile on learning, that on 
 Haham Azevedo’s election to his post, the elders of the 
 Synagogue solemnly debated as to whether the rev. gentle¬ 
 man should wear his beard! For the sake of the ladies who 
 may like to know how the question was settled, we will add 
 that the meeting decided the point in the negative by a 
 majority of several votes. When Rabbi Netto was called to 
 his fathers in 1773, his funeral was attended by great solem¬ 
 nities, and he seems to have been sincerely lamented. 
 
 Though instruction in English was evidently deficient 
 among the Portuguese boys, instruction in Hebrew super- 
 abounded. Hebrew masters were remarkably plentiful. 
 When a vacancy for a teacher occurred on a certain occasion, 
 no few r er than sixteen candidates presented themselves, a 
 state of things which singularly contrasts with that which 
 now obtains. On the other hand, if the Hebrew instruction 
 were to be measured by quality rather than by quantity, the 
 result arrived at would leave small cause for boasting. I 11 
 Haham Netto’s visits he found much more ground for censure 
 than for commendation. The boys, to use his own forcible 
 expression, were 66 steeped in crass ignorance.” The pupils 
 stopped away, and the masters did not attend; and no 
 attempt was made at preserving a semblance of order and 
 discipline. The same condition of affairs remained until long 
 after the death of the worthy Haham. In 1779 a committee 
 was nominated to inquire into the subject. In the report 
 delivered to the elders the committee dolefully complained 
 that of the total number of sixty-four pupils scarcely one- 
 eighth could even read Hebrew, after an instruction of seven or 
 
SWEDEN AND THE JEWS . 
 
 171 
 
 eight years, and nearly all were unacquainted with the daily 
 prayers. After lamenting the utter inutility of an establish¬ 
 ment maintained at an annual cost of £600, the committee 
 proposed various reforms. The principal of these were the 
 division of the school into four different classes, each to 
 receive instruction from a distinct teacher in a distinct class¬ 
 room, and the yearly appointment of masters who, considering 
 their posts as sinecures for life, had hitherto greatly neglected 
 their duties. It is curious to remark that food for mind and 
 food for body proved both sources of incessant trouble and 
 vexation to the authorities of the synagogue. The school, 
 like the slaughter-house, was constantly being reconstituted, 
 to remain as faulty as before. The highest institution for 
 learning Hebrew was the college, or Medrash, and it was 
 reorganised in 1758. In the absence of a Haliam, three 
 students, all of whom were rabbis, were deputed to preside 
 therein alternately; and the eighteen learners were divided 
 into three classes. Formerly scholastic disputations were 
 carried on at random, without plan or aim. Now, when a 
 thesis was given forth, and after all the reasons had been 
 alleged pro and con any particular opinion, the President 
 and his two coadjutors were to decide the question, which, 
 when once thus settled, was not to be renewed unless new 
 authorities were adduced. Rabbi Cohen de Azevedo, before 
 his election to the functions of Haham, had acted as one of 
 the presidents. This institution undoubtedly furnished the 
 means of acquiring a knowledge of the sayings and opinions 
 of the Talmudists, and enabled the students to form a cor¬ 
 rect judgment on any given point, according to the principles 
 of the Jewish oral law. 
 
 In 1768 a useful innovation was introduced in this con¬ 
 gregation. It was found inconvenient not to know the exact 
 ages of men and women of the congregation, and a register 
 was established wherein were to be entered the births of all 
 legitimate children. The date was to be inscribed both in 
 Hebrew and in English. Each father was to pay on that 
 auspicious occasion the moderate fee of one shilling. It was 
 not until many years later that a similar system was adopted 
 by the German Jews. In the year 1816 a certificate of the 
 marriage of Moses Franks and of the birth of his children 
 
172 
 
 SWEDEN AND THE JEWS . 
 
 was applied for to the authorities of the Great Synagogue. 
 It was then stated that previous to 1791 no register of births, 
 marriages, or deaths had been kept, and that even since that 
 date they had not been regularly preserved, only those who 
 thought proper so to do having registered the births of their 
 children. It was resolved on that occasion that for the future 
 such registration should become regular and compulsory, and 
 a committee was appointed, consisting of Messrs Hyman 
 Cohen, Nathaniel Nathan, and Solomon Cohen, to give effect 
 to this resolution. 
 
 Seekers after truth have existed in all ages, though not 
 always has truth been properly understood when discovered. 
 Among those who were desirous of ascertaining the actual 
 facts with reference to the text of the Scriptures we may 
 name the Bev. B. Kennicott. This gentleman, who was a 
 clergyman of the Church of England, applied in the year 
 1763 to the authorities of the Portuguese Synagogue for per¬ 
 mission to have their oldest Hebrew MS. Bible inspected by 
 his nominee, M. Bruns. The Bev. B. Kennicott stated that 
 he had sent M. Paul J. Bruns, of Lubeck, to Frankfort, 
 Worms, Strasburg, Venice, Prague, Amsterdam, and other 
 cities to visit Jewish Synagogues. His mission was to exa¬ 
 mine the most ancient MSS. of the Bible or of part of the 
 Bible, and to see how far the passages of importance agreed 
 with the Hebrew text as ordinarily printed. The inquiry 
 had been carried on for three years, under patronage of the 
 King of Great Britain and of several eminent Jews. The 
 reverend gentleman thought that there must be some primi¬ 
 tive MSS. in public synagogues, as well as in private hands, 
 and he desired to have letters of recommendation from emi¬ 
 nent Jews to their brethren abroad to assist in their researches, 
 his object being to establish truth and do honour to the 
 genuine words of Moses and the prophets. As may be ima¬ 
 gined, the Portuguese elders hastened to comply with so 
 praiseworthy a wish; and they placed at Mr Kennicott’s 
 disposal the two ministers of the congregation, the Bev. Mr 
 de Crasto and the Bev. Mr Salom. The results of the 
 labours of Dr Kennicott are curious. He discovered in the 
 British Islands no fewer than 129 MSS. of the Bible or 
 portions of the Bible, in Hebrew, and 336 on the Continent. 
 
SWEDEN AND THE JEWS. 
 
 i 73 
 
 He collated, with the assistance of a qualified staff, nearly 
 all these MSS. with the best printed editions of the Hebrew 
 Bible. He examined, among other valuable MSS. the Sama¬ 
 ritan Pentateuch, given by Archbishop Usher to Sir R. 
 Cotton, and which was very old. Dr Kennicott’s undertak¬ 
 ing inspired general interest. Cardinal Passionei, librarian 
 at the Vatican, placed the whole of the Hebrew MSS. in that 
 great library at his disposal. Dr Kennicott’s work was 
 completed at the end of 1769, and had lasted ten years, as 
 he had calculated. 
 
 The inquiry cost over £9000, and the funds were raised 
 by a subscription, which was headed by the King. In 1776 
 Dr Kennicott published the first volume of his great Hebrew 
 Bible, with its various readings ; and this was followed in 
 1780 by the second and final volume. Dr Kennicott, who 
 was regarded as a profound Hebrew scholar, discovered 
 numerous inaccuracies in the Hebrew text. The Hebrew 
 MSS. differed greatly from each other, and from the printed 
 text. The oldest printed copies varied considerably from the 
 latest, and agreed more with the oldest and best MSS. The 
 conclusion Dr Kennicott drew from this was that the original 
 text had with time become vitiated. 
 
 In the month of August during the same year, a Jewish 
 dignitary of consequence arrived from abroad. For the first 
 time, we believe, a foreign power despatched an avowedly 
 Jewish representative to London, on a diplomatic mission. 
 On the 19th of August, Jacob, son of Abraham Benider, was 
 introduced to King George III., and delivered his creden¬ 
 tials as minister of the Emperor of Morocco. His Maroqueen 
 Majesty spoke most graciously of his envoy, and referred to 
 him thus, in the missive he had forwarded to the King of 
 England: “ The bearer of this imperial letter is Jacob, the 
 son of Abraham Benider, a person equally beloved of his 
 sovereign and country, and who has your Majesty’s interest 
 to heart. I have entrusted him with full powers to treat, 
 and from his knowledge of public affairs and his attention to 
 our mutual affairs, I doubt not that he will conduct to a suc¬ 
 cessful issue the negotiations I have empowered him to carry 
 on with your Majesty’s Government.” We trust the Jewish 
 envoy may have realised the expectations raised by his abilities 
 
174 
 
 SWEDEN AND THE JEWS . 
 
 and integrity. Certain it is that the Emperors of Morocco 
 felt themselves justified in again confiding the representa¬ 
 tion of their empire, at the Court of St James’s, to Hebrew 
 ministers, which they did on two subsequent occasions. In 
 1794 the Jew Sumbal came to London, charged with a 
 special mission to the King; and subsequently in 1827 Meir 
 Cohen Macnin visited the same capital as the envoy of the 
 Emperor Muley Abdelrrahman. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER XXII, 
 
 CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES — THE JEWS OF PORTUGAL — 
 JEWISH OFFENDERS — THE JEWS AND THE LORD 
 MA YOR. 
 
 A similar fate is shared by families, by communities, by 
 empires. When the highest pinnacle of prosperity is attained, 
 and after a longer or shorter interval, a period of decay 
 begins more or less visibly, and continues steadily if slowly. 
 There are few instances on record of families retaining great 
 wealth for a whole century, unless such wealth be invested 
 in land. That is why all those who wish to found a family 
 eagerly purchase landed estates, and probably that is why so 
 little of the riches held by Jews during last century has 
 been preserved by their successors of the present day. The 
 Jews, as is well known, being debarred from owning broad 
 acres, invested their capital in mercantile or financial opera¬ 
 tions. The exciting speculations of Change Alley offered a 
 great temptation to the quick-witted Israelites who flocked 
 thither from ail parts of Europe. Jonathan’s was thronged 
 with Jewish jobbers, and the neighbouring alleys were 
 crowded with Jewfish beggars who sped thither to solicit 
 alms from their richer brethren. Many Jews realised large 
 fortunes; few retained them beyond one or two generations. 
 When any commercial disaster happened, the Jews became 
 considerable sufferers, as in the case of the failure of the 
 Dutch East India Company. That the Spanish and Portu¬ 
 guese Jews of London sustained heavy loss on the occasion 
 is apparent from various reasons. Xot the least important 
 of these is that at this period—between 1770 and 1780—the 
 finances of the Synagogue were not in so flourishing a condi¬ 
 tion as was their wont. For the first time for many years 
 we hear of a deficit in the annual estimates, and retrench- 
 
176 
 
 CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES. 
 
 ment became the cry of the day. The allowances made to 
 various charities were diminished; the distribution of medi¬ 
 cine and other relief to the poor, which had led to many 
 abuses, was subjected to stringent regulations ; other expenses 
 were cut down; and the legacy fund being completed to 
 £16,000, all further legacies w T ere merged in the Zedaka or 
 poor fund. Numerous members were in arrears to the Syna¬ 
 gogue, which clearly points out a general cause affecting 
 many congregants. The evil, however, was far from being 
 irreparable, and a few years subsequently the congregation 
 was once more in a position to make generous grants to their 
 necessitous brethren abroad. But the palmiest days of the 
 Portuguese commmunity were certainly over; and their co¬ 
 religionists of German extraction were fast approaching them 
 in the race in which they subsequently so completely out¬ 
 stripped them. It is a remarkable and curious fact that in 
 the year 1873, the Bevis Marks Synagogue could boast of no 
 more members than it counted in 1773 ; and that the quantity 
 of Passover cakes distributed to the poor at both periods was 
 precisely identical. Statistics it is said may be made to 
 prove anything; but we question whether in this instance 
 they can be made to prove that the Sephardi congregation is 
 more numerous or wealthier at present than it was a hundred 
 years ago. It would require much time and space to endeavour 
 to trace why one of the two communities of Jews existing in 
 London a century since, should have remained stationary or 
 nearly so, whilst the other should have increased tenfold. 
 We must of course allow for the natural difference in growth 
 between the Spanish and Portuguese Jews, the fresh supply 
 of whom from abroad was, if not exhausted, at all events 
 very restricted, owing to the original source being nearly 
 dry; and the German congregations which could draw a 
 practically inexhaustible supply of fresh blood, from the 
 millions of their co-religionists vegetating in poverty and 
 ignorance in the crowded Ghettos of German cities, or in the 
 wild plains of Poland. But one source of the stagnation is 
 so obvious and palpable, that we cannot refrain from record¬ 
 ing it. It is the numerous desertions that have occurred 
 from the ranks of the Sephardi community, that are at the 
 root of the diminished importance of their ancient congrega- 
 
CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES. 177 
 
 tion. It is to those who lapsed from the old path of Israel, 
 an who forsook the old faith for the new dispensation ; to 
 lose who sold their spiritual privileges for a mess of pot¬ 
 tage; to those who deserted the Bevis Marks Synagogue 
 and set up a new code of laws, substituting the ordinances 
 of their wise men to the ordinances of the wise men of Israel; 
 to those who were neither Jews nor Christians, and whose 
 religion was their convenience, and whose God was mammon ; 
 it is to all these that the Portuguese Jews of London owe 
 their decline from their former greatness. Neither on the 
 other hand can we acquit from blame those who, embued 
 with a narrow mind and an unyielding intolerant spirit, 
 re. used to make the slightest concession, and who deter¬ 
 mined, by harsh and ill-judged measures, the departure of 
 some of their brethren from the House of Israel. 
 
 The Portuguese Jews once enjoyed decided advantages 
 over their co-religionists of German extraction in other 
 places in addition to London. Nevertheless the latter, over¬ 
 weighted as they were in the race, by their superior industry, 
 energy, and enterprise, everywhere reached to the front. It 
 may not be generally known that during last century 
 Israelites of Spanish and Portuguese origin enjoyed in Paris 
 the especial privilege of being admitted to that city without 
 a passport, a privilege denied to German Jews, who, on the 
 contiaiy, weie subject to very strict police supervision. 
 Henry II. had granted letters patent in the year 1550 in 
 favour of the Portuguese Jews; and these letters had been 
 renewed from king to king. For some years this immunity 
 lad not been claimed by the Sephardi Jews, possibly through 
 their, ignorance of it. But in December 1777, M. Jacob 
 otnguez Pereire of Paris wrote to the authorities of Bevis 
 Marks, to remind them of the charter granted by his most 
 Christian Majesty to their nationality, and to hand them a 
 copy, of the regulations referring thereto. Jacob Bodriguez 
 eieire, we may add, was the well-known teacher of the deaf 
 and dumb, and the grandfather of M. Emile and M. Isaac 
 eiene. At the same time M. Pereire informed them that 
 a ceiti cate signed by seven of the Elders of the congrega¬ 
 tion would entitle the bearer to enter the capital of France 
 an to well therein without any other papers, and without 
 
 M 
 
CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES. 
 
 178 
 
 any fear of molestation by tlie police. IVhat a blessing such 
 a boon would have proved even within the recollection of the 
 present generation! 
 
 Even so late as this period the hanks of the Tagus were 
 not free from the presence of the “ Judeo,” who still dwelt 
 in disguise on the soil of Lusitania. It is an ascertained 
 fact that a number of families—how many it is impossible 
 to tell—under the guise of devout Catholics, secretly wor¬ 
 shipped in Portugal the God of Israel. From time to time 
 one of these families succeeded in making their safe escape 
 to a land, where the fact of their being members of a race 
 which produced the founder of Christianity, was not deemed 
 sufficient cause to ensure their being broken on the rack or 
 their being roasted at the stake. A curious case is related, 
 in which the timely intervention of the Wardens of the Bevis 
 Marks Synagogue prevented the discovery of a family of 
 hidden Jews in Portugal, and the almost inevitable fate 
 that would have been their doom. A certain Isiaelite 
 who had himself escaped from Portugal, and who adopted 
 the name of James de Lemos, had a claim against a co¬ 
 religionist described as Antonio Suarez de Mendoza, of 
 Lisbon. Antonio Suarez, it appears, demurred in satisfying 
 the demands of James de Lemos, if he did not altogether 
 decline to acquit them. Whereupon the latter wrote to 
 the former threatening that were he driven to despair by 
 the continued non-payment of the sum owing to him, he 
 would denounce the true faith of the latter to the Inquisi¬ 
 tion. The Wardens by some means heard of the menace 
 held forth against a co-religionist, and ordered De Lemos to 
 hand over to the Mohamad all the papers in his possession 
 incriminating Antonio Suarez de Mendoza—that is, advert¬ 
 ing in any manner to his religion. At first De Lemos 
 refused to obey; then fourteen days were allowed to him 
 wherein to comply. At the last moment he reluctantly gave 
 up to one of the religious officials of the congregation the 
 dangerous writings that might have consigned to ruin a 
 Jewish family. These documents were retained by the 
 Synagogue authorities for some months, and then they were 
 returned to the owner under promise that he would never 
 commit the rash act that once had been in his thoughts. 
 
CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES. 
 
 179 
 
 Poor De Lemos, who probably bad never seriously contem¬ 
 plated betraying a co-religionist, does not seem to have 
 recovered the sum be claimed, and eventually he fell into 
 want, and bad to be assisted by the Synagogue. Among 
 wonderful escapes from the Iberian Peuinsula, we must not 
 fail to mention that of a boy only seven years old who fled 
 from Gibraltar in the year 1777 because bis liberty of con¬ 
 science was endangered! The boy, or child rather, bid 
 himself on board a ship about to sail for the Thames, and 
 succeeded in finding bis way to Bevis Marks. The story of 
 Moses de Paz—for so the young fugitive was called—was 
 very extraordinary. His family, to save their lives, bad 
 embraced Christianity, but he, child as he was, rather than 
 forsake the creed of his fathers, had found strength and 
 courage enough in his little heart to flee from those he 
 loved and to face unknown perils. Of course the youthful 
 hero was taken by the hand by the Wardens of the Syna¬ 
 gogue, and for several years he was maintained and educated 
 at the public expense. Whether he showed subsequently 
 any gratitude for the benefits he received from the con¬ 
 gregation we are unable to say; but it was not at all un¬ 
 common for individuals who had received help from the poor 
 fund, to restore in after years to the community the sums 
 that had been allotted to them from that source. At one 
 time a certain person remitted more than £80 to cover charity 
 distributed to his late father; another returned £50 which 
 he reckoned had been expended on his mother; and a third 
 personage forwarded back upward of £150 which he calculated 
 his parents had cost the congregation. This gentleman rose 
 to be a Warden of the Synagogue, and his name was, until 
 recently, borne by his descendants in the community. These 
 restitutions, which were necessarily effected by men who had 
 risen from a lowly condition, were always offered in a thank¬ 
 ful manner, and always accepted in a kindly spirit. 
 
 During the second half of the eighteenth century, the 
 general position of the Jews in the country showed no signs 
 of improvement. They were still debarred from political 
 and civil rights; still the objects of social prejudices ; still 
 fettered by commercial restrictions. The privilege of being 
 one of the twelve Jewish brokers, which was the only number 
 
i8o CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES. 
 
 allowed, was eagerly sought for, and it was always purchased 
 by a liberal gratuity to the Lord Mayor. The sums paid on 
 these occasions usually varied according to the elasticity of 
 conscience, or to the wants of the u King of the City, and 
 £2000 was frequently given by an aspiring Hebrew to be 
 enrolled among the fortunate twelve. It is related that in 
 the year 1774, when John Wilkes was Lord Mayor, one of 
 the Jewish brokers happened to be lingering for some time 
 on the point of death. That greediest and most extravagant 
 of patriots began to speculate on the advantages to be 
 derived from the occurrence. A rumour that Wilkes had 
 expressed a wish for the speedy death of the Jew soon 
 spread, and quickly reached ’Change Alley. The indignant 
 son of the broker rushed to the presence of his Lordship to 
 upbraid him for his unfeeling conduct. 66 My dear fellow,” 
 replied Wilkes, 66 you are mistaken ; I would rather witness 
 the death of all the other Jew brokers than that of your 
 father.” It must be admitted that if there was little in¬ 
 dulgence displayed toward the Jews, they were nearly 
 always treated with strict justice. A curious instance of 
 this will be perceived in the fact that in 1776, a woman who 
 kept a public-house was charged at the Westminster police 
 office with assaulting a Jew and greasing his chin with pork, 
 for which offence the defendant was condemned to pay a fine 
 of £10 for damages. 
 
 The Jews, though occasionally accused of petty offences, 
 seldom rendered themselves amenable to the laws of their 
 country for serious crimes. Jews have rarely been guilty of 
 deeds of violence. One of the very few instances in which 
 they are known to have spilled ihuman blood occurred in 
 1771, when four Polish or German Jews were convicted of 
 robbing the house of Mrs Hutchins at Chelsea and killing a 
 man-servant, and were sentenced to death. A journal of 
 the day relates that u The Kecorder prefaced the sentence 
 with a just and judicious compliment to the principal Jews, 
 for their very laudable conduct in the course of this prosecu¬ 
 tion, and trusted no person would ignorantly stigmatise a 
 whole nation for the villanies of a few, to bring whom to 
 justice they had done everything they consistently could.” 
 It is to be hoped that the audience profited by the liberality 
 
CONGREGA TIONAL CHANGES. 
 
 181 
 
 of the words of the judge, who displayed at the same time 
 charity and knowledge of human nature. The Jews were 
 ordinarily very well behaved and orderly, but it was not sur¬ 
 prising that among the arrivals from foreign Ghettos, some 
 black sheep—such as exist in every community—should be 
 found. On the Sabbath prior to the execution, an anathema 
 (Herem) was pronounced at the Synagogue in Duke’s Place 
 against the criminals. The sentence was carried out at 
 Tyburn on the 9th December 1771. 
 
 The Synagogue authorities of the Portuguese Congregation 
 usually carefully avoided any conflict with the constituted 
 authorities of the country. But of course there were excep¬ 
 tions. Hence, in the year 1772, a warrant was issued by 
 the Lord Mayor to constrain the Portuguese community to 
 maintain an individual named Uzily. This fellow, who was 
 an incorrigible vagabond, had been refused relief by his own 
 people, and he rendered at the Mansion House an exaggerated 
 account of the privations he was enduring through the hard¬ 
 heartedness of the Jews. The Makamad declined to obey the 
 mandate of the Lord Mayor, and at once submitted a case to 
 leading counsel. The important points on which legal opinion 
 was solicited were the following:—1st. Whether the Jews were 
 compelled to maintain their poor? 2d. Whether the Lord 
 Mayor had any jurisdiction in the matter? 3d. Whether the 
 parish could constrain the Jews to pay for the support of their 
 paupers ? All these points were answered in a manner abso¬ 
 lutely favourable to the Synagogue authorities, and so high an 
 authority as Mr Attorney-General Thnrlow, who afterwards be¬ 
 came the celebrated Lord Chancellor Thurlow, expressed him¬ 
 self thus on the question. u I am of opinion that the poor 
 of whatever nation or religion must be maintained by the 
 officers of the parish, where they are found, and that no other 
 person is compellable to relieve them, except under especial 
 circumstances, which make no part of this case.” This view 
 was also supported by another eminent authority, Mr Dunning 
 the late Solicitor General, who stated u That the people of 
 the Jewish nation have time out of mind had a Synagogue 
 in the Parish of St Botolph, and paid a poor rate of £30 per 
 annum, and that the Wardens or Elders of the Synagogue 
 were by no means whatsoever compelled to maintain their 
 
182 
 
 CONGREGATIONAL CHANGES. 
 
 poor.” These opinions, however important they may have 
 proved to the Jews at large, did not satisfy Uzily, for that 
 enterprising individual once more summoned the Wardens 
 before the Lord Mayor. That magistrate at once dismissed 
 the case, but he recommended to the attorney representing 
 the defendants to assist the plaintiff, if his clients could con¬ 
 scientiously do so. Eventually Uzily became penitent and 
 submissive, and having publicly entreated to be pardoned 
 by the Mahamad , he was placed on the roll of the Zedaka or 
 poor fund. 
 
 Then again in 1777, the vestry clerk of Cree Church 
 summoned the Wardens of the Synagogue for the payment 
 of church rates. The claim was resisted. The Wardens 
 appeared before the Yestrv, accompanied by Mr Constable, 
 their u man of letters ” or attorney, and pleaded exemption. 
 The Wardens exhibited strong opinions in their favour from 
 several leading counsel, and at the request of the Vestry the 
 former undertook to forward to the Vestry copies thereof for 
 their consideration. The case of the Synagogue appeared to 
 be good as against the Church, for no more seems to have 
 been heard of the matter. The Jews had occasion not un- 
 frequently to attend the Lord Mayor’s Court; and as an 
 acknowledgment of the patient hearing bestowed on their 
 cases, and perhaps as a sense of gratitude for favours to come, 
 the Portuguese Congregation were wont to present to the 
 first magistrate of the city an annual gift of fifty guineas. 
 This practice was continued till 1780, when, owing to the 
 unfavourable condition of the finances of the Svna£ 0 £ue, the 
 last deputation that waited upon his Lordship for that pur¬ 
 pose, politely intimated to him the inability of their con¬ 
 stituents to keep up the time-honoured custom after that 
 year. 
 
CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 A NOBLE PROSELYTE . 
 
 On the 6tli and 7th of June 1780, London was at the 
 mercy of a mob roused by religious fanaticism and maddened 
 by fiery liquors. Calamitous scenes of conflagration, plunder 
 and slaughter were being enacted, accompanied by frantic 
 cries of “ Xo Popery,” “ Repeal the Bill,” “ Lord George 
 Gordon.” The prisons of Newgate and Clerkenwell were 
 broken open, and all the prisoners therein confined let loose 
 upon society. To pillage, to burn, to drink, to ravage, ap¬ 
 peared to be the aims of the drunken representatives of 
 the Protestant interest. Many houses were destroyed, among 
 which were the residences of Sir John Fielding, the magistrate, 
 and Lord Mansfield, with all their valuable furniture, paintings 
 and papers. Catholic chapels were razed to the ground, and 
 persons of that faith were in fears for their lives. Mr Lang- 
 dale, a Papist and distiller, saw his premises set on fire 
 whilst his stock was running in the gutters, and many of the 
 rioters literally drowned themselves in gin. Members of both 
 houses of parliament were personally ill-used, their carriages 
 were stopped, they were constrained to alight amid the jeers 
 and gibes of the mob, and they had to seek safety in flight. 
 The loss of property was enormous, and at one period there 
 were no fewer than thirty-seven conflagrations casting lam¬ 
 bent flames towards the lurid sky. At last the government 
 resolved to take energetic measures to restore peace and 
 order in the capital. Troops had been summoned from the 
 country, and magistrates were found to perform their duty. 
 The night of Wednesday, the 7th June, presented a terrific 
 sight. Crowds of ruffians, armed with sledge hammers and 
 bludgeons and infuriated by gin, threw themselves on the 
 
184 
 
 A NOBLE PROSELYTE . 
 
 gates of the Bank of England, to be shot down by the mus¬ 
 kets of the soldiery. The gleam of distant fires, the cries 
 of the countless rabble, the groans of the wounded and 
 dying, the roar of the volleys of musketry, rendered the scene 
 dreadful and never to be forgotten. The mob was every¬ 
 where defeated, with considerable slaughter. On the follow¬ 
 ing morning London presented the appearance of a city 
 stormed and sacked. Several partial riots again occurred on 
 that day, but the rioters were easily dispersed by the military. 
 On the same day the cause of all this evil, the ill-advised 
 author of all this mischief, Lord George Gordon, was ar¬ 
 rested in his house in Welbeck Street; and after being 
 conducted to the Horse Guards, he was taken in the evening 
 to the Tower, under the strongest escort then ever known to 
 attend political prisoners. 
 
 A detailed account of the origin of the u Ho Popery Biots” 
 would here be out of place, and doubtless our readers need 
 no repetition of their history. Suffice it to say that Lord 
 George Gordon had been elected President of the Protestant 
 Association, a society established in Edinburgh with ramifi¬ 
 cations in all parts of England, and having for its object 
 the protection of Protestant interests which were supposed 
 to be in jeopardy; that Lord George Gordon determined to 
 present a petition to the legislature for the repeal of an act 
 passed in 1778 for relieving the Boman Catholics from some 
 of the heavier penalties inflicted upon them formerly; that 
 he headed a threatening procession of 60,000 petitioners to im¬ 
 pose the will of the mob on parliament; that his inflammatory 
 discourses aroused the passions of the multitude; that gradu¬ 
 ally many of the real Protestants who had the interests of 
 the Church at heart, drew back, whilst the elements of dis¬ 
 order came forward: and finally, that notwithstanding the 
 disavowal of the riots, printed, published, and circulated by 
 Lord George Gordon, the thirst for plunder and bloodshed 
 having been fairly excited in King Mob, the negligence or 
 mistaken leniency of the government had led to the disas¬ 
 trous spectacles we have already adverted to. Lord George 
 Gordon was brought up for trial by writ of Habeas Corpus 
 on the 24th January 1781. He was charged before Lord 
 Mansfield with levying war against the King in his realms. 
 
A NOBLE PROSELYTE. 
 
 i 85 
 
 The trial lasted several days and did not conclude until the 
 6th of February. The prisoner’s counsel pleaded insanity, 
 which plea was not exactly admitted by the jury, who never¬ 
 theless acquitted him on the score that his offence did not 
 amount to high treason. 
 
 Much has been written on the question of Lord George 
 Gordon’s mental condition. As a member of the House of 
 Commons, his extraordinary interruptions and unaccountable 
 manner had afforded scope for comment; albeit his singu¬ 
 larities in dress and appearance had furnished subjects rather 
 for pleasantry than for serious apprehension. 
 
 Hume gravely asserts in his History of England, that this 
 nobleman gave afterwards undoubted proofs of insanity by 
 turning Jew. How for a Christian to become a Jew con¬ 
 stitutes pev se no greater proof of madness than for a Jew 
 to become a Christian. The border land between sanity and 
 insanity is easily crossed over, and few can say where the 
 exact limit lies that separates the two conditions of mind. 
 Lord George Gordon was a religious enthusiast whose brain 
 had been attuned to a dangerously high key. To take refuge 
 from the doubts of one religion, divided within itself and full 
 of uncertainties, to the bosom of another religion which is 
 simple and homogeneous, might be considered by reflective 
 minds rather a proof of wisdom than of folly. Conversions 
 from the faith of the land to another faith, whose principal 
 merit consists, or rather consisted, in its uniformity, have 
 been justified on similar grounds, and as we think with less 
 reason. 
 
 Lord George Gordon rigorously underwent all the rites 
 imposed upon proselytes before he was admitted within the 
 pale of Judaism. He was received into the Covenant of 
 Abraham in the city of Birmingham, under the agency of 
 Rabbi Jacob of Birmingham. Subsequently he returned to 
 London ; and having meanwhile acquired some knowledge of 
 the Hebrew language and of Jewish ceremonies, he attended 
 the Hambro Synagogue. He was there called to the Law 
 and honoured with a Meshaharach (benediction) when he 
 offered £100 to the Synagogue. Lord George with the rest¬ 
 lessness that characterised him, proceeded after this to Paris, 
 where he recklessly cast serious accusations against person- 
 
i86 
 
 A NOBLE PROSELYTE. 
 
 ages in high positions. Subsequently new proceedings were 
 taken against him, first at the instance of Mons. Barthelemy, 
 the French Charge d’ Affaires, for a libellous publication 
 against the Queen of France in connection with Count Cag- 
 liostro; and secondly, at the suit of the Attorney-General, 
 for a libel entitled the “ Prisoner’s Petition,” reflecting on 
 the administration of justice in this country. He was tried 
 in the Court of Queen’s Bench before Justice Buller, and 
 found guilty on both counts. Judgment was reserved, and 
 the prisoner being allowed to remain at large, he proceeded 
 to Holland. Thence he went to Birmingham, where he lived 
 as a Jew until he was apprehended in December 1787, at 
 the house of an Israelite. When Justice Asliurst pronounced 
 judgment, he passed severe strictures on the prisoner whom 
 the judge 66 wished had made a better use of his reading the 
 Bible, and had not used the Scripture style for the wicked 
 purpose of promoting mutiny and sedition, and of under¬ 
 mining the laws of his country.” The sentence of the court 
 was very heavy. The prisoner was condemned to three years’ 
 imprisonment in Newgate for the 66 Prisoner’s Petition,” and 
 to two years imprisonment and a fine of £500 for the libel 
 on the Queen of France; and further at the expiration of 
 his time, he was ordered to enter into a bond for £10,000 
 to keep the peace, and to find two sureties for £2500 each. 
 
 Notwithstanding the weight of the condemnation, Lord 
 George Gordon did not appear to modify his religious views. 
 He remained as irrepressible as ever ; from his prison he sent 
 forth handbills full of Scriptural quotations to be distributed; 
 and he applied texts from Scripture to the state of the King. 
 This greatly exasperated the prison authorities, and the 
 Governor threatened him with removal to a worse cell if he 
 did not alter his conduct; so the circulation of the hand¬ 
 bills had to be stopped. 
 
 This singular proselyte was very regular in his Jewish 
 observances in prison. Every morning he was seen with 
 phylacteries between his eyes and opposite to his heart; 
 every Saturday he held public service in his room with the 
 aid of ten Polish Jews. His Saturday’s bread was baked 
 more Judaico ; he ate Jewish meat; he drank Jewish wine. 
 On his prison wall were inscribed the ten commandments ; 
 
A NOBLE PROSELYTE. 
 
 187 
 
 by their side hung a bag containing his Talith and his phy¬ 
 lacteries. How the gloomy years of imprisonment passed, 
 Heaven knows ! It must have been a long and dreary time 
 for the prisoner, and only the belief that he was suffering a 
 political and religious martyrdom could have given him the 
 
 strength of living through it. 
 
 At last, on the 18th January 1793, the prisoner’s sen¬ 
 tence had expired; but before he could obtain his freedom 
 he had to satisfy the court as to his future good behaviour. 
 He entered the court, accompanied by his keeper and by 
 several foreign Jews, two of whom were to be bail for him. 
 Lord George Gordon wore a huge patriarchal beard, and 
 carried a large slouched hat on his head. He was ordered 
 to uncover his head, which he declined to do. The crier took 
 off the large slouched hat, whereupon the prisoner desired 
 the court to observe that his hat had been removed by 
 violence. He then deliberately drew from his pocket a 
 white cap, which he placed upon his head, tying a handker¬ 
 chief around it. After this he produced a document which 
 he laid before the court, which he said was his petition. At 
 the same time he apologised for appearing with his head 
 covered agreeably to the custom of the Jews. He meant no 
 disrespect to the court, but his conduct arose from tender¬ 
 ness of conscience, since he had entered into the u holy 
 covenant of circumcision.” The petition was read by the 
 officers of the court, and a great portion of it consisted of 
 arguments drawn from Jewish sources in favour of appear¬ 
 ing covered before all men. Lord George Gordon then 
 entered into some details with respect to his fortune, from 
 which it - results that he possessed an annuity of £500 a year, 
 and that his brother, the Duke of Gordon, had advanced 
 him £500 to pay his fine. In conclusion he furnished the 
 names of two Polish Jews who had agreed to become bail 
 for him. Unfortunately for the petitioner these men were 
 penniless, and could not be held responsible for any one. 
 The Attorney-General objected to them, and an affidavit was 
 read of their incompetence. So Lord George Gordon had to 
 return to his prison cell. He did not long survive this 
 disappointment. No doubt his position preyed upon his 
 mind ; he was attacked by fever, and died in November 1 < 93 ; 
 
i8S 
 
 A NOBLE PROSELYTE, 
 
 at the age of forty-three. He had studied literature in his early 
 days, and in his varied political writings his arguments were 
 usually sound; his language was animated, his diction cor¬ 
 rect and classical, and occasionally he showed flashes of 
 genuine humour. Personally he is said to have been ex¬ 
 ceedingly amiable, notwithstanding the libellous publications 
 he issued; and his conduct to his fellow-prisoners was very 
 humane and even beneficent. A contemporary periodical 
 says that u his last moments were embittered by the know¬ 
 ledge that he could not be buried among the Jews, to whose 
 religion he was warmly attached.” Lord George Gordon, 
 we must add, does not lie in a Jewish u House of Life,” as 
 a Jewish cemetery is called ; he was interred in St James’ 
 burial-ground in the Hampstead Road. 
 
 The Christian writer, whose words we quote above, pro¬ 
 bably thought with many others, how little the Jews had 
 done for one who had become a zealous convert to their 
 faith. But it was not callousness that caused the Jews with 
 all their wealth to allow Lord George Gordon to perish in 
 prison for want of two miserable bail. We have already 
 observed the unwillingness of Jews to receive proselytes. 
 This to a great extent arose from some real or fancied en¬ 
 gagement contracted by the early Jewish immigrants at the 
 time of Cromwell or of Charles IT., when they settled in 
 this country. The Jews invariably discouraged proselytes, 
 in proof of which we will cite one instance of many we 
 could record. We will premise that the Portuguese Jews 
 then formed the leading congregation in this country, and 
 that the Germans usually followed the example of the senior 
 Synagogue. A certain Luis da Costa, a native of Portugal, 
 appeared in 1789 before the Wardens of the Bevis Marks 
 Synagogue, stating that he was desirous of being admitted 
 to the Covenant of Abraham; that he had sailed in a ship from 
 Bordeaux to Amsterdam for that purpose; that the vessel had 
 been wrecked off Dover, and he begged to be dispatched to 
 Amsterdam to fulfil the longings of his heart. The Wardens 
 of the Portuguese Congregation did not deem fit to comply 
 with this request, on the ground that they were not sure 
 his ancestors had belonged to Israel. How much stronger 
 would the same reasons have militated against the reception 
 
A NOBLE PROSELYTE. 
 
 189 
 
 into Judaism of Lord George Gordon ! We also must take 
 into consideration motives of worldly prudence, for the con¬ 
 version to Judaism of an English nobleman, the brother of 
 an English duke, if openly abetted and avowed by the Jews, 
 might have aroused popular vengeance against that race, and 
 cries of “ No Judaism ” might have proved as disastrous 
 to those against whom they were directed as cries of “ No 
 Popery ” had been to the Catholics. 
 
CHAPTER XXIY. 
 
 A NEW IMMIGRATION—ECCLESIASTICAL LOSSES AND OFFICIAL 
 CHANGES- CEME TERIES AND B OD Y-SNA TCHING. 
 
 Though the position of the Jews in England was not in itself 
 especially brilliant or enviable, Great Britain was to the 
 Jewish race a very Garden of Eden as compared with many 
 other countries. What if they possessed neither civil nor 
 political rights; if they were usually regarded by the mass 
 of the population with a mixture of contempt, suspicion and 
 aversion; if they had to endure slights and rebuffs with 
 smiling lip and cringing step ! At least they enjoyed under 
 the British flag a certain amount of material prosperity. 
 Their lives and limbs and property were safe; and above all 
 they were permitted openly to follow the practices of their 
 religion and to worship the Lord of their forefathers. 
 
 Painful evidence of the perils incurred by the Jews abroad 
 was given in June 1781. One day the Portuguese Congrega¬ 
 tion received news from the Jews of Portsmouth of the 
 arrival of a number of destitute families. The siege of Gib¬ 
 raltar was raging at that period, and though one of the Royal 
 Princes of France was exchanging polite notes with Gen. 
 Elliott, the English commander, and the besieger had chival¬ 
 rously forwarded to the chief of the besieged, presents of game 
 and fruits, the ill-starred Jews had suffered severely. Hap¬ 
 pily many families succeeded in effecting their escape, and 
 reaching some neutral ships. Of the hair-breadth escapes 
 and romantic adventures encountered by the fugitive Jews 
 much has been said, and it is difficult in these traditional 
 tales to separate actual facts from legendary amplifications. 
 It is traditionally recorded that a ship containing some 
 Hebrew families was captured by an armed privateer, that 
 the Jews found themselves cast on the shores of Ireland 
 utterly wanting the common necessaries of life; that the 
 
A NEW IMMIGRATION. 
 
 191 
 
 Irish gave the Jews a warm and hospitable reception, and 
 provided them with all they needed; that some Roman 
 Catholic priests most strenuously helped the hapless Israelites 
 by word and deed, contributing by their influence and example 
 to the generous treatment of the scarcely welcome strangers; 
 and that the Jews, after being liberally supplied with food 
 and raiment, were assisted on to London by different routes. 
 The Jews of Portsmouth were under some obligation to the 
 Bevis Marks Synagogue, which had granted them shortly 
 before £50 to aid them in building a new house of prayer. 
 The Jews of Portsmouth, perhaps inspired by gratitude, 
 treated the immigrants from Gibraltar with great kindness, 
 and furnished them with sufficient funds to enable them to 
 reach London. The Scrolls of the Law had been saved from 
 the two Synagogues of the beleaguered fortress, to the great 
 personal risk of the devout Jews, who had to cross some open 
 spaces exposed to the fiery globes hurled against the impreg¬ 
 nable rock, in the midst of a severe bombardment. 
 
 Among the names of the refugees we find those of Ben 
 Oliel, Ben Susan, Almosnino, and others, since well and 
 honourably known in the Portuguese Community. Haham 
 Almosnino was the Chief Rabbi of Gibraltar. In London he 
 was regarded with great consideration for his learning and 
 piety; and his descendants became zealous, efficient, and 
 respected officers of the congregation. 
 
 As time elapses, the laws and regulations of every com¬ 
 munity need remodelling, or at least modifying, according to 
 the requirements of the period. In 1783 a committee was 
 appointed to consider what alterations might be advisable in 
 the Askamoth or Laws of the Portuguese Congregation, and 
 a report, suggesting a number of amendments, was presented 
 to the Elders in the spring of 1784. The proposed amend¬ 
 ments were discussed seriatim, and many slight modifications 
 were introduced in the regulations governing the Congrega¬ 
 tion. But the fundamental laws remained untouched. The 
 unity of the Synagogue was strongly insisted upon, and only 
 a majority of two-thirds of the Yehidim, or members, were 
 allowed to order the erection of another Portuguese house of 
 prayer. Stringent provisions again were made for raising 
 the necessary funds, the former system of finta , or tax, and 
 
192 
 
 A NEW IMMIGRATION. 
 
 an impost or per centage on business carried out on commis¬ 
 sion, being retained. The powers of the Elders were some¬ 
 what enlarged, and when each member of the congregation 
 attained to the dignity of elder, he was required to take a 
 solemn oath before the doors of the Ark, where are deposited 
 the Scrolls of the Pentateuch, to administer the laws of the 
 congregation fairly and impartially, without fear and without 
 favour, and to respect the usages of the community. We 
 have more than once adverted to the objects of these laws, 
 which were promulgated at a time when the fortunes of Israel 
 were in a precarious state, and when stringent enactments 
 became necessarily conservative measures. We are bound to 
 state that these ordinances were not always kept in consonance 
 with the spirit of the times, and that altered circumstances 
 and the march of events were taken too little into account 
 in the re-constitution of such laws. 
 
 It will be seen that the constitution of the Portuguese 
 Jews, like that of the German Jews, was a pure oligarchy, 
 the real power resting in the Elders, while the Wardens w T ere 
 little more than an administrative body. Of late years, 
 however, wdth the spread of popular ideas, the Elders have of 
 their own accord resigned some of their functions to the 
 members of the congregation. The principle of popular 
 election has been recognised in most institutions in this 
 country, and it has been admitted in the Synagogue. The 
 Spanish and Portuguese Jews, one of the most conservative 
 bodies in England, have vested the appointment of their 
 Wardens and treasurer in the hands of the members, and as 
 these officials become ipso facto Elders of the Synagogue, it 
 necessarily follows that the ratepayers practically become the 
 constituents of the Elders. Among the German Jews, also, 
 the members choose their own honorary officials; and at 
 present the majority of contributors to a Synagogue may 
 exercise a fair share of influence directly or indirectly in its 
 government. 
 
 At one period the Portuguese Synagogue was deprived by 
 death of several of its religious officials, who died within a 
 few months of each other. The first to depart was Haham 
 Moses Cohen de Azevedo, much respected for his piety and 
 esteemed for his humility and modesty; qualities not always 
 
A NEW IMMIGRATION. 
 
 *93 
 
 to be perceived in ecclesiastical authorities. His death 
 occurred in September 1784. Haham de Azevedo had desired 
 to be interred at the cost of his family, who were prepared to 
 incur the outlay, albeit the very moderate stipend which the 
 deceased had received had prevented him from making any 
 provision for his wife and children. But the Elders decided 
 that the funeral of their late spiritual chief should be per¬ 
 formed at the public expense, and that all customary honours 
 should be paid to his memory. The last earthly remains of 
 the Haham were carried into the Synagogue, followed by the 
 Wardens, Elders, and members of the Beth Din, attired in 
 deep mourning. The Synagogue was lighted up by numerous 
 wax tapers, and solemn hymns were chaunted. The bier was 
 carried from the Synagogue to the hearse by the Wardens, 
 whilst the loud tones of the Shophar or ram’s horn resounded 
 far and wide. In the cemetery, again, mournful dirges were 
 intoned, with a prayer recited on the Day of Atonement 
 ( Vayabor ), and the coffin was carried from the mortuary hall 
 to its last resting place by the Wardens, accompanied by 
 rinffiim strains from the ram’s horn or cornet. Then a sermon 
 
 o O 
 
 was delivered in affecting accents, and during the Escaba or 
 prayer for the dead, the late Rabbi received the glowing and 
 hyperbolical titles customary on such occasions. The cere¬ 
 mony was most impressive and solemn, and the multitude 
 must have been greatly affected. On the 27th of the follow¬ 
 ing October died Haham I. Almosnino, of whom we have 
 already spoken. Though this gentleman held no recognised 
 place in the congregation, he appears to have been much 
 esteemed; his opinion was frequently sought on religious 
 questions, and he was treated with as much respect as if he 
 had been Haham, or ecclesiastical head, of the community. He 
 was followed on the 3rd of January 1785, by Israel David 
 de Crasto, who was a Minister and Dayan—member of the 
 ecclesiastical tribunal—and on the 26th January, by Rabbi 
 Benjamin Dias Lorenzo, another Dayan and a teacheri n the 
 schools. Public honours were paid to all these Hahamim, 
 who had been of unblemished lives, and suitable pensions 
 were granted to their widows. 
 
 In the year 1786 Elian Lopes Pereira, who had for some 
 years creditably filled the position of Secretary or u Chancel- 
 
 N 
 
194 
 
 A NEW IMMIGRATION. 
 
 lor”to the Congregation, resigned his functions. Elian Lopes 
 Pereira was descended from an ancient family, a member of 
 which had received the title of Baron d’Aguilar. Mr Lopes 
 Pereira, on his inheriting a considerable property from a 
 relative, wrote a graceful letter to the Wardens saying that 
 he no longer considered himself justified in accepting from 
 the Congregation emoluments that might be of more service 
 to another member. The “ ex-Chancellor ” became then an 
 honorary officer in his Synagogue, in due course serving the 
 offices of treasurer and Warden. It may be noted that Mr 
 Lopes Pereira was in 1788 a colleague in the Mahamad of 
 Mr Abraham Israel Picardo, the father of David Eicardo, 
 the financier and political economist, and grandfather of Mr 
 Eicardo, the Member for Stoke-upon-Trent. At his death, 
 Mr Lopes Pereira bequeathed a legacy of £200 to the Syna¬ 
 gogue, the interest of which was to be distributed on certain 
 occasions. This gentleman was succeeded as “ Chancellor ” 
 by Daniel de Castro, who faithfully discharged his trust in 
 the Congregation for many years. 
 
 Towards the end of last century, the Jews of London were 
 exposed to one source of anxiety, which happily their de¬ 
 scendants at this period do not experience. Body-snatcliing 
 was then practised to an alarming extent; the grave was 
 nightly made to give up its dead, and no sect and no place 
 were secure from the operations of miscreants who dragged 
 from their long rest the last remains of humanity, to convert 
 them into so many gold pieces. The Jews, who feel a great 
 veneration for the dead, took various measures against this 
 desecration. The Portuguese Jews, when they opened their 
 new burial ground, proposed a variety of schemes to ensure 
 safety to all that was left on earth of those they had loved. 
 First, it was designed to heighten the walls of the cemetery 
 and to protect the tombs by a kind of chernux de f rise . 
 These plans were dismissed as expensive and impracticable ; 
 and heavy stones weighing a ton each were placed over the 
 graves. At one time it was resolved to fill up the spaces 
 between the graves by blocks of stone equally heavy, and 
 lying close together, so that there should be no room to in¬ 
 troduce any power of leverage. Eventually the sacred con¬ 
 tents of the “ House of Life ” were entrusted to watchmen. 
 
A NEW IMMIGRATION. 
 
 195 
 
 Several persons, both Jews and Christians, were engaged for 
 this duty. A wooden house moving on wheels and resem¬ 
 bling a watch-tower was constructed, and thence a Jew and a 
 Christian were conjointly to perform night duties. The watch¬ 
 men were to be provided with a fireplace to warm themselves in 
 the long, dreary, winter nights, with a blunderbuss to frighten 
 away graveyard robbers, and bells to summon assistance. 
 Subsequently, in 1804, the watchman was ordered to call out 
 the time every half-hour. In the new cemetery, inaugurated 
 in 1786, no trees were to be planted near the walls, no 
 strangers were to be permitted to enter within the precincts 
 under any pretence whatsoever, and every morning each tomb 
 was to be examined separately to ascertain whether any 
 attempts had been made to tamper with it. It is said that 
 before these measures had been adopted, some coffins appeared 
 to have been disturbed in their places, and some bodies dis¬ 
 played marks of violence. When the practice of hasty burial 
 is taken into account, and the fact is considered that in 1779 
 the Portuguese authorities ordered that u to conform with the 
 customs of the country, no interment should take place until 
 twenty-four hours after death, unless on special grounds,” a 
 horrid cause for these appearances will at once suggest itself 
 to the mind of the reflecting reader. To speak more plainly, 
 the fearful consequences of premature burials, far more to be 
 dreaded than the acts of body-snatchers, seem to have been 
 wilfully ignored by the Jews of the 18th century. Who can 
 tell now how many victims were sacrificed at the shrine of an 
 antiquated, superstitious usage ! And how many wretched 
 beings may have perished in the agonies of suffocation, in 
 the injuries suffered in their desperate though vain attempts 
 to release themselves from their narrow and dreadful prison ! 
 
 Among the German congregations a strict watch was 
 established for the same purpose. A law was passed in 
 Duke’s Place Congregation to the effect that all members 
 between eighteen and seventy years of age should in rotation 
 perform the pious duty of protecting the dead, three members 
 acting together. They might, however, provide substitutes ; 
 and it is not unreasonable to suppose that, judging from the 
 ordinary standard of human nature, substitutes must have 
 been in great demand. 
 
CHAPTER XXY. 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 That in former times a certain number of Jews of intelli¬ 
 gence and note left the Synagogue for the Church, is a fact 
 which, however painful it may be to Jewish ears, must be 
 held to be historically true. Xo amount of ostrich-like 
 holding of heads in the sand, and closing of eyes to what is 
 palpable to the rest of the world, can alter stern reality. 
 Instead of evading a difficulty or endeavouring to pass it 
 over in silence, it is preferable to grasp it manfully, and to 
 discuss it calmly and impartially, employing reason instead 
 of prejudice, and logic instead of abuse. 
 
 The apparent process through which one form of religious 
 belief is gradually changed for another form of religious 
 belief, has perhaps never been more vividly described than 
 by an eminent Christian ecclesiastic in his u Apologia,” 
 which forms a substantial defence for his leaving the Estab¬ 
 lished Church in favour of the Church of Rome. We will 
 venture to say that when once the element of mystery is 
 admitted as forming part of a creed, and indeed its very 
 essence, reason ceases to exercise its functions, and the 
 human mind becomes ready to accept any dogma that would 
 not bear the process of ratiocination. Into the sincerity of 
 the converts from the Law of Moses to the dispensation of 
 Jesus of Xazareth, we will not undertake to inquire. A 
 man is only bound to answer to his Maker for his religious 
 creed, and no other man, be he rabbi or bishop, has a right 
 to call him to account on matters of faith. While we 
 decline, therefore, to examine this question from a theo¬ 
 logical point of view, we will lay before our readers a variety 
 of motives and circumstances of a purely temporal nature 
 that may account for these conversions from Judaism, and 
 
CONVERSIONS. 
 
 197 
 
 which motives must in any case have exercised a powerful 
 influence in causing such results. 
 
 By far the greatest number of these changes of creed, or 
 at all events of outward form of worship, were effected during 
 the last quarter of the eighteenth century, and the first 
 quarter of the present century. This is explicable from the 
 general position of the Jews in Great Britain during the 
 periods of transition. With the principal features of that 
 position we have already made our readers familiar. What 
 the authorities of the oldest Synagogue in London thought 
 on the subject we can ascertain from the document we shall 
 now bring forward. The Jews of Home had addressed a 
 communication to their brethren of Bevis Marks as to the 
 status of the latter in this country; and the following is a 
 translation of the reply forwarded to Messieurs Tranquillo 
 del Monte and Salomone Ambron of Borne, under date of 
 the 14th August 1787. “ The privileges of the Jews in this 
 
 country must not serve as a rule for their privileges in other 
 countries, as the government is very different. Where sove¬ 
 reigns are absolute, the Jews may enjoy advantages to a 
 greater or lesser extent; but in this kingdom, even if his 
 Majesty wished to favour them, he could not do so without 
 the consent of Parliament, consisting of more than 500 or 
 600 Nobles and Commons. This makes it very difficult to 
 obtain the privileges we need, and which would be very 
 useful to us. The only privileges enjoyed by our nation are 
 equal to all those enjoyed abroad, and these consist of the 
 free exercise of our religion, and the security of our property, 
 which any one may possess without fear of king or govern¬ 
 ment.” 
 
 The Jews of this period knew their position, and, we 
 believe, were not altogether discontented with it. Probably 
 the bulk of them thought little on the matter, or considered 
 it was the lot of Israel to suffer, and bore their fate with 
 resignation; or they contrasted their situation with that of 
 many of their brethren abroad, and were thankful. But in 
 all communities there are men of keen feelings, of restless 
 energy, of ambitious minds, and withal, of weak convictions. 
 To these individuals, the condition of a Jew entailed con¬ 
 tinual humiliations, disappointments, and miseries. To re- 
 
198 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 main on a dead level with those around them, hopeless of 
 ever soaring higher in the social sphere, must have proved 
 gall and wormwood to many Israelites in olden days. The 
 mart, the exchange, the Synagogue, the domestic circle, did 
 not suffice for their aspirations. Gold, always the pursuit 
 of gold ! And what availed their wealth when their sordid 
 occupations were crowned with success ? Their race, their 
 religion, were insurmountable barriers frowning down against 
 all hope of worldly advancement. The wealthy Jew was 
 unable to serve his country, for the Senate was to him a 
 dreamland altogether beyond his reach; the magistracy 
 would not be contaminated by his presence; all political, 
 civil, and municipal offices were strictly closed against him, 
 and even society looked at him askance, and wdtb some 
 occasional exceptions, kept him at arm’s length. Then 
 what could he do with his sons ? A university education 
 was as unattainable as if they had been Hottentots ; the 
 army would disdain to admit Israelites within its ranks; 
 the bar carefully excluded them; and a father could not 
 even with safety settle upon his children landed estates. 
 The only liberal profession they were permitted to follow was 
 that of medicine. When a proficiency in that art had been 
 acquired at great disadvantage, the usual difficulty stared 
 the Jewish physician in the face. The hospitals would not 
 open their wards to him; Christian patients would not con¬ 
 sult him; public offices were out of the question ; and 
 Jewish young men were driven to tender their services 
 gratuitously, or at a paltry pittance, to the authorities of 
 their own community, merely to practise their profession. 
 
 All these difficulties and restrictions arose from one cause, 
 one solitary cause, and one so easily removable ! A 
 tempting voice whispered a word into the ear of the Jew, 
 a word that contained a sovereign remedy against all his 
 vexations, all his heart-burnings. Baptism was the cure of 
 all his moral ailments. Baptism promised to the rich the 
 realisation of his ambitious dreams; place, honour, power, 
 social consideration;' to the poor it promised loaves and 
 fishes for the present, and sufficient provision for the future. 
 To both rich and poor it offered—precious boon—eternal 
 salvation ! Prosperity in this world; heaven in the next 
 
CONVERSIONS , 
 
 199 
 
 world. Assuredly a tempting bait. True, the gentlemen 
 who embraced this opportunity of satisfying their desires, or 
 their needs, most probably placed greater reliance on the 
 material than on the spiritual advantages to be gained by 
 their conversions ; still it was desirable to be able to tlnow 
 a sop to their conscience if it happened to cry out occa¬ 
 sionally. After all, what had they to renounce to win 
 these brilliant benefits ? It was easy to cast off the forms 
 of a religion that hung loosely enough around them; and 
 a long time had elapsed since they had prayed with heartfelt 
 fervour to the Lord of Israel. To break off early associa¬ 
 tions and memories, and feelings imbued with their mothers 
 milk, may have caused some pangs in the minds of the 
 Neophytes; and the word apostate has an ugly sound. 
 Sophistry may have offered a variety of excuses for their 
 conduct, and gratified desires go far towards allaying 
 scruples of conscience; but we do not envy theiv death-beds. 
 Many a convert during his lifetime has rested his aching 
 head on an uneasy couch of luxury. Some men are cast in 
 a delicate mould ; and when the strong passions that led 
 them away had calmed down, and the earthly prospects that 
 dazzled them had ceased to appear in so brilliant a light, 
 these men must have been painfully aroused by the still 
 small voice which rose reproachfully within their hearts. 
 Many a deserter from Judaism in his last moments would 
 have given all he possessed to have recalled that one step; 
 alas ! it was too late. 
 
 Conversions from the Synagogue to the Church, as our 
 readers have perceived, occurred more frequently among the 
 higher class of the Sephardi Jews than among a similar 
 class of the Ashkenazim. The reason can be easily explained 
 by a reference to the characteristics marking these two 
 sections of English Jews, and to which we have already 
 adverted. It were needless and invidious to say more on 
 the subject. We will only say that the Germans, retaining 
 some of the traits distinguishing the natives of their ancient 
 fatherland, were more plodding, more steady, more earnest 
 of purpose, and less ambitious than their Portuguese co¬ 
 religionists of those days. The warehouse, the. domestic 
 fireside, the Synagogue, were enough to fill their minds . 
 
200 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 accustomed to trade and to pray, their lives were absorbed 
 by these two pursuits. And as long as they were able to 
 advance their material interests and to worship the Lord of 
 their forefathers, they cared for little else. Gradually the 
 German Jews rose to higher aspirations, and they equalled 
 in time, if they did not surpass, the mental achievements of 
 the Portuguese. Meanwhile the former escaped the tempta¬ 
 tions to which some of the latter had succumbed. When 
 the Jews of Teutonic descent had awakened to a new life, 
 
 and had attained to the amount of culture necessarv for 
 
 «/ 
 
 them to shine in the Senate, the forum, or the magistracy, 
 the barriers of intolerance that had so long excluded their 
 race from occupying in the world the position due to their 
 brain power, had crumbled to pieces before the light of 
 advancing civilisation, and the Jews were enabled to follow 
 a multitude of new paths without forsaking their religion. 
 
 Worldly considerations were not the only temptations to 
 which Jews were exposed, speaking from a religious point 
 of view. Another influence, sometimes even more powerful, 
 would occasionally exercise an almost irresistible effect! 
 The Jews of England lived apart from their fellow-subjects : 
 nevertheless they had eyes and ears, and they were not 
 insensible to the blandishments of beauty. The Jews have 
 ever enjoyed the reputation of being admirers of the fair 
 sex. Many a Samson became an easy prey to many a 
 Delilah. The golden tresses, the sapphire eyes, the soft 
 voices of the fair daughters of Albion did more to draw 
 followers from the Synagogue to the Church than is usually 
 imagined. Nor did lovely English girls disdain the con¬ 
 siderable fortunes and dark complexions of the Jews, more 
 especially of those of Sephardic origin. Christian children 
 by Christian mothers were too common in the Portuguese 
 community ; the offspring adopted their mothers’ faith and 
 surname, and thus many an ancient family and great 
 accumulated wealth have been lost to Judaism. Occa¬ 
 sionally these descendants of Jews know perfectly well their 
 origin, and live in friendly intercourse with professing Jews ; 
 and at other times the former disappear in the masses of 
 population in this country, and it becomes impossible to 
 trace their future course. 
 
CONVERSIONS. 
 
 201 
 
 Another source of losses to the Jewish community, though 
 to a minor degree, may he traced to the practice of sending 
 Jewish children to Christian schools, especially to public 
 schools. The effect of surrounding influences on children is 
 well known. The continual allusions to Christianity, the 
 religious observances of that faith, and sometimes the active 
 conversionist zeal of some teacher or fellow-pupil, implant 
 seeds that bring their fruition some day, if they do not win 
 at once a stray sheep into the fold. TV e might point to 
 several cases of secession from Judaism from this cause; 
 and among others we might mention the instance of the 
 family of an eminent member of the leading German Syna¬ 
 gogue, who were lost to their ancient race from his boys 
 being sent to Charterhouse School. Much unhappiness had 
 been entailed on parents by such occurrences. The atten¬ 
 tion of Jewish fathers has often been called to the necessity 
 of providing for their children Jewish training in Jewish 
 schools. Happily this is now easily attainable, and per¬ 
 fectly compatible with complete secular and even scientific 
 instruction. 
 
 So far we have only spoken of the external influences that 
 drew members of the Synagogue into the pale of the Chuich. 
 Strong as were these influences, there were others within the 
 community itself that acted as their allies. Attractive foice 
 towards the one side, repulsive force from the other, formed 
 a dangerous combination. The latter arose from the very 
 nature of Jewish institutions. There is a double and constant 
 peril in voluntary associations. If their members are not 
 bound together by a fixed and rigid code of rules, a lack of 
 cohesion will arise that may end in dissolution. If the rules 
 are too fixed and too rigid, many members will not accept 
 the trammels they impose, and disruption is threatened. 
 Among the Jews in general, and the Sephardic Congregation 
 in particular, to avoid the Scylla of laxity, wreck was made 
 against the Charybdis of over-strictness. The Elders ot that 
 congregation were usually benevolent men leaning to the 
 side of mercy. But they strictly exacted full and uncom¬ 
 promising obedience. Every offence of a member would be 
 condoned, provided he made humble submission. Eebellion 
 was an unpardonable sin. The strict letter of a conventional 
 
202 
 
 CONVERSIONS. 
 
 law was injudiciously enforced on occasions when very mode¬ 
 rate relaxation would have prevented the loss of valuable 
 members. Certain laws or rules not of a religious character, 
 but of congregational polity, probably necessary and wise 
 when they had been enacted, might advantageously have 
 been modified when from change of circumstances they had 
 ceased to be prudent or beneficial. Yet blind resistance 
 was the practice to all demands for slight emendations or 
 personal concessions. Non possumus was the only reply to 
 such applications. And thus it happened that members of 
 that congregation, whose descendants now might be gracing 
 the councils of their race, have either seceded entirely from 
 Judaism, or cast their tents independently elsewhere. 
 
 We have it also from undoubted contemporary authorities, 
 from men well affected towards their brethren, that the 
 services in the principal Synagogues w r ere ordinarily con¬ 
 ducted in a manner not at all likely to inspire feelings of 
 devotion. Some of the congregants were addicted to chat¬ 
 tering and laughing, to the annoyance of those more earnestly 
 disposed ; the readers said the prayers in a listless and in¬ 
 different manner; no choirs existed, and charity boys 
 screamed—we cannot say sang—the sacred melodies in dis¬ 
 cordant strains, entailing acute sufferings on those who 
 unfortunately possessed musical ears. Moreover, a long 
 time was spent in the tedious repetition of the Meshaberach 
 and mutual compliments, which practice tended to render 
 the service tedious and wearisome. It may be observed that 
 these are trivial matters. We do not think so. Whatever 
 impairs the solemnity of a religious service does considerable 
 harm, for it discourages the attendance of members whose 
 religious ties become weakened, their interest in communal 
 affairs is slackened, and their withdrawal from the congre¬ 
 gation is more easily effected. We must not omit to 
 take into account the private prejudices and crotchets of 
 members of various congregations, which could not easily be 
 satisfied. In all communities there are obstinate, impractic¬ 
 able, and narrow-minded men, who conceive mortal offence 
 if their every desire is not instantly gratified. In voluntary 
 associations, in such cases, refusal on the one side is followed 
 by secession on the other; albeit such men are no loss to 
 
CON VERSIONS. 
 
 203 
 
 any religious community. These individuals are ready to 
 change their belief as they would their coats ; they usually 
 are destitute of real faith, and they are guided in their out¬ 
 ward form of worship by pure expediency and convenience. 
 We have present before our eyes instances of this nature to 
 which we will recur more fully in another paper; we will 
 merely observe that about a century ago a member of one 
 of the first families in the Portuguese Synagogue resigned 
 his seat in the Synagogue only because he could not obtain 
 a particular mitzvah or honour on the day of the Fast of 
 Expiation. 
 
 We have above endeavoured to place before our readers 
 the principal causes that have conduced to the loss from the 
 Jewish community of a certain number of persons of that 
 race. Though it is impossible to trace the particular motives 
 that prevailed in each instance, we have striven to show 
 that in the great majority of cases, these conversions were 
 not the result of researches after religious truths, nor were 
 they likely to shake the belief of those who have followed 
 faithfully the dispensation of Moses. 
 
 In our days, when happily some of the causes we have 
 enumerated are no longer at work, conversions of another 
 and coarser type have become more frequent in this country. 
 Powerfully organised associations, with extensive pecuniary 
 resources at their command, send out paid officials to chase 
 Jewish souls, and to bring them within the pale of imaginary 
 salvation. Their instruments, chiefly apostates themselves, 
 interpose between parents and children, and by ingenious 
 devices, destroy the peace of families, in order to produce 
 triumphantly at head-quarters some poor simpleton or child 
 said to have been converted. These organisations, which 
 all right-minded Christians condemn, have their field of 
 operations principally among the uneducated children of the 
 indigent and among destitute foreigners. Their salaried 
 agents do not disdain the use of bribery and misrepresenta¬ 
 tions, and with keen mockery call their victims 66 Inquirers 
 after truth.” After truth indeed! Empty stomachs and 
 half-clad bodies know better the objects of their inquiries. 
 Ignorance and poverty brought face to face with plenty, and 
 with a picture of comparatively brilliant prospects held 
 
204 
 
 CON VERSIONS. 
 
 before their eves appear so easily persuaded, so thoroughly 
 convinced, as to render it almost a, pity to destroy their 
 delusion. Yet frequently some of these dupes have con¬ 
 science enough, or feeling enough left, to reconsider their 
 position, and then often they slip away from the grasp of 
 their would-be saviours. Thus the gains of societies’ con¬ 
 version are reduced to only a small figure, and their opera¬ 
 tions are supported by grossly exaggerated reports and 
 misrepresentations. Sometimes the results are somewhat 
 amusing. It is related that once a poor Polish Jew, who 
 had been induced to 66 inquire after truth,” and whose 
 conviction had been facilitated by advances during u the 
 inquiry ” amounting to a hundred crowns, was eventually 
 baptized. Subsequently an old acquaintance whom he met 
 asked him whether he had discovered the truth. He had 
 discovered an important truth, said the neophyte: he had 
 ascertained that the old religion was just worth one hundred 
 crowns more than the new religion, since on his making the 
 exchange, he had received that balance. With that sum the 
 convert soon after disappeared. We need not say that such 
 black sheep are no loss to any flock. 
 
 In conclusion, with all deference to that very large majority 
 of her Majesty’s subjects who profess the creed of Jesus of 
 Nazareth, we make bold to assert that had the position of 
 affairs been reversed — had Christians dwelt in a Jewish 
 country, subject to similar external temptations and internal 
 influences—the Church would have yielded to the Synagogue 
 a goodly number indeed of proselytes. That the Jews, not¬ 
 withstanding all the defections suffered by the community, 
 are still increasing in numbers, is a proof of the vitality of 
 their race, and of the staunch adherence of the bulk of this 
 people to their ancient form of worship. 
 
CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 THE PURIM RIOTS—THE BERNAL FAMILY. 
 
 In our preceding chapter we dealt generally with the subject 
 of conversions, pointing out the principal causes that for¬ 
 merly powerfully influenced the Jews in forsaking the law of 
 Moses for the dispensation of Jesus. We shall now, and 
 again hereafter in the course of our narrative, place before our 
 readers such particular cases of conversion as are remarkable 
 either for their accompanying circumstances or because they 
 form landmarks in the annals of families of note, ranking with 
 the aristocracy of wealth or intellect of the United Kingdom. 
 
 It was once the custom among the Jews, during the feast 
 of Purim, for unruly boys and silly men to show their repro¬ 
 bation of Hainan’s conduct by loudly knocking against the 
 Synagogue benches during the celebration of the service. 
 This absurd and irreverent usage had ever been opposed by 
 the congregational authorities; and in March 1783, im¬ 
 mediately before Purim, they issued strict orders ^forbidding 
 such puerile manifestations. Nevertheless certain members 
 of the congregation, either from mere spirit of mischief or 
 from love of opposition, insisted on Purim eve on following 
 a custom more honoured in the breach than in the observ¬ 
 ance. Whereupon on the morrow the ruling powers secured 
 the attendance of a couple of constables, who, on the at¬ 
 tempted repetition of such discreditable behaviour, veiy 
 quickly removed the offenders. The Mahamad summoned 
 before them the delinquents, who all, with a solitary excep¬ 
 tion, either appeared or sent complete apologies. A few of 
 the parties were condemned to pay slight fines for their dis¬ 
 obedience, others were altogether forgiven, and thus the matter 
 ended so far as the public was concerned, albeit the Purim riots 
 formed for some time a favourite topic of conversation with 
 
20 6 
 
 THE PURIM RIOTS. 
 
 communal gossips. Isaac Mendes Furtado was tlie onl) r in¬ 
 dividual who had rebelled against the Synagogue authorities. 
 Furtado was a man who had acquired some wealth, which, 
 according to his views, conferred upon him the right of treating 
 disrespectfully the Elders of the congregation. On more than 
 one occasion he had behaved with marked rudenesss towards 
 them. In the present instance, though he occupied an honorary 
 office in the Synagogue, he was one of the most prominent 
 among the disturbers of the peace, apparently from sheer wan¬ 
 tonness. Isaac Mendes Furtado not only declined to appear be¬ 
 fore the Mahamad , but wrote an offensive and scurrilous letter, 
 evidently the production of an arrogant, unruly spirit. He had 
 been disturbed in his devotions by the entrance of constables 
 in Synagogue. It was not the rioters who had outraged his 
 feelings ; it was the constables. He would separate himself 
 from so irreligious a society. He would renounce Judaism 
 and the promised land. After a tirade of malicious accusa¬ 
 tions against the Svnagogue authorities, Furtado concluded 
 this precious document, which was signed by himself and 
 his wife, by the expression of his firm determination not to 
 hold any further intercourse with members of the community. 
 
 Furtado subsequently caused the open baptism of his 
 children; and he erected certain houses at Mile End to 
 commemorate the glorious event, designating them Purim 
 Place. Mrs Sarah Furtado, his wife, was however interred 
 in the Portuguese cemetery. Furtado himself was buried in 
 Hewington Churchyard, albeit it signifies little where are 
 laid the bones of one who, never a strict adherent to his 
 creed, eagerly seized the first absurd and worthless excuse to 
 quit it. An indifferent Jew is hardly likely to make a good 
 Christian. Here we behold the spirit animating at least 
 some of the converts from Judaism. The moving springs 
 are too apparent: laxity of principle, exaggerated notions 
 of self-importance, unbounded pride, and expectations of 
 worldly advancement! But a sense of religious feeling, a 
 sincere and profound belief in the truths of Christian dog¬ 
 mas, a preference of the new dispensation to the old faith 
 from pure conviction,—in vain shall we seek for them in 
 these neophytes! 
 
 The case of Elias Curry had a very different issue, and it 
 
THE PURIM RIOTS. 
 
 207 
 
 came to a pitiful end. The person who had adopted this 
 pseudonym was a native of Portugal. He had arrived into 
 this country in extreme youth, and had received much sub¬ 
 stantial kindness from the congregation. In his after-life 
 ugly rumours reached the authorities of the Sephardi Jews, 
 concerning the conduct of this individual. He was a toler¬ 
 ably regular attendant at Synagogue ; nevertheless it was 
 asserted that he had entered the Church. A member of the 
 congregation took considerable pains to ascertain the truth 
 of the reports ; he searched the baptismal register of various 
 churches; and eventually he had an interview with the Rev. 
 Mr Green, the rector or curate of West Ham parish church. 
 Elias Curry who, contrary to Jewish habits, had been known 
 to indulge in fiery liquors, had been heard to boast in his 
 cups of his new faith. Mr Green admitted readily having 
 baptized Curry ; but before the latter could be recognised as 
 a Christian, he considered it was necessary to perform again 
 the ceremony which had not been attended with due solem¬ 
 nity. The clergyman moreover regretted having given any 
 annoyance to the Jews, and did not appear especially eager 
 to admit this black sheep into his flock. The truth was that 
 Elias Curry had been converted to Christianity over a bowl 
 of punch, and the rum which it contained no doubt exercised 
 a lively influence in changing his theological opinions. The 
 Wardens of the Portuguese Congregation did not desire to 
 encourage a new sect of baptized Jews, who professed to be 
 both Jews and Christians, and who were neither; so they 
 resolved to dismiss Elias Curry from the community. This 
 occurred early in 1785 ; and in the April of that year Elias 
 Curry wrote an insolent letter to the Mahamad , in which 
 with affected contempt for that body, whom he designated 
 by the novel designation of “ little court, or tribunal of great 
 injustice wherein Prince Satan presides as First Lord,” he 
 took leave of those to whom he was beholden for many benefits. 
 
 For once ingratitude and want of principle met with con¬ 
 dign punishment. Elias Curry did not prosper in his new 
 creed. He became poor ; he became unhappy; he became 
 conscience-stricken. In 1791 the burden of remorse be¬ 
 came more than he could bear, and his heart longed to 
 return to his old faith and early associations. He wrote a 
 most penitent letter to the authorities of his community en- 
 
2o8 
 
 THE PURIM RIOTS. 
 
 treating their forgiveness, and craving to be received back 
 into the Synagogue. He was not satisfied with the refusal 
 he received ; he prayed again to be admitted as a proselyte, 
 which he thought would be facilitated by his being a 
 foreigner, and he offered in vain to make any atonement, to 
 undergo any penance. A year after this, the Elders, who 
 would not open their arms to Elias Curry in life, granted 
 him six feet of ground in death. At first, indeed, they 
 refused; but the entreaties of a relative, the tears of his 
 mother, had their effect. Three witnesses declared that the 
 sinner had made a solemn recantation on his death-bed, and 
 that he departed this life a sincere Jew. The Wardens con¬ 
 sulted the Beth Din, or ecclesiastical authorities; and 
 eventually the wretched man was interred in a corner of 
 the cemetery. Let us hope that this example may have 
 served as a salutary lesson, at least for a time, among men 
 of his class, whose eyes must have been opened to the fact 
 that apostasy does not necessarily lead to prosperity, wealth 
 and success. 
 
 The most important loss that occurred among the Jews at 
 this period was the secession of some members of the Bernal 
 family, which appears to have been induced by a variety of 
 causes. Isaac and Jacob Israel Bernal were the sons of 
 that Jacob Bernal who had many years before asked permis¬ 
 sion to marry a German lady, which, as may be remembered, 
 had been somewhat reluctantly granted. These gentlemen 
 were persons'^of means and character, and had realised mod¬ 
 erate fortunes in the West India trade ; albeit they did not 
 rank among the foremost men in their congregation. Mr 
 Isaac I. Bernal became dissatisfied at his non-election to 
 some honorary office in the institutions of his community, 
 and on the 5th June 1786, he wrote in strong terms to the 
 Synagogue authorities. He had been proposed twice, he 
 said, as a Governor of the Hebra (Burial Society), and of 
 Hesliaim (Charity School), and twice he had been rejected. 
 He had contributed annually £40 to £50 to the Synagogue 
 funds, and yet he had been treated with great disrespect. 
 He felt himself called upon to resent the affront. He re¬ 
 tired from a society where he had been so ill-treated. But, 
 he concluded, he was born a Jew, and would continue a Jew 
 until his death. Mr Bernal’s resignation not being at once 
 
THE PURIM RIOTS. 
 
 209 
 
 accepted, lie wrote subsequently another and more peremp¬ 
 tory letter, and finally a third letter a year afterwards. In 
 November 1787, his resignation was admitted, though the 
 reasons were considered insufficient. At about the same 
 period Mr Jacob I. Bernal, too, thought it fit to address the 
 rulers cf the Synagogue in a most unseemly and overbearing 
 manner. He compared the latter to the Portuguese Inquisi¬ 
 tion for their proficiency “ in the art of torturing the 
 sensibility of religious men.” He accused them “ of feeling 
 causeless hatreds like their ancestors.” He said that a 
 similar groundless vindictive spirit existed among some of 
 them with malignant ardour. He ended by observing that 
 u it was a serious consolation to be liberated from wanton 
 and unmerited insults which were aggravations of their com¬ 
 mon, miserable, abject state, and he renounced any further 
 connection with the Jewish body.” The elders naturally 
 considered certain expressions in this document as unworthy 
 and offensive, and erased his name from the list of the 
 members of the Synagogue. 
 
 Thus terminated the relations between the leading members 
 of the Bernal family and the Synagogue. The cause of their 
 withdrawal was apparently pique ; but there were other and 
 more important reasons in the background which we abstain 
 from laying before our readers from prudential considerations. 
 The term employed by Mr Jacob Bernal of “ our miserable, 
 abject state,” affords a key to his state of mind, and we can 
 easily understand his desire to retire from the society of those 
 who were placed in that unfortunate condition. 
 
 We shall now give a few details of the history of the 
 Bernal family from the time when Isaac and Jacob Bernal 
 left the Synagogue. Isaac Bernal, albeit his anger against 
 the Synagogue authorities was not appeased, continued to 
 observe strictly all Mosaic precepts. He had wedded a 
 Christian lady who seems to have accepted the Jewish re¬ 
 ligion, and his son and his several daughters followed the 
 creed of their forefathers. Isaac Bernal having retired from 
 general business was induced to advance a large amount 
 (£40,000) to an Irish nobleman, at a fair rate of interest. 
 This nobleman soon failed to pay the interest due on his 
 debt, which in time seriously inconvenienced Bernal, and 
 
 0 
 
210 
 
 THE PUR1M RIOTS. 
 
 constrained the latter to fall into arrears with tradesmen and 
 others with whom he had dealings. He dwelt at this period 
 in a handsome residence in Great Prescott Street, Goodman s 
 Fields, then a desirable situation and much affected by 
 opulent Jews. The Tenterground was a well laid out public 
 garden, with trees, flowers, and shrubberies, and was a great 
 place of resort for the dark-eyed daughters of Judah. Isaac 
 Bernal’s creditors became first importunate and then would 
 wait no longer. One day the bailiffs penetrated into the 
 precincts supposed to be an Englishman’s castle, and seized 
 all their contents, from his wife’s jewels to his favourite pea¬ 
 cocks. Bernal this time narrowly escaped personal arrest; 
 but two or three years afterwards he was less fortunate. His 
 friends had purchased part of his property and returned it to 
 him. For a long period he defied the bailiffs, in his barri¬ 
 caded stronghold, until a traitor in the camp brought him to 
 the Fleet. The once opulent merchant still possessed friends. 
 He was enabled to give substantial bail, and, instead of oc¬ 
 cupying a cell in the prison, he was permitted to live within 
 the rules -of the Fleet, and took up his quarters above a shop 
 at the corner of the Old Bailey. Years elapsed; his son 
 went abroad endeavouring to retrieve the fortunes of the 
 family, whilst a lawsuit against his lordly debtor, and then 
 against his executors, for the recovery of his debt, was drag¬ 
 ging its weary length. His brother Jacob, whose animosity 
 against his race seems to have acquired a special bitterness, 
 endeavoured to induce him to abandon Judaism, but in vain. 
 Isaac Bernal and his family remained attached to their faith. 
 Probably Jacob Bernal, who had increased his fortune, as¬ 
 sisted his brother, and his son Ralph occasionally visited his 
 uncle. At last Isaac Bernal obtained a verdict for a very 
 large amount for capital, interest, and costs. But he did not 
 live long to enjoy his restored fortunes. His son came home 
 in an almost dying state, in time to confess to his father 
 that he had married a Christian woman; and then father and 
 son descended to the grave within a few days of each other. 
 In October 1820, application was made to the Synagogue 
 authorities, by the representatives of Isaac Bernal, for the 
 interment of the body of the deceased in the Portuguese burial- 
 ground. For thirty-four years he had lived apart from the 
 
THE PURIM RIOTS. 
 
 211 
 
 Synagogue; nevertheless the request was granted : and on 
 payment of an unimportant sum by his relatives, Isaac 
 Bernal was permitted to sleep by the side of his forefathers. 
 Two of his daughters became contributing members of the 
 Portuguese Congregation until they and most of their sisters 
 followed the destiny of their sex, and some espoused Jews 
 and others espoused Christians. 
 
 The future of Jacob Bernal’s descendants was more bril¬ 
 liant, and their lives were cast into pleasant places. Jacob 
 Bernal educated his children to Christianity, though we 
 believe his son Ralph married a Miss Da Silva, a lady ap¬ 
 pertaining to a Portuguese Jewish family. Mr Ralph Bernal 
 became a magistrate, a land owner, and a member of Parlia¬ 
 ment. His son, Captain Bernal, married in 1844 the heiress 
 of Sir Thomas Osborne of Newtown Anner, Tipperary, when 
 he assumed the surname of Osborne in addition to his own, 
 and he is now known as Mr Bernal-Osborne. 
 
CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 SAMUEL MENDOZA.—THE SHE CHITA.—SYNAGOGUE 
 
 DIFFERENCES . 
 
 The prize-ring is not a very noble arena of contest, and 
 pugilistic encounters do not present a refined and elevated 
 aspect of human nature. We do not propose, however, to 
 depict in these pictures only the highest side of Judaism. 
 It is, on the contrary, our desire to endeavour to delineate 
 faithfully and impartially the various phases of Anglo-Jewish 
 life, as well as to record the most interesting or curious 
 Events in which Jews participated. We will then for a 
 short time leave the Synagogue, the council chamber, and 
 family annals, and descend into the prize-ring. Boxing 
 matches were formerly exhibitions much affected by people 
 of quality, and as much patronised by the “ upper ten ” as 
 now is pigeon shooting. The average Briton of the eighteenth 
 century was not a being endowed with exquisite sensibility, 
 and he loved to imitate his superiors. When he saw some 
 of the oldest names among the aristocracy, with the princely 
 George himself, the “ finest gentleman in Europe,” at their 
 head, associate on terms of intimacy with professional prize¬ 
 fighters, and crowd to witness the feats of their prowess, it 
 is not surprising that plain John Bull should look upon the 
 champions of the noble art of self-defence as heroes to be 
 regarded with awe and admiration. 
 
 The Jews have usually excelled more in mental than in 
 physical pursuits, and have habitually displayed more 
 power of brain than of sinews. But Samuel Mendoza, the 
 pugilist, proved an exception to the rule, and he became a 
 man of mark in his day. He had already acquired some 
 reputation, when a match was arranged for considerable 
 stakes between him and another hero named Humphreys. 
 On the 18th February 1788, many thousands of people 
 
SAMUEL MENDOZA . 
 
 213 
 
 flocked to Odiham, to see the encounter, notwithstanding the 
 inclemency of the weather; and hundreds of eager spectators 
 paid their half guineas to gain admission within the pad- 
 dock. Humphreys was seconded by Johnson, and Mendoza 
 by Jacobs. The fight commenced at one o’clock, when 
 betting was two to one in favour of Humphreys, who was 
 the more experienced champion. Mendoza began with great 
 spirit, and gradually the odds changed to his side. The 
 superior skill of Humphreys prevailed in the end, and he 
 planted on his adversary’s jaw a heavy blow that nearly 
 disabled him. Mendoza struggled on manfully, but blinded 
 and exhausted, he became helpless, and yielded after half 
 an hour’s struggle. £20,000 was lost in this contest, the 
 greater portion of which was the money of Jews. Mendoza, 
 however, would not own himself defeated. Like Bruce when 
 he was watching the spider, he determined to try again. 
 With the perseverance and energy of his race he worked 
 until he obtained greater proficiency in his art, when he 
 challenged his old opponent. The second encounter took 
 place at Stilton, on the 6th March 1789. A spacious 
 amphitheatre had been erected in Mr Thornton’s park, 
 capable of accommodating 3000 spectators, and all the seats 
 were occupied. Again Humphreys’ second was Johnson, 
 while Mendoza was supported by Captain Brown, and Sir 
 Thomas Appryce was his umpire. After a severe struggle 
 of an hour and a quarter the Jewish champion was declared 
 conqueror. Times truly have changed, and manners with 
 them ! Can we imagine a country gentleman now placing 
 his park at the disposal of a mob to revel in the spectacle 
 of a prize fight, and an officer in the army and a baronet 
 escorting and abetting one of the pugilists! Mendoza, we 
 will add, flourished for a long time as a successful champion, 
 and nearly twenty years after this period we find him, during 
 an undecided contest, again making a fierce onslaught against 
 
 his antagonist, and triumphing. 
 
 Let us now return to matters more strictly concerning the 
 Jews. The Israelites of England must confess, that they 
 have usually found the judges of the land perfectly ready to 
 uphold the spiritual jurisdiction of the Jewish rabbins, and 
 to maintain the authority of the latter among their own 
 
214 
 
 SAMUEL MENDOZA. 
 
 flock. A curious action at law was tried in 1788, which 
 indeed differed hut little from another action brought on 
 similar grounds of late years against the Chief Rabbi of the 
 German Congregations. In the former case, a butcher, 
 named Rodriguez, had been repeatedly discovered selling 
 to Jews terefa , or unlawfully killed meat, thus perpetrating 
 a fraud on the conscience of his customers; a much greater 
 offence than perpetrating a fraud on their purses. A zealous 
 Jew named Levy summoned Rodriguez before the Sephardi 
 Beth Din (ecclesiastical tribunal), when the offence was clearly 
 proved, and the butcher deprived of his licence. His name 
 was denounced in the Synagogue from the pulpit, according 
 to the custom of the day, and Jews were forbidden from 
 purchasing any more meat from him. Rodriguez at once 
 took legal proceedings against Levy, asking for heavy 
 damages; and after much litigation, Levy obtained a ver¬ 
 dict in the Court of Common Pleas. Lord Chief Justice 
 Loughborough, afterwards Lord Chancellor, justified com¬ 
 pletely the action of the “ High Priest ” (Beth Din, or 
 ecclesiastical tribunal); which view was also confirmed by 
 all the judges of the Common Pleas, when a motion for a 
 new trial was moved before them. It must therefore be 
 understood that the rabbinical heads have full control in 
 religious questions, and that the law of England will 
 support their authority in all matters within their com¬ 
 petence. 
 
 We have repeatedly observed that the irregularities of the 
 Jewish butchers entailed much trouble and vexation on the 
 heads of the various Synagogues, and each congregation was 
 left to struggle individually with the slaughterers and 
 butchers. An organised institution to deal with the subject 
 was first proposed on the 19th April 1792, when two repre¬ 
 sentatives from each of the three German Synagogues met 
 to discuss this important question. We advisedly say im¬ 
 portant question, however prosaic it may seem, for matter 
 feeds mind; and the loveliest maiden, the noblest hero, and 
 the greatest poet would soon be reduced to inanity if deprived 
 of the fibrous juicy flesh, that quickly becomes part of their 
 own fibre and muscle. At that meeting Mr L. de Symons 
 proposed to draw up a plan for the foundation of a joint 
 
SAMUEL MENDOZA. 
 
 2I 5 
 
 board, in which all London congregations should be repre¬ 
 sented, and for the construction of a Central Hall for the 
 sale of meat. This scheme was prepared and was submitted 
 to the Sephardi community by Mr Bing, Secretary to the 
 Great Synagogue. It was alleged in this document that the 
 Portuguese Synagogue would not only save £100 which they 
 annually expended in providing kosher meat -for their con¬ 
 gregation, but would even realise an assured yearly profit. 
 The Hall to be erected was to contain twenty shops to be let 
 to the butchers, and Christian butchers were to pay a small 
 amount for each head of cattle they killed. Plans and 
 estimates for the proposed market were also forwarded to 
 the Portuguese authorities for their consideration. The 
 scheme was found impracticable by the latter. It was 
 alleged in reply that the building contemplated would be 
 utterly useless if constructed; that butchers would not 
 remove thither; that it would be highly inconvenient for 
 families who dwelt at a distance; that on Sundays it would 
 prove a scandal to surrounding Christians; and that Chris¬ 
 tian butchers would refuse to pay the tax to be levied upon 
 them. The Portuguese would willingly join in the forma¬ 
 tion of a general body for the management of the Shechita 
 (arrangements for slaughtering and preparing cattle for food 
 more Judaico ), but declined altogether to accept the scheme 
 for the market. The subject did not drop at once, and 
 Duke’s Place and Bevis Marks again exchanged letters. 
 The Germans stated that they could not separate what they 
 regarded as two portions of one integral plan, that the three 
 City Synagogues had resolved to construct a Hall, and that 
 the Portuguese could join them whenever they deemed it 
 proper. The latter replied that the necessary orders had 
 been given to the Beth Din to consolidate the Shechita; 
 but that there was no reason to alter the decision arrived at 
 on the subject of the Hall. Thus the correspondence ended, 
 not without numerous expressions of good will on both 
 sides; and Mr de Castro, the Portuguese Secretary, stated 
 in conclusion that u we shall be happy to cultivate that 
 harmony and good understanding that subsist between our 
 congregations, and which are so essential to our welfare.” 
 A subscription was set on foot among the German Con- 
 
2l6 
 
 SAMUEL MENDOZA. 
 
 gregations to obtain funds for the construction of the Hall, 
 but with little success. About a twelvemonth afterwards 
 another spasmodic effort was made to carry out this object. 
 Hobody, however, believed in a Hall, and the Jewish Butchers’ 
 Hall never existed except on paper. The plan for a general 
 Shechita Board remained in abeyance for more than a decade, 
 and it was not until 1805 that Askenazim and Sephardim 
 finally united to establish the body known by that name at 
 the present day. 
 
 It will be perceived that the three City German Syna¬ 
 gogues were acting in unison on that occasion; unfortunately 
 such was not always the case. All Jews are not necessarily 
 endowed with lofty patriotism, neither are their actions in¬ 
 variably guided by pure philanthropy. Human nature is 
 alike everywhere; Cmsar strongly resembles Pompey, and 
 Synagogue committees do not at all times soar above the 
 level of parish boards. The influx of foreign poor, especially 
 of Germans and Poles, at the end of last century, was in¬ 
 creasing to an alarming extent. The Askenazi Jews, though 
 augmenting in numbers and wealth, found it no easy task°to 
 cope with an evil that was yearly assuming more gigantic 
 proportions. Each Synagogue was expected to contribute 
 towards the relief of those wretched immigrants in life, and 
 to their interment in death. Those nearest and dearest often 
 quarrel with each other over some paltry pecuniary question. 
 The principal source of wrangling among the sister con¬ 
 gregations, was as to which should spare six feet of ground 
 for the bones of some miserable foreigner. On some occa¬ 
 sions these unseemly disputes led to unpleasant conse¬ 
 quences. One evening in September 1790, a coffin was 
 lying in the middle of Duke’s Place. The parochial spirit 
 was strong at that moment, and not one of the Synagogues 
 would give decent sepulture to the remains of the pauper. 
 Duke’s Place considered it was the turn of Leadenhall 
 Street, and Leadenhall Street was certain the duty devolved 
 on Duke’s Place. Meanwhile a Portuguese Jew, to save the 
 body from being buried in a neighbouring church, gave the 
 coffin temporary shelter in his own house. He then went 
 to the Portuguese authorities to inform them of the occur¬ 
 rence. The wardens were summoned to meet at once, albeit 
 
SAMUEL MENDOZA. 
 
 217 
 
 it was nine o’clock at night. A message was despatched to 
 the Leadenhall Street Synagogue, which was stated to be the 
 delinquent on this occasion. Eventually one of the wardens 
 from that Congregation and the secretary came to Bevis 
 Marks and promised to bury the dead man, on account of 
 the intercession of the Portuguese Mahamad, though in 
 reality it was no concern of their Synagogue. 
 
 In June 1794, a similar case occurred, when a German 
 child remained unburied owing to the dissensions between 
 the Duke’s Place and the Hambro Synagogues. Mr Alex¬ 
 ander Phillips, presiding warden of the former Synagogue, 
 came to explain matters to the Portuguese Mahamad 
 (vestry), and said that owing to a resolution of the 
 members of his Congregation he did not dare to inter the 
 child; but desiring that it should be buried as a Jew, he 
 begged the Portuguese to interpose and effect a reconcilia¬ 
 tion between the two Synagogues. A meeting was held at 
 ten o’clock on the following morning, at the Portuguese 
 vestry. It was attended by Mr Alexander Phillips, of Duke’s 
 Place Synagogue; Mr E. P. Solomons, presiding warden of 
 the Hambro Synagogue; Mr Asher Goldsmid and Mr 
 Solomon Solomons, on the part of the Germans; while the 
 Portuguese were represented by their wardens — Messrs 
 Emanuel Lousada, Gabriel I. Brandon, Baphael Bodriguez 
 Brandon, A. Lopes Pereira, and Isaac Gomes Serra. It was 
 proposed that the Hambro Synagogue should pay £50 for 
 six months, from Nisan to Tisri, to the Duke’s Place Syna- 
 gogue, in consideration of which payment the latter under¬ 
 took to provide for the poor. It was left to the Portuguese 
 wardens to decide in future whether that sum should be 
 increased. The two Synagogues were to complete an 
 arrangement on this basis; but it was agreed that should 
 they fail in doing so, another meeting should be held on the 
 following Monday. The two Synagogues did not im¬ 
 mediately arrive at an understanding, and the intended 
 meeting was not convened, owing to the absence of Mr 
 Joseph Gompertz, whose opinion it was desired to consult. 
 Then the Hambro Synagogue declined to accept arbitration, 
 like those capricious ladies who, after soliciting intervention 
 in their domestic quarrels, are ready to repudiate such 
 
2 l8 
 
 SAMUEL MENDOZA. 
 
 intervention if likely to end in a decision against them. 
 This conduct so displeased Mr E. P. Solomons, that he 
 addressed an apologetic letter to the Portuguese authorities, 
 explaining that in consequence of such decision he had re¬ 
 signed his office in the Synagogue. However, an agreement 
 on the above terms was eventually entered into by the Great 
 and the Hambro Synagogues; and information to this effect 
 was conveyed in a letter written in very handsome terms by 
 the wardens of Duke’s Place to those of Bevis Marks. We 
 extract the following paragraph from that document :— 66 Our 
 vestry are fully convinced that your laudable interference at 
 the commencement, and indefatigable perseverance in offer¬ 
 ing your assistance, are some of the principal causes to which 
 they must attribute the happy conclusion.” 
 
 ' This letter, which contained a profusion of thanks and 
 expressions of gratitude, was signed by Messrs Levy Barent 
 Cohen, and Moses Samuel, the wardens. 
 
 Unfortunately such agreements as the one above adverted 
 to were made periodically, only to be periodically disre¬ 
 garded. 
 
CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 THE RICARDO FAMILY.—THE ALIEN BILL.—SYNAGOGUE 
 
 FINANCE. 
 
 The Hebrew mind lias usually displayed an extraordinary 
 aptitude for Stock Exchange operations. The keen wit, the 
 far-seeing vision, and the unceasing activity of the Jew, ren¬ 
 dered him especially fit to grasp with stock-jobbing; while 
 the boldness of his conceptions, his power of combination, 
 and the means at his disposal of obtaining accurate informa¬ 
 tion, enabled him to amass great wealth. Many Jewish 
 capitalists came over from Holland with William III. From 
 Menasseh Lopez to Abraham Goldsmid and Nathan Meyer 
 Rothschild, a series of Hebrew speculators held commanding 
 positions in Change Alley or the Stock Exchange. They 
 followed their avocation with eager zest; and their expresses 
 from every court in Europe outstripped Government mes¬ 
 sengers with the latest news. Stock-jobbing flourished 
 greatly, and increased in extent in the middle of last century, 
 notwithstanding various attempts made by the legislature to 
 check this form of gambling. Sir John Barnard’s Act—provid¬ 
 ing that no loss suffered through time bargains should be re¬ 
 coverable at law, and which remained in force until late years 
 —at first proved a serious hindrance to speculation. Time 
 bargains had originated from the period of six weeks in each 
 quarter in which the bank books were closed, and for obvious 
 reasons they greatly encouraged gambling. Sir John Barnard, 
 we will observe, was for many years Member for the City of 
 London, and he was an honest, conscientious man; albeit he 
 bitterly opposed the Jewish Naturalisation Bill in 1753. 
 Speculators soon accepted this Act; brokers were made 
 responsible for the contract they entered into, and the rush to 
 Change Alley in pursuit of Mammon became greater than ever. 
 
220 
 
 THE RICARDO FAMILY. 
 
 Abraham Israel Ricardo was a prominent member of the 
 Stock Exchange during the latter part of the eighteenth cen¬ 
 tury. He was a devout Jew, and for many years acted as 
 broker for the Bevis Marks Synagogue, of which he was mem¬ 
 ber. His family had come over from Holland long before, 
 and they had always strictly adhered to the tenets of Judaism. 
 The Portuguese Congregation in those days, instead of in¬ 
 vesting all their funds in permanent securities, as at present, 
 were wont to leave a large sum in the hands of their agent 
 to be advanced in properly covered loans in the Stock Ex¬ 
 change. Abraham Israel Ricardo carried out many transac¬ 
 tions of this nature to the great satisfaction of his brethren, 
 and nearly every year a vote of thanks was awarded to him 
 by the electors, for the care and zeal which enabled him to 
 hand over to them by no means contemptible profits. Mr 
 Ricardo’s business on behalf of the Synagogue seems to have 
 been extensive, and carried on with Jew and Christian. On 
 one occasion we find that he lent £22,000 in consols, at a 
 small backwardation, and £9500 bank stock at a continua¬ 
 tion, to Mr E. P. Solomons, to whom we adverted in our 
 previous chapter as resigning the Presidentship of the 
 Hamburg Synagogue, when its wardens declined to accept 
 the arbitration of the Portuguese Mahamad. Mr Ricardo 
 had a numerous family of sons; and great was his sorrow 
 when his child David, a bright, intelligent boy, whom 
 he had initiated at the age of fourteen into the mysteries 
 of the Stock Exchange, began to waver from the ancient 
 faith of his forefathers. David Ricardo was induced in ex¬ 
 treme youth to secede from Judaism, when his father aban¬ 
 doned him altogether. David’s own means were narrow, but, 
 as will easily be imagined under the circumstances, a number 
 of influential members of the Stock Exchange readily came 
 forward to assist him. They discovered his extraordinary 
 powers, and they foresaw that he would prove an important 
 acquisition to Christianity. At twenty-five years of age David 
 Ricardo began the study of mathematics, and explored the 
 secrets of nature through chemistry and mineralogy. Then 
 he grew acquainted with Adam Smith’s “ Wealth of Nations,” 
 and the bent of his genius becoming apparent, he devoted 
 himself to political economy, in which field he won distinc- 
 
THE RICARDO FAMILY. 
 
 221 
 
 tion. He realised a fortune in the Stock Exchange, while 
 his opinions on the last-named science acquired great weight. 
 The Bank Charter was to a great extent founded on his 
 principles, and to him the country was indebted for the 
 original plan by which the resumption of cash payments by 
 the Bank was effected without danger. His writings on 
 political economy almost formed as marked an era as the 
 work of Adam Smith. His principal production was pub¬ 
 lished in 1817, and attracted considerable attention. David 
 Kicardo in time reached the Senate, where his reputation 
 had already preceded him, and he died in 1823, at about 
 fifty-two years of age. At the time of his death he represented 
 in Parliament the borough of Portarlington. His fortune 
 was estimated at £700,000, and comprised several consider¬ 
 able landed estates, which were equitably distributed between 
 his three sons ; his four daughters being also adequately 
 apportioned. David Ricardo’s withdrawal was an undoubted 
 loss to Judaism. He was an acute, patient, and comprehen¬ 
 sive thinker on scientific subjects, though we are not aware 
 that he had specially studied theological questious, neither do 
 we offer any opinion to explain his change of religious views. 
 His example was followed by most of his own brothers; and 
 Abraham Ricardo, who lived to beyond the threescore and 
 ten years allotted to man, had the grief of seeing son after 
 son deserting the creed in which they had all been nurtured, 
 and to which he himself remained faithful to the last. 
 
 During the last decade of the eighteenth century, the poli¬ 
 tical position of the Jews in England appears to have been at 
 times very far from agreeable. The French Revolution had 
 raised its sanguinary flag. Hew and subversive doctrines 
 were preached on the other side of that narrow strip of sea 
 which divides Great Britain from the Continent; general 
 uneasiness reigned in England; a fear of Jacobinism per¬ 
 vaded nearly all classes; strangers were eyed with suspicion, 
 foreigners were often regarded as spies in disguise, and Jews, 
 from their correspondence and relations with other states, 
 inspired more or less open distrust. To obviate unpleasant 
 consequences from the condition of public feeling, on Sabbath 
 Hanucah, or during the Feast of Dedication in 1792, the 
 Wardens of the Portuguese Synagogue instructed their Dayan, 
 
222 
 
 THE RICARDO FAMILY. 
 
 Rabbi Hasday Almosnino, to preach a sermon, inculcating 
 upon his audience the duty of Jews to show a firm attachment 
 to their king and constitution. Doubtless this was intended 
 rather to satisfy Gentile feeling than to teach Jews senti¬ 
 ments of loyalty, which they had always prided themselves 
 upon possessing. At the same time the Portuguese Secretary, 
 Daniel de Castro, communicated this resolution to Messrs 
 George Goldsmid, Alexander Phillips, and Joseph Lazarus, 
 the Wardens of the Great Synagogue, in conformity with a 
 previous understanding. What steps were taken on the 
 question we are unable to say: for Rabbi Tabil Schiff had 
 died in 1791, no successor had been appointed, and the neces¬ 
 sity for pulpit instruction had not yet been recognised by 
 the authorities of the Great Synagogue. Then also, on the 
 19th December 1792, Lord Grenville brought forward the Alien 
 Bill in the Lords, which gave Government control over the 
 movements of foreigners in this country, and notwithstand¬ 
 ing the eloquent opposition of Fox and his party in the Com¬ 
 mons the Alien Bill became law. This measure was rigorously 
 enforced. Occasionally King George himself did not disdain 
 to sign an order for the expulsion of some poor Dutch or 
 Polish Jew, whose misfortune it was not to be following some 
 profitable calling. Such occurrences were by no means rare, 
 and pressed heavily on the Jewish community, which had to 
 find funds for the departure from England of these aliens, 
 mostly men of little or no available means. Nevertheless the 
 Jews again displayed their attachment to the throne by 
 celebrating a special service on the 13th April 1793, the day 
 ordered by his Majesty to be kept as a fast. King George III. 
 and his advisers did not believe, like Napoleon, that Providence 
 was on the side of big battalions, and they desired to propitiate 
 Providence by prayers and humiliations. 
 
 Towards the end of the last century the German Congrega¬ 
 tions were rising in wealth, in numbers, and importance, and 
 were rivalling in some respects the older Portuguese Congre¬ 
 gation. The Sephardim, whatever may have been their private 
 views, had the wisdom of accepting the inevitable, and entered 
 into closer ties public and private with the Ashkenazim. 
 Since 1785 the Portuguese had elected Dr Joseph Hart Myers, 
 as doctor of their poor, a position which Dr Myers filled with 
 
THE RICARDO FAMILY. 
 
 223 
 
 much credit for many years, until constrained to resign by ill 
 health. In 1790 that community resolved to permit the ad¬ 
 mission into their hospital of the poor of any other Jewish 
 Congregation, on proper arrangements to cover the extra 
 expense being effected. Then in December 1794 the wardens 
 of the four city Synagogues decided conjointly to reduce the 
 cost of the flour to be used for Passover Cakes on the ensuing 
 festival, by having all their wheat ground at the same mill. 
 It was war time, it must be recollected; flour was worth 65s. 
 to 70s. the sack, and economy was w r ell worth practising. 
 The poor were not allowed to suffer on that account; the best 
 quality of flour was employed, only, owing to its scarcity, the 
 poor received two-thirds of their customary allowance in 
 Matzoth or Passover Cakes, and one-third in potatoes. The 
 tendency was clearly towards a closer connection between 
 English Jews of German and of Portuguese stock; a tem¬ 
 porary check to this good feeling occurring in 1802, through 
 a circumstance which we shall in due course fully narrate, but 
 which fortunately made no lasting impression. 
 
 When Eabbi Tabil SchifF, the German Chief Rabbi, died 
 in 1791, his funeral was conducted with great decorum, and 
 all the honours sanctioned by Jewish usage were paid to his 
 remains. All the London Synagogues deputed their wardens 
 to do homage to the virtues of the deceased Rabbi, and the 
 Bevis Marks Synagogue was represented by their five wardens, 
 and by the four members of their Beth Din. We have already 
 in a former paper spoken of this pious doctor of Jewish Law, 
 so we need not further dilate on the subject. The office of 
 Chief Rabbi in his community remained unfilled for many 
 years ; the Rabbi of the New Synagogue being provisionally 
 appointed Dayan of the Duke’s Place Synagogue at a nominal 
 salary. The election of a new Rabbi was mooted, but no 
 active steps were taken until 1794, when the requirements of 
 the Congregation were made known. Four or five applications 
 for the office came from abroad, one of them being from Dr 
 Hirschel, who was eventually elected. But no resolution was 
 arrived at, at that time, lack of funds being pleaded as a reason 
 for procrastination ; and the first year of the present century 
 still saw the Duke’s Place Synagogue without a spiritual 
 chief. In truth the finances of that Synagogue were not in 
 
THE RICARDO FAMILY. 
 
 2 24 
 
 an over flourishing condition. Mrs Levy’s generous gift in 
 1787, and the subsequent loan of £2000 raised in 1789, had 
 not sufficed to place the Synagogue in the state desired by 
 zealous worshippers. And in November 1791, it was found 
 necessary to borrow a further sum of £3500 to liquidate the 
 debts incurred for repairs of the holy building. On this 
 occasion the ingenious expedient was hit upon, in order to 
 facilitate the operation, of taking members’ notes of hand at 
 twelvemonths’ date for the amount of their subscription; 
 such notes being renewable on payment of interest for the 
 term of three years, when the loan itself was to be repaid. 
 Thus some members contributed to the good work by merely 
 lending their signatures. However, in most cases the amount 
 subscribed was advanced in cash, and nearly £3000 were col¬ 
 lected. The brothers Goldsmid, of whom we shall speak fully 
 hereafter, were then rising men; and among the subscribers 
 to that fund we find the names of Abraham Goldsmid, Asher 
 Goldsmid, and George Goldsmid, each of whom gave £200. 
 
 At this period, too, the exchequer of the Bevis Marks 
 Synagogue, formerly full to overflowing, did not present by 
 any means a brilliant aspect. The offerings had fallen off, 
 the deficits of several years had accumulated, and it was 
 deemed desirable also to open a subscription for the amount 
 of £2500. Neither public spirit nor wealth had become ex¬ 
 tinct in the Congregation, and the sum required was readily 
 forthcoming. 
 
 In the year 1794, a singular compact was made by the 
 members of the Great Synagogue to maintain the unity of 
 their sacred institution. Whether a falling off of members 
 was feared, or whether it had actually occurred we cannot say; 
 but certain it is that a number of gentlemen signed an under¬ 
 taking not to withdraw from the Synagogue under penalty of 
 forfeiting £100 each. An excellent plan this to prevent 
 desertions. An appeal to a man’s purse is occasionally more 
 effective than an appeal to his religious principles ; and pique 
 and convenience may perhaps be found not to weigh down 
 the scale when balanced on the other side against the sum of 
 one hundred pounds. 
 
CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS.—TWO JEWISH WORTHIES. 
 
 One of the first thoughts of Jews when they congregate in suf¬ 
 ficient numbers, is to erect a place of worship; and the beauty 
 and size of their Synagogues may serve to give a fair idea of 
 their numbers, means, and zeal. As we have alreadv ex- 
 plained, their increase during the eighteenth century was 
 mainly confined to the Jews of German and Polish descent; 
 and that section of Jews from being a minority, gradually rose 
 into being a large majority. Synagogue after Synagogue was 
 by them raised in London and in provincial towns. One of 
 the few places where their establishment does not appear 
 to have been always successful was Dublin. From some 
 unexplained cause, the Jews, who are beholden to the Irish 
 for more than one act of true kindness, did not uniformly 
 prosper on the banks of the Liffey. At one time, indeed— 
 in the year 1791—the congregation had so dwindled in ex¬ 
 tent, that the Synagogue had been closed and the Scrolls of 
 the Law had been returned to the London Portuguese 
 Jews to whom they belonged. This temporary check 
 must have been owing to some purely fortuitous circum¬ 
 stances, for Dublin has since beheld a flourishing Jewish 
 Congregation. The Jews of Dublin, let us say, always felt a 
 sense of friendship and gratitude towards the Jews of Bevis 
 Marks* and even so late as 1842, the former expressed a 
 desire to affiliate their Synagogue to the Portuguese Syna¬ 
 gogue of London. But everywhere else, at the period of 
 which we are speaking, the Jews with characteristic energy 
 and activity were extending their religious, educational, and 
 charitable institutions. Usually, as soon as the Synagogue 
 reared its head, the school-room quietly rose at its side. 
 The three German Synagogues in Duke’s Place, Fencburch 
 
 p 
 
226 
 
 SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS. 
 
 Street, and Leadenhall Street, had become insufficient for 
 the crowds of worshippers who assembled thither on the 
 days of solemn gathering to invoke the Lord of Israel. 
 Permission was granted by the authorities of the Great 
 Synagogue to small Congregations of foreigners to meet for 
 prayers in suitable localities ; and among others a small 
 Polish Synagogue was built near Cutler Street, Houndsditch. 
 The Great Synagogue itself had been enlarged and rebuilt; 
 and its members had so multiplied that a new resting-place 
 where they could sleep their last sleep undisturbed had to be 
 purchased. Towards this pious object Mr Abraham Golds- 
 mid and his brother Mr Asher Goldsmid did not fail to con¬ 
 tribute with their customary liberality. The ground for the 
 new u House of Life ” was purchased in 1795; and a portion 
 of the land was sublet to a Christian, with the curious pro¬ 
 viso that a certain space should be devoted to the cultivation 
 of willow-trees, for the use of the Congregation in their ritual 
 observances during the Feast of Tabernacles. Then the 
 Portuguese Congregation had ordered the reconstruction of 
 some of the buildings adjoining their House of Prayer, at a 
 cost of about £4000. The Hew Synagogue in Leadenhall 
 Street was not behind its sister Congregations, and in 1798 
 the edifice was repaired and decorated in a very elegant and 
 chaste style. The ceremony of the consecration was attended 
 with great solemnity, and is thus described by a Christian 
 eye-witness. “ The High Priest with the subordinate rabbis, 
 the chorus and attendants with a great number of fathers of 
 families in the proper vestments, were at the ceremony which 
 was affecting, grand, and awful. The music and the voices 
 performed in the eastern manner of strophe, antistrophe, and 
 chorus. The anthems were performed in a very superior 
 style of modulation and harmony. A crowd of people 
 attended, and they all conducted themselves decorously. A 
 subscription was opened, and in about twenty minutes up¬ 
 wards of £200 was subscribed.” 
 
 TV e have thus seen that the City Synagogues were flour¬ 
 ishing, and their Congregations growing larger and richer ; 
 now we must record the foundation of a new Synagogue in 
 another quarter of the town. It was found advisable for 
 many Jews in trade to dwell beyond the boundaries of the 
 
SYNAGOGUE PEOGEESS. 
 
 227 
 
 principally in those districts where the rich, the idle, 
 and the fashionable, meet and lounge and flirt together. 
 These Jews lived at a distance from the City Synagogues ; 
 and not being able to walk thither, and not wishing to be 
 excluded from the religious services to which they had been 
 accustomed, they naturally resolved to establish a place of 
 worship in their own locality. In the year 1797, a small 
 Synagogue was fitted up in Denmark Court, Strand. This 
 was the beginning of the Congregation of the Westminster 
 Jews, now in St Alban’s Place. In the above-mentioned 
 } eai, the founders of the Westminster Synagogue consulted 
 the authorities of the Hambro Synagogue on the subject, and 
 all the three existing German Congregations resolved to act 
 together in this question. The old communities raised no ob¬ 
 jection to the formation of another Congregation; no feelings 
 of narrow-minded jealousy were awakened: and no laws of 
 the Medes and the Persians enacted that Jews should assemble 
 to pray in certain fixed spots and nowhere else. In 1798, the 
 City Congregations entered into a temporary arrangement 
 with the new Westminster Synagogue on a very reasonable 
 basis. It was not until the beginning of the present cen¬ 
 tury that a regular agreement was effected between the 
 Great Sjmagogue—on behalf of the City Congregations—and 
 the Westminster Synagogue. 
 
 During the same period, too, Jewish intellect was far from 
 being idle in London. Several Hebrew works principally by 
 German writers were published, which reflected great credit on 
 authors, editors, and printers. Among these we must enume¬ 
 rate two important works by Eliakim ben Abraham, which saw 
 the light in the year 1794. One of these was called Milchamoth 
 Aclonai , “ The battles of the Lord,” and consisted of essays 
 on several philosophical subjects; and the other, Maamar 
 Beenah Laetim , was a commentary on the most difficult pas¬ 
 sages of Daniel. The diction of these treatises has been pro¬ 
 nounced to be chaste and elegant, and their contents to dis¬ 
 play much knowledge in science, natural philosophy, and 
 theology. The same writer also edited other works in the 
 holy tongue, consisting mainly of philosophy and metaphysics. 
 But Hebrew was not the only language in which Jews wrote; 
 and one man at least wielded the vernacular with vigour if 
 
228 
 
 SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS. 
 
 not with elegance. We must not forget the services that 
 David Levi rendered to Judaism; and let us pay a just tri¬ 
 bute to the memory of a man who taught Jews to appreciate 
 the beautiful prayers they too often addressed parrot-like to 
 the Deity, without understanding them ; and who broke many 
 a lance on behalf of his co-religionists. Let us say a few 
 words concerning David Levi. Born in 1742, his youth was 
 passed like the old masters in the Talmud in the pursuit of 
 a handicraft. Whilst struggling to earn a living as a shoe¬ 
 maker and a hat dresser, and surrounded with domestic cares, 
 he found time to devote to those studies he loved so well. 
 He first produced a volume on the rites and ceremonies of 
 the Jews. He next published his “ Lingua Sacra ” in three 
 volumes, consisting of a Hebrew grammar with points, and a 
 complete Hebrew and English dictionary. These works are 
 far from being the most perfect of the kind, but they form a 
 remarkable instance of industry and perseverance in a person 
 constrained to follow a mechanical pursuit to supply the 
 necessities of life. He then defended his faith against the 
 attacks of ardent sectarian, albeit modified, Christianity on 
 the one side, and against the attacks of pure atheism on the 
 other. Dr Priestley, the well-known natural philosopher and 
 dissenting minister; the extraordinary man who dived into 
 the mysteries of nature; who followed by turns the doctrines 
 of Arius and Socinius ; and who discovered new gases, desired 
 to convert the Jews to a religion the divine nature of which 
 he entirely repudiated. Dr Priestley, F.R.S., invited the Jews 
 to a friendly discussion on the evidences of Christianity. 
 Thus replied David Levi in the first of two series of letters : 
 “ I am not ashamed to tell you that I am a Jew by choice 
 and not because I was born a Jew. Far from it, for I am 
 clearly of opinion that every person endowed with ratiocina¬ 
 tion ought to have a clear idea of the truths of revelation, 
 and a just ground for his faith so far as human evidence can 
 go.” In 1789, David Levi administered another rebuke to Dr 
 Priestley, and then he broke a lance in defence of the Old 
 Testament against Thomas Paine’s “ Age of Reason.” David 
 Levi was a hard worker; he gave the Portuguese Jews a 
 translation of their prayers, and subsequently he rendered 
 the same service to his own community. He addressed 
 
SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS. 
 
 229 
 
 several controversial letters to Christian writers; and he 
 published a Pentateuch in Hebrew and English with notes. 
 He was poet in ordinary to the Synagogues, and he furnished 
 odes as occasions required on public celebrations. The work 
 which appears to have lain nearest to his heart was his 
 “ Dissertation on Prophecies,” of which a part only had come 
 before the world when he was stricken with paralysis. In 
 1801, David Levi was summoned before his Maker, whom 
 he had humbly and zealously glorified for nearly sixty 
 years. David Levi, though not a polished or cultured writer, 
 was an earnest thinker, and he strove hard to benefit his 
 community. He was the first Jew who had vindicated his 
 faith in English; and though he was no match for Joseph 
 Priestley as a controversialist, by the help of books he made 
 a respectable figure in print. A curious elegy in his honour 
 appeared in the Gentleman’s Magazine. We quote two 
 stanzas :— 
 
 “ Though science reared not in his anxious breast, 
 
 Confessions, creeds, nor formularies vext, 
 
 On prophecy’s sure grounds he built his rest, 
 
 Nor with their mystic meanings was perplext. 
 
 He took the part benevolent and sincere 
 To argue and explain from falsehood clear. 
 
 “ For to Priestley’s philosophic views, 
 
 He cautious answered in his people’s name. 
 
 The sceptic turned, nor more among the Jews 
 Sought for another argument or claim, 
 
 Nor did the arch demagogue’s disloyal train 
 From Levi’s pen a better chance obtain.” 
 
 This poetry, as will be seen, is not of a very high class. 
 The author, Lemoine, was neither a Gray, a Cowper, nor a 
 Southey, but he was sincere ; and he seems to have really 
 admired David Levi in particular, though he did not expe¬ 
 rience the same feelings towards the Jews in general. The 
 long intimacy that had existed between the Jewish mechanic 
 and the Christian bookseller, doubtless predisposed the latter 
 to judge the former with a favourable eye. We shall here¬ 
 after meet again with Henry Lemoine as a writer on Jewish 
 affairs, who, evidently well intentioned, fell into serious 
 blunders, and who apparently possessing some knowledge 
 concerning the Jews, really frequently misunderstood them. 
 
230 
 
 SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS. 
 
 Among the Jews deserving some notice during the period 
 of which we are writing, that is, the end of last century, 
 we must not omit to mention the name of David Alves 
 Rehello, an eminent member of the Portuguese Congregation. 
 David Alves Rehello was not only a valued member of his 
 own community, where he had filled several offices of honour, 
 but he was an ornament to society of any faith. He was a 
 patron of the fine arts and a benefactor of the poor. He had 
 applied himself to the study of natural history, on which 
 science he left several writings. He was a great admirer of 
 works of art, particularly of coins; and he gathered an 
 elegant, judicious collection of them, as well as of numerous 
 objects of mineralogy, botany, and every other branch of 
 natural history. David Alves Rebello is described by cotem¬ 
 porary writers as having possessed a vigorous and expanded 
 mind, fully equal to grasping successfully with the problems 
 of science. He died in May 1796, at Hackney, where many 
 Portuguese Jews then dwelt; and he bequeathed to his 
 Synagogue a curious legacy of £500, the interest of which 
 was to be devoted to the purchase of certain under-garments 
 to be annually distributed to twelve poor persons of each 
 sex. 
 
 Let us now return to the Askenazi Community, and glance 
 once more to the men of note who sprang during the last por¬ 
 tion of the eighteenth century from that section of the Jews of 
 London. We shall in due course furnish an account of the 
 Goldsmid family. Of David Levi, the humble and zealous 
 scholar and earnest worker, we have spoken. We will now take 
 a brief glance at two individuals of a very different stamp. 
 The one a clever journalist; the other a famous songster; 
 both Jews, yet neither of whom contributed to the advance¬ 
 ment of Judaism. 
 
 Lewis Goldsmith was an ambitious young notary who, to 
 acquire some sort of celebrity, published a work entitled 
 “ Crimes of Cabinets.” In those days it was not safe to 
 write even the truth concerning ministers, for then the 
 greater the truth, was often literally the greater the libel. 
 So Goldsmith the Jew was indicted for libel and sedition, a 
 most unusual occurrence in respect of one of his race, and he 
 sought safety in France. 
 
SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS. 
 
 231 
 
 It was during the time of the first empire, when every man 
 had his price; and the French authorities were not slow in 
 detecting the literary talents of the exile. Soon Goldsmith 
 began to hurl his thunder against the British Cabinet through 
 the columns of the Argus , an English journal established in 
 Paris for that purpose. 
 
 After a while the French, with the fickleness, proverbially 
 if not always correctly, attributed to their nation, became 
 tired of their protege, and negotiated with the English Govern¬ 
 ment for the exchange of Goldsmith for some Frenchmen in 
 that Government’s hands. Fortunately Goldsmith received 
 timely advice of the negotiations of which he was the object 
 and likely to be the victim, and he forestalled their result by 
 placing himself at once in communication with the English 
 authorities. His offences were not found to be of a very deep 
 dye; he obtained permission to return; duly submitted to a 
 pro forma trial for high treason, and was discharged. 
 
 The underhand attempts of his late friends greatly enraged 
 Lewis Goldsmith, who started in England the well-known 
 paper called the Anti- Galilean Monitor . Then the pliant and 
 versatile journalist turned his keen satire and powers of in¬ 
 vective against Hapoleon and his court, drawing real or im¬ 
 aginary descriptions of the abuses and excesses perpetrated 
 in those precincts. His inflated periods on this occasion 
 served him to so good a purpose, that Louis XAIII., on his 
 Eestoration, at once rewarded the reviler of his enemies by 
 conferring on Lewis Goldsmith a pension for life. We may 
 also mention that a daughter of Lewis Goldsmith became the 
 second Lady Lyndhurst. 
 
 In the year 1801, a new singer made his debut at Covent 
 Garden Theatre in the opera of “ Chains of the Heart,” by 
 Mazzinghi and Riviere. This artist possessed one of the most 
 magnificent and yet one of the sweetest voices ever heard on 
 the stage. He was a short dark man, with restless and in¬ 
 telligent eyes. He was said to be a Jew, and he was called 
 John Braham. John Abrahams, or Braham, was truly born 
 of Jewish parents in the year 1774, and he became an orphan 
 at a tender age. He became early the pupil of Myer Lion, 
 otherwise Leoni, the Synagogue chorister and operatic singer 
 to whom we have already adverted, and who is stated to have 
 
232 
 
 SYNAGOGUE PEOGEESS. 
 
 been related to young Braham. The future tenor himself as 
 a boy sang in the choir of the Great Synagogue. Subse¬ 
 quently he experienced much kindness from Ephraim Polack, 
 father of Maria Polack, an authoress, and grandfather of 
 Elizabeth Polack, also a writer. Moreover, young Braham 
 enjoyed the protection of Mr Eliason, the eminent merchant 
 and son-in-law of Mr Aaron Goldsmid. At ten years of age 
 the youthful student began singing on the stage, and he suc¬ 
 cessfully delivered the bravura pieces composed for the cele¬ 
 brated Mad. Mara. He played subsequently at Drury Lane, 
 and he resolved to make a continental tour to finish his musical 
 education. In 1798 he visited Paris, and notwithstanding the 
 turmoil of the Revolution, he gave there a number of concerts 
 which attracted considerable crowds. In Italy he studied 
 composition under Isola, and he visited nearly all the principal 
 cities of the Land of Song; in most of which he displayed in 
 public his fine talents. On his return to England he at once 
 became the first operatic performer of the day, and for years 
 he was rivalled on the British stage only by Charles Incledon. 
 This singer had fled to sea in boyhood, and on his return he 
 was taken in hand by Rauzzini, a well-known Italian maestro, 
 who instructed him in music. Incledon was endowed with a 
 splendid voice, but possessed little musical or other culture, 
 and he lacked genius. Nevertheless, the beauty and wonder¬ 
 ful compass of his voice made him a dangerous competitor for 
 Braham. The latter represented the romantic or operatic 
 school, while the former shone principally in pure ballad 
 singing. The suffrages of London were divided between the 
 two stars, and their respective merits were canvassed as 
 warmly as in the well-known instance of the differences be¬ 
 tween Tweedle-de-dum and Tweedle-de-dee. John Braham 
 greatly surpassed Incledon in talents; he became known as a 
 composer, and the musical world is indebted to him for several 
 light operas and songs. Among the latter, the best remem¬ 
 bered production is the patriotic air called the 66 Death of 
 Nelson,” which long maintained its popularity. Of Braham 
 it was said in questionable praise that he sang like an angel 
 and spoke like a Jew. It is not believed that he ever formally 
 adopted any kind of Christianity, but there was nothing visible 
 of Judaism with him in his latter days except the ineffaceable 
 
SYNAGOGUE PROGRESS. 
 
 233 
 
 stamp imprinted by nature on his countenance. John Braham 
 married, and left several children, one of whom is Frances 
 Countess Waldegrave, now the consort of Lord Carlingford. 
 This greatest of modern English singers, after retiring from 
 the stage, lived in obscurity for many years, and died at an 
 advanced age, we believe in 1856. 
 
 We have spoken of the journalist and of the songster, 
 because it is a necessary part of our work to notice eminent or 
 notorious men born within the pale of Judaism, though neither 
 Goldsmith nor Braham in any manner advanced the cause of 
 their race. They were Jews from accident of birth, and not 
 from conviction ; and at least in one instance when the forms 
 of the ancient creed became inconvenient and were considered 
 as opposed to worldly advancement, they were, as in other 
 cases, cast off without compunction. 
 
CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 FRIENDS AND VINDICATORS OF THE JEWS. 
 
 We must yet linger awhile on the latest years of the eighteenth 
 century, for during that period, and during the early years 
 of the present century, many events occurred of direct interest 
 to Judaism. Indeed, we consider that epoch to he one of 
 great moment in Anglo-Jewish history. Judaism seemed 
 to acquire a new life, notwithstanding the desertions from 
 its pale which it has been our duty to chronicle, and which 
 still continued from time to time; and a considerable com¬ 
 munal development, as we have already perceived, was un¬ 
 folding itself in various directions. On future occasions we 
 shall speak of new institutions founded, and of schemes for 
 the amelioration of the Jewish masses proposed or carried 
 out. We will first proceed to treat of the awakened interest 
 and sympathy which were beginning to be felt by thoughtful 
 Englishmen and English women for a long persecuted race. 
 
 In the beginning of the nineteenth century, when Napoleon 
 raised his then all-powerful hand to uplift the Jews from the 
 effects of the ill-treatment of ages, and to place them as 
 civilised human beings on terms of equality with the rest of 
 mankind, the inquiring eyes of Europe and of England were 
 turned towards the children of Israel. But even in the pre¬ 
 ceding decade, between 1790 and 1800, we find signs of 
 freshly stirred-up curiosity concerning Jewish manners and 
 customs, and newly-inspired friendship towards Jews. 
 Jewish Synagogues and cemeteries became the objects of 
 visits from Christians; Jewish merits and demerits were 
 discussed in magazine articles ; and Jewish virtues—strange 
 to relate—formed the chords upon which the dramatist 
 played to stir up the hearts of the audience. 
 
 In the year 1795, a Christian lady visited the Portuguese 
 
FRIENDS OF THE JEWS. 
 
 2 35 
 
 Cemetery at Mile End, with which she appeared to be much 
 gratified. We shall give an extract from her account which 
 is really worthy of note, for it furnishes some curious in¬ 
 formation. The ladv was struck wfith the sentence from 
 Ecclesiasties, chosen by the Jews, “ Then shall the dust 
 return to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return 
 unto God who gave it,” which she considered formed a 
 happy contrast with the French atheistic motto, u La mort 
 est un eternel sommeil.” After quoting St Paul, and de¬ 
 scribing the ceremonies attending a Jewish funeral, our fair 
 writer thus continues : u The dead are interred in rows, 
 without any respect to difference of rank. He who is buried 
 to-day lies next to him that was buried yesterday, whether 
 poor or rich, except a few instances when a husband, wdfe, 
 or some dear relative purchases the next place to be reserved 
 for himself or herself; nor is there any difference in the 
 coffins. One plain hearse carries all; the more respected 
 they are the more numerous are the train that follow. 
 Those who have been notoriously bad are put into the 
 ground without any ceremony, and I believe put apart from 
 the rest, else the only distinction is the richer having grave¬ 
 stones with Hebrew, Portuguese (or Spanish), and English 
 inscriptions. Some have only one of these languages, many 
 with emblems and devices, such as a hand coming out of 
 the clouds with an axe in the act of hewing down a tree, 
 shedding the water out of a pitcher, or plucking a rose if it 
 is a donzella that lies beneath. On a Mrs Ximenes who 
 died in childbed at the age of sixteen, the emblem is 
 strikingly pathetic. A rose just cropt, a bud remaining 
 over it. 4 Oh, spare the bud ! ’ But I could not comprehend 
 that on Sir Sampson Gideon’s grave arose a building which 
 appeared to me like a temple divided into compartments, in 
 one of which a man in long robes seems walking in a 
 melancholy manner; in another, a group of figures and a 
 dog; this surprises me as I thought they were not per¬ 
 mitted to carve any figures of animals. ... I must not 
 forget a kind of fountain in which they wash their hands on 
 their return from the ground as a purification : and I am 
 told that the friends and the relatives of the deceased make 
 it a point of tender attention to fill up the grave, wdiich, as 
 
FRIENDS OF THE JE WS. 
 
 236 
 
 sucli numbers generally attend, is soon performed. Besides 
 the keeper of the place, who lives in a house adjoining, two 
 men constantly sit up every night in a movable watch-box, 
 which wheels over the last grave; this has been done for 
 four or five years, in consecjuence of their giound being 
 robbed by resurrectionists.” Our fair writer’s description 
 seems correct in the main, and gives an accurate and pleasing 
 account of the cemetery of the Portuguese Jews. The lady 
 does full justice to the perfect equality that reigns in death 
 among Jews, with whom poor and rich lie side by side with¬ 
 out distinction. She falls, however, in error when she alludes 
 to the grave of Sit Sampson Gideon. II& never was interred 
 among the Jews. The Sampson Gideon whose tomb she 
 beheld died untitled. It was his son who was first created a 
 baronet, and then raised to the peerage of Ireland under the 
 style of Lord Eardley, as we have formerly stated. As for 
 the figures she saw over the building which she depicts, they 
 are certainly contrary to Jewish custom. That temple, how¬ 
 ever, is no longer in existence, for the monument having 
 fallen into a state of decay, the family asked, permission of 
 the Synagogue authorities, little more than thiity j ears ago, 
 to place a new tombstone over the grave of the once great 
 financier. This permission was naturally granted, and the 
 tombstone that had originally covered Sampson Gideon’s 
 bones, passed into the possession of Ins descendants. 
 
 Among the friends and advocates of the Jews we must 
 rank a writer who, under the initials of u J. D. I., espoused 
 in warm and eloquent accents the cause of the Jews, during 
 the same year, viz., 1795. Another writer had addressed a 
 communication to a magazine, in which he repeated a story, 
 found in Matthew Paris, who gravely accused the Jews of 
 killing a Christian child in 1255, for the sake of his blood. 
 Whereupon our author, whose full name we regret we cannot 
 give, answered with an able and glowing defence of the Jews. 
 Want of space and other obvious causes must prevent us 
 from reproducing it in extenso , but we shall extract two 
 paragraphs, from which our readers will be able to judge of 
 the whole. “ J. D. I.,” after lamenting that Dr Tovey, 
 that humane and learned antiquary, should have placed some 
 credence in this legend, founded on such slender basis; and, 
 
FRIENDS OF THE JE WS. 
 
 237 
 
 after rebutting the exceedingly slight evidence adduced in 
 support, thus proceeds :— 
 
 “ The calumnies which have been spread concerning the 
 descendants of Jews have been numerous, but they have all 
 been like the present one, accompanied with circumstances 
 which in this age destroy their possibility. I shall consume 
 little time in mentioning a few I recollect. Because a king 
 of France happened to be more insane than some of his pre¬ 
 decessors, all Jews were expelled from their native country; 
 for the royal lunatic was declared by an archbishop to be so, 
 in consequence of Jewish witchcraft. Because a vagrant, not 
 less insane than this French monarch, proposed exterminat¬ 
 ing the Turks, the crusaders to begin auspiciously first 
 fleshed their swords among the European Jews ; and because 
 these Quixotic expeditions were, as they naturally should be, 
 more destructive to the Jews than to the Turks, half the re¬ 
 maining Jews were massacred on their return. Was there a 
 plague? The waters were poisoned by the Jews! Was 
 there a famine ? The harvests were bewitched by the Syna¬ 
 gogue ! They burnt; they massacred ; they tortured, till at 
 length the plague ceased, and the famine was no more: and 
 the° consequence was, that murdering Jews was therefore 
 considered as a desirable national expiation. Was a king 
 crowned? the royal ceremony was attended with the splendid 
 destruction of his unhappy subjects, the Jews. ... It is 
 a great misfortune that the Jewish nation cannot produce 
 one writer to vindicate, with elegance and with truth, their 
 forlorn, their indigent state. The Jews have only found 
 advocates in enlightened Christians, but it is more frequently 
 their misfortune also to receive in silence and resignation the 
 insult of Christians.” 
 
 Happily, we can truly say now, nous avons changd tout 
 cela. The persecution of Jews in civilised states, or at all 
 events in England, is purely a matter of history ; and since 
 the days of David Levi, scores of champions from the ranks 
 of Judaism have risen “ to vindicate with grace and with 
 truth,” the wrongs and sufferings of their brethren. 
 
 There is another name which should now be remembered 
 by Jews with that gratitude which unfortunately was not 
 manifested towards its bearer during his life. Richard 
 
238 
 
 FRIENDS OF THE JE WS. 
 
 Cumberland was the first dramatist who had the courage to 
 make a Jew appeal to the sympathies of the audience. 
 Hitherto in the words of a character in Cumberland’s play, 
 whenever playwrights wanted a butt, or a buffoon, or a 
 knave to make sport of, out came a Jew to be baited and 
 buffeted through five long acts for the amusement of all 
 good Christians. Much ingenuity has been exercised in 
 endeavouring to prove that William Shakespeare, in drawing 
 the character of Shylock, desired secretly to justify the Jews. 
 We confess we cannot concur in this opinion. On the con¬ 
 trary, we are heretics enough to believe that Shakespeare 
 represented Shylock not according to nature, but only accord¬ 
 ing to that which nature was popularly believed to be. In 
 other words, he depicted a Jew in conformity with the small 
 knowledge or prejudices of his audience, and he reversed 
 the original story, if he ever had heard of the true version, 
 because he considered, and justly considered, that a cruel, 
 avaricious, and vindictive Jew would impress more and at¬ 
 tract an audience better than a philanthropic or benevolent 
 Jew. Richard Cumberland, inferior as he was to William 
 Shakespeare in genius and power, sought to raise and defend 
 an unjustly vilified race; and he ran counter to popular 
 notions to uphold what he believed to be the truth. Instead 
 of depicting the potential villainies of the Jews, he delineated 
 their actual virtues. The u Jew ” was first performed in 
 1794, and was supported by some of the best artists of the 
 day. Sheva the Jew was played by Bannister, “ handsome 
 Jack Bannister; ” while Jubal, his man, was represented by 
 Suett, an irresistibly droll low comedian. Palmer, one of the 
 greatest 66 villains ” that ever strode on the stage, appeared as 
 Frederick; and the beautiful and celebrated Miss Farren— 
 who subsequently became Countess of Derby—graced the part 
 of Louisa Ratcliff. Sheva the Jew, under the guise of an 
 old hunks of a curmudgeon, conceals the noble heart of a 
 generous philanthropist, who does good by stealth and blushes 
 to find it fame. Under a sordid exterior, Sheva casts his 
 benefactions on the deserving with unsparing hand. A very 
 Harpagon in appearance and manners, he is in reality a 
 Cheeryble in feeling. He starves himself, he pinches his 
 servants, and feeds abundantly the necessitous poor. He 
 
FRIENDS OF THE JEIVS. 
 
 239 
 
 succours the son of a Christian merchant unjustly discarded 
 by his father; he saves from want a meritorious youth, and 
 he bestows an ample fortune anonymously on a worthy damsel 
 whose father had helped his escape from Spain ; thus enabling 
 the young lady to be honourably recognised as a wife by her 
 father-in-law, the self-righteous Christian merchant. The 
 play was successful enough at the time of its appearance. 
 But the plot is slender, and the language prosy and mono¬ 
 tonous. Above all, it lacks the stamp of genius ? and thus 
 it happens that whilst audiences flock to hiss at the cruelty 
 and avarice of Shylock, the existence of the beneficent Sheva 
 is scarcely known to the present generation. Still doubtless 
 some good was effected by Cumberland’s “Jew” at the period ol 
 its production. It produced a temporary sympathy for Sheva; 
 tears must have been shed by sensitive ladies at the recital of 
 his sorrows, and probably his co-religionists may have inspired 
 kinder thoughts. The 66 Jew ” was not without its imitations, 
 and among these we may mention a piece called the “ Jew of 
 Mogador,” which is conceived in the same kindly spirit as 
 Cumberland’s play. Richard Cumberland, in addition to his 
 drama, again illustrated the sufferings of the Jews, in his 
 description of the wrongs of Abraham Abrahams. 
 
 It is much to be regretted that the Jewish nation did not 
 deem it proper to express their gratitude to Cumberland ; 
 which is all the more surprising, as the Jews have habitually 
 been most ready to demonstrate their thankfulness towards 
 those who befriended them. The author of the u Jew ” felt 
 keenly this neglect. In the memoirs of his own life thus does 
 he express himself on this, to him, sore subject: 66 The public 
 prints gave the Jews credit for their sensibility in acknow¬ 
 ledging my well-intended services: my friends gave me joy 
 of honorary presents, and some even accused me of ingratitude 
 for not making my thanks for their munificence. I will speak 
 plainly on this point. I do most heartily wish they had flat¬ 
 tered me with some token, however small, of which I could 
 have said, this is a tribute to my philanthropy, and delivered 
 it to my children as my benevolent father did to me his badge 
 of favour from the citizens of Dublin; but not a word from 
 the lips, not a line did I ever receive from the pen of any Jew, 
 though I have found myself in company with many of their 
 
240 
 
 FRIENDS OF THE JE WS. 
 
 nation; and in this perhaps the gentlemen are quite right, 
 whilst I had formed expectations that were quite wrong; for 
 if I have said of them only what they deserve, why should I 
 be thanked; and if more, much more, than they deserve, can 
 they do a wiser thing than hold their tongue? ” 
 
 Richard Cumberland speaks with all the courtesy and 
 dignity of a true gentleman; which increases our chagrin at 
 his being constrained to give vent to such utterances. 
 
CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 CONVERSION 1ST A TTEMPTS-.PRIVILEGE OF PRISONERS 
 —THE JEWS' HOSPITAL—A BAAL SHELL 
 
 The increasing interest felt on behalf of the Jews mani¬ 
 fested itself among certain Christians, by an increasing care 
 for the welfare of Jewish souls. According to these persons 
 of peculiar minds, salvation could only be achieved by belief 
 in their own creed; beyond which nothing could be expected 
 except irredeemable perdition. In conformity with these 
 convictions, attempts were made towards the end of last cen¬ 
 tury to convert the Jews on a large scale. No regular society 
 for that purpose had yet been formed, but organised efforts 
 were made to open the eyes of Jews, and to save that stubborn 
 race from the doom of unbelievers. A meeting-house of dis¬ 
 senters in Bury Street opened its portals to the Jews, and 
 efforts were made to attract them within its precincts. A 
 committee of dissenting ministers was appointed to prepare 
 a series of lectures, and a young preacher named Cooper is 
 said to have felt an especial calling for such a mission, and 
 to have gathered crowds to listen to his eloquent accents. 
 The Rev. John Lowe, a Scotch minister, and one of the secre¬ 
 taries of the Missionary Society, drew up a syllabus of subjects 
 for lectures, which were successively delivered by various 
 English and Scotch clergymen. According to the account 
 rendered by one of these preachers, the hall in Bury Street, 
 though large enough to contain 800 to 900 persons, was 
 scantily attended, and not fifty Jews were ever found there at 
 one time. It is represented that some of the principal Jewish 
 merchants were occasionally present at these lectures, but 
 that they seemed incredulous on religious subjects. Cooper, 
 who preached in the fields, is stated to have drawn many Jews 
 who, far from their homes and lost among thousands, were 
 
 Q 
 
242 
 
 CONVERSIONIST ATTEMPTS. 
 
 less exposed to observation. Bnt these efforts did not appear 
 to produce any effect—Jews possibly beard these lectures; 
 assuredly they were not converted. We have spoken at length 
 on the subject of Jewish conversions, and we need not revert 
 to the question ; we will only observe that conversion societies 
 have seldom, if ever, gained over to Christianity one single 
 Jew of note or position in his own nation. After some years 
 these efforts were relinquished. One of the dissenting mini¬ 
 sters, Dr Hunter, who appeared to be more sensible than the 
 rest, declared the undertaking to be fruitless, and he said in 
 his last lecture, “ Prophecy did not encourage us as yet to 
 expect the conversion of 1000 Jews in London, and success 
 would have falsified prediction.” Dr Hunter also alleged, 
 and the first part of his proposition is correct—“ That Jews 
 had not always had before them the amiable and attractive 
 side of Christianity; that they had met with hatred, contempt, 
 and persecution from Christians, and in return hated them 
 and their religion.” His concluding remarks deserve repro¬ 
 duction : u Whenever the salvation of Israel is wrought out, 
 you may rest assured it will be at a time and by means of 
 instruments far beyond the power of human sagacity to de¬ 
 termine. I have contributed my mite towards the attempt, 
 but under a complete conviction of its total inutility. But so 
 little am I wedded to my own prejudice or opinion, that to 
 live to see the event giving them a flat contradiction, I should 
 consider that as the most blessed event of my life.” Oh, 
 that the over-zealous speakers of Exeter Hall could learn a 
 little of the wisdom, moderation, and sincerity of Dr Hunter! 
 and that the pious old ladies and tender-hearted country 
 jrentlemen, who are so anxious for the salvation of the Jews, 
 could be prevailed upon to turn their philanthropic attention 
 to the rescue of the numerous heathens who walk in the streets 
 of London, and who know not their right hands from the left! 
 A certain foreign convert, who adopted the name of Frey, 
 exerted himself zealously to induce his former brethren to 
 follow his example, like the fox which had lost its tail. Frey 
 became a Christian clergyman, and to inspire faith in his 
 sincerity, he adopted such extreme views, as to check rather 
 than encourage neophytes; and his own fellow-labourers were 
 constrained to admit that he effected little good in their cause. 
 
CONVERSIONIST ATTEMPTS. 
 
 243 
 
 Frey was a man of some knowledge in Hebrew, and lie wrote 
 a Hebrew lexicon. He addressed a letter to the Jews of 
 which they took no public notice. But a certain Solomon 
 Bennett, a Pole, wrote a reply thereto which was neither a 
 learned nor a well-written production. It was not until some 
 years after the beginning of the present century, that rank 
 and wealth commenced their efforts to win over, not to say 
 purchase, Jews to Christianity; and of these attempts we 
 shall speak in the proper place. 
 
 Notwithstanding the improved tone of feeling towards the 
 Jews which was beginning to prevail among the educated 
 part of the population, the general position of that commu¬ 
 nity was by no means more secure, more honourable, or more 
 brilliant than it had been during the preceding half century. 
 They eujoyed neither civil nor political rights. The Alien 
 Act had already pressed somewhat hardly upon them. Again, 
 in July 1798, the Lord Mayor summoned the Wardens of the 
 City Synagogues, to say that the Duke of Portland, one of 
 her Majesty’s Secretaries of State, had ordered him to pro¬ 
 cure a return of all aliens within three weeks, and all Jews 
 not conforming were liable to imprisonment and transporta¬ 
 tion. The Sephardi authorities took stringent measures to 
 induce all foreign Jews, except those who had become free 
 denizens, to attend in the vestry-room for the purposes of 
 registration. At the same time a meeting of the Honorary 
 Officials of the Ashkenazi Congregations was held at the 
 Anti-Gallican Coffee-house, under the presidency of Mr 
 Abraham Goldsmid, at which it was resolved to register all 
 members, seatliolders, past seatholders, and their servants, so 
 as to avoid incurring the penalties of the law. 
 
 We are glad, however, to be able to record an example of 
 liberality and good feeling displayed towards the Jews, a few 
 brief years after this occurrence. Mr Abraham Goldsmid 
 and Mr Gabriel I. Brandon, as Presidents of their respective 
 Synagogues, in Duke’s Place and Bevis Marks, applied in 
 1801 to Mr Main waring, Chairman of the Commission of 
 Magistrates for the preservation of the peace in the County 
 of Middlesex, praying that Jewish prisoners in Bridewell 
 might be dispensed from work on Sabbaths and festivals. 
 Whereupon Mr Mainwaring desired to be informed of the date 
 
244 
 
 CO NVERSI0N1ST A TTEMPTS. 
 
 of such festivals and the hour of their beginning according to the 
 Jewish ritual. These particulars having been duly furnished, 
 Mr Mainwaring wrote the following courteous communication 
 to Mr de Castro, Secretary to the Portuguese community: 
 
 cc Sir—I have received the list of the solemn holidays, 
 transmitted to me by order of the Rulers of the pimcipal 
 Jewish Synagogues, and beg you will present my respectful 
 compliments to these gentlemen, and inform them that I 
 will, as soon as possible, obtain the indulgencies requested for 
 such Jews, as may be so unfortunate as to become prisoners 
 in the gaols under the direction of the magistrates of this 
 county.—I am, &c., W. Mainwaring.” 
 
 The kind act of this gentleman deserves mention as estab¬ 
 lishing an official precedent for such exemptions. The same 
 privilege has since been frequently, though not invaiiably, 
 accorded to Jews in English prisons ; where fortunately the 
 number of Jewish prisoners has ordinarily been small, even 
 considering the proportion the Jews bear to the rest of the 
 population. 
 
 We have already said that the German Jews were beginning 
 to acquire wealth and position during the last years of the 
 eighteenth century. Men of fortune and public spirit arose 
 among them, and the Goldsmid family shone pre-eminently for 
 their wealth and their munificent generosity. 
 
 The want of an asylum for the poor of the German com¬ 
 munity was beginning to be felt 5 and in 1795, Messrs Ben¬ 
 jamin and Abraham Goldsmid opened for the purpose a list of 
 subscriptions, to which they liberally themselves contributed. 
 In the year 1797, the sum collected amounted to £20,000, 
 which was invested in 3 per cent, stock. The scheme remained 
 in abeyance until 1806, when a meeting of the Jewish sub¬ 
 scribers was summoned. We advisedly say of the Jewish 
 subscribers, for a considerable part of this £ 20,000 had been 
 liberally given by Christians,—by large-hearted men, whose 
 object was purely philanthropic, and who had no desire to 
 meddle in internal Jewish affairs. At that meeting it was 
 resolved to establish an hospital for the reception and support 
 of the aged poor, and for the education and industrious em¬ 
 ployment of the youth of both sexes. A portion of the funds 
 
CONVERSIONIST A TTEMPTS. 2 4 5 
 
 which served for the foundation of the institution, came from 
 an abortive scheme to establish an hospital for the Jewish 
 sick. 
 
 With the funds on hand, which had considerably increased, 
 and which formed a total capital of £30,000 stock, an income 
 of £900 a year was secured. A spacious and convenient 
 building, especially constructed, was opened on the 28th June 
 1807. It was called the Neveh Tzedek —Abode of Righteous¬ 
 ness—and it provided for the reception of live aged men, live 
 aged women, ten boys, and eight girls. The new institution 
 proved a success. It was most favourably described in the 
 press of the day; and it has been since steadily extending its 
 scope and its sphere of usefulness. The boys, after a course 
 of proper instruction, were taught a trade in the house, and 
 at the age of twelve or thirteen were bound apprentices to 
 suitable masters. The girls learnt reading, writing, needlework, 
 cooking, and other domestic arts, and were kept in the asylum 
 until fifteen years of age. The aged of both sexes found a 
 refuge under the hospitable roof of the Neveh Tzedek in which 
 to spend their declining years, and they remained there until 
 summoned to join the greater number. Among the founders 
 we must not omit to make honourable mention of Mr Joshua 
 Van Oven, who, by' his abilities, energies, and activity, con¬ 
 tributed to the successful execution of an idea, to the origin 
 of which he was not himself a stranger. 
 
 The possession of supernatural powers has been usually 
 attributed to those Jewish doctors who have mastered the 
 secrets of the Kabbala, and the character of a Thaumaturgos 
 is by no means new in Jewish history. A gentleman, popu¬ 
 larly invested with those miraculous gifts, made his appear¬ 
 ance in London during the latter part of the eighteenth century. 
 This Baal Shem , this master of the mode of uttering the In¬ 
 effable name; this holder of an extraordinary faculty, which 
 was said to have proved highly valuable to him, was known 
 in everyday 7- life as Dr or Rabbi de Falk. He came from 
 Furth, where his mother had died in straitened circumstances, 
 and had been buried at the expense of the Congregation : De 
 Falk himself was without means when he reached this country. 
 Whether he owned among his other secrets the grand one of 
 the transmutation of metals, or whether he followed privately 
 
246 
 
 CONVERSION!ST ATTEMPTS. 
 
 some lucrative occupation, like a common mortal, we are un¬ 
 able to state. But by all accounts, soon after his arrival in 
 London, De Falk was seen to be in possession of considerable 
 funds, and one of his first cares was to remit to the Congre¬ 
 gation of Furth the amount of the expenses incurred for his 
 mother’s funeral. Usually De Falk was well provided with 
 cash; but occasionally he found himself in absolute need, 
 when he did not disdain to seek advances on his plate from 
 a pawnbroker in Houndsditch. The bolts and bars of the 
 pawnbroker’s strong room were insufficient to confine there 
 De Falk’s valuables, when he summoned them back to his 
 own closet: but he always honourably acquitted his debt. 
 One day, shortly after having deposited some gold and silver 
 vessels with the pawnbroker, the Kabbalist went to the shop 
 in question, and laying down the duplicate with the sum ad¬ 
 vanced and exact interest, he told the shopman not to trouble 
 himself for the plate, as it was already in his possession. 
 The incredulity with which this statement was received, 
 changed into absolute dismay, when it was ascertained that 
 De Falk’s property had really disappeared, without displacing 
 any of the articles that had surrounded it! 
 
 Rabbi de Falk lived in Wellclose Square, where he kept a 
 comfortable establishment. He had there his private Syna¬ 
 gogue : and he exercised great benevolence towards the de¬ 
 serving. He is described as a man of universal knowledge, 
 of singular manners, and of wonderful talent, which seemed 
 to command the supernatural agencies of spiritual life. In¬ 
 stances are given of his extraordinary faculties, by respectable 
 witnesses of his day, who evidently placed implicit faith in 
 the stories they related. Dr de Falk was a frequent guest 
 at Aaron Goldsmid’s table. One day, it is said, the Baal 
 Shem was invited to call on one of Mr Goldsmid’s visitors, a 
 gentleman dwelling in the Chapter-house in St Paul’s Church¬ 
 yard, to hold some conversation with him in a friendly manner 
 on philosophical subjects: “ When will you come?” asked 
 the gentleman. De Falk took from his pocket a small piece 
 of wax candle, and handing it to his new acquaintance, re¬ 
 plied : “ Light this, sir, when you get home, and I shall be 
 with you as soon as it goes out.” Next morning, the gentle¬ 
 man in question lighted the piece of candle. He watched it 
 
CONVERSIONIST A TTEMPTS. 
 
 247 
 
 closely, expecting it to be consumed soon, and then to see 
 De Falk. In vain. The taper, like the sepulchral lamps of 
 old, burned all day and all night, without the least diminution 
 in its flame. He removed the magic candle into a closet, 
 when he inspected it several times daily, for the space of 
 three weeks. One evening, at last, Dr de Falk arrived in a 
 hackney coach. The host had almost given up all expectation 
 of seeing De Falk, as the taper, shortly before his advent, 
 was still burning as brightly as ever. As soon as mutual 
 civilities were over, the master of the house hastened to look 
 at the candle in the closet. It had disappeared. When he 
 returned, he asked De Falk whether the agent that had re¬ 
 moved the candle would bring back the candlestick. u Oh 
 yes,” was the reply; “it is now in your kitchen below,” 
 which actually proved to be the fact. Once a fire was raging 
 in Duke’s Place, and the Synagogue was considered in im¬ 
 minent danger of being destroyed. The advice and assistance 
 of De Falk were solicited: he wrote only four Hebrew letters 
 on the pillars of the door, when the wind immediately changed 
 its quarter, and the fire subsided without committing further 
 damage. 
 
 When Dr de Falk made his will, for not all his knowledge 
 could save him from the fate of ordinary mortality, he ap¬ 
 pointed as his executors Mr Aaron Goldsmid, Mr George 
 Goldsmid, and Mr de Symons. He bequeathed to the Great 
 Synagogue a small legacy of £68, 16s. 4d., and an annual 
 sum of £4, 12s. to whoever fulfilled the functions of Chief 
 Rabbi. To Aaron Goldsmid, De Falk, in token of his friend¬ 
 ship, left a sealed packet or box, with strict injunctions that 
 it should be carefully preserved, but not opened. Prosperity 
 to the Goldsmid family would attend obedience to De Falk’s 
 behests; while fatal consequences would follow their disre¬ 
 gard. Some time after the Kabbalist’s death, Aaron Gold¬ 
 smid, unable to overcome his curiosity, broke the seal of the 
 mysterious packet. On the same day, he was found dead. 
 Near him was the fatal paper, which was covered with hiero¬ 
 glyphics and cabalistic figures. 
 
 We need not multiply instances of De Falk’s alleged super¬ 
 natural powers. We must, however, express a regret that his 
 miracles did not assume a higher form. It seems hardly 
 
248 
 
 CONVERSIONIST A TTEMPTS. 
 
 worth while to summon the assistance of the world of spirits, 
 merely to conjure away from a pawnbroker’s office some coffee 
 pots and silver dishes. To make a candle burn for weeks is 
 a very purposeless prodigy, unless applicable to the objects of 
 domestic economy. We will not undertake to say whether 
 there is more in heaven or earth than we dream of in our 
 philosophy; whether, as is more likely, De Falk’s miracles 
 partook of the nature of the feats performed by Robert Houdin, 
 Professor Anderson, and Dr Lynn; or whether, as is most 
 probable of all, they were ordinary occurrences magnified into 
 wonders by the love of the marvellous and of the supernatural 
 obtaining in the mind of the vulgar. All we have to add 
 with reference to De Falk is, that the poor considered him 
 as a benefactor, and consulted him on every emergency during 
 his life, while they blessed his memory after death for the 
 liberal donations he left, which were dispensed by Mr de 
 Symons, the surviving executor. 
 
I 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 Aaron Goldsmid was a Dutch merchant of means and of 
 good connections, who established himself in this country 
 with his family in 1765. He was the father of eight children, 
 four of whom were sons and four were daughters. The sons 
 grew up and prospered, and wedded wealthy wives from their 
 own community. The eldest son, George Goldsmid, became 
 a partner in his father’s firm of Aaron Goldsmid & Son. 
 Asher, the second son, joined Mr Mocatta of Mansell Street, 
 and founded the eminent firm of Mocatta & Goldsmid, who 
 became bullion-brokers to the Bank of England. Originally 
 Mr Goldsmid intended to admit his third son, Benjamin, to 
 a share in the affairs of his house. A serious blow sustained 
 by his firm caused him to alter his plans. He determined 
 that his younger sons, Benjamin and Abraham, should begin 
 an independent business as brokers. The limited capital with 
 which they started, was afterwards increased by a legacy of 
 £15,000, bequeathed to them by an uncle at Amsterdam. For 
 family reasons it was deemed desirable that Benjamin should 
 travel for a few months; and he took this opportune of 
 visiting some of the principal cities of Europe in company with 
 Mr Joachim, his brother-in-law. In brilliant Paris, in solemn 
 Berlin, in artistic Rome, Benjamin Goldsmid visited his 
 brethren, made himself acquainted with their political con¬ 
 dition, with their educational status, and with their material 
 and moral wants. Being of a generous disposition he liberally 
 contributed to the assistance of the Jews abroad, and on his 
 return to England his attention became more easily fixed on 
 the needs of the Jews at home. To all his co-religionists, 
 English and foreign, he always proved open-handed. The 
 death of Aaron Goldsmid occurred suddenly, as we related in 
 
250 
 
 THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 the previous chapter. Not many months after he had wel¬ 
 comed back his son Benjamin, the head of the house of Gold- 
 smid divided his fortune equally among his children. 
 
 Benjamin Goldsmid was lucky enough to secure the hand 
 of Miss Jessie Solomons, the daughter of Mr Israel L. Solo¬ 
 mons of Clapton, an opulent East India merchant, of Dutch 
 extraction. The young lady was a highly-coveted prize, not 
 only for the beauty of her person and the charm of her manner, 
 but because she was reported to be the richest maiden in Israel. 
 The marriage of Benjamin Goldsmid took place as soon after 
 the death of his father as circumstances permitted. The 
 £100,000, brought to Benjamin by his young bride, materially 
 added to the credit of the house; and the increasing opera¬ 
 tions of the firm of Goldsmid in time attracted the attention 
 of government. Large sums passed through their hands in 
 the purchase and sale of bullion, stocks, navy and exchequer 
 bills, and in negotiating foreign bills of exchange. Their 
 transactions amounted annually to millions, until the extent 
 of their speculations and of their credit, and the liberality of 
 their dispositions, raised them without opposition to the very 
 first place in the Stock Exchange. They were the earliest 
 members of the Stock Exchange, who competed with bankers 
 for national loans. Hitherto, these had been allotted by the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer to the banking interest, who 
 were wont to form a confederation to keep down the prices. 
 The brothers Goldsmid broke down the monopoly, and the 
 country profited by obtaining more favourable terms. At the 
 same time fortune seemed to follow their every act, and the 
 smiles of the capricious goddess were lavished upon them. 
 Their charity and their beneficence were equal to their wealth, 
 and their liberality was not confined to the poor of their own 
 faith, but was freely afforded to Christians of every denomina¬ 
 tion. They possessed financial genius of the highest order; 
 they knew a bad name to a bill of exchange as if by instinct. 
 In 1793 when a commercial crisis occurred, as severe as the 
 crisis of 1847, when some of the oldest and most substantial 
 commercial houses in England fell to pieces like houses of 
 cards, Benjamin and Abraham Goldsmid lost only £50! 
 The press of the period faithfully reported their movements, 
 and one day we find recorded a banquet to royalty, the next 
 
THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 2 Si 
 
 day an errand of mercy to a prisoner’s cell. Their hospitality 
 was unbounded. Their entertainments were on the grandest 
 scale, and were said to have rivalled the fairy glories of the 
 Arabian Nights. 
 
 Benjamin Goldsmid, immediately after his marriage, took 
 a tasteful and elegant residence at Stamford Hill; and subse¬ 
 quently he purchased an estate at Roehampton, where he 
 ordered the erection of a princely mansion. Nothing w T as 
 omitted that could add splendour to this abode of luxury and 
 boundless wealth. Magnificent and costly staircases, vesti¬ 
 bules with beautiful and expensive marble pavements, a 
 rich library, a noble dining-room, a choice gallery of paint¬ 
 ings, gorgeous drawing-rooms, unique stables, grounds laid 
 out with admirable taste and judgment, and a terrace and 
 lawn, where art and nature seemed to vie with each other to 
 gratify and bewitch the beholder. Such were some of the 
 features of a residence that was compared with Windsor Castle! 
 Brilliant illuminations on public occasions rendered it a fairy 
 palace; and the fete given after the battle of the Nile, is 
 stated to have surpassed in splendour all that had been at¬ 
 tempted before in England ! Benjamin was a great personal 
 favourite with Pitt, England’s celebrated minister. His name, 
 and that of his brother Abraham, were found in all lists of 
 subscriptions for charitable objects. Benjamin Goldsmid was 
 the founder of the Naval Asylum, and for a time the institu¬ 
 tion was under his management, until the Government adopted 
 it, enlarged it, and rendered it worthy to shelter the children 
 of the sailors of the greatest naval nation in the world. At 
 the anniversary dinner, the Duke of Kent (father of her 
 present Majesty) presided, with Admiral Sir Sydney Smith 
 on his right hand, and Benjamin Goldsmid on his left. Jews 
 and Christians alike freely gave on the occasion, and Benjamin 
 Goldsmid collected £2000 among his friends. Neither did 
 he forget his race and faith. He was a generous donor to the 
 Synagogue funds; and he had an apartment fitted up in his 
 mansion where his household assembled for divine worship, 
 and where was carefully kept a Scroll of the Law. He ap¬ 
 propriated a piece of ground to the Chief Rabbi, and he 
 annually presented to him its produce, fine wheat, with which 
 to make Passover cakes. Knowing the low state of education 
 
252 
 
 THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 among German Jews in his time, he liberally promoted all 
 schemes likely to raise the mental condition of his co-re¬ 
 ligionists. He supported all educational movements, and in 
 conjunction with Hr Myers (father of the late Baroness N. M. 
 de Rothschild), he formed a society to assist David Levi in 
 the publication of his works, and he treated Levi in the most 
 generous manner. Unhappily, Benjamin Goldsmid in his 
 later years became afflicted with, tits of despondency, for 
 which there was no possible cause. His family do not appear 
 to have felt any serious apprehension. Mischief was brewing 
 nevertheless, and on the 15th April 1808, during an attack 
 of gout, Benjamin Goldsmid took his own life. His mind 
 had evidently become affected, and so certified the jury im- 
 pannelled for the inquest. Thus perished, at the premature 
 age of fifty-five, the senior partner of one of the wealthiest 
 houses in Europe, a man whose life had presented an un¬ 
 broken series of successes and triumphs, and who had tasted 
 all the happiness that may fall to the lot of mortals. 
 
 Abraham Goldsmid was, if possible, even more popular 
 than his brother Benjamin. His friendly demeanour, his 
 mild, unassuming manner, his extended philanthropy, his 
 ready munificence, were the themes of general conversation. 
 The anecdotes related of his unostentatious charity would 
 almost fill a volume. Now we hear of him saving the humble 
 home of a waiter from the clutches of the bailiffs. Now we 
 see him delicately assisting a single-minded and worthy curate 
 
 _whose poverty he considered a disgrace to the Church of 
 
 England—by allotting him a share of a new loan; the letter 
 of allotment being considered a hoax, and thrown aside by 
 the curate, until another post brought a cheque for a large 
 amount realised on the allotment. Another time we find 
 Abraham Goldsmid obtaining the reprieve of a forger; or 
 taking charge of some destitute orphans; or relieving from 
 ruin a distressed officer. He had been united to a Dutch 
 voung lady of wealth, and he possessed an establishment at 
 Morden, little inferior in munificence to his brother’s residence 
 at Roehampton. It is related that one day King George III., 
 during a drive with Queen Charlotte, alighted from his car¬ 
 riage for a stroll, and stopped to admire some fine trees, en¬ 
 closed within a gentleman’s park. In answer to an inquiry, 
 
THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 2 53 
 
 his Majesty was told that the estate belonged to Abraham 
 Goldsmid the Jew. “What, what, my friend Abraham! ” said 
 the King; “ I must see it. Go and tell Mr Goldsmid to get 
 some luncheon ready for us, and we shall go to him at once. 
 King George’s commands were obeyed, and the vast resources 
 of the household of the great loan-contractor were called into 
 requisition. A sumptuous repast was laid before their Majes¬ 
 ties of England. “ Farmer George,” after having inspected 
 the highly ornamented and beautifully laid-out grounds, was 
 ushered into a handsome and well-proportioned dining hall. 
 Royalty sat down before the well-spread board, while Abraham 
 Goldsmid with his family remained standing like dutiful 
 subjects. “ Come, Goldsmid,” exclaimed Farmer George, 
 observing this, “ if you do not sit down to luncheon I shall 
 stand up too.” The King was not a Lucullus, but he loved 
 good cheer, and he seldom enjoyed a repast more than the 
 refection in which, side by side with the financier, he tasted 
 the delicacies of the season. 
 
 The death of Benjamin Goldsmid proved a serious blow to 
 Abraham, for the two brothers were tenderly attached to each 
 other. Nevertheless, the latter continued his operations with¬ 
 out interruption. In 1810 the houses of Baring and Gold¬ 
 smid were contractors for the ministerial loan of £14,000,000. 
 Sir Thomas Baring died at this juncture, leaving, it is said, 
 a fortune of £5,000,000. The care of supporting the market 
 fell on the shoulders of Abraham Goldsmid, and the task 
 proved most arduous. A powerful organisation had been 
 formed, which would have required the combined resources of 
 the two houses to overcome. Day by day the price of scrip 
 dropped, and with it dropped the fortunes of Abraham Gold¬ 
 smid. He held £8,000,000 of stock; he gradually lost all 
 fortitude, and became a prey to despondency. 
 
 When the reduction in the price of omnium had reached 
 £65 per thousand, his singularly clear mind became confused, 
 and he appeared restless and disordered. Another circum¬ 
 stance added to his embarrassment. The East India Company 
 had placed Exchequer Bills to the extent of £500,000 in his 
 hands to negotiate. That corporation became alarmed for 
 the safety of their property and claimed its value. The pay¬ 
 ment was fixed for Friday the 28th September 1810. Abra- 
 
254 
 
 THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 ham Goldsmid was unprepared, and his sensitive and honour¬ 
 able nature made him shrink from facing a disgrace which 
 he exaggerated a thousand times. It has been said, we know 
 not on what authority, that one of his kinsmen hastened to 
 Morden (his residence) on that Friday morning, with the 
 good news that the funds for the East India Company were 
 ready. At all events, it was too late. Abraham Goldsmid 
 
 was dead! 
 
 The news of the calamity produced an unparalleled sensa¬ 
 tion. The loss of the great loan-contractor was regarded as 
 an event of national importance. Expresses were dispatched 
 to the King and to the Prince of Wales. Consols fell in a 
 few minutes from 66 J to 61|-, and omnium from 6-Jr to 10j 
 discount. Jobbers met with anxious faces in Capel Court, 
 and merchants attended before their time in the Exchange. 
 Business was suspended; the news of peace or war scarcely 
 caused equal excitement. The public journals teemed with 
 eulogies on a man whose name had been synonymous with 
 charity, with beneficence, with philanthropy. His remains 
 were followed to the grave by weeping and mourning thou¬ 
 sands, who, having experienced his generosity and liberality 
 in life, now crowded to honour him in death. 
 
 Then for a time the star of the Goldsmid family paled. 
 In later years some members of the family, who had seceded 
 from Judaism, acquired rank and distinction in the service of 
 the East India Company, and one Goldsmid (afterwards a 
 general) fought at Waterloo. It was left to Sir Isaac Lyon 
 Goldsmid, son of Mr Asher Goldsmid, and nephew of Ben¬ 
 jamin and Abraham Goldsmid, to revive the glories of his 
 
 house. 
 
 Isaac L. Goldsmid was born in 1778, and received a good 
 education at an English school in Finsbury Square. He be¬ 
 came a fluent Latin scholar, and a fair mathematician, while 
 he cultivated at the same time Jewish theology, the higher 
 branches of philosophy, and political science. In due course 
 he was admitted a partner in the firm of Mocatta & Goldsmid, 
 brokers to the Bank of England and the East India Company. 
 This was one of the twelve houses of Jewish brokers then 
 allowed in the city of London. Mr I. L. Goldsmid, as bullion- 
 broker, was by right also a member of the Stock Exchange. 
 
THE G OLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 2 55 
 
 His first speculations were not successful, but subsequently 
 be was more fortunate, and began to amass a vast fortune. 
 
 Mr Goldsmid initiated various public undertakings, such 
 as the Croydon and Merstham Railway, which was one of the 
 earliest attempts at railways in England; and he assisted in 
 the establishment of the London Institution and the London 
 Docks. 
 
 It was not only towards industrial schemes that his energies 
 were directed. The causes of philanthropy and education 
 enlisted his warmest sympathies. He co-operated with Joseph 
 Lancaster in spreading enlightenment among the masses, and 
 with Mrs Fry in improving the condition of prisoners. The 
 share Mr Goldsmid had in the foundation of the London 
 University and University College are well known. Mr 
 Goldsmid married, in 1804, his cousin Isabel, by whom he 
 became the father of several children. He was much attached 
 to his kindred, and on the downfall of his uncles, he exerted 
 himself strenuously to save the relics of their fortune for 
 their widows and offspring. 
 
 As the subject of this sketch grew in wealth, he participated 
 in numerous financial operations, which were mostly con¬ 
 nected with Portugal, Brazil, and Turkey. The loans he car¬ 
 ried out for these countries were highly successful. He was 
 visited by many foreign political exiles, among whom was Prince 
 Louis Napoleon, albeit the future Emperor of the French did 
 not succeed in enlisting his support. Sir I. L. Goldsmid, after 
 receiving an English baronetcy, was created a Knight of the 
 Tower and Sword of Portugal. Subsequently, the king of 
 that country bestowed upon him the title of Baron da Palmeira, 
 to which a small estate was attached. It is said that Sir 
 I. L. Goldsmid was induced to accept these honours, rather 
 by a desire to vindicate the Jewish name—his race having 
 endured prolonged persecution in Portugal—-than by motives 
 of personal ambition. 
 
 Sir I. L. Goldsmid, having satisfactorily negotiated two 
 loans for Brazil, was appointed to the financial agency of 
 that empire, which he shared with his friends, Alderman 
 Thompson, M.P., and Messrs T. and W. King. At sixty 
 years of age he retired from business, and was succeeded by 
 his younger son. Sir I. L. Goldsmid then visited France, 
 
256 
 
 THE GOLDSMID FAMILY. 
 
 Italy, and Germany, for the benefit of his health; and on his 
 return to England he was again drawn into a variety of 
 transactions. He lived until an advanced age, though in 
 his last years he had become childish, and he eventually died 
 in 1859. He was, during his whole life, a strict observing 
 Jew, and the services he rendered to the Jewish cause were 
 of the highest importance. He contributed, to as great a 
 degree as any other individual, to the removal of Jewish 
 disabilities, and his efforts in this direction will receive full 
 justice in due course. 
 
CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 A SCHEME FOR IMPROVING THE CONDITION OF THE 
 
 POOR. 
 
 How best to relieve tlie suffering and distress that seem 
 to be the doom of human nature in the present condition 
 of society, without inducing on the part of the poor too 
 great a reliance on the support of the beneficent, is one of 
 those problems, the satisfactory solution of which has baffled 
 human ingenuity. How to cope with pauperism; how to 
 rouse the poor from the slough of despond; how to infuse 
 into them the spirit of hope and the spirit of self-exertion, 
 have been tasks that have taxed to the uttermost the energies 
 and ingenuity of many a philanthropist. If the plague- 
 spots of pauperism, of ignorance, of crime, still eat into the 
 heart of society in our days, after so many noble efforts have 
 been made to grapple with the evils that form hideous blots 
 on our much-vaunted civilisation, the condition will easily 
 be imagined of the lower classes three-quarters of a century 
 since. A vivid picture of that condition is presented by a 
 work on the police of London, emanating from the pen of 
 Patrick Colquhoun, LL.D., an able and philanthropic magis¬ 
 trate, who for many years presided at the Westminster Police 
 Office. The nature of our undertaking prescribes to us the 
 treatment of matters of essentially Jewish interest. We 
 will, therefore, resist the temptation of laying before our 
 readers some remarkable details concerning the poor of 
 London in general, and we will limit ourselves to speaking 
 of the Jewish poor in particular. 
 
 We will at once say, that the state of the Jewish indigent 
 at the close of last century was most lamentable—an appal¬ 
 ling degree of misery, ignorance, and demoralisation obtained. 
 Even among the Sephardic Jews, with their superior wealth, 
 
 u 
 
258 
 
 A SCHEME FOR IMPROVING THE 
 
 education, and opportunities, the condition of the poor was 
 highly unsatisfactory. We have it from the pen of an 
 enlightened member of that community, Jacob Abenatar 
 Pimentel, who addressed some letters on this vital question to 
 the authorities of his congregation, that there was a mani¬ 
 fest increase of the poor in that period, and that the increase 
 was to be attributed to their own want of industry and sheer 
 idleness. The same gentleman informs us that the poor of 
 his community were averse to hard work; that they only 
 supplied cane strings, barley-sugar, and sweet cakes ; that 
 scarcely any mechanics and few domestic servants were found 
 in their ranks; that charities were multiplied ad infinitum , 
 and that ruinous establishments were maintained at a heavy 
 expense indiscriminately for the idle, the worthless, and the 
 profligate; that the certainty of being relieved, when suffer¬ 
 ing the combined miseries of age and poverty, tended to 
 relax the efforts of the humbler classes in early life; that it 
 was better to place them in a position to purchase their own 
 bread rather than to have their bread purchased for them ; 
 and, finally, that the poor were little inclined to work, and 
 the authorities, out of mistaken kindness, contributed to 
 pauperise them. These letters of Mr Pimentel seem to have 
 led to nothing beyond an empty vote of thanks to him for 
 his communications! And yet they dealt with most import¬ 
 ant topics ! A wonderful amelioration in the condition of 
 the Jewish poor has doubtless occurred since then ; neverthe¬ 
 less, we question whether, even at the present day, the evils 
 complained of by Jacob Abenatar Pimentel, with reference 
 to the mistaken treatment of the poor, have been wholly 
 removed. 
 
 The state of the poor among the Sephardim, unsatisfactory 
 as it may have been, was absolute excellence, was supreme 
 goodness, as compared with the vastly inferior general condi¬ 
 tion of the Askenazi poor. Here we have to deal not only 
 with poverty and idleness ; we have to face the lowest depth 
 of destitution, profound ignorance, great demoralisation. 
 The shoals of indigent Jews flocking over from German 
 Ghettos and from Polish villages, without resources, without 
 any other knowledge than that of the exterior forms of their 
 own religion—generally unacquainted with any trade and 
 
CONDITION OF THE POOR. 
 
 259 
 
 with the language of this country, found themselves utterly 
 adnft in London, and frequently had to choose between 
 hunger and dishonesty, starvation and petty crime. In 
 a new edition of his work, Mr Colquhoun drew so severe 
 a picture of the malpractices habitually committed by some 
 of the foreign Jewish poor, and painted their sufferings and 
 their general conduct in such gloomy colours, as to attract 
 the attention of some of the most enlightened members of 
 the Askenazim. Mr J. Van Oven, a gentleman who distin¬ 
 guished himself for the eminent services he rendered to the 
 Jewish cause, and for the zeal and ability with which he 
 was always ready to promote the interests of the Jewish race, 
 took up the pen in reply to the strictures of Mr Colquhoun. 
 Under date of the 24th March 1801, Mr Van Oven pub¬ 
 lished a letter addressed to that gentleman, in which he 
 eloquently defended his poorer co-religionists, and pro¬ 
 pounded the general feature of a scheme for their moral and 
 material improvement. From this source we gather some 
 \ aluable details on the Jewish poor. Mr Van Oven is able 
 to explain and palliate, though not altogether to deny, the 
 allegations of Mr Colquhoun. “The Jews,” says Mr Van 
 Oven, “ are refused the privilege of exercising any trade or 
 calling, and they are necessarily driven to the shift of money 
 tiansactions, which leads to the idea that Jew and usurer 
 are convertible terms. The poor Jews practise petty knavery 
 absolutely for bread. The constrained and deplorable state 
 of these poor gives ground for the continuance of the pre¬ 
 judice against them.” He proposed to erect houses of 
 industry and education, with hospitals for the sick, subject 
 to their own ceremonial laws, and to maintain such houses 
 by annual contributions from the sum paid to the general 
 poor-rates by Jewish housekeepers. The whole was to be 
 vested under the management of a properly-elected board. 
 Mr Van Oven thought it an especially favourable moment to 
 moot the question, owing to the presence among the Jews 
 of a man—“ who was an honour to his species in general and 
 his nation in particular (Abraham Groldsmid), who united in 
 himself the rare qualities of integrity, generosity, and active 
 benevolence, whose liberality was unbounded, and who had 
 deservedly acquired the love and admiration of all who knew 
 
26 o 
 
 A SCHEME FOE IMPROVING THE 
 
 him.” As for the general condition of the German Congrega¬ 
 tions, we gather from Mr Yan Oven, through other documents, 
 that the German Jews at that period still possessed the fewest 
 number of rich and the largest number of poor; that the 
 Synagogue in Fen church Street comprised a small number 
 of opulent members with very few poor; that the Synagogue 
 ki Leadenhall Street, with a sprinkling of rich men, consisted 
 mainly of persons of the middle-class and of poor people; 
 that the Great Synagogue in Duke’s Place had the greatest 
 number of all classes, but its poor were altogether unlimited 
 as all strangers w r ere customarily considered as attached to 
 this congregation. The income of the Synagogues was mostly 
 uncertain and fluctuating. The members did not pay, as 
 in the Portuguese Congregation, a fixed rate (finta) and a 
 tax on commercial operations (imposta). They only contri¬ 
 buted a rental for their seats, and the offerings made on 
 festivals and on especial occasions, the payment of which 
 there was no means of enforcing. The relief of the poor 
 depended solely on the amount in hand, and was conducted 
 by the overseer at his discretion. No wonder, therefore, that 
 it was totally ineffective. 
 
 Mr Colquhoun was a large-minded man, desirous of pro¬ 
 moting the welfare of Jew as well as of Christian. A private 
 correspondence ensued between him and J. Yan Oven, and 
 these two philanthropic men, of different creeds, learned to 
 respect and esteem each other. Mr Colquhoun drew up the 
 draft of a comprehensive scheme, from the notes furnished 
 him by J. Yan Oven. The scheme was discussed by these 
 two gentlemen; it was submitted to and approved by 
 Abraham Goldsmid : it was slightly amended, and eventually 
 Mr Goldsmid placed it in the hands of Mr Addington, the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, supported by a petition in its 
 favour. It was proposed, according to this plan, to form a 
 board, consisting of twelve representatives of the German 
 Jews, four representatives of the Portuguese Jews, two aider- 
 men of the City of London, two magistrates for Middlesex, 
 Kent, Essex, and Surrey, and the four presidents of the four 
 City Synagogues, all of whom were to be appointed by the 
 Act of Parliament applied for. This board was to be em¬ 
 powered to purchase land, not to exceed 100 acres, and to 
 
CONDITION OF THE POOR. 
 
 261 
 
 erect thereupon the following buildings : 1. An asylum for 
 aged and infirm persons. 2. An hospital for the sick, the 
 maimed, and the diseased. 3. A school for the education of 
 children, and their instruction in mechanical and other useful 
 arts. 4. A workhouse, or institution of industry for vagrant 
 
 poor, and such as were able but not willing to work for their 
 living. 
 
 The Jews were to relieve the parishes they inhabited of all 
 expense for their poor, and the parish was to hand to the 
 Board one-half of the assessment for the relief of the poor 
 contributed by Jews. The Board was to be empowered to 
 levy an assessment from each Synagogue; and if the re¬ 
 venue of the Synagogue should prove insufficient, an indi¬ 
 vidual assessment was to be levied from each member. It 
 was also to possess the power of borrowing up to £10,000. 
 The Board was to inquire into the circumstances of foreign 
 Jews who came over without any evident means of main¬ 
 tenance ; and to receive from the several Synagogues all the 
 incomes appropriated to the poor, in order to distribute 
 them. 
 
 This scheme, of which we have given the barest outline, 
 would have effected an incalculable amount of good, had it 
 been duly carried out at the time it was proposed. But its 
 very completeness and extended bearing militated against 
 its success, and raised against it strenuous opposition from 
 various quarters. The Great Synagogue certainly regarded 
 it with favour, and appointed a committee, to which was 
 added Mr Van Oven himself, who was one of the medical 
 officers of the Synagogue, to discuss the plan with the com¬ 
 mittees of the other Synagogues, and forwarded through its 
 secretary to the other congregations copies of the plan and 
 of the resolutions already arrived at on the subject. But De 
 Castro, the secretary to the Portuguese Congregation, has¬ 
 tened to disclaim, on the part of his constituents, any desire to 
 participate in the scheme. The Portuguese Community, he 
 said, already possessed an hospital, an asylum, and a school; 
 and they did not consider themselves justified in altering 
 their political or economical system, which, for upwards of 
 a century, had answered every purpose for which it had been 
 created. The fact is, that the Portuguese Jews, who had 
 
262 
 
 A SCHEME FOR IMPROVING THE 
 
 already most of the establishments intended to be formed, 
 and who possessed a much larger number of rich men in 
 their body, and a much smaller number of poor in proportion, 
 than any other congregation, would have been considerable 
 losers by the proposed amalgamation. They alleged at the 
 meetings convened in their own vestry to oppose the plan in 
 question, that their charitable institutions had been founded 
 to save their brethren who fled from Spain and Portugal, or 
 who were reduced by misfortunes, and not for the purpose 
 of encouraging German, Dutch, or Polish adventurers ;— 
 that they differed greatly from the Germans in ceremonies, 
 customs, and pronunciation, so that they could not read 
 prayers together, and that each community formed a distinct 
 political (not religious) body ;—that during the previous fifty 
 years the German Jews, especially the poorer classes, had 
 increased so prodigiously in numbers, that their poor bore 
 no proportion to the Portuguese poor, who were already pro¬ 
 vided for. 
 
 For these and other reasons the Sephardim instructed 
 their attorney to prepare a petition to Parliament in opposi¬ 
 tion to the petition of the Askenazim, in which the motives 
 were explained at length, why the two sections of the British 
 Jews could not make common cause in the support of their 
 poor. The Portuguese, moreover, dwelt forcibly on their 
 desire to retain their complete autonomy in all respects. Mr 
 Isaac Aguilar and two other representatives of this community 
 waited upon Mr Hobhouse, M.P., who had charge of the 
 Bill, to express the views of their constituents on the intro¬ 
 duction into the Bill of a clause excluding altogether the 
 Portuguese Community from the operation of the projected 
 plan. 
 
 Thus a union with the Portuguese had to be given up ; 
 and the withdrawal of the oldest and still wealthiest con^re- 
 gation in England from the proposed amalgamation scheme 
 proved a serious blow to it. Then the clause asking for half 
 the amount paid by Jews for poor-rates met with disappro¬ 
 bation from high quarters, owing to parochial influence, and 
 had to be abandoned. Finally, the idea of vesting on any 
 body of men the right of coercively taxing the Jewish 
 public, raised a host of enemies to the Bill among the German 
 
CONDITION OF THE POOR . 
 
 263 
 
 Jews themselves. Several pamphlets were written showing 
 the impracticability of the scheme, and Mr Abraham Gold- 
 smid found himself constrained to withdraw the application to 
 Parliament. Mr Van Oven greatly deplored this lame and 
 impotent conclusion : and Mr Colquhoun, who was equally 
 disappointed, thus addressed him in a letter: “ You have 
 done your utmost to obtain one of the greatest blessings, 
 moral and political, that could have been conferred on this 
 people. The time must come when- the measure must be 
 adopted under perhaps less favourable auspices.” The dis¬ 
 cussion on this scheme, if it did not lead to an immediate 
 practical result, at least aroused the German Jewish Com¬ 
 munity to a sense of their needs, which have all since been 
 provided for, though at different times, under different forms, 
 and in a manner scarcely verifying Mr Colquhoun’s predic¬ 
 tion. Mr Van Oven did not altogether renounce his philan¬ 
 thropic designs ; and in the Jews’ Hospital—to the consti¬ 
 tution of which he had materially contributed—he saw the 
 realisation of a small portion, at least, of the extended scheme 
 which he had so ably advocated. 
 
 The German Jewish Community of London may indeed 
 look back with pride on the results it has achieved since the 
 beginning of this century. Not only has it provided for the 
 material wants of its poor with a care, with a liberality, with 
 a completeness of detail unapproached by any other race; it 
 has also elevated their spiritual condition until the Jewish 
 poor of all sections of the Jewish Community in London 
 have become equal, if not actually superior, in thrift, in 
 honesty, in sobriety, and in moral and religious condition, 
 to the poor of any other faith or nationality. 
 
CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 The history of the principal German Jewish Congregation in 
 London presents few, if any, stirring events since the begin¬ 
 ning of the present century. We behold a uniform record of 
 progress in every direction; of progress in wealth, in numbers, 
 in public institutions, in education, in general welfare. The 
 most serious trouble was an occasional difference with the 
 New or with the Hambro’ Synagogue. The most startling 
 occurrence was a state visit from Royalty to the Synagogue. 
 The most puzzling dilemma was the election of a Chief 
 Rabbi, or a minister, or a deputy. Legacies were bequeathed 
 by the pious, and the funds of the community were rapidly 
 increasing. As we have often said, the real rock ahead of 
 the Askenazim was the treatment of the poor, especially of 
 the foreign poor. When the narrow parochial spirit pre¬ 
 dominated, as was too often the case, each Synagogue desired 
 to contribute as little as possible to the relief of the poor. 
 We have seen what the condition of that class was, and 
 in common justice we are bound to observe that to relieve them 
 effectively was indeed a colossal task. In 1804 a conference 
 took place between the delegates of each of the three German 
 City Synagogues, with the view of accomplishing a union 
 between them. The representatives of the Hambro’ Syna¬ 
 gogue proposed, in addition, the appointment of a committee 
 of seven members from each congregation, to consider the 
 state of the poor. These conferences and committees led 
 to no tangible result, for the inevitable law of self-interest 
 which guides communities, as it does individuals, conduced 
 to a clashing of the apparent interests of the different con¬ 
 gregations. 
 
 It was only in 1802 that a coolness of long standing 
 
THE GREA T S YJVA GOGUE. 
 
 265 
 
 between the New Synagogue and the Great Synagogue 
 had ceased to exist on the auspicious event of the nuptials 
 of Nathan Solomons, the Rosck or Principal Member 
 of the New Synagogue, with a daughter of Asher 
 Goldsmid. Mr Solomons was then admitted a member 
 of the Great Synagogue, and eternal amity was de¬ 
 clared between the members of the two congregations. 
 This happy concord lasted not quite two years ; when the 
 apple of dissension appeared under the shape of a member, 
 who was alleged to have been enticed away from one 
 Synagogue into the other. Mr L. de Symons at this 
 period (1804) suggested an amalgamation of the three 
 Askenazi Synagogues, or at least a fusion of their receipts 
 and expenditures. This proposal was declined by the 
 Hambro’ Synagogue, and rejected by the New Synagogue. 
 Happily peace was restored by the (then) new Chief Rabbi 
 of Duke’s Place, the Rev. Sol. Hirschel, who attended a 
 meeting of the Synagogue delegates, and desired each con¬ 
 gregation to elect representatives empowered to adjust all 
 differences without any further reference to their constituents. 
 A meeting of the representatives so deputed was held under 
 the presidency of the Rev. Sol. Hirschel himself, and it 
 was agreed to continue the statu quo , each Synagogue bear¬ 
 ing the same share as before of the common burden—that is, 
 the Great Synagogue relieving all the foreign poor in life, 
 and the New Synagogue and the Hambro’ Synagogue each 
 affording a small annual contribution to that object; while 
 after death the Great Synagogue was to provide sepulture to 
 two paupers, and the other two Synagogues to one pauper 
 each. This arrangement was the basis of all compacts 
 between the Askenazim congregations; differences of opinion 
 arising only as to the proper sum to be disbursed by each of 
 the smaller Synagogues. It was distinctly stipulated, too, 
 that no Synagogue should accept as member any individual 
 who was member of another. This was considered a point of 
 honour among all Jewish Synagogues in London. So strongly 
 did each congregation resent any infringement of its rights 
 on the part of the others, that once, years after this time, a 
 Yahid or member of the Portuguese Congregation, who, on 
 espousing the daughter of a member of the Duke’s Place 
 
266 THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE IN 
 
 Synagogue, had permitted the ceremony to be performed by 
 the Rev. Sol. Hirschel, was dismissed summarily from his 
 community, and a serious remonstrance was sent to the 
 German Chief Rabbi. 
 
 The treaties between the three German Synagogues were 
 usually made for five or six years, with six months’ notice of 
 discontinuation. On the 12th September 1811, the Hambro’ 
 Synagogue gave notice of discontinuing the articles of agree¬ 
 ment entered into on the 9th March 1805; and the next 
 treaty between the Hambro’ and the Great Synagogue was not 
 entered into until March 1815. Then the Hambro’ Syna¬ 
 gogue covenanted to hand over to the Great Synagogue 
 £125 per annum, and to give interment to six adult foreign 
 poor. Peace being restored between these two congregations, 
 a coolness ensued between Duke’s Place and Leadenhall 
 Street. Negotiations between the last two congregations 
 were initiated in 1818 ; committees met, the most friendly 
 intentions were expressed on both sides, but as neither side 
 would accede to the demands of the other, even in small 
 matters, the negotiations necessarily broke down. 
 
 It was not until later times that a complete understand¬ 
 ing and perfect union took place between the various German 
 congregations in London. This happy result was partly 
 owing to the exertions of Nathan Meyer Rothschild, as will 
 be seen in its place. In 1808, a contract was entered into 
 between the Westminster Synagogue, in Denmark Court, 
 Strand, and the three German Congregations in the City. 
 According to this treaty, the Westminster Synagogue was 
 allowed to have its separate existence and administration , 
 and as an adequate return for the benefits of the protection 
 of the Great Synagogue, each member was to be considered 
 as member of the Great Synagogue, and to pay annually a 
 small poll tax to the parent congregation. 
 
 From statistics of the day we perceive that in April 1804, 
 there were said to be in London 346 places of worship. Iu 
 six of these establishments the Jews assembled to sing the 
 praise of the Lord of their forefathers ; while in six more, 
 the Society of Friends met to wait until they were moved by 
 the Spirit. There were five Synagogues, one Sephardim and 
 three Askenazim in the city, and one of the latter denomina- 
 
THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 267 
 
 tion in the Strand. The remaining sixth Jewish House of 
 Worship was a Polish society, gathering in the district which 
 was then the extreme East of London. It should be borne 
 in mind that the German Jews did not lay so much stress on 
 unity as their Portuguese brethren ; and they did not think 
 the safety of the community imperilled if a few humble 
 individuals met quietly in some convenient place to perform 
 their devotions. 
 
 In the year 1808 several improvements were introduced in 
 the details of internal management in the Great Synagogue. 
 Among others all the salaries of the officials were consolidated 
 and perquisites were abolished; an innovation that was not 
 adopted by the Portuguese until long afterwards. At the same 
 time the property of the Synagogue was augmented in extent 
 by the purchase of an adjoining piece of ground for the sum 
 of £1200, which was raised by an especial loan repayable in 
 six annual instalments. In the same year, Levy Barent 
 Cohen bequeathed £500 to the Synagogue, to be invested in 
 government securities, and to be allowed to accumulate until 
 the 1st January 1823; and then to become available for 
 general congregational purposes. This was the beginning of 
 the Legacy Fund, which received large additions from time 
 to time by similar contributions from the pious. Among 
 other sums willed to this congregation during the first 
 quarter of the nineteenth century, we may mention, £4490, 
 8s. Id., from Judah Phillips, of Jamaica, left to trustees 
 for the benefit of his brother and sister to revert after their 
 death to the Synagogue; £3900 from Asher Goldsmid, 
 bequeathed in 1823, for the benefit of the poor ; and smaller 
 legacies from B. A. Goldschmidt, of Great St Helen’s, 
 and from other benevolent individuals. 
 
 The loyalty of the Askenazim was as deep as that of the 
 Sephardim, and they seized every opportunity for its mani¬ 
 festation. In April 1809 the Synagogue in Duke’s Place 
 experienced the unusual honour of receiving a state visit 
 from several princes of the blood. Abraham Goldsmid 
 attended personally at a meeting of the Synagogue on the 3d 
 of April, to give notice that the Duke of Cumberland, the 
 Duke of Sussex, and the Duke of Cambridge, intended to 
 assist at a Friday evening service. The Duke of Sussex, it 
 
268 
 
 THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE JN 
 
 is well known, always displayed much friendship and 
 sympathy for the Jews. On this occasion pompous prepara¬ 
 tions were made for the reception of these distinguished 
 guests. The Wardens of the day were Messrs Asher Golds- 
 mid, Joseph Cohen, and Moses Samuel. The notice was 
 short, for the visit occurred on Friday evening, the 14th April. 
 The path of the Royal Dukes from their carriages to the 
 entrance of the Synagogue was strewn with flowers ; and 
 their advent was hailed with the usual Prayer for the Royal 
 Family—“ He who giveth salvation unto kings”—intoned 
 by a well-drilled choir. Some verses, written, we believe, by 
 the late Michael Josephs, were sung; and a few copies 
 printed on silk were distributed to a favoured number. 
 Altogether the celebration is said to have met in the highest 
 degree the approbation of the princely sons of George III.; 
 and the visit of the Royal Dukes still forms a tradition of 
 glory among the older members of the Great Synagogue. 
 
 The 25th October 1809 was kept as a jubilee, for George 
 III. had reigned fifty years over these realms. The festival 
 was celebrated according to Jewish customs. The command¬ 
 ments enjoining the remission of debts in the year of 
 jubilee were not forgotten, and the various Jewish Congrega¬ 
 tions subscribed as far as their means permitted towards the 
 relief and discharge of persons confined for small debts. In 
 the Duke’s Place Synagogue, a special service was held at 
 one o’clock in the day. A Hebrew prayer was composed by 
 Di Hirschel, and translated into English by Joshua Van 
 Oven. An ode, composed for the occasion, was sung by a 
 trained choir ; and the ceremony was attended with great 
 solemnity. The Jews participated no less in the sorrows of 
 the Royal family; and on the sad occasion of the death of 
 the Princess Charlotte, special services were performed in all 
 the Synagogues, appropriate sermons were delivered, and the 
 congregations appeared in full mourning. 
 
 As the prosperity of this congregation increased, so we find 
 its generosity grow larger and more catholic. The funds of 
 the members of the community were available to meet the 
 calls of public and private charity. Now we find a subscrip¬ 
 tion made to relieve a famine in Sweden; now a collection 
 to dimmish the sufferings of English prisoners in France; 
 
THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 269 
 
 at another time contributions are sought in aid of the 
 Waterloo Fund. Irish distress is not forgotten, and on more 
 than one occasion, after the failure of the potato crops, 
 appeals were made by the authorities of the Great Synagogue, 
 on behalf of the hunger-stricken children of Ireland. 
 
 The city of London seems to have generally borne a 
 favourable character for liberality, and we hear in 1800, some 
 years after the lease of the ground of the Great Synagogue 
 and buildings expired, that the President of the Congregation, 
 Mr Joseph Cohen, had met with generous treatment from the 
 City Lands’ Committee. The lease had really come to an 
 end in 1801, but the congregation experienced great courtesy. 
 The lease was renewed on payment of a fine of £45, and 
 arrears of interest and costs, and it was covenanted that the 
 lease should be renewed every fourteen years from 1815 at a 
 rental of £32 per annum, and on payment of the same fine. 
 It is only at the present time that the tenure of the Great 
 Svnagogue has been converted into a freehold. 
 
 OO 
 
CHAPTER XXXY. 
 
 THE PORTUGUESE SYNAGOGUE IN THE NINETEENTH 
 
 CENTURY. 
 
 The condition of the oldest Jewish Congregation in London 
 was by no means satisfactory at the beginning of the present 
 century. There was a falling off in the number of members 
 and a proportionate diminution in the congregational income. 
 Its house of prayer was frequented by a scanty number of 
 worshippers. The service w r as conducted in a slovenly, 
 unimpressive manner; decorum was little regarded; choral 
 music was not known; and a general indifferentism seemed 
 to reign in the community. The aspect of affairs appeared 
 so grave in the year 1802 that an inquiry into the ecclesias¬ 
 tical state of the community was instituted. The Council of 
 Wardens had strenuously recommended this step, otherwise 
 said they, “ In this Kahal (congregation), which had shone 
 brilliantly for more than a century as one of the principal in 
 Europe, the study of the law will be entirely lost, and the 
 Kahal will become an object of contempt and ridicule.” The 
 gentlemen to whom this delicate investigation was entrusted 
 were Messrs Jacob Samuda, Joseph Sasportas, Gabriel Israel 
 Brandon, Jacob Aboab Osorio, and Jacob Mocatta. Their 
 report was presented in January 1803. It recommended that 
 a Haham (Doctor of Divinity) or Rabbi should be appointed 
 as. the spiritual guide of the congregation; that the Com¬ 
 mittee of the Heshaim (charity schools) should revise their 
 laws and take measures to effectively promote the education 
 of the children; and that the Medrash (Religious College) 
 should be better regulated, so that members of the congrega¬ 
 tion might be induced to send their children for religious 
 instruction to a Yeshiba or school to be established in Con¬ 
 nection therewith. 
 
THE PORTUGUESE SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 271 
 
 Since the death of Haham D’Azevedo the Portuguese 
 Community had been without a pastor, and the loss of Rabbi 
 Hasdai Almosnino, the Chief of the Beth Din, had left the 
 congregation destitute of able expounders of the Jewish law. 
 It was resolved to appoint a Haham without further delay. 
 The requirements of the congregation having been made 
 known, two applications for the vacant office were presented, 
 and the selection fell on Rabbi Raphael Meldola of Leghorn. 
 Of the qualifications of this gentleman we shall speak more 
 fully hereafter. For the present we will merely say that he 
 was nominated on the 7th October 1804; that ample pro¬ 
 vision was made to enable him to fulfil his functions 
 worthily; that a residence was chosen for him and appropri¬ 
 ately furnished; and that all honour was paid to him on his 
 arrival in this country. 
 
 The Board of Shechita, a body of gentlemen deputed by 
 the various London Synagogues to superintend arrangements 
 for slaughtering animals and inspecting the carcases for 
 sanitary purposes, according to the Mosaic law, was consti¬ 
 tuted, as we have already stated, in the year 1805. This 
 was a great improvement on the former faulty and incomplete 
 mode of supplying meat suitable for Jews; and not only 
 much inconvenience and annoyance to the public and to the 
 Synagogues were thus saved, but an absolute profit accrued 
 after payment of all expenses. At the end of the first year 
 a surplus of £397, 7s. 9d. was on hand, and each Synagogue 
 was credited with the fourth part of that sum, which was 
 invested in consols. The net produce increased in subsequent 
 years, and to the present day it continues to be equally 
 distributed between the Portuguese Congregation and the 
 three German Synagogues in the city. 
 
 In 1807 the Bevis Marks Synagogue furnished a minister 
 to the Portuguese Congregation of Charlestown, South Caro¬ 
 lina, in the person of Benjamin Cohen D’Azevedo, son of 
 their former rabbi. The South Carolinians, who had trumpeted 
 forth their wants in high sounding language, and had dwelt 
 on their potential liberality and generosity in terms which 
 at all events had not the merit of modesty, showed scant 
 courtesy to the nominee of the parent Synagogue in London, 
 or to that Synagogue itself. They sent back Benjamin C. 
 
272 
 
 THE PORTUGUESE SYNAGOGUE'IN 
 
 D’Azevedo without assigning any plausible cause. This line 
 of conduct stung to the quick the Portuguese pride of the 
 rulers of Bevis Marks, who resented it in no measured words, 
 and took the returned minister into their service as teacher. 
 
 The new Haham was a man of active temperament, and 
 he repeatedly declared that he had accepted the post lie 
 occupied, to act and not merely to speak. He addressed a 
 communication to the Mahamad, urging that body to take 
 stringent measures to prevent the children of the poor from 
 attending certain schools opened in the neighbourhood for 
 conversionist purposes, and wherein tracts were distributed. 
 In July 1802 he joined Dr Hirschel in a declaration refer¬ 
 ring to the maintenance of the sanctity of the Sabbath. 
 
 At the end of 1808, the Sephardic Synagogue found itself 
 short of funds. There was a narrower number of mem¬ 
 bers to offer, and the offerings themselves were smaller; 
 moreover the imposta (tax on commercial transactions on 
 commission) was falling into desuetude. It was resolved to 
 summon a meeting of members. The meeting was convened 
 for the 18th January 1809, and was carried out with great 
 solemnity. It was held in the Synagogue itself; and only 
 the members who were not indebted to the Zeclaka (poor fund) 
 were admitted. At 11 o’clock the doors of the Synagogue 
 were closed, no one was allowed to enter or to leave, and the 
 keys of the doors were deposited with the president, who 
 stood before the reading-desk. Before the affairs of the con¬ 
 gregation were discussed, some psalms were chanted and a 
 prayer was recited. In our present matter-of-fact days, when 
 reason often holds the place of faith, when doubt is substi¬ 
 tuted for reverence, and when speed rather than dignity 
 characterises the actions of our lives, our readers may well feel 
 surprised at so many formalities accompanying, and so much 
 importance being attached to, a mere Synagogue meeting. 
 It is certain that on the occasion in question, the members 
 present were deeply impressed with the momentous character 
 of the proceedings. The president made an opening speech; 
 and it was resolved to grant power to the elders to increase the 
 finta from £900 to £1400 per annum. No Yahid (or mem¬ 
 ber) was to be called upon to contribute more than 4 per cent, 
 of the total amount of the finta, nor less than 10s. per annum. 
 
273 
 
 THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 The impost was reduced to 6d. per £100. Other provisions 
 of minor consequence were made in addition ; and a small 
 sum was ordered to be sold out of the funds to provide for 
 immediate urgencies. At the same time, it was resolved that 
 no Minyan (congregation for prayer) should be permitted to 
 assemble within six miles of the Synagogue, instead of within 
 four miles, as was formerly the case. 
 
 The finances of the Synagogue, under skilful management, 
 soon recovered their balance: gentle pressure was laid on 
 members who were in arrears in their accounts. Some of the 
 defaulters settled; others undertook to settle them as soon as 
 circumstances permitted, and only a few allowed their names 
 to be posted up on the doors of the Synagogue. It was not 
 found necessary to call for more than £1200 of the £1400 
 
 voted for Jinta; and a year or two afterwards we find that 
 the deficit had disappeared. 
 
 In 1809, Joseph Barrow died, and bequeathed to the 
 wardens of the Portuguese Synagogue and their successors 
 a sum of £2000, to build almshouses for the residence of 
 respectable indigent families. The sum was invested in 
 consols; and it was not until 1815 that a suitable piece of 
 ground was found and purchased, and the beneficent inten¬ 
 tions of the donor were begun to be carried out. In 1813 
 the funds of the Synagogue were considerably increased by 
 the death of Abraham Lopes Pereira, of Hackney. This 
 gentleman left £500 to the Synagogue wardens for the benefit 
 of the poor; £100 to the congregational hospital; and several 
 other legacies to charitable institutions. He bore in mind 
 that cold chills the limbs of Christians as well as of Jews, 
 and he gave to the churchwardens of his parish in Hackney 
 £200, the interest of which was to be annually expended 
 in furnishing coals to the needy. Finally, he willed the 
 residue of his estate to the wardens of the Portuguese Syna¬ 
 gogue for the benefit of the poor. Such residue amounted to 
 between twelve and fourteen thousand pounds, and formed a 
 noble addition to the capital of the community. 
 
 In the beginning of the century, the house of Alexander 
 Lmdo, engaged in the West India trade, enjoyed great repute 
 for wealth and integrity. It had embarked in extensive 
 transactions in connection with the French Government; and 
 
 s 
 
 « 
 
274 
 
 THE PORTUGUESE SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 trusting to the faith of the First Consul, it was induced to 
 enter into large contracts, and to effect immense shipments 
 to the French West India islands. General Leclerc (the 
 beloved of Hortense Beauharnais, stepdaughter of Napoleon, 
 and afterwards Queen of Holland) then commanded the 
 French forces at that time. He gave in payment to the 
 representative of Alexander Lindo, a bill for the sum of 
 £260,000 on his Government. This draft, for an amount 
 that must in those days have been considered a vast sum, 
 was dishonoured on the frivolous pretext that the bill had 
 been issued at a discount, and that full value had not been 
 given for it. This unexpected check seriously affected the 
 house of Alexander Lindo, who had every reason to con¬ 
 sider himself very ill treated by the French Government. 
 The celebrated General Rochambeau, who succeeded Leclerc, 
 protested in the strongest language against the conduct of 
 the Government. He gave the lie direct to the statements 
 made by the Minister of Marine to the First Consul, and 
 declared that the bills given in payment by General Leclerc 
 and himself had been perfectly correct and against proper 
 value. We are unable to state whether the representations 
 of the General had any effect, and whether Lindo came to 
 his own again. Certain it is, that his firm never regained its 
 former position, and that the unjust and arbitrary act of 
 the consular Government brought one of the most respected 
 members of the Sephardim Congregation to the verge of 
 ruin. Alexander Lindo was one of the few remaining repre¬ 
 sentatives of that series of merchant princes who once had 
 flourished among the Portuguese Jews. The Ricardos, the 
 Nimenes, the Rodrigues Lopes, the Jessurun Alvares, the 
 Levys, were verging towards another church, and now a 
 calamity fell on the head of one of the numbered faithful. 
 Alexander Lindo was a zealous Jew; he took great interest 
 in the affairs of the congregation; he had passed through its 
 various dignities until he became president; and he was one 
 of the largest contributors to its funds. For many years his 
 affairs remained unsettled. He died in 1818, and left a 
 legacy to the Synagogue, but his executors were unable to pay 
 it at the time, for his estates had been placed under the con¬ 
 trol of the Court of Chancerv. 
 
 * 
 
CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 
 JEWISH VOLUNTEERS—WRITERS ON THE JEWS. 
 
 Martial ardour is not a quality usually ascribed to Jews. 
 Nay, sneers have not been wanting on the assumed want of 
 bravery on the part of Jews. It is possible, and even pro¬ 
 bable, that the oppression of ages may have somewhat broken 
 the spirit of the descendants of one of the most belligerent 
 of ancient races. But as soon as they are, we will not say 
 placed on an equality with their fellow-citizens, but even 
 treated with some toleration, and allowed to hold a stake in 
 their fatherland, they come forward and are ready to live and 
 die for their country. Witness in our day the remarkable 
 spectacle of sons of Israel reciting their prayers on the Hay 
 of Atonement in the ranks of the German Army, to the ac¬ 
 companiment of the roar of the guns of the maiden fortress 
 of Metz. Witness the sight of Frenchmen of the Jewish 
 religion falling sword in hand pour la belle France in the 
 plains of Champagne, or within sight of the forts of be¬ 
 leaguered Paris. Witness the numerous Jews of Italy who 
 many times shed their blood in the cause of Italian unity. 
 Witness in the beginning of the present century the Jews 
 who, serving under the banners of the greatest conqueror of 
 modern times, left their bones to char beneath the torrid sun 
 of Spain, or to bleach on the snow-clad steppes of Russia. 
 
 Happily, England, since the return of the Jews to its 
 hospitable shores under the Commonwealth and Restora¬ 
 tion, has never been under the necessity of defending itself 
 against a foreign invader on its own soil. But whenever a 
 danger real or supposed arose, the Jew came forward ready 
 to bear his full share of hardship and danger. In the autumn 
 of the year 1803 England was in a commotion. The Treaty 
 of Amiens had not stopped the career of the “ Corsican 
 
2 7 6 JE WISH VOL UNTEERS. 
 
 Usurper,” and war with France had been again declared. 
 Regular troops were being raised, militiamen were being 
 drilled, and volunteers freely flocked to the standard. Bel- 
 Iona sounded her shrill trumpet from Land’s End to John 
 o’Groats. On the 19th October, London wore the appear¬ 
 ance of a Sunday. A fast was strictly observed, and the shops 
 were closed. A number of volunteer corps paraded the city, 
 and ten regiments attended divine service, filling every prin¬ 
 cipal church. The corps who had not already taken the oath 
 did so on that day. Three hundred of the most respect¬ 
 able individuals of the Jewish persuasion took the oaths to 
 Government on that occasion. A contemporary publication 
 states that “ By an order from their High Priest they were 
 prohibited from attending in our churches during the time 
 of Divine Service. The High Priest, however, expressed 
 his highest concurrence to their taking the oaths of fidelity 
 and allegiance to our king and country. Those gentlemen 
 accordingly took the oaths, either upon the drilling giounds 
 of their respective corps, or in the vestry-room of the churches, 
 as circumstances required. They were sworn upon the Book 
 of Leviticus instead of the New Testament. 
 
 On the 26th October a great burst of loyalty was displayed 
 by the armed citizens of London, who were desirous of show¬ 
 ing their sovereign that they were ready to shed their blood 
 in°defence of their country. A general review of volunteers 
 was witnessed in Hyde Park, by an enthusiastic assemblage 
 of upwards of 200,000 spectators. The King, accompanied 
 by the French princes, Monsieur, the Prince of Conde, the 
 Duke of Bourbon and the Duke of Berry, attended by the 
 celebrated General Dumouriez, rode before the ranks amid 
 repeated cheers. Several hundred Jews were present among 
 the volunteers. His Majesty on subsequent occasions re¬ 
 viewed the different corps separately. Once when the King 
 was inspecting an East-end regiment in which the Jewish 
 element predominated, he is said to have expressed some 
 amused surprise on hearing from the roll-call some of the 
 volunteers designated by names usually borne by familiar 
 quadrupeds, such as Fox, Wolf, Bear, and Lyon. 
 
 We have repeatedly noticed the loyalty of the Jews, 
 and the attachment and devotion they have invariably dis- 
 
JEWISH VOLUNTEERS. 
 
 277 
 
 played towards the governments of all countries,—without re¬ 
 gard to their form—where they have met with common tolera¬ 
 tion and ordinary justice. In England they have ever been 
 ready, as ciicumstances occurred, to pray for the recovery of 
 a sick monarch, to offer thanks for his escape from the bullet 
 or the knife of the assassin, to rejoice at his marriage, or 
 mourn at his death. At different times during the reign of 
 George III., the Jews returned thanks in the Synagogues 
 for the King’s recovery, even before the church prayers were 
 ordered by the Government; though in this they were kept 
 in countenance by the Dissenters. During the severe illness 
 of the present Prince of Wales, prayers were daily offered in 
 several of the London Synagogues for his recovery, to Him 
 who sends salvation unto kings. Indeed, the first prayer 
 raised for his restoration to health was in a Jewish Syna¬ 
 gogue ; and when the Angel of Death, which had so long 
 hovered over his threshold, sheathed his sword and passed 
 
 away, the Jews were the first to sing a Song of Thankso-ivino- 
 to God. 0 0 
 
 At the period of which we are speaking, a simple and yet 
 most important action was performed by a Jew, which does not 
 appear to have been sufficiently known, or to have met with 
 public recognition. On the 15th of May 1800, George III. 
 had two narrow escapes from being killed. On the morning 
 of that day, when reviewing the Grenadier Guards, a bullet 
 struck and wounded a gentleman who was standing not 
 twenty yards from the King. At first it was considered 
 that this was the result of an attempt on the King’s life, 
 though subsequently the event was attributed to accident. 
 In the evening “ Farmer George” went to Drury Lane 
 Theatre to see a comedy by Colley Cibber, and crowds flocked 
 thither to cheer the popular monarch. While the King was 
 bowing his thanks from the royal box, a man named Had- 
 field rose from the front row of the pit and fired a horse-pistol 
 point blank at the King. Two slugs passed over George III.’s 
 head and effected a lodgment in the wainscot of the box. The 
 King never lost his self-possession, and instead of retiring as 
 he was entreated to do by the Earl of Salisbury, his Lord 
 Chamberlain, and others of his retinue, he with great com¬ 
 posure looked round the house and ordered the performance 
 
278 
 
 JEWISH VOLUNTEERS. 
 
 to commence. These are facts with which all readers of 
 history are acquainted. But probably they are not aware 
 that Hadfield, the ex-soldier and lunatic who fired at the 
 King, missed his aim because some man near him struck his 
 arm while in the act of pulling the trigger. This individual 
 was a Jew named Dyte, and to him in all likelihood the 
 country owed the King’s life. Byte was the father of the 
 late Henry Dyte, formerly Honorary Secretary to the Blind 
 Society, and the grandfather of D. H. Dyte, Surgeon to the 
 Jewish Board of Guardians. It is stated that Dyte asked as 
 his sole reward the u patent ” of selling opera tickets, then a 
 monopoly at the Royal disposal; and we presume he obtained 
 from King George’s generosity this very modest recompense. 
 The Jews in those days seldom entertained very ambitious- 
 feelings, and their desires and hopes were not permitted by 
 circumstanoes to assume a very high flight. 
 
 In the beginning of the nineteenth century we find con¬ 
 siderable attention devoted to the Jews by the press. The 
 history, creed, habits, and language of the children of Israel 
 formed the theme of many an essay or article in English 
 periodical literature. In a single number of a monthly 
 magazine published in 1810, we find no fewer than seven 
 papers on the subject of the Jews. Some of these lucubra- 
 * tions treated of the spiritual condition of the Jews, princi¬ 
 pally lamenting their misguided obstinacy in questions of 
 faith. Others spoke of mere temporal matters. From these 
 writings we glean much curious information on the state of 
 the Jews in England at that period. Among the persons 
 who displayed great interest in Jewish affairs, we may name 
 Henry Lemoine, whom we have already mentioned as the 
 author of an elegy on David Levi. Henry Lemoine had been 
 a bookseller in Bishopsgate Churchyard, until his business 
 failing, he gained a precarious subsistence by composing 
 verse and prose for the magazines. Shortly before his death 
 Henry Lemoine obtained hospitable shelter under the roof 
 of a benevolent Jew, who, finding him in sore distress, 
 generously secured him from want in his last days. Henry 
 Lemoine had become intimate with David Levi, to whom he 
 furnished books ; and he wrote a short biography of Abraham 
 Goldsmid. Thus he ought to have been well conversant with 
 
JEWISH VOLUNTEERS. 
 
 279 
 
 Jewish affairs, which, however, he did not prove himself to be. 
 He conceived an opinion far from favourable on the attain¬ 
 ments of the Jews and on their general condition in the 
 country. According to him, they were too much under the 
 control of their ecclesiastical authorities and Synagogue war¬ 
 dens. The Synagogue laws were too stringent, °and the 
 Synagogue elders too high-handed. As the Jews agreed to 
 submit their differences to their authorities, many arbitrary 
 decisions were arrived at, which were not always found legal 
 ■ coul 't s _ of law. The Jews were generally ignorant on 
 most subjects; even those connected with their own form of 
 worship. What they knew of the Pentateuch, or of their 
 prayers, was derived from collateral English translations 
 printed with the original Hebrew; with the Talmud and 
 rabbinical writings they were utterly unacquainted. They 
 were born and bred to commercial transactions; their know¬ 
 ledge was confined to such topics, and all their leisure was 
 spent in the amusements of the town, visiting or walking, 
 but always with an eye to business. Learned English Jews 
 were rare, albeit there were a few such living, who were an 
 ornament to society. The foreign Jews, German, Dutch, or 
 Portuguese, were more cultivated. No absolute agreement 
 had been made between, the Jewish Synagogues to main¬ 
 tain their poor; but as the rich were always at hand, the 
 poor did not perish of want. From the few trades the Jews 
 followed, their industry and sobriety must have been great 
 indeed to enable them to live. As their diet and ceremonies 
 precluded them in a great measure from learning trades, 
 they became dealers. Their capitals were small. He 
 (Lemoine) did not think there were thirty members of the 
 Great Synagogue,, twenty members of the Fenchurch Street 
 Synagogue, and six of the New Synagogue, who possessed 
 above £5000 to £6000. He excepted the Portuguese Jews, 
 some of whom had brought large fortunes into this country! 
 He considered the Jews, as a rule, a poor race of people, whose 
 religious and ceremonial laws had always placed an in¬ 
 superable obstacle to their rising beyond a certain sphere in 
 this state of existence. 
 
 . are una ^le to state how much truth there was in this 
 picture of the Jews of the day ; certain it is that it was 
 
28 o 
 
 JEWISH VOLUNTEERS. 
 
 emphatically contradicted by both Jews and Christians. A 
 writer named Atkins, who had composed a History of the 
 Modern Jews in a very kindly spirit, and dedicated it to 
 Abraham Goldsmid, altogether demurred to the opinions and 
 statements of Henry Lemoine. He took np the cudgels on 
 behalf of the Jews, and expressed a very different view on their 
 state from that entertained by Lemoine. He said there were 
 numerous respectable artisans of every description among 
 them, but chiefly in the jewellery and gold and silver trinket 
 department. He believed that the word 66 jewel” had been 
 derived from Jew, as they were probably the first people who 
 introduced such ornaments into use, and who were then con¬ 
 siderable dealers in jewels in the rough and manufactured 
 states. With all deference to Mr Atkins, we do not agree 
 with his derivation of the term jewel, which we think is 
 probably derived from the Italian giojello. The Florentine 
 and Venetian artificers of the Middle Ages were celebrated 
 far and wide for their cunning in the manipulation of the 
 precious metals, and were perhaps the founders of modern 
 jewellery. With reference to the Jews, Atkins considered 
 that, nothwithstanding the strictness with which most of them 
 kept their Sabbath, they were, by unremitting diligence and 
 constant attention, at least as successful as their Christian 
 neighbours who worked another day in the week. Altogether, 
 Atkins entertained a much higher opinion than Lemoine con¬ 
 cerning the wealth, as well as the intellectual attainments, 
 of the Jews. 
 
 Among the writers who displayed a warm sympathy for 
 the Israelites, at the period of which we are speaking, we must 
 mention Thomas Witherby and William Hamilton Reid. 
 
 The former was a retired bookseller, and had always mani¬ 
 fested a sincere friendship for the Jews. His opinion 
 concerning the Jewish religion may be gathered from the 
 following extract from a letter addressed by him to Mr Joshua 
 Van Oven, with whom he occasionally corresponded: “ The 
 Roman religion has tended to persecute both your nation and 
 those Christians who are more friendly to you, because we 
 read your Scriptures as well as our own. The Mohammedan 
 religion, instead of tending to this object, compels a uniformity 
 of creed by the sword. The Jewish is the foundation of all 
 
JEWISH VOLUNTEERS. 
 
 28l 
 
 true religion, and we can conceive that the Christian is the 
 same being founded thereon.” Whatever may be thought 
 of Wither by’s theology, there can be no question as to his 
 kindness towards the children of Israel. In 1810, and the 
 following year, he repeatedly took up the pen in defence of 
 the Jews, in the public press, against the attacks of intolerant 
 fanaticism on the one hand, and against the wiles of the 
 conversionists on the other. According to the theory of 
 some men, their own religious belief is faith; the religious 
 belief of their neighbours is superstition. Witherby° was 
 not of that class of men; he was liberal towards all—even 
 the conversionists against whom, as a class, he entertained 
 special aversion. Speaking of the manners of the Jews, he 
 mildly says that in some respects they differ from those of 
 Christians. He did not think the Jewish mode of worship 
 so solemn as that of Christians; and in mentioning to a Jew 
 what he deemed a deviation from seriousness in the middle 
 of prayers, he received the following reply : u Ours is not a 
 melancholy religion.” 
 
 William Hamilton Reid was a gentleman of some literary 
 attainments, and he had produced several historical works 
 which had met with fair success. Among others he had 
 published a book called “ The Hew Sanhedrin and the causes 
 and consequences of the French Emperor’s conduct towards 
 the Jews.” The work was written in a most fair and impar¬ 
 tial spirit, but he had been a considerable loser by its issue. 
 We will quote his own words with reference to his relations 
 with the Jews: “ Nevertheless, the attention I have since 
 received from a few enlightened individuals of the Jewish 
 persuasion in this metropolis, with whom I have had the 
 happiness of being acquainted, I look upon as a source of the 
 purest gratification, particularly in being a witness of their 
 integrity as men, their industry and ingenuity as mechanics 
 and artists, and of their gratitude in general to Christians 
 who do not persecute them with their ill-timed importunities 
 about conversion and repentance, while so many there are 
 of our own people who stand more in need of these changes 
 themselves.” On another occasion William Hamilton Reid 
 says, that the antipathies of Jews to Christians were fast 
 wearing away, that the former condemned no one for their 
 
282 
 
 JEWISH VOLUNTEERS . 
 
 faith, and did not wish to make any converts, and only re¬ 
 quired of their fellow-subjects to be suffered to enjoy in peace 
 that liberty of conscience which Government and the Church 
 of England liberally allowed them. We are also told, 
 by the same authority, that the sermons of Dr Hirschel 
 frequently dwelt on the duties of universal toleration ; that 
 many of the wealthy Jews were found among the sub¬ 
 scribers to the Christian charitable foundations, and that 
 in return maii} r Christian names appeared among the list of 
 donors to the new Jewish Hospital in Mile-End. These 
 Christians, we are assured, did not require the least interfer¬ 
 ence in the management or education of the Jewish children 
 there, and had no connection whatever with the London 
 Society, or with the missionaries who preached in the Jews’ 
 Chapel, near Spitaltields. 
 
 Among all these discussions on Jewish affairs only one 
 Jewish writer makes his appearance in print. He adopted 
 the signature of (C An Unconverted Jew and Englishman.” 
 According to his statement, William Hamilton Beid was the 
 most accurate exponent of facts referring to the Jews, and 
 Henry Lemoine the least correct. Indeed, the assertions of 
 the latter are said to be full of errors. The Jews pos¬ 
 sessed five Synagogues in London, each with its own code of 
 regulations, which interfered no more with the laws of the 
 country than the rules of an Oddfellows’ club interfere with 
 the penal code. Each Synagogue had its independent code. 
 Jews in country cities governed themselves without any 
 orders from the London vestries. The poor were amply pro¬ 
 vided for, and upward of thirty societies existed for the 
 relief of their wants. All those Jews whose circumstances 
 permitted it subscribed liberally to Christian institutions, 
 and at the same time they acknowledged in return with 
 heartfelt gratitude the liberal donations of many worthy 
 Christians to the new Hospital. 
 
CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 R/SE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY-THE DUKE OF SUSSEX-A 
 WEDDING AND A MURDER-A NOBLE-HEARTED JEW. 
 
 \Ve have seen in onr previous chapter that the press, that 
 mighty engine, had eagerly canvassed the affairs, status, and 
 aspirations of the Jews in this country, and that many 
 Englishmen of eminence and learning had turned their eves 
 towards the Jews with curiosity, if not with interest. But 
 it was not merely the worldly position of the Jews that 
 called for consideration from the would-be benevolent. The 
 spiritual condition of the children of Israel, even more than 
 their material welfare, seemed to engross their attention and 
 trouble them sorely. Indeed, some Christians, possibly well- 
 meaning and assuredly ill-judging, insisted on saving the 
 souls of the Jews from everlasting perdition, under cover of 
 an attempt to relieve their bodily wants. . These efforts 
 which formerly had been of a desultory nature, now became 
 regularly organised and controlled by a paid staff. In 1808 
 a committee of gentlemen who professed great interest in the 
 Jews, founded a society for the ostensible purpose of “ visit¬ 
 ing and relieving the sick and distressed, and instructing 
 the ignorant, especially such as are of the Jewish nation.” 
 At first, indeed, the association, which had been formed on 
 dissenting principles, did not prosper. Frey, a convert of 
 whom we have already spoken, was one of its most zealous 
 instruments, though his ill-directed, fiery enthusiasm, did 
 little good to the cause he advocated. The society was 
 subsequently reconstituted on Church of England principles 
 and was termed the “ London Society for promoting Christi¬ 
 anity among the Jews.” Wealth and rank were gathered 
 withm its fold, and men of title acted as its honorary 
 managers. Still the corporation was heavily in debt_it is 
 
284 
 
 RISE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY. 
 
 said to the extent of £14,000—when Louis Way, a gentle¬ 
 man of large means, and a mistaken philanthropist, endowed 
 it with a considerable fortune. On the 7th April 1813, the 
 Duke of Kent, father to the Queen, laid the foundation-stone 
 of what was called the Episcopal Jews Chapel in Cambridge 
 ^ Heath, Bethnal Green. We must, however, render the Duke 
 the justice of saying, that he expressed at the time his high 
 sense of respect for the Jews, naming especially Benjamin 
 Goldsmid in tones of warm eulogy; that he strenuously 
 disclaimed any intention of proselytising among the Jews ; 
 and that when he discovered the line of conduct followed by 
 the London Society, he declined to hold any further con¬ 
 nection with that corporation. 
 
 The assistance of Mr Louis Way enabled the London 
 Society to satisfy its liabilities, and left it ample funds with 
 which to pursue its glorious chase after souls. The proceed¬ 
 ings of this society have been, as a rule, of the most unscru¬ 
 pulous nature in carrying out its objects, and they have 
 met with merited censure at the hands of many right- 
 thinking members of the Church of England. Thomas 
 Witherby strongly animadverted against the ill-advised and 
 unprincipled schemes of the conversionists; and in a letter 
 he addressed to the Rev. Christopher Wordsworth, D.D., we 
 gather that this truly Christian clergyman denounced these 
 practices with as much severity as Witherby himself. In¬ 
 deed, the London Society was not a popular institution ; and 
 its modus operandi was held up to public obloquy on 
 frequent occasions in the public press, from the time of its 
 establishment until about 1830. (Soon after its formation 
 an attempt was made to raise a fund to advance loans to 
 Jews, who might be induced to intermarry with Christians. 
 Subsequently to punish the Jews for their obduracy, it was 
 proposed to translate a book called Toledoth Jesu , the 
 “ Generations of Jesus,” a work possessing no authoritative 
 character among the Jews, but which is said to contain some 
 passages inimical to Christianity; thus stimulating popular 
 prejudice against the Jews. The first of these schemes was 
 held up to public ridicule ;^the second to public execration. 
 Neither was carried out; for however prejudiced and in¬ 
 tolerant an Englishman may be, there is usually in his com- 
 
ELSE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY. 
 
 285 
 
 position a sense of honour and justice, that prevents him 
 from having recourse to unfair, not to say nefarious, practices 
 even to accomplish a favourite object. Strong indignation 
 was expressed from many quarters against such and similar 
 measures; and honest Thomas Witherby emphatically stated 
 “ his hope that the insiduous policy of the London Society 
 will expose them to that contempt to which the meanness of 
 their measures so justly devotes them.” Nevertheless, such 
 were the blindness and credulity of the public, that the 
 income of the London Society steadily increased, and in 
 1828 reached the sum of £14,000. In that year the number 
 of converts secured consisted of two adults and eighteen to 
 twenty children, rendering the cost of persuading a human 
 being to embrace Christianity at between £500 to £600. At 
 this period the London Society solicited further subscriptions 
 to enable them to award an annuity to every neophyte ; which 
 modest demand called forth expressions of unqualified anger 
 from the press. Journalists complained of the gross injustice, 
 when the country was over-burdened with debt and eaten up 
 by pauperism, of taking away charitable donations from 
 worthy Christians to bestow them upon unworthy apostates. 
 Such, however, is the maxim to the present day of those 
 gentlemen who parade, on the platform of Exeter Hall, 
 their benevolence and their lack of discrimination, their love 
 for the Jews, and their aversion to Judaism. 
 
 The Jews may esteem themselves fortunate in having 
 succeeded in securing the friendship, and protection of several 
 members of the reigning family. The Duke of Kent, as we 
 have already seen, after passing a high eulogy on the Goldsmid 
 family in particular, and on the Jews in general, ceased to 
 countenance the London Society when he discovered its true 
 colours. The kindliness evinced by his royal brother, the 
 Duke of Sussex, is well known to many living members of 
 the Jewish community. The Duke of Sussex displayed in 
 many ways his sympathy and good feeling for the Jews. He 
 became the patron of the Jews’ Hospital in 1813, at the 
 prayer of that zealous worker, Joshua Van Oven, and he 
 regularly presided at the anniversary banquets of that insti¬ 
 tution. His Royal Highness studied Hebrew under the Rev. 
 Solomon Lyon of Cambridge, and a Mr Levy of London, 
 
286 
 
 RISE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY. 
 
 t 
 
 and opened his doors to Jews with great affability. It is even 
 said that the Duke was an honoured visitant to Jewish 
 households. He read daily portions of the Bible in the grand 
 old language in which it was originally written; and 
 manifested the greatest interest in the progress of Jewish 
 education and subsequently of Jewish emancipation. 
 
 A Jewish wedding at the present day is an event which, 
 however interesting to the parties immediately concerned, is 
 not likely to draw the attention of the British public. Such 
 was not the case in 1810, when Jewish ceremonies were an 
 object of especial curiosity. Indeed, one of the magazines of 
 the period thought it worth its while to favour its readers 
 with a circumstantial account of the nuptials of Mr Jonas 
 Lazarus with the beautiful and accomplished Miss Rosceia 
 Nathan, daughter of Mr M. I. Nathan of Godmanchester, 
 Huntingdonshire. The details of the happy event are fully 
 related, and we learn, among other things, that the ceremony 
 was performed under a canopy in the garden of the residence 
 of the bride’s father; that the bridegroom was preceded to 
 the presence of the bride by a band of music playing a grand 
 martial air ; and that four green tapers were kept burning 
 during the celebration. In our days martial strains and 
 green tapers are no longer considered as necessary adjuncts 
 to the solemnity of the scene, or indispensable to the 
 happiness of the newly-married couple, but otherwise the 
 ceremonies followed on those auspicious occasions have 
 undergone no change. 
 
 From a marriage to a murder, from the shedding of wine 
 to the shedding of blood, there seems to be a long distance. 
 Yet deeds of violence and festive gatherings, joy and sorrow, 
 intermingle with each other during every period of our exist¬ 
 ence. A clergyman from a wedding proceeds to a funeral, 
 and the same column of a newspaper chronicles a birth and 
 a death. In 1812 a man named Wyatt of Fowey was tried 
 at Launceston assizes for the murder of a Jew called Isaiah 
 Falk Yallentine. Wyatt, who kept a public-house at Fowey, 
 had been intimate with his victim, whom he invited to 
 Fowey, on the plea of having some buttons or guineas to 
 sell. Wyatt, under the plea of leading Yallentine to meet 
 the sellers of tKe coin&, conducted him along a quay whence 
 
MSE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY. ,g ? 
 
 he threw him into the water, suffocated him, and then robbed 
 him of £260, which the dead man had on his person. Wyatt 
 was found guilty on circumstantial evidence, and condemned 
 o death. A curious point of law was raised on this trial, 
 in those days the law required capital punishment to he 
 inflicted within forty-eight hours of the judge’s sentence. 
 Murderers, were usually tried on Friday and their execution 
 
 i lf r n r C ; ted -"' aS dxed for Monday, to give them the 
 benefit of bunday, which is a dies non. On this occasion 
 the murderer was brought up on Thursday, instead of Friday 
 to receive sentence. On the justice presiding in court dis¬ 
 covering his error, he sentenced the prisoner again on the 
 
 , nday ; But a doubt ar ose as to the legality of the sentence • 
 the prisoner was respited ; the opinions of the judges in 
 
 banco were taken, and the law was not carried into effect for 
 some time. 
 
 The following story is related by a Christian, an officer in 
 the navy, who probably entertained the prejudices of the day 
 against a Jew, or at all events who regarded the latter with 
 no especial favour. An Israelite, named Jacob von Helbert 
 engaged a passage for himself and Moses Levy, his servant’ 
 on board the good ship Pelham , Captain Wells, bound 
 for Bombay. Von Helbert, being strict in his religious 
 observances, engaged the captain in a bond to suppl/him 
 with meat killed according to Jewish usages, or in default 
 thereof to furnish him with a fowl daily for his (Von Hel- 
 bert’s) subsistence. It seems that Moses Levy slaughtered 
 the sheep for the captain’s table; but after a time the meat 
 would turn out with provoking frequency unfit for Jewish 
 food. It came to be a common, if not choice joke on the 
 part of the captain to say, “ Well, Moses, is it a Hew Testa¬ 
 ment or an Old Testament sheep to-day ? ” The reply very 
 frequently was: “That cannot do for my master, sir.” 
 “lour master is very unfortunate in a servant,” would be 
 the captain’s rejoinder; “had you not come on board the 
 Pelham, Moses, Jacob Yon Helbert would have adopted 
 a Christian’s opinion about meats long ago.” Then the 
 servant would bow and the master remain silent. The 
 voyage was long and tedious, but like all other things it 
 came to an end. And now came the explanation of° the 
 
288 
 
 RISE OF THE LONDON SOCIETY. 
 
 mystery. Among the passengers there was a lady, young, 
 fair, and alone. The captain, taking advantage of her 
 unprotected condition, addressed to her words of, we will 
 not desecrate the term love, but say of coarse passion. Miss 
 Black declined his overtures with contempt, and refused 
 to sit at table with him. The captain tried to starve her 
 into compliance, and ordered that no food should be supplied 
 to Miss Black. Jacob Von Helbert sent the lachj half every 
 fowl he received , and the meat had been said to turn out 
 terefa , or unfit for Jewish food, so that the lady might 
 not perish of want. Such an act of kindness exalted the 
 Jewish character. Hunger was nobly borne to save an 
 exposed, insulted woman from the machinations of a sensual 
 despot. A degree of self-abnegation was practised, not often 
 displayed on behalf of a total stranger. 
 
 i 
 
CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 
 THE CASE OF HARPER'S CHARITY—THE LAWS OF THE GREAT 
 SYNAGOGUE—UNION OF THE CITY ASKENAZIM CON- 
 GREGA TIONS— IRREGULAR MARRIA GES. 
 
 A CURIOUS case occurred in 1817, illustrating the manner in 
 which the Jews on some occasions were regarded by the law. 
 A certain bequest for purposes of charity had been devised 
 by an inhabitant of Bedford, named Harper, to the parish¬ 
 ioners of that town. Hitherto the Jews had participated in 
 the division of the fund in question, when suddenly it was 
 discovered that a Jew was not a u parishioner.” The Jews 
 of Bedford resolved to lay the case before the Lord Chan¬ 
 cellor, and they addressed themselves in the first instance 
 to the authorities of the Great Synagogue. The vestry of 
 that congregation at once appointed a committee to inves¬ 
 tigate the subject, and sought the co-operation of the other 
 Synagogues in London. The Hambro’ Synagogue and the 
 Sephardi Synagogue declined to entertain the matter, refer- 
 ling it to the Board of Deputies, while the Xew Synagogue 
 heartily took it up, and voted a sum of money for legal 
 expenses. The opinions of several eminent counsel were 
 asked, and they seemed to have been favourable to the Jews. 
 Mr Samuel Samuel, the chairman of the committee, bestirred 
 himself with much zeal; consultations were held with Sir 
 Samuel Romilly, and the case was laid before the Lord 
 Chancellor. It was not until the year 1820 that the highest 
 legal functionary in the country decided that a Jew was not 
 a parishioner; and all that the two Synagogues could do was 
 to pay cheerfully the heavy law costs incurred. In after 
 years the efforts of Mr Lissack of Bedford culminated in 
 obtaining a recognition of the rights of Jewish townspeople 
 to the advantages of Harper’s foundation. 
 
 T 
 
2Q0 
 
 THE CASE OF HARPER'S CHARITY. 
 
 The absence of decorum in public worship, which formerly 
 too often marked Jewish devotions, did not fail to attract at 
 various periods the attention of pious and enlightened Jews. 
 In May 1821 a petition, signed by several of the principal 
 members of the Great Synagogue, among whom we find the 
 name of Goldsmid, set forth forcibly the evils of the pro¬ 
 longed Meshabirach. The petitioners, in entreating the 
 committee to shorten the Meshabirach (complimentary 
 money offerings), alleged that “ it is pitiful to behold how 
 indecently our solemn prayers are hurried on, particularly 
 during the sacred holidays, in order to allow time for a 
 system of finance, which, however beneficial in its operation, 
 is certainly inconsistent with decorum and public order. 
 The interruption to public worship, caused by a serious and 
 growing evil, was clearly pointed out to the ruling powers, 
 who nevertheless deferred the consideration of the memorial. 
 After several adjournments it was eventually decided “ that, 
 f rom the manifold distresses of the poor and the consequent 
 claims, it was inexpedient to hazard any experiment by 
 which the revenue was likely to be diminished.” One great 
 step in advance towards the abolition of these sources of 
 indecorum was taken by the Hambro’ Synagogue in 1832, 
 when that congregation, on the proposal of Mr Abraham 
 Henry, its treasurer and one of its most intelligent members, 
 abolished the sale of the Mitzvoth (honorary offices during 
 services). The example was sooner or later followed by all 
 other London Synagogues ; but the abrogation of the Me¬ 
 shabirach has not yet been entirely effected in any Jewish 
 place of worship except the West London Synagogue of 
 British Jews. The evil has doubtless been much reduced 
 since the accession to office of the present Chief Rabbi; 
 but money offerings still continue to be publicly proclaimed 
 during the service in all London Synagogues, except in the 
 one last mentioned, to the grave disturbance of the solemnity 
 of prayer. The exigencies of financial wants doubtless form 
 a barrier to the suppression of this indecorous and irreligious 
 practice. We entertain‘ nevertheless, the utopian belief that 
 at a future period, more or less distant, a substitute will be 
 discovered for this objectionable means of raising Synagogue 
 
 revenue. 
 
THE CASE OF HARPER'S CHARITY. 
 
 291 
 
 In November 1819, a committee was appointed by tbe 
 vestry of tbe Great Synagogue to consolidate, revise, and 
 reform tbe laws of that congregation, and to record them in 
 Hebrew and English. This committee, of which Mr Joshua 
 Van Oven and Mr Hyman Cohen were members, performed 
 its delicate task carefully and conscientiously. The Syna¬ 
 gogue laws were then written in that mongrel dialect called 
 Jewish German, which was neither Hebrew nor German ; 
 which was read by few and understood by fewer still. The 
 labours of the committee occupied some years, and their 
 report was not delivered to the constituent body until the 
 28th February 1825. The laws then had been framed and 
 classified ; they had been translated into English and sub¬ 
 sequently rendered into pure Hebrew. They were adopted 
 after due discussion by the vestry of the Great Synagogue ; 
 they were printed and circulated, and they remained in force 
 for the lifetime of a generation. In November 1854 it was 
 considered that a modification and revision of the then exist¬ 
 ing code was needed, and a sub-committee was elected for 
 that purpose. It may be noted that Dr Barnard Van Oven, 
 the able and zealous son of an able and zealous father, 
 Joshua Yan Oven, was appointed chairman of the sub-com¬ 
 mittee. The report of the sub-committee with the amended 
 code of laws was presented on the 16th March 1858, and the 
 sub-committee, before closing their report, recorded their 
 grateful appreciation of the services of their chairman. The 
 revised code was submitted to the consideration of the vestry, 
 and underwent the most careful and minute consideration of 
 that body, during a period of nearly three years. Before it 
 was finally adopted it was laid before a conjoint body, con¬ 
 sisting of the vestry and of forty-two members of the con¬ 
 gregation, and finally the parts relating to religious matters 
 were submitted to the Chief Rabbi, the Rev. Dr Adler. This 
 code of laws, which is the one now in operation, was framed 
 to meet the requirements of the epoch, maintaining intact at 
 the same time those principles which had always governed 
 the community. 
 
 The good understanding between the Askenazi Syna¬ 
 gogues was subject to frequent interruptions, usually on the 
 old score of the relief of the foreign poor, and occasionally on 
 
292 
 
 THE CASE OF HARPER'S CHARITY. 
 
 the ground of a member being surreptitiously taken by one 
 Synagogue from another. Treaties were made between the 
 Great Synagogue and the two sister Synagogues, which iu 
 due course were infringed or lapsed; and, as a rule, no one 
 was ever to blame whenever any irregularity happened. It 
 would be useless and uninteresting to our readers to render a 
 detailed account of these differences; to state the number of 
 meetings in which the representatives of one Synagogue met 
 the representatives of the others; or to give extracts from 
 the voluminous correspondence that passed between the 
 secretary of the Duke’s Place Synagogue and the secretaries 
 of the New and the Hambro’ Synagogues. The first germs 
 of a complete union between the three German congregations 
 were due to the good offices of Mr N. M. Rothschild, whose 
 mediation was accepted in September 1824, in a discussion 
 between the Great Synagogue and the New Synagogue. A 
 meeting of the representatives of these two Synagogues, and 
 of those of the Hambro’ Synagogue, was held at Mr Roths¬ 
 child’s residence in May 1825. Though no final arrangement 
 was concluded then between the three Synagogues, the pro¬ 
 posals made at that conference served afterwards as a basis 
 for negotiations, which ultimately resulted in a permanent 
 and complete union of the three German city congregations 
 under one ecclesiastical head. The Great Synagogue still 
 continued to be, as it always remained, the leading Askenazi 
 community in the United Kingdom, to which proud position 
 it is justly entitled, by the superior numbers, wealth, and 
 influence of its members. The funds of this Synagogue had 
 rapidly increased since the commencement of the present 
 century ; and in July of the year 1828, its invested capital 
 amounted to upwards of £28,000. Mr Rothschild again 
 placed his mansion and his good services at the disposal of 
 the representatives of the three German Synagogues at this 
 period (July 1828) ; but for various causes, though an 
 understanding was established between the Synagogues, 
 no definite treaty was signed at the time. In April 
 1834, when differences threatened to arise between the 
 Duke’s Place Synagogue and the New Synagogue on the 
 question of burials, it was considered advisable to end this 
 state of uncertainty. Delegates were appointed by these 
 
THE CASE OF HARPER’S CHARITY. 
 
 2 93 
 
 Synagogues and by the Hambro’ Synagogue, and in July 
 1835, a convention was signed by the delegates, subject to 
 the ratification of their constituents. This was fortunately 
 given in due course, and then Mr Rothschild’s good work 
 was crowned. The convention between the Synagogues was 
 based' on fair and equitable terms. It provided that the 
 foreign poor should be interred—one-half of their number 
 by the Great Synagogue, and one-quarter by each of the 
 other two Synagogues; that the cost of relieving the 
 stranger poor should be defrayed in the same proportion ; 
 that the amount received from the Polish Synagogue in Gun 
 Yard should be divided in the same ratio, as well as the 
 profit that might accrue from the receipts for the burial of 
 strangers. It was also agreed that all flour for Passover 
 should be purchased conjointly; that a committee of arbi¬ 
 tration should be annually appointed, consisting of three 
 members from the Great Synagogue and two members from 
 each of the other two Synagogues, to adjust any diversities 
 of opinion that might arise between the Synagogues ; that 
 monthly statements should be exchanged by the Synagogues ; 
 that each overseer of the poor should be appointed at a 
 common charge. In our days various services to the poor 
 are rendered expeditiously, efficiently, and completely by the 
 Board of Guardians, which affords the greatest obtainable 
 amount of good to the indigent at apparently the lowest 
 practicable cost. 
 
 In the year 1825 the attention of Dr Hirschel, the Chief 
 Rabbi of the German Jews, was directed towards a marriage 
 performed by a Pole, named Solomon Bennett, which 
 Dr Hirschel and the Haham of the Portuguese Jews con¬ 
 sidered irregular according to Jewish custom, and they 
 united in reprimanding the officiator. Unfortunately, 
 marriages of this nature, styled kedushim by the Sephardim 
 and mehedisch by the Askenazim, had been frequent among 
 the members of both congregations. Some of these indeed 
 perpetrated the worst evils of Fleet marriages. Any design¬ 
 ing man might entrap an artless’ girl into forfeiting 
 her freedom. These unions were as simple and easy as 
 Scotch marriages, and the reader will easy imagine what 
 incalculable evils they might originate. We have already 
 
294 THE CASE OF HARPER'S CHARITY. 
 
 spoken at length on Jewish marriages, and we will onlv 
 revert briefly to the subject. Not unfrequently it happened 
 that a scheming, unprincipled man, having given to some 
 girl of reputable parentage the title of wife, allowed her to 
 return home to her father. The matter would soon be 
 brought to the knowledge of the wardens, who would take 
 the opinion of the Beth Din, on the validity of the marriage. 
 If pronounced valid, the speculating husband coolly asked a 
 good round sum of the father, to agree to the formalities 
 requisite to release the maiden wife. Of course it often 
 occurred that the husband was truly attached to his bride; 
 and that this form of marriage was adopted through a dis¬ 
 parity of condition, or other similar cause, and then other 
 evils would ensue. To render such unions more difficult, if 
 not impossible, the committee of the Great Synagogue 
 ordered that seven or eight days before the solemnisation of 
 a marriage, the names of the parties intending to marry 
 should be notified in Hebrew and English on a tablet placed 
 in a conspicuous spot in the Synagogue. This rule, however, 
 does not appear to have been strictly adhered to. Among 
 the Portuguese, the Mahamad (vestry) had always constituted 
 a court of marriage and divorce ; and, subject to the religious 
 opinion of the Beth Din, they made and unmade wives with 
 a speed and ease that Sir Cresswell Cress well never equalled, 
 and Sir James Wyld would have regarded with astonishment. 
 The five gentlemen composing the Mahamad decided the fate 
 of the couples brought before them. We recollect one in¬ 
 stance in which a husband, having prayed for a divorce against 
 his wife, apparently on valid grounds, the matter was put to 
 the vote, and the question was decided against the husband 
 by the hesitating vote of the President. It seems rather hard 
 for any one to be inflicted for life with an uncongenial or 
 
 offending partner, purely on account of a president’s casting 
 vote. 
 
CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 
 ISAAC D y ISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 In the beginning of the present century, several families of 
 note among the Jews of Portuguese descent abandoned the 
 faith taught by Moses, to follow the precepts of Jesus of 
 Xazareth, or to speak with strict accuracy, to obey the dic¬ 
 tates of St Paul. . In most of these instances the change was 
 evidently a matter of pure personal convenience. 
 
 The greatest loss to Judaism, at least from an intellectual 
 point of view, was unquestionably the secession of Isaac 
 D’Israeli. How his ancestors had abandoned the Spanish 
 Peninsula, sought refuge in Venice, and assumed the name of 
 D’Israeli—an appellation never before borne by Jews—is a 
 “ twice-told tale,” well known to most of our readers. 
 Under the shelter of the Lion of St Mark, the family of 
 D’Israeli followed commercial pursuits and prospered. For 
 two centuries they flourished as merchants, protected by the 
 “ Queen of the Adriatic.” In the year 1747 the then repre¬ 
 sentative of the lineage despatched his younger son, Benja¬ 
 min, to a country where a settled dynasty reigned, and 
 where public opinion was presumed to be in favour of 
 freedom of conscience. Benjamin D’Israeli fixed his resi¬ 
 dence in England, and in time became the father of Isaac 
 D’Israeli. Benjamin D’Israeli appears to have acquired 
 affluence by trade. He did not take great interest in Syna- 
 gogal matters, and indeed, like some of the Italian Jews 
 who, tempted by the comparative liberality of English insti- 
 tions, had quitted the azure skies of Italy for the dusky 
 yellow of London fogs, he was somewhat lax in his obser¬ 
 vances. But he contributed liberally to the support of the 
 Synagogue, and his donations increased according to his 
 means. His finta (Synagogue tax), which was assessed at 
 
296 
 
 ISAAC D'ISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 first at 10s. per annum, gradually was augmented until it 
 reached in 1813, £22, 13s. 4d. Benjamin D’Israeli only 
 served once a minor office in the Synagogue, that of In¬ 
 spector of Hes-Haim, or the charity school. That was in 
 1782, and from the fact of his not being appointed to any 
 other honorary post, it seems that he did not display much 
 zeal in his superintendence over the unruly charity boys. 
 Isaac D’Israeli, his son, was a student and a writer, and 
 mixed little with the world. He was born in 1766, and 
 married Maria Basevi, the sister of Joshua or George Basevi. 
 He was the father of four children, one daughter and three 
 sons, who were in their childhood brought up, at least 
 nominally, as Jews. Indeed, the boys were all initiated in 
 the covenant of Abraham. Isaac H’Israeli was not a fre¬ 
 quenter of the Synagogue; and, albeit he paid regularly his 
 ffiita of £10 per annum, and a few guineas more for chari¬ 
 table subscriptions, he entirely abstained from any close 
 connection with his community. On October 3, 1813, he 
 was elected Parnass or warden of the Bevis Marks Syna¬ 
 gogue. This office he declined, and he wrote to that effect 
 to the Mahamad (Wardens), dating his letter from King’s 
 Boad, Bedford Bow. Isaac D’Israeli expressed surprise that 
 at so late a period of life he should have been so elected; he 
 thought that had their choice been worth a moment’s con¬ 
 sideration, they must have been aware of its singular imjDro- 
 priety, and he concluded by saying : “ I am willing to contri¬ 
 bute, so far as my limited means permit, to your annual 
 subscriptions, but assuredly without interference in your 
 interior concerns.” No notice was taken of this communi¬ 
 cation, and the author of “ Curiosities of Literature” was 
 fined £40. The secretary of the Synagogue sent Mr D’Israeli 
 a summons to a meeting, which the latter returned under 
 date of the 26th October, attributing the occurrence to a 
 mistake, and concluded by saying, “ I mentioned the terms 
 on which alone I could allow myself to be considered in any 
 way connected with your society.” The reply to this re¬ 
 monstrance was a letter from the secretary, J. de Castro, 
 enclosing copy of a resolution in Portuguese, passed by the 
 elders, to the effect that Mr D’Israeli’s election was in 
 accordance with the Ascamoth or laws of the congregation. 
 
ISAAC D'ISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 2 97 
 
 The observations of Mr D’Israeli made no impression on the 
 Elders, and the only reply vouchsafed to him was non pos- 
 sumus. 
 
 Isaac D’lsraeli addressed a highly interesting letter to the 
 authorities of the Synagogue, which, as expressing the views 
 on modern Jewish worship of so eminent a man, deserves to 
 be laid before our readers. 
 
 This letter, which, we believe, has never before seen the 
 light, was couched in the following terms:— 
 
 “ You are pleased to inform me that my election of Parnass is in 
 strict conformity with your laws. Were I to agree to this it would not 
 alter the utter impropriety of the choice. Whatever may be the laws, 
 the spirit of the laws must depend on their wise administration. 
 
 “ A person who has lived out of the sphere of your observation, of 
 retired habits of life, who can never unite in your public worship, be¬ 
 cause as now conducted it disturbs instead of exciting religious emo¬ 
 tions, a circumstance of general acknowledgment, who has only tolerated 
 some part of your ritual, willing to concede all he can in those matters 
 which he holds to be indifferent; such a man, with but a moderate 
 portion of honour and understanding, never can accept the solemn 
 functions of an elder of your congregation, and involve his life and 
 distract his business pursuits not in temporary but permanent duties 
 always repulsive to his feelings. 
 
 “ I lament the occasion which drives me, with so many others, out 
 of the pale of your jurisdiction. The larger portion of your society 
 bears a close resemblance to the tribe of Ephraim, whom Hosea curi¬ 
 ously describes, chap. vii. 8, ‘ Ephraim hath mixed himself among the 
 people ! Ephraim is a cake not turned ! ’ That is a cake upon the 
 hearth, baked on one side, and raw on the other, partly Jew, and 
 partly Gentile ! Why have you so many Ephraimites ? The cause of 
 this defection is worthy of your inquiry. Gentlemen, allow me to add, 
 that whenever the governed are unruly, some defect will be discovered 
 in the governors. Even the government of a small sect can only be 
 safely conducted by enlightened principles, and must accommodate 
 itself with practical wisdom to existing circumstances, but above all 
 with a tender regard to the injured feelings of its scattered members. 
 Something like the domestic affections should knit us all together—a 
 society existing on the voluntary aid of its members is naturally in a 
 feeble state, and if it invests itself with arbitrary power, a blind pre¬ 
 cipitation in a weak body can only tend to self-destruction. Many of 
 your members are already lost; many you are losing! Even those 
 
298 
 
 ISAAC DISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 whose tempers and feelings would still cling to you, are gradually 
 seceding. 
 
 “ But against all this you are perpetually pleading your existing 
 laws, which you would enforce on all the brethren alike ! 
 
 “ It is of these obsolete laws so many complain. They were adapted 
 by fugitives to their peculiar situation, quite distinct from our own, and 
 as foreign to us as the language in which they are written. Some of 
 you boast that your laws are much as they were a century ago ! You 
 have laws to regulate what has ceased to exist; you have laws which, 
 through the change of human events, prove to be new impediments to 
 the very purposes of the institution, and for the new circumstances 
 which have arisen, you are without laws. 
 
 “ Such, gentlemen, is my case ; invincible obstacles exist against my 
 becoming one of your elders, motives of honour and conscience ! If 
 you will not retain a zealous friend, and one who has long had you 
 in his thoughts, my last resource is to desire my name to be withdrawn 
 from your society. 
 
 “ It remains for you, gentlemen, to set a noble example of dignity 
 and political wisdom. Let the award of the Mahamad be revised 
 because they have erred in the choice of a fitting person to become 
 a Parnass. 
 
 “ At all events you have my warm wishes for happier days. Do not 
 shut out the general improvement of the age. Make your schools 
 flourish, and remember that you have had universities ere now; a 
 society has only to make itself respectable in these times to draw to itself 
 the public esteem. Believe me I have not come like Sanballat the 
 Horonite, who with bitter derision impeded Nehemiah in his zealous 
 labour of rebuilding the walls of the Holy City, scoffing at him for re¬ 
 ceiving the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish (Neb. iv. 2)._I am, 
 
 gentlemen, with due respect, yours, Isaac D'Israeli. 
 
 “ 6 King’s Road, Bedford Row, 
 
 Dec . 3, 1813.” 
 
 Mr D’Israeli, it will be perceived, did not write as if he 
 were a strict orthodox Jew ; but he showed a strong feeling 
 for his race and a desire to remain connected with the Jewish 
 body, provided such connection could be continued in a 
 manner in accordance with his views. The author of the 
 u Curiosities of Literature ” had been brought up from child¬ 
 hood aloof from his own co-religionists, and his course of 
 reading and literary studies had not tended to impress him 
 with sufficient reverence for the ceremonial laws of the Jews. 
 
ISAAC D’ISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 2 99 
 
 He had do desire to quit Judaism for Christianity; but he 
 wished to follow only that portion of Judaism which coincided 
 with certain facile opinions he entertained. 
 
 It must at the same time be admitted that the authorities 
 of the ancient Portuguese Congregation, and for that matter 
 the authorities of other Jewish Congregations too, did nothino* 
 to keep those of their brethren who had any tendency to 
 waver from their old creed. As we have before asserted, the 
 rigidity with which certain congregational laws or regulations 
 that might advantageously have been modified were enforced ,• 
 the unwillingness to grant any concession to the desires or 
 views of individual members ; and the indecorous, slovenly, 
 and unattractive manner in which Synagogue services were 
 too often conducted, caused, or at all events hastened, the 
 secession of many an old family from the faith of Israel. 
 
 The elders did not show any disposition to yield to 
 DHsraeli’s requests. They merely instructed their secretary, 
 through the Mahamad, to write to Mr D’Israeli “ that in 
 accordance with the present laws, it is not possible to grant 
 him the exemptions he desires.” 
 
 In the month of March following (1814), Isaac D’Israeli 
 received his Synagogue account, in which he was debited 
 with the usual fine for non-acceptance of office. This he 
 repudiated, but he expressed his willingness to discharge his 
 regular finta. The question appears to have remained thus 
 pending until March 1817, when the author of “ The Ameni¬ 
 ties of Literature ” received new accounts and summonses to 
 attend meetings. These proceedings irritated him, and he 
 wrote to the Mahamad (Wardens), regretting that he had not 
 been 66 suffered to remain in quiet as a useful contributing 
 member, although otherwise unfitted to deliberate in their 
 councils.” He concluded by saying: 66 I have patiently 
 sought for protection against the absurd choice of two or 
 three injudicious individuals, but I find that you as a body 
 sanction what your own laws will not allow. I am not a fit 
 member of your society, and I certainly am an aggrieved one. 
 
 I must now close all future correspondence, and I am under 
 the painful necessity of insisting that my name be erased 
 from the list of your members as yehidim (acknowledged 
 members) of the Synagogue.—lam, &c., I. D’Israeli.” 
 
3°° 
 
 ISAAC D>ISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 His resignation was followed by that of his brother-in-law, 
 Joshua or George Basevi, the well-known architect. 
 
 In May, in the same year, Sarah, widow of Benjamin 
 D’Israeli, obtained the permission of the Mahamad to place 
 a new tombstone on her husband’s grave. In 1821 Isaac 
 D’Israeli applied to the secretary of the Portuguese Con¬ 
 gregation for the certificates of birth of himself and family. 
 There was some hesitation in complying with this request, 
 owing to the indebtedness to the Synagogue of Mr D’Israeli. 
 But an arrangement was arrived at, through the interven¬ 
 tion of Ephraim Undo, by which the Mahamad agreed to 
 receive as full payment, the amount of the finta and offer¬ 
 ings due by D’Israeli up to 1817, waiving the remainder 
 of their claim for fines. On Ephraim Undo handing 
 over to the secretary the sum of £40, 17s, on account of 
 D’Israeli, the resignation of the latter was accepted, and the 
 required certificates were famished him. Mrs Isaac D’Israeli, 
 who was born in December 1755, gave birth to her only 
 daughter, Sarah D’Israeli, in December 1802, while her 
 eldest son, the Bight Hon. Benjamin D’Israeli, saw the light 
 on the 21st December 1804. The present Premier of Eng¬ 
 land thus proves older than he is usually said to be. His 
 two younger brothers were respectively born, Balph D’Israeli 
 in 1809, and James D’Israeli in 1813, and they were all 
 initiated into the covenant of Abraham.'* 
 
 At this period ended the connection between the D’Israeli 
 family and the Synagogue; a connection that might never 
 have been severed, had the authorities of the Sephardi Con¬ 
 gregation displayed more judgment and tact in their dealings 
 with Isaac D’Israeli. 
 
 We have spoken of this gifted family when they belonged 
 to the Jewish communion. Of the literary career of Isaac 
 D’Israeli, the talented father, and of the literary and poli¬ 
 tical career of Benjamin D’Israeli, the still more highlv 
 endowed son, it is not our province to speak. Isaac D’Israeli 
 
 * It may be interesting to our Jewish readers to learn that the gentleman who 
 performed the initiatory rite on the present Premier of England was a relative of 
 his mother, the late David Abarbanel Lindo, an influential member of the 
 Spanish and Portuguese Congregation, and a merchant of high commercial 
 standing. 
 
ISAAC D 1 ISRAELI AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 3°i 
 
 in his “ Curiosities of Literature,’’ suggests some work re¬ 
 cording 66 a history of events which have not happened.” 
 He speculates on what might have occurred if Charles II. 
 had not been defeated at Worcester ; if Charles Martel had 
 not routed the Saracens at Tours, and the Mohammedan rule 
 * had been established in Europe; if Martin Luther had not 
 been too much terrified at the threats of Cardinal San Sisto 
 to renounce his errors, which at one time he was disposed to 
 do, had he received some preferment. As the author himself 
 says, it is often that the fortunes of men and of nations re¬ 
 volve on a single event. A fair ground for speculation may 
 he formed as to the potential history of Benjamin D’Israeli, 
 had the few gentlemen who ruled over the Portuguese Com¬ 
 munity in 1814 resolved to conciliate the good will of Isaac 
 D’Israeli. It was only a question of two or three votes. 
 Benjamin D’lsraeli might in that case have been a brilliant 
 man of letters, a successful lawyer, a rising member of Par¬ 
 liament. In all human probability he would not, whilst we 
 write, be guiding the destinies of England. 
 
CHAPTER XL. 
 
 y. KING AND JEWISH WORSHIP—SIR MAURICE XI ME AES— 
 MORDECAI RODRIGUEZ LOPEZ. 
 
 The sincere love we bear for a dear friend or relative, the 
 deep devotion we feel for the faith in which we have been 
 born and in the traditions of which we have been nurtured, 
 do not prevent us from acknowledging the faults of the one, 
 or from observing the blemishes that may have crept into 
 the forms of the other. Without going so far as to admit 
 the entire justice of I. D’Israeli’s strictures on the autho¬ 
 rities of the Bevis Marks Synagogue, we find much in his 
 remarks on the religious condition of that community, that 
 should have been received with far greater attention and 
 consideration than were vouchsafed to his words. 
 
 The Jews must acknowledge it, however harshly the ad¬ 
 mission may grate on their ears. The mode of worship as 
 conducted in Jewish Synagogues in the early part of the 
 nineteenth century, did not satisfy either the minds or the 
 hearts of many sincere and conscientious Jews. Aged living 
 witnesses confirm verbally, what men now dead had written. 
 Thoughtful and earnest Jews keenly felt the abuses that 
 shocked their sense of religious decorum, and vainly endea¬ 
 voured to remedy the crying evils that throve almost un¬ 
 checked before their eyes. In 1812 J. King, a member 
 of the Portuguese Congregation, addressed several communi¬ 
 cations to the wardens of that communitv, wherein he re- 
 peatedly stated that his absence from Synagogue for many 
 years was because u it was not a place of devotion, and 
 prayers could be better said in the closet.” He observed 
 u with grief and astonishment how little the Synagogue was 
 attended, how indecent was the conduct of those that did at¬ 
 tend, and how extremely uneducated and disorderly were the 
 
J. KING AND JEWISH WORSHIP. 
 
 303 
 
 charity boys.” He offered to contribute to the better in¬ 
 struction of these children, so that they should no longer 
 distress people’s ears by discordant noises. He complained 
 that the house of prayer was converted into an exchange or 
 mart for the discussion of news or carrying out of commer¬ 
 cial transactions. He strongly recommended reform in these 
 respects, and concluded by placing his purse and his person 
 at the service of the congregation. His allegations unfor¬ 
 tunately only confirm pictures drawn by higher hands, as to 
 the truth of which we can entertain no reasonable doubt. 
 Mr King’s proposals were coldly received; they were de¬ 
 ferred consideration until he wrote again and again urging 
 the Mahamad to make some alterations to avoid a schism. 
 Eventually, King’s services not being accepted and his ad¬ 
 vice not being followed, he returned to his retirement from 
 his own community, nevertheless King lived and died a 
 Jew. Belonging to a middle-class family in his congrega¬ 
 tion, Key, for such was his original name, was fortunate 
 enough to win the affections of an Irish Catholic lady of 
 rank and fortune, whom he married. King, who had an Hi- 
 cised his pseudonym, being thus possessed of a wealthy and 
 influential wife, might, had he consented to embrace Chris¬ 
 tianity, have aspired to some high post. But he strenuously 
 resisted his wife’s solicitations and the temptations to which 
 lie was exposed. He did not deviate from the old faith. On 
 the contrary, he proved himself attached to its tenets. He 
 was deaf to the pleas of conjugal love, and to the calls of 
 ambition; and he even edited and published at his own ex¬ 
 pense David Levi’s Dissertation on the Prophets. He died 
 in 1824, bequeathing a small legacy to the Synagogue. 
 
 Among the defections of note from Judaism, which occurred 
 during the first quarter of the century, in addition to the 
 withdrawal of Isaac D’Israeli, we will mention the cases of 
 the families of Ximenes, Kodriguez Lopez, and Uzzielli. 
 Moses Ximenes was an ambitious and rich man, indifferent 
 in religious matters, eager for worldly honours. In 1802 he 
 had been elected to office in the Synagogue, which he declined 
 to accept. Having been fined for non-attendance, according 
 to custom, he desired to retire from the community, deput¬ 
 ing his friend, Mr Uzzielli, to pay what was due to the 
 
J. KING AND JEWISH WORSHIP. 
 
 3°4 
 
 Synagogue. Uzzielli adopted Christianity, and became the 
 founder of the family of that name, several members of whom 
 have since become well-known financiers. Moses, otherwise 
 Captain, Ximenes did not leave his community in real or 
 affected anger like some other neophytes. On the contrary, 
 he embraced his new faith while expressing the most friendly 
 feelings towards the professors of the old faith; and in his 
 parting communication, he thus wrote to the Mahamad of 
 the Portuguese Synagogue :—“ I shall always be ready to 
 cheerfully contribute to any of those charities that do so 
 much honour to your heads and hearts, and in which no 
 body of people are so praiseworthy as yourself.” We have 
 here at least the not common spectacle of an apostate, who 
 does not revile and vilify his former co-religionists or their 
 institutions. Ximenes was knighted; and Sir Maurice 
 Ximenes became high sheriff and magistrate of his county, 
 and died apparently a prosperous man. 
 
 Mordecai Rodriguez Lopez was descended from an ancient 
 Sephardi stock, whose name we have met already, who 
 flourished in the world of finance, and who realised fortunes 
 in foreign trade. Mordecai Rodriguez Lopez dwelt in Clap- 
 ham, and had wedded Rebecca, daughter of Menasseh Pereira 
 of Jamaica, by wdiom he had a son, Menasseh Lopez, who 
 was born in that island in 1755. The elder Lopez, after a 
 residence in the West Indies, returned to England an 
 opulent man. He conformed outwardly to the rites of 
 Judaism for many years, and served the usual Synagogue 
 offices. Towards the end of the 18th century his attendance 
 and that of his son at the house of prayer, slackened; 
 rumours as to his orthodoxy arose, and a letter to the follow¬ 
 ing effect, dated 11th July 1802, did not cause much surprise 
 to the Mahamad, to whom it was addressed :—“ A recent 
 circumstance in regard to my future situation, which will 
 very soon appear, makes it incompatible to my remaining 
 any longer a yahid or member of the congregation, and I 
 have desired my friend, Mr Moses Lindo, junr., to apprise 
 you of my intention and to pay my account with the Syna¬ 
 gogue.” In concluding his communication, Mordecai Rodri¬ 
 guez Lopez, like Moses Ximenes, expressed the best wishes 
 for the welfare of his late brethren, and, moreover, he stated 
 
/. KING AND JE WISH WORSHIP. 
 
 305 
 
 that he had instructed Moses Lindo, junr., to present the 
 Synagogue with £150 for the zedaka or charity fund. The 
 66 recent circumstance ” adverted to by Lopez was evidently 
 his conversion and that of his son to the recognised religion 
 of the State. The change in the theological opinions of 
 Mordecai and of Menasseh Lopez happened by a singular 
 coincidence to manifest itself at the time of a general election, 
 and the fact was immediately followed by the return of 
 Menasseh as member for New Romney. Menasseh Lopez 
 was created a baronet in 1805, with remainder to his nephew, 
 Ralph Franco. In the next election, Sir Menasseh secured 
 a seat for Barnstaple, for which borough he was again re¬ 
 elected in 1818. Curious to say, we find that an attorney, 
 named Dance, who had insulted Sir Menasseh Lopez, incor¬ 
 rectly described as “a Jew baronet,” was condemned to 
 twelve months imprisonment, and to be struck off the rolls. 
 On the 18th March 1819, the “Jew baronet” was found 
 guilty at the Exeter Assize of having bribed the electors of 
 the borough of G-rampound to secure his election, and 
 sentence was deferred. On the 13th November he was again 
 prosecuted for a similar offence, and convicted, and he 
 received sentence in the Court of Queen’s Bench. He was 
 condemned for the first offence to be imprisoned for twenty- 
 one months in Exeter Jail, and to pay to the King a fine of 
 £10,000, and for the second infraction of the law, which had 
 been committed in Devonshire, he was sentenced to a further 
 confinement of three months and another fine of £2000. 
 Notwithstanding these untoward circumstances, Sir Menasseh 
 Massey Lopez was once more returned to Parliament, and 
 this time he was chosen as a fit representative for the imma¬ 
 culate borough of Westbury. In 1826 he resigned to make 
 room for Sir Robert Peel, who had been ejected from the 
 Protestant University of Oxford, on account of his public 
 conduct on the question of Catholic emancipation. Sir Men¬ 
 asseh married the daughter of Mr John Yeates of Monmouth, 
 and his only child, Esther, died in 1819, when twenty-four 
 years old. Sir Menasseh Massey Lopez, Bart., died at an 
 advanced age in 1831, at Maristow House. He was then 
 fulfilling the functions of Recorder of Westbury, in addition 
 to being a magistrate for two counties. He was succeeded 
 
 u 
 
3°6 
 
 J. KING AND JEWISH WORSHIP. 
 
 by liis nephew, Ralph Franco, who became Sir Ralph Lopes, 
 Bart., the last letter in the name being softened into S. 
 The landed and personal property bequeathed by the first 
 baronet was estimated at upwards of £800,000. Sir Massey 
 Lopes, one of the present Lords of the Admiralty, is the son 
 of Sir Ralph Lopes, Bart., otherwise Ralph Franco. It is 
 worthy of remark that Sir Massey Lopes, the son of a Jew, 
 holds a place in the present Conservative administration, 
 which is headed by the son of another Jew, himself born 
 within the pale of Judaism. 
 
 It may be observed that few of those gentlemen who so 
 easily renounced their old creed had been a frequent or 
 regular attendant at Synagogue. Nobody suddenly becomes 
 very wicked, says the old Latin adage, or, we may add, very 
 good either. Few men who are zealous and sincere followers 
 of one religion readily embrace another religion, without even 
 going through the form of an inquiry. The Jews who aban¬ 
 doned Judaism in the early part of this century, had long 
 been lax in their observances. Indifference to form leads to 
 indifference to principle, and convenience points to a change 
 which can do no worldly harm, and may conduce to a great 
 many very material advantages. 
 
 Judaism has shown itself to be possessed of far greater 
 vitality than it got credit for from Isaac D’Israeli. Some 
 families of eminence did doubtless lapse from Judaism in his 
 time; and we have at different periods thoroughly inquired 
 into the subject of conversions to Christianity. But the 
 enjoyment by Jews of civil and political freedom, the intro¬ 
 duction of wholesome improvements in the performance of 
 Jewish religious services, the spread of enlightenment and 
 education among the Jews, and various other causes have 
 long obviated any temptation for Jews to forsake their old 
 religion. 
 
 To abandon one’s faith is no longer regarded as a pass¬ 
 port to good society, or as a preliminary to entrance into 
 public life. Apostasy is not considered by right-minded 
 Christians as a title to their confidence, and a conscientious 
 Jew may aspire to serve his country and to rise to high 
 dignity, and still remain an open and zealous believer in the 
 Lord of Israel. 
 
CHAPTER XLI. 
 
 A CHIEF RABBI AND A HAH AM. 
 
 A spiritual pastor must always exercise great influence over 
 liis flock, and the Rev. Solomon Hirschel undoubtedly 
 possessed great authority over the Askenazim of London. 
 The Rev. Solomon Hirschel, as our readers may recollect, 
 was born in England, and was the son of a former rabbi of 
 the Duke’s Place Synagogue, Rabbi Hirsch. The future 
 head of the German Community of London was educated in 
 Germany and in Poland,, where the public schools being 
 closed against him, he devoted himself to the study of Jewish 
 theology. Solomon Hirschel possessed a clear understanding, 
 keen humour, and sound judgment, and he acquired a correct 
 and pure style of Hebrew composition.. Mathematics formed 
 a favourite pursuit of his. This science, by its ingenuity 
 and by the facility with which it can be acquired in solitary 
 research, had always been a favourite study of the rabbis. 
 
 According to the custom obtaining in his day among the 
 Jews of Poland, Solomon Hirschel married at the early age 
 of seventeen. For nine years he occupied the Rabbinical 
 Chair of Prenzlau, in Prussia. In 1802, when forty years 
 old, he was called to preside over the Synagogue in Duke s 
 Place ; but gradually his jurisdiction was extended over all 
 the Jews of Askenazi Minhag or rite in London, and indeed 
 in England. 
 
 With this appointment began a new and important phase 
 of the life of the Rev. Solomon Hirschel. The period of his 
 administration deserves a conspicuous place in. the annals of 
 the English Jews. It was during this period that the 
 scattered elements formed by the English Jews were gathered 
 into one compact mass, and that the Spanish and Portuguese 
 Jews and the German Jews, who were formerly spoken of as 
 
3°8 
 
 A CHIEF RABBI AND A HA HAM. 
 
 two distinct “ nations,” became closely connected together 
 as members of the same ancient race and followers of the 
 same ancient creed. It was during this time that monuments 
 were established, demonstrating to posterity the munificent 
 charity of the English Jews towards their poorer brethren. 
 It was at this epoch that the Jews’ Hospital, the Jews’ 
 Free School, and several useful institutions were founded. 
 During this period the ever memorable mission to the East 
 was performed by Sir Moses Montefiore; and, we must add, 
 it was at this period that the unfortunate schism took place, 
 which separated some of the best members of the old congre¬ 
 gations from their early associations and former brethren. 
 The Rev. Solomon Hirschel had seen the communities which 
 he guided increase in number, in wealth, and in enlighten¬ 
 ment. Nevertheless his life was not without its bitterness. 
 In his earlier days he is said to have been disturbed by 
 family troubles, while in old age the dissensions prevailing 
 in his congregations sorely vexed his spirit. 
 
 Considerable dissatisfaction had manifested itself princi¬ 
 pally with liturgical forms. Though the Rev. Solomon 
 Hirschel represented the spirit of a bygone age, he is said by 
 those who knew him best to have possessed a tolerant and 
 equitable disposition. Had the secession movement occurred 
 a few years earlier, it is believed that the pious rabbi by his 
 prudence and energy might have averted the unhappy con¬ 
 sequences which followed, and that by counselling opportune 
 and moderate reforms, only two communities of Jews might 
 yet exist in Great Britain. But it happened otherwise. 
 The Rev. Solomon Hirschel, broken in mind and body and 
 weighed with years, was unequal to the emergency. Fasting 
 and other privations had told on his powerful frame. At 
 one period he never ate meat except on Sabbaths ; at an¬ 
 other period he fasted altogether during the whole of every 
 Monday and Thursday, and only medical prohibition pre¬ 
 vented him from fasting on such days to the last moment of 
 his life. Two severe accidents confined him to his chamber 
 for some months before his death. He died on the 31st 
 October 1842, when he had reached the advanced age of 
 eighty-one. 
 
 The Rev. S. Hirschel was an uncompromising foe to con- 
 
A CHIEF RABBI AND A HAH AM. 
 
 3°9 
 
 versionists; but he was mild in manner and desirous of 
 avoiding religious controversies with non-Jews; and espe¬ 
 cially careful not to give offence to Christians. Once 
 indeed he strongly remonstrated against some unseemly and 
 ill-judged expressions on the part of some members of a 
 debating club which styled itself the Philo-Judaoan Society, 
 and which consisted mainly of Jewish young men. Above 
 all, the learned rabbi loved peace and hated public polemics, 
 invariably checking intemperance of expression. He left 
 a family of four sons and four daughters, to whom he 
 bequeathed his savings, said to amount to £13,000 or 
 £14,000. His property was sold at public auction by the 
 well-known George Robins, who treated the objects of Jewish 
 worship, the use of which was unknown to him, with great 
 respect and good feeling. The excellent library which the 
 Rev. S. Hirschel had gathered was purchased for the Beth 
 Hamedrash, and some of his flock eagerly bought as keep¬ 
 sakes the articles he familiarly employed in domestic wor¬ 
 ship. 
 
 The late rabbi was a man of commanding presence and 
 tall stature. He had a lofty forehead and a keen eye, and 
 his countenance is described as having a benignant and in¬ 
 tellectual expression. His appearance abroad inspired rever¬ 
 ence, and most persons in the streets touched their hats and 
 made way for the High Priest of the Jews, as they styled 
 him. Two or three portraits of him are extant, the best 
 being that seen in the vestry of Duke’s Place. The Rev. S. 
 Hirschel was wont to rise at early dawn, rarely retiring 
 until midnight, and occupying every available moment in his 
 engrossing theological studies. He was endowed with a 
 remarkably quick perception of character; and to him was 
 attributed a ready wit. The manuscripts he left behind are 
 said to be richly garnished with humorous sayings. 
 
 The funeral of the late Chief Rabbi, which was celebrated 
 on 2d November 1842, presented an imposing spectacle. His 
 body was brought from his residence in Bury Street to 
 the Duke’s Place Synagogue by twenty-four bearers, one of 
 whom was Sir Moses Montefiore. The bier was placed before 
 the ark, which was covered with black cloth. The numerous 
 windows were darkened, the Synagogue was illuminated with 
 
310 A CHIEF RABBI AND A HA HAM. 
 
 wax tapers, and the whole arrangements had a sombre and 
 impressive effect. The service was read by the Rev. S. 
 Ascher, and then a procession was formed to accompany the 
 mortal remains of the Chief Rabbi to the German Jews' 
 Cemetery in North Street, Mile End. The procession com- 
 piised upwards of a hundred plain carriages, for mourning 
 coaches had been eschewed by the directions of the deceased"! 
 Deputations from all the Synagogues and all the Jewish schools 
 in Eondon attended the funeral, and the scene at the burial- 
 ground was most solemn and stinking. Several brown paper 
 packets, sealed with wax and containing papers and docu¬ 
 ments, were thrown into the grave by order of the deceased. 
 The shops of Jewish tradesmen remained closed until after 
 ■the conclusion of the funeral ceremony, which lasted from 
 ten until three o’clock. A medal was struck in commemora¬ 
 tion of .the late Chief Rabbi, displaying an emblematic device 
 with inscriptions in Hebrew. 
 
 Shortly after the Duke’s Place Synagogue, which had been 
 foi many years without a spiritual guide, had resolved to 
 elect a chief rabbi, the Portuguese Community, who had 
 found themselves in precisely the same position, determined 
 to supply a similar want. Our readers are already aware 
 that the Rev. Raphael Meldola was appointed in 1805 
 Sahara of the Sephardi Congregation, and that he fulfilled 
 his functions with zeal, if not always with the tact and 
 discretion desirable in a man occupying his responsible post. 
 The learned Haham was born at Leghorn in 1754. He was 
 the son of Haham Moses Meldola, formerly Professor of 
 Oriental Languages at the University of Paris, and whose 
 literary writings are to be found in the works “ Tosaphot 
 Rekem,” “ Mahamar Mordecai,” &c. His ancestors had been 
 great labbis and men of erudition for many generations * his 
 grandfather had been Haham at Pisa, and then had been 
 called to France, while his uncle became Rabbi of the ancient 
 and important Congregation of Amsterdam. Haham Raphael 
 Meldola himself became an accomplished theologian and 
 philosopher. After a regular course of studies,° he was 
 admitted member of the first rabbinical university at the 
 age of fifteen ; and in 1803 he received the title of Rab, and 
 was appointed a judge to try causes among his own people, 
 
A CHIEF RABBI AND A HAHAM. 
 
 3* 1 
 
 as was customary in Italy. At an early age he published a 
 work called 66 Korban Minha,” a literary comment on and 
 explanation of the service of the High Priest read in Syna¬ 
 gogue on Kipur day. In 1796 he brought out a rabbinical 
 work entitled “ Hupat Hatanim,” which is said to display 
 great mathematical as well as talmudical knowledge. He 
 moreover left ten MS. works, one of which was published by 
 his son, the Rev. David Meldola, and was entitled u Hezek 
 Hemunah, Faith Strengthened.” This forms a complete 
 exposition of the Jewish doctrines, rites, and belief, in the 
 form of dialogues in pure Hebrew with an English version. 
 
 Haham Meldola was humble in manner and unpretending 
 in deportment. Some infirmity of temper, however, brought 
 him into occasional collisions with the Synagogue authorities 
 or officials, to the detriment of the dignity of his office. He 
 was a kind-hearted man, ever ready to lend a willing ear 
 to tales of distress and to do his uttermost to procure assist¬ 
 ance for those who really deserved it. Haham Meldola died 
 in June 1828, at the age of seventy-four, and was interred in 
 the old burial-ground by the side of Rabbi Nieto at his 
 especial desire. Truly there was this resemblance between 
 those two learned rabbis, that both were natives of Italy, 
 both had prosecuted their studies at Leghorn, both had 
 been appointed chiefs of the same college, had been called 
 to London, had acquired considerable fame for learning, and 
 both died at about the same age. 
 
 The Hev. Solomon Hirschel and Haham Meldola laboured 
 under the disadvantage of being called upon to direct spiritu¬ 
 ally congregations with the language of which they were more 
 or less unacquainted. The Lev. Solomon Hirschel, though an 
 Englishman by birth, had been brought up abroad, and like 
 Haham Meldola, he never succeeded in mastering the tongue 
 in which Shakespeare and Milton wrote. Pulpit instruction 
 did not form a recognised part of the service in those days, 
 and the exhortations which those reverend gentlemen, at rare 
 intervals like angel’s visits, addressed to their flocks, fell on 
 unprepared soil. The strange German speech of the Rev. 
 Solomon Hirschel, and the very questionable Spanish in 
 which Haham Meldola gave his religious instruction to his 
 cougregants, were necessarily only understood by a small 
 
312 
 
 A CHIEF RABBI AND A HAHAM 
 
 minority of them. The Jews of German and Spanish or 
 Portuguese origin have ordinarily adopted the language of this 
 country as their own, at all events in the second generation; 
 and thus it happened that the reverend preachers directed 
 their homilies to nearly empty benches. 
 
 The Jews have now changed all this. Religious sermons 
 form in nearly all Synagogues an acknowledged portion of 
 the services \ and the Jews of all sections of the community 
 may consider themselves as extremely fortunate in having 
 secured the benefit of the presence of lecturers eloquent and 
 learned, who impart to their respective congregations the 
 fruit of their studies and meditations in pure English. 
 
CHAPTER XLII. 
 
 JEWISH WORTHIES—THE REV. SOLOMON LYON—EMMA 
 L YON—MICHAEL JOSEPHS—ARTHUR L UMLE Y DA VIDS, 
 
 Though the Jews of England have not been so prolific in pro¬ 
 ducing great names in literature as their Continental brethren, 
 they can show, nevertheless, a fair number of scholars, lin¬ 
 guists, and men of letters, of such extended knowledge and 
 varied talents as would reflect credit on any community. It 
 must be owned that English Jews have never displayed any 
 especial predilection for literature. They have not risen to 
 high rank in journalism, and they do not influence or guide 
 the opinion of an important section of the community. Their 
 literary reviews do not decide the fate of a new book; they 
 do not draw the tears or raise the smiles of crowded audiences 
 before the curtain, by the invention of heart-stirring plots, or 
 by the creation of original types of character ; and with, per¬ 
 haps, one single exception, they do not enchain the attention 
 of thousands of readers of fiction to the fortunes of the 
 puppets of their imagination, through the customary three 
 volumes. The few names at the head of this chapter, and the 
 far greater number who have distinguished themselves since, 
 clearly prove that it is not the lack of any natural gift which 
 prevents the Jew from achieving success in the pursuit of 
 literature. The prospect of speedy wealth in the Stock 
 Exchange, or the ambition of vying with the merchant 
 princes of England, undoubtedly exercises an alluring in¬ 
 fluence in this century, when the sovereign sway of gold 
 becomes daily more and more apparent and irresistible. More¬ 
 over, the bar, music, and painting, have attracted the greater 
 part of such Jewish talent and energies as have not been 
 monopolised by commercial or financial occupations. Few 
 Jews have devoted themselves heart and soul to the pursuit 
 of literature. 
 
3*4 
 
 JEWISH WORTHIES. 
 
 Among the learned Jews at the beginning of this century, 
 we must not omit to mention the Rev. Solomon Lyon of 
 Cambridge. This gentleman was a scholar of considerable 
 attainments. He was educated at the University of Prague, 
 and he settled in this country in the latter part of last cen¬ 
 tury. He established the first Jewish boarding-school in 
 England, and became a registered tutor at the University of 
 Cambridge. He taught Hebrew to several persons of social 
 distinction, among whom may be named the Duke of Sussex, 
 the present Duke of Wellington, Charles Poulett Thompson, 
 Colonel Thompson, the Corn Law reformer, Dr Mansell, 
 Bishop of Gloucester, and many others. He wrote a Hebrew 
 Grammar and several erudite treatises. He was himself an 
 able man, and he associated with men of ability. From him 
 descended a gifted family. His daughter, Miss Emma Lyon, 
 was an accomplished poetess, and those who had the privilege 
 of knowing her personally, are aware that she was as estim¬ 
 able and kind-hearted as she was intellectual and well edu¬ 
 cated. This lady was the first Jewish Englishwoman who 
 was an authoress. She received an unusually good education 
 for her days; her father’s position and connections at the 
 University of Cambridge affording her exceptional advantages 
 of this nature. Miss Emma Lyon published a volume of 
 poems in 1812, which proved highly successful, and met with 
 a very favourable reception from the reviewers of the period. 
 After her marriage with Mr Abraham Henry, this lady con¬ 
 tinued to write occasional poems, which were recited at public 
 institutions, such as the Jews’ Hospital, Jews’ Free School, 
 Society of Friends for Foreigners in Distress, &c. Among 
 Mrs Henry’s children, we may name the late able and accom¬ 
 plished editor of the Jewish Chronicle , a gentleman who was 
 as much esteemed in his community for his talents as for his 
 largeness of heart and modesty of disposition. 
 
 Many of our readers will doubtless recollect the venerable 
 figure of the late Michael Josephs. He rendered great ser¬ 
 vice to Anglo-Jewish literature, and no Anglo-Jewish history 
 would be complete without a glance at his life and at his 
 works. Michael, or as sometimes he styled himself Myer, 
 Josephs, was born in Ivonigsberg in 1763, and he came to 
 London when a youth of sixteen. The great intellectual 
 
JEWISH WORTHIES. 
 
 3 X 5 
 
 movement led by Mendelssohn in Germany had begun at that 
 time, and he came to England inspired by it. The move¬ 
 ment would have spread to England had a favourable field 
 for literary culture and a love for Hebrew literature existed 
 here. Michael Josephs brought with him great knowledge of 
 the Holy Scriptures, and much aptitude for Hebrew writing. 
 He had the gift of making happy epigrams; and ingenious 
 turns in prose and in verse characterised all his literary works. 
 Many of his epigrams and poems are scattered in different 
 journals ; and many are dispersed in manuscript partly among 
 his own papers, and partly in the letters he addressed to his 
 friends. He composed for many years the Hebrew ode re¬ 
 cited at the anniversary banquet of the Free School. The 
 fugitive pieces he wrote may be numbered by the score, 
 and these will always be read with pleasure by all who un¬ 
 derstand and appreciate Hebrew literature. Probably his 
 fame as a Hebrew scholar rests more solidly on his Hebrew 
 and English Lexicon, a work of great utility, and which dis¬ 
 plays real scholarship and mastery over the sacred tongue. 
 
 Michael Josephs took an active part in all the movements 
 tending to the advancement of progress and enlightenment 
 among his co-religionists. He participated in 1830 in the 
 foundation of the Hebrew Literary Society for the cultivation 
 of the sacred language, a society which came to an untimely 
 end in less than two years. It is said that he was frequently 
 consulted by the Chief Rabbi, the Rev. Dr Hirschel, on 
 questions connected with Hebrew, composition ; an art of 
 which Michael Josephs was complete master. He also was 
 the first to suggest the necessity of replying to 66 M‘Caul’s 
 Old Paths; ” a work which has been since answered, though 
 perhaps not so completely as might be desired. Michael 
 Josephs was a merchant by profession; and he graced his 
 leisure hours by the pursuit of those studies for which his 
 education and tastes had so well fitted him. In his religious 
 views he belonged to that happy medium, which it is to be 
 lamented is not found oftener among men of intelligence. 
 He was not one of those who consider the slightest infraction 
 of the minutest observance as a mortal sin; nor did he hold 
 with those who completely disregard the ceremonial law ot 
 Moses. He was a wise and prudent man, and he would 
 
316 JEWISH WORTHIES. 
 
 often familiarly say, like Socrates, “ Let us sacrifice a cock 
 to iEsculapius.” 
 
 Mr Josephs had a true love for his fellow-creatures. 
 Charitable himself, he was the cause of charity in others. 
 From the esteem he enjoyed in his community, it was easy 
 for him to gather important sums for deserving objects. 
 In his literary labours he was indefatigable; and to literary 
 aspirants from Germany he proved little less than a pro¬ 
 vidence. His purse and his advice were at their service, 
 and he never abandoned them until their object, so far as it 
 was attainable, was accomplished. In his last years Michael 
 Josephs lived in retirement, surrounded by three of his sons 
 who cheered his last days. He died in 1849, having reached 
 the patriarchal age of eighty-six. He was deeply regretted 
 by the rich and by the poor; and especially by men of letters. 
 The void his death left in the community was not easily 
 filled. Zealous workers among the Jews in the cause of 
 charity have always been plentiful; zealous workers in the 
 cause of Jewish literature have been found, though not so 
 numerous. Men who have worked, at the same time, to 
 elevate the Jews spiritually and to ameliorate their physical 
 condition, have not been numerous, and Michael Josephs 
 may justly claim to rank among them. 
 
 The dispensations of Providence are at times strangely 
 incomprehensible. A thunderbolt falls. The old worn-out 
 decayed trunk, leafless, branchless, with scarcely any vitality, 
 is spared, and a young vigorous sapling, hardly finished 
 growing, with all the elements of a fresh robust life before 
 it, is stricken to the earth. A pestilence arises. The aged 
 invalid who for years has been tottering on the verge of 
 the grave, to whom existence is no longer aught but a 
 prolongation of pain, who longs to lie down and die that 
 he may rest from the weary pilgrimage which has proved 
 to him nought but vexation of the spirit and suffering of 
 the flesh; he escapes unscathed. The youth whose career 
 opens with brilliant prospects : who is endowed by the gifts 
 of nature, whose bright genius raises the highest hope as to 
 his future career, whose path seems strewed with flowers, is 
 inexorably snatched from our midst by the merciless angel 
 of death. The blooming young bride perishes and the 
 
3*7 
 
 JEWISH WORTHIES. 
 
 wrinkled old beldame survives; why or wherefore our 
 limited intelligence cannot fathom. Arthur Lumley Davids, 
 like Numa Hartog and like Philoxene Luzzatto, the pro¬ 
 digiously learned son of the great Hebraist, Professor 
 Luzzatto of Padua, lived indeed but a short span of time. 
 Arthur Lumley Davids was born in the year 1811, and he 
 died in July 1832, ere he had reached his twenty-first 
 birthday. Before he was twenty, this wonderful young man 
 had delivered a lecture in the presence of the “ Society for 
 the Cultivation of Hebrew Literature ” on the Philosophy of 
 the Jews, a lecture replete with deep learning and profound 
 research. Before he reached to the years of manhood, 
 before he was called aw r ay from his family, he had written 
 a Grammar of the Turkish language, with a preliminary 
 discourse on the language and literature of the Turkish 
 nation, &c.; a work which called forth from the most 
 competent judges of the subject the most unqualified praise. 
 The “ Literary Gazette,” the arbiter of literary merit in those 
 days, expressed itself on the subject in the following terms: 
 “ We are informed that the author of this volume has not 
 yet completed his twenty-first year; and if we were disposed 
 to think very highly indeed of the learning and research 
 which it displays, even had they marked the labours of grey 
 hairs how much more must we prize and estimate them 
 when we learn that the extraordinary effort proceeds fiom 
 the verge of boyhood.” Happily this great work was 
 honoured with the applause of the monarch the language 
 of whose people it illustrates; and it secured to its author 
 
 immortal fame. 
 
 Davids, in the few years of his life, had acquired a fund of 
 knowledge so extensive and so varied, that were age reckoned 
 by the amount of learning attained, he must have reached a 
 patriarchal old age. Had he been spared to his co-religionists 
 and to the world at large, a mind so ardent, so stored with 
 erudition, and so endowed with zeal and pei severance, would 
 undoubtedly have amply realised the glorious promise of 
 youth. Providence had decreed otherwise. Davids had been 
 bred to the law, and was possessed of a competent fortune. 
 Within a few weeks of that epoch of life which would have 
 rendered him his own master, in the midst of his pure and 
 
JEWISH WORTHIES. 
 
 3iS 
 
 lofty aspirations, he became a victim to the new pestilence 
 that was then spreading its ravages over every country in 
 Europe. Like so many other men of genius, the mind 
 seemed to be too powerful for the slender body. Exhausted 
 by nightly vigils and incessant labour, his corporeal strength 
 wa» insufficient to withstand the violent attack of cholera 
 with which he was seized on the night of the 17th July 
 1832. He suffered in silence to avoid alarming his mother, 
 and when medical assistance became available, it was, alas! 
 too late. His pure spirit fled to its Creator. To the sorrow 
 of his broken-hearted mother we need not advert here. 
 iSothing could console her ; not even the generous testi¬ 
 monial of Sultan Mahmoud II., who presented to Mrs 
 Davids. a splendid diamond ring, accompanied by a letter 
 expressing his high approbation of the work dedicated 
 
 to him, and his deep regret at the author’s premature 
 death. 
 
 Di Arthur Lumley Davids the Jews of his day lost one of 
 their brightest ornaments. His noble efforts contributed to 
 vindicate Jewish fame from the unjust reproaches which the 
 prejudice of ages had heaped upon it. He gave a glorious 
 example to the youths of Israel, and no doubt the good seed 
 has borne good fruit. Albeit there has been only one Huma 
 Hartog, it is impossible to say what amount of honest 
 emulation and good work the memory of Davids may have 
 induced. 
 
CHAPTER XLIII. 
 
 THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND IN LISBON—THE SHAARE 
 TICVA SCHOOL — AN UNLAWFUL MINYAN — GIFTS TO 
 THE SEPHARDI SYNAGOGUE. 
 
 Albeit the Portuguese Jewish Community of London had 
 ceased in the second decade of the present century to he the 
 wealthiest and most important Jewish body in this country, 
 it still remained an influential and opulent congregation, 
 able and willing to stretch forth a helping hand to its dis¬ 
 tressed brethren abroad. Napoleon Bonaparte was approach¬ 
 ing his downfall, and his lieutenants were making a desperate 
 resistance to a coalesced Europe. The French were shut up 
 in Hamburg among other places, and as their provisions 
 were diminishing, their authorities ordered the expulsion of 
 non-combatants. Numbers of poor Jews precipitately quitted 
 Hamburg and sought refuge in Altona, utterly unprovided 
 with the barest necessities of life. Sick women and starving 
 children indeed formed a heartrending spectacle. A committee 
 was constituted by the Jews of Altona ; and as many of the 
 fugitives were of Spanish and Portuguese origin, application 
 for assistance was made to the Bevis Marks Synagogue. A 
 grant was at once allotted, to their suffering co-religionists, 
 by the elders of that congregation, who assembled especially 
 for the purpose. Several sums of money were remitted to 
 Altona, and doubtless many Jews were saved from the pangs 
 of starvation, or from the poisoned breath of typhus fever. 
 In the course of the correspondence between the authorities 
 of Bevis Marks and the chiefs of the Hamburg Congregation, 
 it transpired that the latter body was, or claimed to be, the 
 oldest Spanish and Portuguese Community in the world. 
 It was stated that at this period (1814) this congregation 
 had been in existence for over 400 years. We think, how- 
 
3 20 
 
 THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND LISBON 
 
 ever, that the Jews of Leghorn may claim at least as ancient 
 a foundation for their congregation, which dates hack over 
 four centuries. 
 
 In 1816 the Mahamad of the Sephardi Congregation were 
 informed that the harriers of intolerance were broken down 
 in Portugal, and that the government of that country had 
 permitted the Jews of Lisbon to profess openly their ancient 
 faith. Lusitania, less intolerant and bigoted than the land 
 of the Cid Campeador, did not consider that the peaceful 
 existence of a few Jews within its bosom would imperil the 
 national safety of the State or its national religion. Hitherto 
 such Jews as might happen to die in Lisbon, were interred 
 in the English cemetery. At this period it was resolved to 
 purchase a piece of land for a burial-ground, and the Por¬ 
 tuguese Jews of London contributed a small sum to that 
 pious object. The number of Jews dwelling at that time in 
 the capital of Portugal seems to have been very limited, and 
 it appears that it did not increase with any great rapidity 
 when they were allowed to constitute themselves into a con¬ 
 gregation. On the other hand, the descendants of Jews, who to 
 save their lives adopted Catholicism, formed a not inconsider¬ 
 able part of the population. Jewish blood runs through the 
 veins of some of the noblest families of Portugal, and the 
 saying of that enlightened minister, the Marquis de Pombal, 
 to King Jos6 I., has often been quoted. When the King 
 expressed a desire that those individuals whose ancestors had 
 been Jews should wear yellow hats,, the minister brought two 
 such hats to the king, observing that one was for his Majesty 
 and the other for himself. 
 
 The Portuguese language had constituted for more than a 
 century and a half, the official language of the Jewish Com¬ 
 munity of Bevis Marks. In the beginning of this century 
 that tongue had fallen into desuetude, and was only under¬ 
 stood by some of the foreign Israelites who settled in London. 
 In February 1819, it was resolved to adopt the plan of keep¬ 
 ing the minutes of all proceedings in the English instead of 
 the Portuguese language; and a month afterwards a com¬ 
 mittee was appointed, of which Mr David Brandon was 
 chairman, to translate the Askamoth (laws) of the congrega¬ 
 tion from the tongue of Camoens to that of Shakespeare. 
 
THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND LISBON 321 
 
 The task was creditably performed; and since that period 
 members of the congregation could no longer plead that they 
 were unacquainted with the laws regulating their community, 
 because they were written in a foreign language. 
 
 In 1821 Mr de Castro, the secretary of the Synagogue, 
 died. In August of that year his successor was elected in 
 the person of Mr Solomon Almosnino, the well-known and 
 esteemed gentleman who for more than half a century has 
 served his community most zealously and efficiently, gaining 
 the respect of all with whom he has come in contact. 
 
 The state of the education of the Jewish poor remained 
 in an unsatisfactory condition, notwithstanding the frequent 
 changes and reforms introduced into the management of the 
 communal schools. To increase and improve English instruc¬ 
 tion a grant of £40 per annum, from the legacy of £5000 
 left by Moses Lamego in 1757, was allotted for the payment 
 of an English master to the school of “ Heshaim,” in addi¬ 
 tion to the interest of £1000 in consols. A committee to 
 inquire into the state of the educational institutions of the 
 congregation having been appointed early in 1821, the 
 result of its labours became known towards the close of the 
 year. The recommendations of the committee were acted 
 upon. The schools that had existed until then under the 
 direction of Heshaim were abolished. A society was established 
 in their place under the name of Shaare Ticva (Gates of Hope), 
 for the support of a Spanish and Portuguese Jews’ Charity 
 School, for the education of poor youths in the principles 
 of the Jewish religion. The same sums as before were placed 
 at the disposal of the governors of the institution. For the 
 last generation the zeal and efficiency displayed by the 
 various masters and managers have raised considerably the 
 standard of education ; and those schools have now become 
 equal to any others of the same class and appertaining to 
 any sect in the country. 
 
 It is a trite saying that small causes frequently lead to 
 great events. Had Grouchy not lost his way on his march 
 to the field of Waterloo, he would have arrived there before 
 Blucher, and Napoleon Bonaparte might have died on the 
 throne of France. Had Louis Philippe not forbidden a few 
 opposition deputies to dine at a public banquet, his grandson 
 
 x 
 
322 
 
 THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND LISBON 
 
 might now he King of France. And to speak of compara¬ 
 tively small events, had not a certain narrow and exclusive 
 spirit reigned in Bevis Marks, the schism that caused so 
 much pain in the Jewish Community thirty-three yeais ago 
 might probably never have occurred. The first circumstance 
 that sowed the seed of dissension among the Sephardim in 
 London took place in the year 1822. A foreign gentleman 
 of good family, and of extremely orthodox principles, who was 
 settled in England, took occasion on the initiation of a son 
 into the covenant of Abraham, to receive a number of friends 
 at his house to read prayers during the first night of Pente¬ 
 cost. This custom is very generally observed abroad, and is 
 by some families practised in London to the present day. 
 On the following morning the prayers allotted to that festival 
 were recited with Minyccn . The event created a great stir. 
 The first, the fundamental law of the congregation, which 
 sternly prohibited the meeting of ten or more Jews for the 
 celebration of prayers in any locality within a certain radius 
 from the Bevis Marks Synagogue, had been infringed. The 
 offenders, twelve in number, were summoned before the 
 Mahamad, and were placed on their trial. A number of 
 witnesses were examined and cross-examined. The opinions 
 of the Haham and the Beth Din were taken. The principal 
 offenders did not appear in defence ; the minor delinquents 
 alleged various pleas in extenuation. All the transgressors 
 were found guilty, and various penalties were inflicted upon 
 them. The gentleman at whose house had occurred the 
 unlawful proceeding of chanting prayers with Minyan , and 
 his father and another relative, were deprived of their seats 
 in Svna° 02 *ue, their names were erased from the list of 
 Yehidim , they were relegated to certain places at the back of 
 the Theba (reading-desk), disqualified from being called up 
 to the law, declared ineligible for two years for any pious 
 duties, and finally fines of £40 and £20 respectively were 
 inflicted upon them. Minor penalties varying in degree were 
 laid on the other transgressors, all of whom were foreigners, 
 and some making only transient sojourns in England. The 
 condemnations were read in Synagogue, and much unplea¬ 
 santness ensued. One of the parties implicated attended 
 Synagogue, and on being removed from his former seat, he 
 
THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND LISBON 323 
 
 commenced an action at law against the Synagogue authori¬ 
 ties, which after a short time was abandoned. The matter 
 remained in abeyance until November 1825, when the death 
 occurred of the mother of the gentleman at whose house the 
 Berith had taken place. The lady’s husband and son then 
 expressed a desire to return to the Synagogue, and offered to 
 pay the fines which had been imposed upon them ; and those 
 others who had shared in their condemnations, and who were 
 still in England, manifested a similar wish. The gentlemen 
 in question were re-elected as Yehidim ; they duly performed 
 the necessary ceremonies to purge themselves from ecclesias¬ 
 tical censure; their fines were remitted, and they became 
 useful members of the congregation. But the bitterness of 
 their punishment they never forgot. When years afterwards 
 other members of the community asked for the privilege of 
 erecting a place of worship nearer to their own homes than 
 the ancient building in the city, the same men, actuated by 
 a sense of a former wrong, strenuously opposed any concession 
 to others, of that which had been refused to them. They had 
 been treated harshly, as they considered ; and by a strange 
 code of justice, they determined to revenge themselves by 
 inflicting harsh treatment upon others. We shall enter more 
 fully into this subject in its proper place. 
 
 The financial position of the Bevis Marks Synagogue was, 
 generally speaking, favourable. Albeit the impost formerly 
 levied on the transactions effected by the members had 
 gradually been abandoned, and the finta was sometimes in 
 arrears, so many pious legacies had been left to the Syna¬ 
 gogue that its funds were continually increasing. Without 
 mentioning the numerous small sums bequeathed to the 
 congregation, we will only record some of the larger gifts 
 presented at this period. Among these we may mention a 
 legacy from Mr Samuel Bensaken of Philadelphia, and the 
 residue of his estate, which produced £1218, 17s. lid. ; a 
 donation by the illustrious philanthropist, Sir Moses Monte- 
 fiore, in the year 1823, of an estate of thirteen houses in 
 Cock Court, Jewry Street, the rent arising from which was 
 to be invested in the three per cent, consols for five years to 
 form a repairing fund, and then the dwellings were to be 
 occupied by deserving poor as almshouses ; and finally, the 
 
3 2 4 
 
 THE JEWS IN HAMBURG AND LISBON 
 
 Lara gift, which was handed over to the Synagogue in June 
 1826. According to this generous contract, Mr Lara of 
 Canterbury assigned at once as a fund to several trustees an 
 annual revenue of £647, 4s. per annum, which was to be paid 
 to him during his life-time; after his death £500 a year was 
 to be allowed to Mrs Lara, and at her demise the sum of 
 £550 per annum to be appropriated to the following philan¬ 
 thropic objects : (1.) £150 per annum to be applied to the 
 education and maintenance of two Portuguese boys, who 
 were to be instructed in higher studies so as to fit them for 
 the clerical offices of the congregation. (2.) £70 per annum 
 to be allotted to the support of three invalids in the hospital 
 called Beth Holim, and £40 per annum to the clothing of 
 twenty poor girls of the congregation. (3.) £50 per annum 
 to be expended in assisting ten poor lying-in women at their 
 own homes. (4.) £100 to be given annually as a dower to a 
 Portuguese Jewish woman, married for not more than a year 
 to a Portuguese Jew. (5.) £70 a year to be awarded to the 
 Ilebra (burial society) to abolish the use of calico shrouds 
 and to replace them by linen. (6.) £70 per annum to be 
 given for the establishment of a dispensary for the poor near 
 the Synagogue. The surplus was to accumulate and to be 
 applied, part to existing institutions and part to the support 
 of the aged poor, either at the hospital or asylum called Beth 
 Holim, or in some other especial establishment. 
 
 This represents an extended range of benevolence, and 
 doubtless Mr Lara’s dispositions effect a great deal of good, 
 benefiting as they are intended to do various classes. Mrs 
 Lara survived her husband for many years ; and during her 
 life-time she made several important gifts of money to the 
 Synagogue. 
 
CHAPTER XLIV. 
 
 MOVEMENTS IN THE PORTUGUESE CONGRE GA TION—PARTIES 
 IN THAT COMMUNITY — PROGRESS OF THE SEPHARDIM— 
 SIR MOSES MONTEFIORE. 
 
 As the century advanced, cordiality became more apparent 
 in the relations between the ancient Sephardi Synagogue and 
 the more modern Ashkenazi Congregations. The suspicious, 
 doubtful manner in which German Jews had been regarded 
 in Bevis Marks, had long given way to a more brotherly 
 feeling. Family ties had multiplied between the Jews of 
 Spanish or Portuguese, and the Jews of German or Polish 
 descent. It was not, however, until 1825 that a German 
 was allowed in the Portuguese Synagogue to be called up to 
 the Law or hold a mitzvak ; these privileges until that period 
 had been denied to the members of his community. In 
 September 1826, the ministers of the Bevis Marks Syna¬ 
 gogue, on the invitation of Mr A. Kisch, were permitted to 
 attend the consecration of the new Westminster Synagogue 
 in Denmark Court, and to take part in the celebration of 
 the service. In 1834, whilst the New Synagogue in Leaden- 
 hall Street was undergoing repairs, the Shaare Ticva school¬ 
 room was placed at the disposal of the members of that 
 congregation for the purpose of reciting prayers during the 
 New Year Holidays. This simple act of courtesy did much 
 towards establishing warm relations between the two com¬ 
 munities of Jews in England. 
 
 After the death of Haliam Meldola in 1828, the state of 
 public feeling among Portuguese Jews on questions connected 
 with public worship seems to have been of an unsatisfactory 
 and unsettled nature: so much so, that on the 4th Decem¬ 
 ber 1828, a Committee of Elders was appointed to inquire 
 into the best means of raising altogether the tone of public 
 
326 
 
 MO FEME NTS IN THE 
 
 services, infusing therein greater decorum and devotion. 
 Mr Moses Mocatta, the President of the Congregation, in 
 his charge at the close of the Session of the Elders in the 
 same year, adverted to the uneasy state of feeling obtaining 
 among the members of the congregation, and deeply regretted 
 that party sentiment ran high in the community, and that 
 an unfortunate opinion had gained ground among the Yehidim , 
 that men and not measures influenced votes, and that all 
 proposals were accepted or rejected purely from party con¬ 
 siderations. Mr Moses Mocatta, in wise and conciliatory 
 language, deprecated that party spirit should predominate in 
 so small a community. He lamented that gentlemen who 
 considered themselves aggrieved should take the law in their 
 own hands by curtailing their offerings. Finally, he con¬ 
 cluded by some excellent advice to his brethren, recommend¬ 
 ing them u to restore, by forgetting supposed injuries and 
 disappointed results, that brotherly love and good under¬ 
 standing which, until recently, were ever implanted in our 
 breasts.” 
 
 We are unable to say what effect these prudent and well- 
 intentioned words had on the community. The speaker little 
 foresaw that years afterwards his own name would raise a 
 whirlwind in the assembly over which he was then presiding. 
 Human passions and failings reign alike in the council of a 
 small sect and in the parliament of a great nation ; and 
 doubtless bv the time the Greek Kalends shall have arrived, 
 
 v 7 
 
 we may expect perfect unanimity, concord, and unselfishness 
 in all assemblages of men. 
 
 The report of the Committee for the Promotion of Religious 
 Worship was delivered. That document contained a number 
 of recommendations which were adopted by the eiders. It 
 was resolved that the children of the Shaare Ticva and 
 Orphan Schools should be taught to chant; that the wardens 
 themselves should attend Synagogue as often as possible ; 
 that they should abstain from conversation, and give a good 
 •example to the congregation by not stirring from their seats 
 until the end of the service. Certain alterations in the mode 
 of reading prayers were suggested, so as to save time, and 
 the Mahamad was directed to take measures to abridge the 
 length of the service, as far as practicable. The importance 
 
PORTUGUESE CONGREGATION. 
 
 327 
 
 of the study of the Hebrew language was strongly impressed 
 on fathers of families. All proclamations in the Synagogue 
 were to he made in the English language. Moral and reli¬ 
 gious discourses were deemed essential to the welfare of the 
 congregation ; an English sermon was to he delivered every 
 Saturday afternoon, and its text to he taken from Scrip¬ 
 ture. Every sermon before delivery was to he submitted 
 to a committee of three elders, who were to examine the 
 MS. to see that nothing was contained therein opposed to 
 Jewish doctrines or hostile to the institutions of the country. 
 A committee was appointed at the same time to investigate 
 the state of the Medrash (Theological College). This step 
 in due course led to a thorough reform of that institution 
 with the introduction of more stringent regulations as to its 
 discipline. 
 
 There were few persons capable of acting as preachers in 
 those davs either in the Portuguese or in the German Com* 
 munity, a state of things strongly contrasting with what 
 obtains now, when highly qualified gentlemen abound. The 
 Iiev. D. A. de Sola, one of the ministers of the Synagogue, 
 was the first gentleman who offered himself, and he was 
 accepted as public instructor. He preached for some years, 
 giving great satisfaction to his flock ; but the practice of 
 delivering sermons was subsequently abandoned in this con¬ 
 gregation, and was not resumed as a regular institution until 
 more recent times. 
 
 As the union of the two branches of the Jewish race in 
 England became closer, they joined together in various under¬ 
 takings of common advantage. When London was visited 
 in February 1832 by a new and mysterious disease, the 
 cholera morbus, the principal Jewish Synagogues took 
 stringent measures to preserve their poor against the attacks 
 of that pestilence. Visiting committees were established by 
 the Bevis Marks Synagogue and by the three city German 
 Synagogues, which worked harmoniously together. In the 
 Portuguese Synagogue a sum of £500 was placed at the 
 disposal of the Mahamad from the legacy fund; subscrip¬ 
 tions were raised; visiting committees established; bedding, 
 blankets, sheets, and under garments were distributed to the 
 poor ; and such articles of personal apparel as had been 
 
328 
 
 MO VE ME.NTS IN THE 
 
 pledged were redeemed, and returned to their owners. The 
 other Synagogues displayed equal activity ; and the Jews of 
 London suffered much less, in proportion, from the visita¬ 
 tion of the Asiatic pestilence than their Christian country¬ 
 men. 
 
 The Portuguese Congregation also bore its fair share of the 
 expenses entailed upon the Jews by their prolonged struggles 
 to obtain from the Legislature of the country a recognition of 
 their civil and political rights. 
 
 At one time the Bevis Marks Synagogue was threatened 
 with an invasion, which filled its members with indescribable 
 alarm. The shrill shrieks of steam engines, and the thunder 
 of railway trains, might have startled the ears of worshippers 
 in the Portuguese Synagogue had the Blackwall Railway Bill 
 obtained the sanction of Parliament. It was proposed by the 
 promoters of that Bill to take possession of the almshouses, 
 school premises, and readers* residences in Heneage Lane, 
 and to run their line a few feet below the surface of the ground, 
 and within five yards from the Synagogue itself A petition 
 was prepared in opposition by the Synagogue authorities, and 
 it was presented to Parliament by Mr Crawford, a city mem¬ 
 ber. Fortunately, the Bill was defeated in the Legislature, 
 and the Jews were not disturbed in their devotions by the 
 piercing whistle of one of the most important instruments of 
 modern civilisation. 
 
 On the death of King William IV., in 1837, special funeral 
 services were performed in all Jewish Synagogues, which were 
 draped in black. At Bevis Marks, Mr Abraham Alexander 
 Lindo volunteered to preach a discourse. This gentleman, 
 in 1839, wrote a pamphlet entitled, “ A Word in Season,” 
 and he expressed a desire to continue the subject. The Ma - 
 hamad observed to him that they had seen his publication, 
 which had been issued without their sanction, and they cau¬ 
 tioned him against repeating the offence, lest he fall under 
 penalties. Free thought and a free press were not understood 
 in those days. No books touching on religion could be pub¬ 
 lished by a member of the Synagogue, without the permission 
 of the Wardens. Even the useful almanac, compiled by the 
 late Mr E. H. Lindo, was not allowed to mark the course of 
 time and the return of Jewish festivals without repeated 
 
PORTUGUESE CONGREGATION. 
 
 3 2 9 
 
 applications of the author to the custodians of Sephardi 
 orthodox}’. 
 
 In that year (1839) the boys who had assisted the readers 
 in chanting prayers were formed into a permanent choir, 
 which was placed under the direction of Mr Moss. At the 
 same period was founded the Infant School, which affords 
 education to female children of the poor ; and an outfit for 
 the girls was provided by private subscription. 
 
 The Portuguese Community at this epoch, limited as it 
 was in numbers, was far from being homogeneous in its re¬ 
 ligious views. A party of gentlemen existed who appeared 
 desirous of introducing important modifications in Jewish 
 religious observances ; while another party insisted on the 
 intact maintenance of the traditional practices of Judaism. 
 The former party was composed of some of the descendants 
 of ancient families long settled in this country; whilst the 
 latter, which was far more numerous, was to a great extent 
 recruited from foreigners from the extreme south of Europe, 
 or from the continents of Asia or Africa. The movement 
 into which the first section of Congregants entered will be 
 duly recorded in its proper place. At present we will only 
 relate that a portion of the most orthodox members of the 
 Congregation formed themselves into a society styling them¬ 
 selves “ Shomere Meshmeret Hakkodesh ” (Preservers of 
 Sacred Institutions), with the object of upholding and pre¬ 
 serving the Jewish faith as handed down, and of preventing- 
 innovation or alteration in any of its recognised forms, un¬ 
 less sanctioned by properly-constituted religious authorities. 
 These individuals displayed more ardour than discretion. 
 It is difficult to estimate the amount of mischief that may 
 be committed by excess of zeal. So this association was 
 not approved of by the moderate members of the commu¬ 
 nity, who endeavoured to hold a balance between the two 
 extremes. 
 
 The authorities readily recognised that it would cause more 
 harm than good, and that it would tend to fan into a flame 
 any unpleasant feeling that unhappily might exist among 
 different sections of the Congregation. Such gentlemen as 
 had taken part in it were recommended to dissolve the 
 society, and as this was not done at once, the Wardens 
 
33 ° 
 
 MO VEMENTS IN THE 
 
 adopted more stringent measures, and gave forth a notice 
 that members of the association of “ Preservers of Sacred 
 Institutions ” would not be eligible for any office in the Con¬ 
 gregation, or as members of any committee, so long as they 
 remained members of such society. This resolution was 
 rescinded soon afterwards, on the solemn assurance of the 
 individuals in question that the association was no longer 
 in existence. 
 
 In May 1839 the condition of affairs appears to have been 
 far from satisfactory ; for it was deemed advisable to elect an¬ 
 other committee, consisting of five Elders and the Wardens, 
 u to take into especial consideration the condition of the 
 ecclesiastical department of the Congregation and the state 
 of the Beth Hamedrash, so as to better promote the religious 
 instruction and general welfare of the Congregation.” Un¬ 
 fortunately, these well-meaning efforts were quite unavailing 
 to stem the running waters that had sprung up in the midst 
 of the community. The conflicting ideas of different members 
 of the oldest Synagogue in London could not be reconciled, 
 the most painful episode in modern A(l£lo-Jewish History 
 occurred, and brothers were separated Horn brothers, and 
 friends from their dearest friends. J 
 
 From the date of this schism within itsffiosom—the bitter¬ 
 ness of which has long since died away—the Spanish and 
 Portuguese Jewish Community has followed the even tenor of 
 its peaceful career and material prosperity, which the secession 
 of some of its Yehiclim only temporarily diminished. The 
 Sephardim, like the Ashkenazim, have worked hard in the 
 cause of education and in the advancement of the welfare of 
 the Jewish race at home and abroad. They bore their full 
 part in the various movements for the promotion of the civil 
 and political rights of the Jews in England ; and they contri¬ 
 buted to all missions intended for the relief of their distressed 
 co-religionists scattered throughout the globe. Finally, the 
 Jews of Spanish and Portuguese descent possess an especial 
 source of pride; for from their conimfinity has arisen the 
 noblest figure in Israel, whose extended beneficence is catholic 
 and widespread; who, with a deep-rooted attachment to his 
 own race, has devoted the greater part of a long life to the 
 relief of suffering humanity; and whose goodness and charity 
 
PORTUGUESE CONGREGATION. 
 
 33* 
 
 are resplendent wherever the sun shines—we mean the pre¬ 
 eminent philanthropist, Sir Moses Montefiore. 
 
 Here we feel greatly tempted to descant on that wonderful 
 combination of virtues which has produced a long series of 
 almost heroic deeds of benevolence, and to linger on the 
 beauties of a life unique among our cotemporaries. We 
 feel the more impelled to dilate upon the merits of such a 
 man and such a Jew as Sir Moses Montefiore, as we encounter 
 his name in the Jewish history of the last half century at 
 every turn. Wherever charity extends its hands to help the 
 poor, or philanthropy exerts its powers to benefit mankind, 
 or human tenderness hastens to the rescue of the oppressed 
 and the persecuted—in all such situations we find the figure of 
 Sir Moses Montefiore foremost in the canvas of cotemporary 
 Jewish history. But forcible reasons deter us from the grati¬ 
 fication of such a desire. Our powers, in the first place, would 
 utterly fail in rendering adequate justice to so great a subject; 
 and not all that any writer could say, be he the lowliest or 
 the highest in the land, could add to his fame or increase the 
 glory of his reputation. It were impossible to gild fine gold, 
 or to add perfumjfto the lily. Other motives of a more 
 private nature woujd prevent us from following our inclina¬ 
 tions, while our pfitn would scarcely admit of an extended 
 discourse on one theme only, however lofty it might be. 
 Finally, we confess we much admire the rabbinical maxim, 
 which advises us never to praise a man in his presence, a 
 maxim which was wisely and practically adopted by the 
 ancient Greeks in not erecting statues to their heroes in 
 their life-time. A statue to Sir Moses Montefiore is already 
 raised in the hearts of all his kindred and race throughout 
 the world. [ 
 
CHAPTER XLV. 
 
 NEW ASHKENAZI INST1TUTI0NS-SYNAG0GUE LIBERALITY. 
 
 The annals of the Ashkenazi Community in London during 
 the second quarter of the present century, though scarcely 
 very eventful, offer an unbroken record of increasing pros¬ 
 perity and influence, and of advancing social and political 
 importance. A great number of educational and charitable 
 institutions were founded since the hot days of June, when 
 the plains of Waterloo witnessed the downfall of the greatest 
 conqueror of modern ages. First we have the Free School, 
 which was established in the memorable year 1815, to in¬ 
 struct six hundred boys and three hundred girls, and which 
 is at present the largest and one of the best organised institu¬ 
 tions of the kind in the United Kingdom. To clothe the 
 naked and feed the hungry are maxims strictly practised 
 among the Jews, and a variety of associations have been called 
 into existence for those purposes. In 1818, some charitable 
 members of the more ornamental half of the human race, 
 under the title of the “ Ladies’ Benevolent Society,” under- 
 took to clothe half-yearly poor Jewish girls between the ages 
 of eight and fourteen. In 1820 was founded the Western 
 Institution for educating, clothing, and apprenticing indigent 
 Jewish boys. In 1821, other benevolent individuals joined 
 together for the same philanthropic objects, and formed the 
 Westminster Benevolent Institution. In the same year a Kew 
 Synagogue was opened in Brewer Street, the Congregation of 
 which was partly drawn from the members of the Westminster 
 Synagogue. In 1824, the Society for the Relief of the Indi¬ 
 gent Poor began to allow 5s. per week to necessitous widows; 
 and in 1828 the Western Jewish Philanthropic Institution 
 commenced to grant loans not exceeding £5, and gifts not 
 exceeding £2, to cheer the needy during the Jewish festivals. 
 
NE W ASHKENAZI INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 333 
 
 That most excellent institution, the Jews’ Orphan Asylum, 
 for the education, maintenance, clothing, and apprenticing of 
 male and female orphans, was opened in 1851. Many other 
 charities were created to benefit the poor in various ways, 
 and which it would be tedious to mention here. We will 
 only advert to the erection in 1838, by Mr A. L. Moses of 
 Aldgate, at his sole expense, of twelve commodious and 
 handsomely-constructed almshouses for the use of as many 
 respectable poor females of the German Congregation, as an 
 act of true liberality and philanthropy. 
 
 The London Hospital for many years has been a source of 
 signal advantage to the Jewish poor. The calls on the ser¬ 
 vices of that establishment were so great in former times, 
 that in February 1828 it was found advisable to recommend 
 that Jewish governors of the hospital should leave blank 
 admissions for the hospital, to be distributed to the Jewish 
 poor when needful by the Secretary of the Great Synagogue. 
 
 Due honour must be given to the Great Synagogue for the 
 liberality and generosity with which it has almost without 
 exception treated its officials, high and low. The enumera¬ 
 tion of the loans and grants made to meritorious officers of 
 that Congregation would fill a dozen pages. We will merely 
 adduce an instance as an illustration. In 1829, the Reader 
 of the Synagogue, Mr D. Elias, fell into ill-health, and six 
 months’ leave of absence was granted to him. Mr Elias, it 
 seems, was subject to a pulmonary complaint, and two phy¬ 
 sicians, Dr Barnard Van Oven (son of Mr Joshua Yan Oven) 
 and Dr Robertson, certified that by continuing his profession 
 he would endanger his existence. At the expiration of his 
 leave of absence the unfortunate minister felt himself con¬ 
 strained to tender his resignation. His engagement was 
 only for three years. Nevertheless, the Vestry of the Syna¬ 
 gogue presented Mr Elias, over and above the salary due to 
 him, with the sum of £200. They handed him in addition 
 a further sum for his travelling expenses; they allowed his 
 wife to continue to reside for a certain time, rent free, in 
 the house allotted to him; and on her departure to join her 
 husband, who was a foreigner, and who had returned to his 
 native country, they bestowed upon her another gratuity. 
 Readers, choristers, beadles, and watchmen, all equally par- 
 
334 
 
 NE W ASHKENAZI INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 took of tlie liberality of the Synagogue. They were not its 
 only recipients. Occasional assistance was given to decayed 
 members. To a gentleman who was once a President of the 
 Congregation and had fallen into temporary difficulties a loan 
 of £100 was awarded. 
 
 On the retirement of Mr Elias from the post of Reader, 
 the vacancy was not filled up for some time. Many applica¬ 
 tions for the post came from different parts of the Continent, 
 not only from Germany and Holland, but from Dijon and 
 Besanqon in France, as well as from Brussels. Several 
 of the candidates came over to this country, were tried and 
 found wanting. It was not until the 20th May 1832, that 
 the election took place, when the choice fell on Mr Simon 
 Ascher of Groningen, whose melodious voice is well remem¬ 
 bered by many Jewish readers. We need hardly say that the 
 disappointed candidates were not sent away empty-handed. 
 
 In November 1831, when the approach of the cholera 
 morbus was producing a general sense of alarm in this 
 country, Mr Charles Pearson, Chairman of the City Board 
 of Health, addressed a letter to the Wardens of the Great 
 Synagogue, recommending them to put their house in order 
 in good time. Mr Pearson pointed out the dangers resulting 
 from the congregation of dealers in old clothes who assembled 
 in Cutler Street, and brought together a great accumulation 
 of filth, which was most injurious to the public health. Un¬ 
 fortunately, the Wardens do not seem to have been able to 
 remedy this evil thoroughly, for they were afraid of depriving 
 of their living a body of industrious men who had no other 
 resource than this trade. The Great Synagogue, in conjunc¬ 
 tion with the Portuguese Synagogue, as we have said in a 
 former chapter, took many precautions to diminish the con¬ 
 sequences of the dreaded visitation, and with very fair suc¬ 
 cess. We must not omit to relate that the Board of Health 
 of the Parish of St Botolph behaved very liberally to the 
 Jews, and passed several measures conceived in a friendly 
 spirit. The Board called upon the surgeons of the different 
 Jewish Synagogues to attend professionally all Jews and 
 Jewesses who preferred being under their care. They granted 
 to them the use of the Cholera Hospital for the purpose, 
 and they engaged the services of a Jewish nurse. They gave 
 
NEW ASHKENAZI INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 335 
 
 notice at the outbreak of the disorder to all poor Jews resid¬ 
 ing in the parish, that they would be admitted to the hospital 
 on the certificate of their own (Jewish) surgeons. These 
 acts of kindness were duly appreciated by the Jews, and 
 their gratitude was warmly expressed by the Synagogues. 
 
 The Duke’s Place Synagogue, as the representative of the 
 German Jews in London, was in the continual receipt of 
 appeals from their co-religionists from all quarters of the 
 globe. If there was a fire in Constantinople, an earthquake 
 in the West Indies, a famine in Poland, a praj r er for help 
 would certainly reach Duke’s Place. In 1832, an application 
 came from Mr Rothschild on behalf of the community of the 
 island St Thomas, for assistance in building a Synas-osme 
 A sum of £20 was granted, and a deputation waited on the 
 great financier with the cheque. Mr Rothschild declined to 
 accept the cheque, and bade the deputation authorise Mr 
 Wolff, the President of the Congregation of St Thomas, to 
 draw on him (Mr Rothschild) for the amount, with an 
 addition of £10, 10s. which he would give on his own 
 account. 
 
 In 1834, the Great Synagogue several times narrowly 
 escaped destruction. Three distinct fires took place in that 
 building within the course of a few months, all arising 
 apparently from the defective and dangerous construction of 
 the stoves employed to heat the Synagogue. 
 
 The danger was considered so great that there was some 
 difficulty in renewing the insurances. The Globe and 
 Alliance Offices declined to continue the risk, except at 
 an additional premium and unless some further alterations 
 were made. Eventually the Sun Fire Office accepted the 
 insurance on condition that the stoves were enclosed. That 
 arrangement was duly carried out, and happily the Great 
 Synagogue has stood ever since .safe and unscathed, the 
 building being now heated by means of hot water pipes. 
 
 The Jews were for ages debarred from many rights and 
 privileges; but it may not be generally known that the 
 possession of some of these could not be purchased even by 
 apostasy. The question of the privileges of baptized Jews 
 was tried before the Court of Aldermen on the 4th March 
 1828. The Jews were excluded from the advantages of 
 
33 6 
 
 NE W ASHKENAZI INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 citizenship in the city of London. Certain individuals 
 named Sanl prayed to be allowed to carry on business in 
 the city. These persons, born of Jewish parentage, had been 
 initiated into Judaism at their birth, but from their infancy 
 they had been brought up in the Protestant faith. In the 
 year 1785, the Court of Aldermen had made a standing 
 order that baptized Jews should not be admitted to the free¬ 
 dom of the city. The reason alleged for this resolution was 
 a fear lest a number of Jews of indifferent character should 
 accept baptism, and set up in business to the detriment of 
 good and real Christians. Upon the strength of this order 
 all succeeding courts had rejected the applications of indi¬ 
 viduals who had renounced the forms, customs, and opinions 
 of the Jews. On the occasion in question several members 
 of the Court, especially Aldermen Wood, Waitliman, and Sir 
 Peter Laurie, encouraged the applicants. Mr Law argued the 
 question on behalf of the petitioners. He stated that the 
 petitioners never had been Jews. They had been baptized in 
 1803, but he defied the Court to prove that they had been Jews 
 before that period. He adverted to the case of Galindo, 
 which had been tried in 1783, when the Recorder and the 
 Common Sergeant had both agreed that baptism was a suffi¬ 
 cient renunciation of Judaism, but Mr Nugent, the Common 
 Sergeant, had placed before the Court, as a matter of expedi¬ 
 ency, that there might be so many applications even from 
 persons of the lowest sort, that they might be attended by great 
 inconvenience to the public. After some discussion the Court 
 granted the prayer of the petitioners; the order was rescinded, 
 and Messrs Saul were received as freemen of the city of London. 
 What changes indeed have arisen in less than half a century! 
 In the wealthiest city of the world, where even converted 
 Jew r s were not admitted to citizenship, we have witnessed 
 two Jews dispense justice as its chief magistrates ! 
 
 Another curious point of law, in which Jews are con¬ 
 cerned, was raised in the following year in the Sheriff 
 Court, Guildhall. A trial took place in that Court in July 
 1829, for the recovery of the price of a horse found 
 unsound, when a verdict for the defendant was entered. It 
 was moved, on behalf of the plaintiff, that the verdict be set 
 aside, upon the ground that John Salmon, an Israelite and 
 
NEW ASHKENAZI INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 337 
 
 one of the jury, was sworn on the New Testament, though he 
 was of the Jewish religion. Salmon had stood in the box 
 with other jurymen as Christians, and he did not put on his 
 liat or observe any of the ceremonies followed by Jewish 
 people in taking oaths. It was urged that this mode of 
 swearing was not binding upon a Jew to the value of a straw, 
 and that the verdict ought to be set aside, as being in reality 
 the verdict of eleven instead of twelve men. Affidavits prov¬ 
 ing that Salmon was a Jew were put in. The application was 
 opposed, purely on technical grounds. Mr Sergeant Arabin 
 ruled that the affidavits were not strong enough to sanction 
 a disturbance of the verdict, and the application was refused. 
 
 Doubtless no sincere and observing Israelite would consent 
 to be sworn except according to Jewish custom with his hat on, 
 and on the Old Testament; but what value may be attached 
 to the oath of a Jew taken on a book which he does not 
 hold sacred, is a question for his own conscience. Moreover, 
 we are informed that a Jew who takes the oath on a book in 
 the contents of which he does not believe, and which there¬ 
 fore may not be binding on his conscience, is guilty of con¬ 
 tempt of court. 
 
 
 Y 
 
s 
 
 / 
 
 CHAPTER XLVI. 
 
 TESTIMONIAL TO SIR MOSES MONTE FIORE—SYNAGOGUE 
 
 IMPROVEMENTS. 
 
 In 1840, when the eminent philanthropist, Sir Moses Mon te¬ 
 ll ore, undertook his noble mission to Damascus, to save his 
 suffering co-religionists from the tortures inflicted upon them 
 by fanaticism and superstition, the members of the Great 
 Synagogue contributed to the subscription raised to defray 
 part of the expenses of that memorable journey. The history 
 of that glorious mission we shall relate in a separate chapter. 
 Here we shall merely record that a suitable welcome was 
 given to the champion of Israel, on his return from the self- 
 imposed task which he had so successfully accomplished. At 
 the suggestion of the Mahamad of the Sephardim, sub-com¬ 
 mittees were appointed in December 1840, by the three city 
 Synagogues of the u Germans,” in conjunction with the 
 Westminster Synagogue, to consider what measures ought 
 to be adopted by their several congregations on the return 
 of Sir Moses Montefiore. The celebrations took place with 
 great solemnity in the Portuguese Synagogue on the 8th 
 March 1841, and in the German Synagogues on the 13th 
 March. On those occasions thanksgivings were offered up 
 in the several Synagogues to Almighty God for His infinite 
 mercy to His people Israel, in causing their accused 
 brethren in the East to be delivered from unjust and cruel 
 persecutions. Sir Moses and Lady Montefiore were present 
 at the Bevis Marks Synagogue and the Great Synagogue 
 respectively : and the chief men among the Jews gathered 
 to do honour to the illustrious philanthropist and to the 
 accomplished partner of his beneficent labours. 
 
 The amount subscribed by the Jews towards the cost of the 
 journey to the East amounted to £6774. The sum disbursed 
 
TESTIMONIAL TO SIR MOSES MONTEEIORE. 
 
 339 
 
 exceeded tlie sum collected. But as Sir Moses Montefiore 
 generously insisted on bearing himself a part of the expendi¬ 
 ture to the extent of £2200, a surplus remained, of nearly 
 one-fifth, which the trustees resolved to return to the original 
 contributors. 
 
 It has always been a weakness with Englishmen to 
 embody the expression of their gratitude in so many ounces 
 of solid silver. As a mark of gratitude to Sir Moses Monte¬ 
 fiore for his great services to his community, a very hand¬ 
 some testimonial was presented to him on the 27th February 
 1843. This testimonial consisted of a splendid silver orna¬ 
 ment in the form of a miniature monument, three and a half 
 feet high, of great weight, and covering a large quadrangular 
 base. It was surmounted by several figures, the most pro¬ 
 minent of which was David Conquering the Lion. It was- 
 designed by Sir Gf. Hay ter, sculptured by E. Bailey, B.A., 
 and executed by Mortimer and Hunt of Bond Street. The 
 inscription stated that it was presented to Sir Moses by a 
 large number of his Jewish brethren in the United Kindsrom, 
 
 0 7 
 
 Jamaica, Barbadoes, and Gibraltar, in commemoration of 
 the many personal sacrifices endured, and the philanthropy 
 displayed, by him and Lady Montefiore during his mission to 
 the East. 
 
 / , 
 
 The Jews of Germany were not behind their English 
 brethren in expressing their admiration and respect for Sir 
 Moses Montefiore. They offered to him an elegant album, 
 folio-sized and of double width, bound in maroon velvet, and 
 framed in gilded bronze. Appropriate paintings appeared on 
 each cover, and every page was ornamented with a border 
 engraved with tasteful and suitable emblematic devices. The 
 album contained an eloquent address signed by Dr Philippsohn 
 and by 1490 other persons, including many names distin¬ 
 guished in literature and art. 
 
 In May 1841 the first effort at organising a regular choir was 
 made in the Great Synagogue. Formerly the only approach 
 to a choir in German Synagogues consisted of two persons 
 who aided the hazan or precentor, one being called the 
 singer and the other the bass. But the propriety of 
 having an organised choir being admitted, Mr Simon Ascher 
 selected several youths to undergo training for the purpose, 
 
340 TESTIMONIAL TO SIR MOSES MONTEFIORE. 
 
 and Mr Julius Mombacli was appointed to instruct them in 
 singing. Mr Mombacli has been for many years an able 
 composer of sacred melodies, and the choir of the Great 
 Synagogue has been formed and maintained in its present 
 state of high efficiency mainly by his exertions. 
 
 At the same time it was resolved to obtain, if practicable, 
 pulpit instruction in English. In reply to some advertise¬ 
 ments seeking the services of a preacher competent to deliver 
 sermons in the English language, Mr D. M. Isaacs appeared 
 as a candidate. Mr Isaacs had been one of the earliest 
 preachers in the English language. He had already offici¬ 
 ated for some years as minister in Liverpool and elsewhere. 
 He had not long before been invited to preach in the Duke’s 
 Place Synagogue on the occasion of Sir Moses Montefiore’s 
 return from the East. Mr Isaacs was not elected, and the 
 Great Synagogue remained without religious discourses. 
 The reverend gentleman has since been pastor at Liverpool 
 and Manchester, where he has obtained a reputation for 
 scholarship and eloquence. Though he is not an English¬ 
 man, his accent and fluent acquaintance with the English 
 language would proclaim him of English birth. 
 
 The secession of some members of the orthodox congrega¬ 
 tions did not affect the German Community as much as it 
 temporarily affected the Portuguese Community. The vast 
 numbers of the Ashkenazim and their great wealth could not 
 be influenced by the loss of a few individuals, however 
 greatly their departure from orthodox Judaism may have 
 been regretted. Since the days of the Reform movement, 
 the development and increase of the German Jews in 
 London has been as astonishing as their progress has been 
 uninterrupted. Hew schools have been founded, new and 
 sumptuous places of worship have been opened, new charities 
 have been established; and in every quarter we perceive 
 signs of commercial and communal activity, prosperity, and 
 enlightenment. 
 
CHAPTER XLVII. 
 
 SIMON SOLOMON—ISAAC GOMES SERRA—ABRAHAM MONTE - 
 FIORE—NATHAN MEYER ROTHSCHILD. 
 
 We have hitherto endeavoured to bestow our humble meed of 
 praise upon those individuals who have raised the name of 
 Jew, or who have contributed to the advancement of Judaism. 
 We shall continue to glance at the career of those Jews 
 who distinguished themselves during the first half of the 
 nineteenth century for their virtues, their conspicuous abili¬ 
 ties, or their attainment of high position. Should we omit 
 to give due place in our list of worthies to any deserving 
 personage, we trust the reader will attribute such omission 
 to the imperfection ordinarily attending human under¬ 
 takings, rather than to any wilful exclusion on our part. 
 At present we shall speak of the men whose names head this 
 chapter, and whose claims to the respect or admiration of the 
 world are based on widely different grounds. 
 
 The name of Simon Solomon is probably new to our 
 readers. Simon Solomon was not an eminent financier, a 
 successful writer, or a brilliant scholar. He was merely a 
 truly good and pious man. His lines were not cast in 
 pleasant places, for his lot was lowly. Born in Lissa in 
 Polish Prussia, he immigrated in early youth into this 
 country, where he followed the trade of fancy boxmaker. 
 Simon Solomon was not an illiterate man : he was proficient 
 in Hebrew and rabbinical literature, and he was well 
 acquainted with French and German. Possessed of per¬ 
 severing, industrious habits, he was able not only to provide 
 for a large family and to contribute to the necessities of 
 his own community, of which he was a conscientious mem¬ 
 ber, but also to fulfil what he considered his duty, in re¬ 
 lieving his Christian neighbours in such a manner as to 
 
342 
 
 SIMON SOLOMON 
 
 ensure the admiration and esteem of all who knew him. 
 Apart from his private charities, he was one of the first 
 founders of the Clerkenwell Philanthropic Society, to which 
 he and his family liberally contributed, and he was chosen 
 in conjunction with others, the winter before his death, to 
 dispense bread and coals. Precluded by his religious 
 scruples from accepting the refreshments which were offered 
 to him during his rounds, he underwent many privations. 
 He was nevertheless so ardent and cheerful in the perfor¬ 
 mance of these duties, that the poor in his presence always 
 seemed to forget their poverty, and hence, like Job, the 
 blessing of “ those that were ready to perish ” often came 
 to him, and he literally made the “ widow’s heart dance for 
 joy.” Simon Solomon died suddenly in 1817, at the age of 
 sixty-nine. He was interred hastily, to the sorrow of his 
 neighbours, many of whom were unable to pay their last 
 mark of respect to his remains, which were hurried to the 
 cemetery at Ducking Pond How, ere the recipients of his 
 bounty were aware that they would meet his kindly eyes no 
 more. Simon Solomon by his unwearied beneficence did 
 much to dispel the prejudices existing against Jews, especially 
 among the lower and middle classes. He was strictly Jewish 
 in his belief, and always averse to the attempts of those who 
 professionally aim at the conversion of Jews; but he had 
 no objection to an attendance upon Christian worship for 
 the sake of doing good. He broke a lance with converted 
 missionaries, and he published an animated letter to the 
 Eev. C. Frey, on the subject of his conduct with respect to 
 the Jewish proselytes made by the London Society. 
 
 Isaac Gomes Serra was a different type of a noble-minded 
 Jew. He was the last descendant of an ancient Portu¬ 
 guese family, and he died in 1818. He united to a courteous 
 and dignified bearing true piety and sincere philanthropy. 
 He inherited a considerable fortune, and after hav in 
 
 * O 
 
 pursued for some years a commercial career, he retired, and 
 resided in a handsome dwelling in King’s Hoad, Bedford 
 How ; a situation greatly coveted in those days. Isaac Gomes 
 Serra, albeit a zealous and devout Jew, was very popular 
 among Christians. In the Synagogue he served all the 
 offices filled by laymen. In his later days he devoted his 
 
ABRAHAM MONTEFIORE. 
 
 343 
 
 time and attention almost exclusively to beneficence. He 
 not only gave freely to the schools of his own race, but his 
 fortune and generosity permitted him to bestow time and 
 funds in the management and support of charities based on 
 the established Church of the country. He was an active 
 member of the committees of the City of London Lying-in 
 Hospital, and of the workhouse of his parish, St Andrew, 
 Holborn. He was also an assiduous member of the com¬ 
 mittee of the Small-pox Hospital, and was liberal in his 
 subscriptions to many other charitable institutions. His 
 conciliatorv manners and urbane address ensured him polite 
 attention at those meetings of which a Jew formed part for 
 the first time. He is described by a Christian writer of the 
 day in these words : “ In temper placid and serene but just, 
 in character respectable, in age venerable; as a Jew he was 
 conscientiously strict; as a member of society, upright, 
 benevolent, and honourable.” Let us hope that many Jews 
 of the present day may have earned similar praise ! 
 
 In 1824 the Portuguese Community of Bevis Marks lost 
 another eminent member in the person of Abraham Monte- 
 fiore. This gentleman, well known for his benevolence and 
 kindly character as well as for his great wealth, w T as a lead- 
 in 0 * member of the Stock Exchange. He had been to 
 Cannes for the re-establishment of his health, and he died 
 in the prime of life, on his way home, leaving two sons and 
 two daughters. Mr Abraham Montefiore, who was greatly 
 esteemed, was the brother of Sir Moses Montefiore, and he 
 had married, as his second wife, Henrietta, sister of Mr N. M. 
 Rothschild. Mr Montefiore was buried in the Portuguese 
 cemetery at Mile End, and Dr Hirschel performed the 
 funeral rites. The elder of the two sons of this gentleman 
 is the present President of the Jewish Board of Deputies. 
 His second son is President of two of the most important 
 institutions of the Sephardi Community, the Hospital and 
 the Congregational Schools. One daughter, Mrs H. Monte¬ 
 fiore, was an authoress of distinction ; another daughter is 
 the wife of Sir Anthony de Rothschild. 
 
 The name of Nathan Meyer Rothschild is as familiar to 
 the Hebrew public as household words. We shall not 
 repeat here the history of the rise of the Rothschild family, 
 
344 
 
 NA THAN ME YER R 0 TITS CHILD. 
 
 which has become as popular a story as the legend of Alfred 
 burning the cakes, or of William Tell transfixing the apple 
 on his son’s head. Nevertheless, in modern Anglo-Jewish 
 history an honourable place must be given to a family which 
 not only has attained unparalleled wealth and financial pre¬ 
 eminence, but which has become famous for its unbounded 
 munificent and almost unrestricted charity. We cannot pass 
 over the subject without offering a few remarks. Nathan 
 Meyer Rothschild came over from Frankfort to England in 
 1800, when he acted for his father in the purchase of Man¬ 
 chester goods. It was not until the breaking out of the war 
 with Spain, in 1808, that his extraordinary means, which 
 were displayed in making the remittances for the English 
 army, became apparent to the mercantile world. Through 
 the agency of his father, large sums were placed to his 
 credit. Gradually his financial transactions pervaded the 
 whole of the continent, and exercised more or less influence 
 on monetary affairs of every description. No operations on 
 equal scale had existed in Europe previous to his time. 
 Sampson Gideon and Benjamin and Abraham Goldsmid, 
 were puny speculators in comparison with N. M. Rothschild. 
 The latter operator and his brothers participated in most of 
 the great financial affairs of Austria, of France, of England, 
 and of nearly every other county. Nathan Meyer Roths¬ 
 child was considered the head of the firm, though really not 
 the eldest brother in his family. In addition to the essential 
 co-operation of his relatives, he had agencies in almost every 
 important city in the old or the new world, in all of which, 
 under his directions, extensive operations of various kinds 
 were carried out. Mr Rothschild’s loan contracts were not 
 uniformly successful in the first instance. He was at the 
 outset exposed to severe reverses which would have proved 
 fatal to houses of inferior means. One of those reverses 
 was connected with a loan of Exchequer bills in a per 
 cent, stock, the first of that denomination introduced into 
 the English market; he is said to have lost thereby 
 £500,000. This loan was a project of the then Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, the Right Honourable Nicholas Yansittart, 
 afterwards Lord Bexley. Another event by which he would 
 have been exposed to great danger was the conversion of 
 
NA 2 HAN MEYER ROTHSCHILD. 
 
 345 
 
 French rentes projected by M. de Villele, the French Mini¬ 
 ster. Fortunately for Mr Rothschild the measure was lost 
 by a single vote in the Paris Chamber of Peers ; had it been 
 carried, the convulsion that shortly followed in the money 
 markets of Europe would probably have proved fatal to his 
 position, notwithstanding all his vast resources. Another 
 perilous contract was the four per cent, loan made with M. de 
 Polignac, previous to the celebrated three days of July 1830, 
 which heralded the fall of the Bourbons in France. The 
 stock went down twenty to thirty per cent. ; but luckily for 
 Mr Rothschild the greater part of the loan had been dis¬ 
 tributed among the subscribers who suffered more or less 
 severely. 
 
 The great financier’s success in loans made it a matter of 
 rivalry with all those states which wanted to borrow money 
 to obtain his co-operation. He uniformly refused to enter 
 into any such contracts for Spain and the American Repub¬ 
 lics, formerly its colonies; but whether his conduct was 
 actuated by mere worldly prudence, or from a disinclina¬ 
 tion to assist a race which had maltreated his own, and 
 banished it from the Iberian peninsula, we are unable to 
 say. 
 
 Mr Rothschild’s operations in bullion and foreign exchanges 
 were nearly as considerable as his loan contracts. He never 
 hesitated for a moment in fixing the rate either as a taker 
 or as a drawer of bills on any part of the world. Notwith¬ 
 standing the immense transactions into which he entered 
 every foreign post day, and that he never took note of 
 them, he could dictate the whole on his return home to his 
 clerks with the most perfect accuracy. He is said to have 
 been very liberal in his dealings ; and many merchants whose 
 bills were declined in other quarters found ready assistance 
 from him. His judgment was proved to be correct, by the 
 very small amount of loss which he incurred in such liberality. 
 His attachment for and confidence in his wife (a daughter of 
 L. B. Cohen, and a sister of Lady Montefiore) were unbounded, 
 and he proved them by entrusting to her the administration 
 of his will and the distribution of suitable legacies to nume¬ 
 rous charities. For some weeks before his death he was ill at 
 Frankfort, where he had been attended by Professor Chelens 
 
34 ^ NATHAN ME YER ROTHSCHILD. 
 
 of Heidelberg. He died at Frankfort, in 1836, at the age of 
 sixty. He was, perhaps, the greatest financial genius°that 
 this century has seen ; and his demise caused a great tumult, 
 such as followed the death of Abraham Goldsmid. The timid 
 were greatly alarmed. They said it was impossible to foresee 
 what difficulties might arise on the withdrawal of the ability 
 with which the foreign exchanges had been managed. Mr 
 Rothschild had prided himself on the dexterity with which he 
 distributed his immense resources, so that no operation of 
 his should long abstract bullion from the bank. Ho catas¬ 
 trophes, however, occurred in the bourses of Europe after the 
 death of the autocrat of the Exchange ; and the affairs of the 
 world in general, and of his firm in particular, proceeded as 
 
 evenly and as quietly as if he had been at the helm to direct 
 the ship to port. 
 
 The body of Mr Rothschild was brought to England on the 
 4th of August 1836, and was conveyed to his house in St 
 Swithin’s Lane. The funeral took place on Monday, the 8th 
 ^ August; the lemains were removed in a hearse drawn by 
 six horses, and were followed by thirty-six mourning coaches 
 and forty-one private carriages. Among these were the car- 
 liages of the Austrian, Russian, Prussian, and Neapolitan 
 Ambassadors, of Lord Stewart, Lord Dinorben, Lord Mary¬ 
 borough, and the Lord Mayor, Sheriffs, and Aldermen of the 
 city of London. When the procession reached Whitechapel 
 Church, the children belonging to the Jews’ Free School and 
 Orphan Asylum joined in the cortege , which proceeded until 
 the hearse drew up at the north entrance of the then burial- 
 ground of the Great Synagogue. The Rev. Mr Ascher per¬ 
 formed the service, and the Rev. Sol. Hirschel delivered in 
 English an eloquent and fervent address, in which he ex¬ 
 patiated on the beneficence of the deceased, who, in addition 
 to his public subscriptions to nearly every Jewish and Chris¬ 
 tian chaiity, had placed many thousands of pounds in the 
 hands of his relict to be distributed among the poor. 
 
CHAPTER XLYIII. 
 
 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST—MISSION OF SIR MOSES 
 
 MONTEEIORE. 
 
 In the spring of 1840 , the Jews of Europe were startled by 
 rumours of two cruel persecutions in the East, of which their 
 brethren were the victims. Tales of false accusations and 
 infamous aspersions against the unhappy Jews, of tortures 
 and imprisonment to which respectable fathers of families 
 were subjected, of odious calumnies propagated and vehe¬ 
 mently supported by persons who ought to have known better, 
 reached London and Paris. The reports gradually gained a 
 tangible form, and the harrowing details—ascertained to be 
 true—stirred the hearts of all Jew^s from the banks of the 
 Danube to the banks of the Thames, and raised the indig¬ 
 nation alike of Jew and of Christian. 
 
 This was the story: Father Thomas, an Italian priest, who 
 exercised at Damascus the profession of physician, and who 
 visited the houses of Catholics, Armenians, and Jews, for the 
 purposes of vaccination, disappeared with his servant on the 
 1st of Adar. On the following day, a number of so-called 
 Christians crowded to the Jewish quarter, and seizing upon 
 an unhappy barber, they dragged him before the Pasha. The 
 infuriated mob shouted that the Jews had murdered Father 
 Thomas to employ his blood in their superstitious rites, and 
 the Pasha, to calm the rioters, ordered live hundred blows to 
 be administered to the wretched barber. This miserable 
 creature, on being urged to confess, yielding to intolerable 
 physical pain, accused some members of the families of Farhi 
 and Arari, and several other Jews, of having offered him 
 three hundred piastres to kill the padre. Under unbearable 
 torture, he gasped out that as the Passover holidays were 
 approaching, they required human blood with which to knead 
 
343 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST 
 
 their cakes. The prisoner at the same time maintained that 
 he had refused to lend an ear to these instigations, and that 
 he had informed the priest of the danger he incurred. The 
 Pasha ordered the arrest of the individuals inculpated, six of 
 whom were seized; and the remainder saved themselves by 
 timely flight. All the prisoners were submitted to the 
 “ question/’ and endured some of the most excruciating tor¬ 
 tures that the devilish ingenuity of semi-barbarians could 
 invent. They were flogged. They were soaked with their 
 clothes for hours at a stretch in cold water. Their eyes were 
 punctured. They were made to stand upright for three days 
 without being permitted the slightest support, and when their 
 wearied bodies fell down, they were aroused by the prick of 
 the soldiers’ bayonets. They were dragged by the ear until 
 their blood gushed. Fire was set to their beards till their 
 faces were singed, and candles were held under their noses 
 so that the flames burnt their nostrils. Fire, water, and iron 
 were used to extort admission of guilt from the unhappy 
 Jews; and when all these means failed, moral torture was 
 employed. The Pasha carried the children of one of the 
 prisoners to a dungeon, and fed them—or rather starved 
 them—on bread and water, and forbade the mother from 
 visiting them, hoping to tear from the heart of the wretched 
 father a confession which no amount of physical pain could 
 extort. 
 
 In vain the poor Jews appealed to their sacred writings, 
 which stringently prohibit the shedding of human blood. 
 A courageous man, who boldly came forward and stated that 
 the Christians themselves must have put to death the padre, 
 perished under the bastinado. Some dwellings inhabited by 
 Jews were demolished to seek the bodies of the missing friar 
 and his servant, which, as may be expected, were not found. 
 Upon this, fresh cruelties were heaped on the prisoners. It 
 is not surprising that, under such combinations of horrors, 
 several of the incriminated Jews should at last have allowed 
 a frantic confession of guilt to escape their lips. Witches 
 and wizards, it is well known, not so many centuries ago, 
 and in England too, were wont, under the persuasive argu¬ 
 ments of Are and steel, to admit the commission of utterly 
 impossible deeds of darkness. So some of the mangled and 
 
BLOOD ACCUSATIONS JN THE EAST 
 
 3 49 
 
 bleeding Jews said that they had given a bottle containing 
 some of the blood of the padre to Moses Abulafia, who in his 
 turn, after receiving a thousand blows, and hardly knowing 
 what he was uttering, stammered out that he had hidden the 
 blood in a certain closet. Abulafia was carried on the backs 
 of four men to the closet indicated by him, where naturally 
 no traces of blood were discovered. On the other hand, what 
 was of much more value to the Pasha was perceived, that is, 
 a considerable sum of money, which was promptly appro¬ 
 priated to his own uses by that functionary. As to Abulafia, 
 he saved his life by embracing the Turkish religion. A wise 
 individual ascertained, through his knowledge of the stars, 
 that the imprisoned Jews had murdered Father Thomas, and 
 that some other Jews had killed the servant; upon which six 
 other unfortunate Israelites were arrested and thrown into 
 prison. Damascus became so unsafe for Jews, that an 
 Israelite, who served the office of treasurer to the Pasha, was 
 constrained to adopt the faith of Islam in self-preservation; 
 and few Jews durst venture into the street. 
 
 While this tragedy was being enacted in Damascus, a no less 
 serious occurrence happened in Rhodes. In that island a 
 Greek boy, ten years of age, having disappeared, a rumour 
 at once spread that the Jews had killed him. Strange logic, 
 indeed! A Christian child was missing, ergo the Jews must 
 have assassinated him. The Consuls of the European powers 
 proceeded in a body to the residence of the Pasha, and de¬ 
 manded justice against the Jews. The British Consul, Mr 
 Wilkinson, and his son, were among the bitterest denuncia¬ 
 tors of the hunted Jews. The Austrian Consul alone had the 
 courage of defending the unhappy descendants of Abraham 
 against the unfounded and infamous accusation. Two Greek 
 women charged the Jews with this crime. To the shame of 
 civilisation, and the utter disgrace of so-called Christianity, 
 the Consuls subjected one of the Jews to the bastinado. They 
 burned his flesh with red-hot irons, and dislocated his bones 
 on the rack, until praying for a death that would not come, 
 the unfortunate victim named at random several other Jews 
 as his accomplices. These were even in their turn seized and 
 put to the rack, until they also prayed to their God to release 
 them speedily from their sufferings. Christians went round 
 
350 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST. 
 
 to the Jewish quarter in the dark, endeavouring secretly to 
 introduce dead bodies of Christians into Jewish houses to 
 incriminate the latter, and Jews were not permitted to leave 
 their quarter. 
 
 A thrill of horror and of compassion moved the Jews of 
 Western Europe on hearing these recitals, which were duly 
 attested by trustworthy and impartial witnesses. Urgent 
 prayers for assistance reached the ears of Sir Moses Monte- 
 tiore; and the noble-minded philanthropist, before whom the 
 cause of his brethren was never pleaded in vain, at once 
 took up arms in their favour. A meeting was held, on the. 
 21st April 1840, at the residence of Sir Moses Montefiore, 
 Grosvenor Gate, Park Lane, in which were present not only 
 the members of the London Committee of Deputies of the 
 British Jews, but such other eminent men as Isaac L. 
 Goldsmid, Isaac Cohen, David Salomons, A. A. Goldsmid, 
 Drs Loewe and Barnard Van Oven,, and several of the most 
 distinguished members of the Portuguese Community. Mon¬ 
 sieur Cremieux, the Vice-President of the Consistoire Central 
 of the French Jews and present President of the Alliance 
 Israelite Universelle, also attended to represent the Jews of 
 France. Translations of various communications from the 
 East, addressed to Messrs Rothschild and Sir Moses Monte¬ 
 fiore, and giving minute details of the sufferings of the 
 unhappy Jews of Damascus and of Rhodes,, were read, and 
 produced a profound and painful sensation. A letter was 
 also read from the Rev.. Sol.. Hirschel, the Chief Rabbi, 
 solemnly repudiating such charges, and declaring them to be 
 false and malicious; for so great is the horror evinced by 
 the Jewish law at the shedding of blood,, that the slightest 
 admixture of blood, even that of animals,, would pollute the 
 common food of man still more would human blood 
 desecrate and render abominable a religious rite. A series 
 of resolutions were adopted expressing the concern, disgust, 
 and horror of the meeting at such unfounded and cruel 
 accusations against their brethren in the East, and against 
 the barbarous tortures inflicted upon them ; entreating the 
 governments of England, France, and Austria to take up 
 the cause of the unhappy Jews; and appointing a deputa¬ 
 tion to wait on Lord Palmerston (who was- at the time Tier 
 
BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST 
 
 35 1 
 
 Majesty’s Secretary for Foreign Affairs), which comprised 
 Sir Moses Montefiore, Baron de Rothschild, Sir I. L. Gold¬ 
 smid, David Salomons, Mr A. A. Goldsmid, and Mr F. H. 
 Goldsmid. 
 
 Lord Palmerston received the deputation at the Foreign 
 Office with the greatest urbanity and kindness, expressing 
 his abhorrence of the cruel persecution of which the Jews 
 were the objects in the East, and his surprise that the 
 calumny should have met with the slightest credence. IJe 
 assured the deputation that the influence of the British 
 Government would be exerted on behalf of the Jews, and 
 that he would give instructions to Colonel Hodges at Alex¬ 
 andria, and to Lord Ponsonby at Constantinople, to direct 
 them to use every effort to prevent a continuance of such 
 inhuman and undeserved treatment. 
 
 The same deputation then waited on the Austrian Am¬ 
 bassador, who was absent, and on M. Guizot, the French 
 Ambassador. M. Guizot gave fair words, which were not 
 borne out by the deeds of his chief in Paris, M. Thiers, the 
 minister of Louis Philippe. France, the country which 
 boasts of being the leader of civilisation, acted on this occa¬ 
 sion as the champion of ignorance, fanaticism, and savage 
 superstition. Count Ratti Menton, the French Consul at 
 Damascus, was one of the most active persecutors of the 
 wretched Jews. He had lived in Spain for some years, and 
 had imbibed a blind hatred against the Jews. Though the 
 French Government sent M. de Melvoires to inquire into 
 the conduct of M. Ratti Menton, the latter was fully exone¬ 
 rated, and M. de Melvoires was appointed French Consul at 
 Beirout. In fact, as M. Cremieux said, u Nous avons la 
 France contre nous.” France had then ambitious dreams 
 in the East, and supported the rebellious policy of Mehemet 
 Ali against his Suzerain the Sultan of Turkey. Mehemet 
 Ali had possessed himself of Syria, which was occupied by 
 his troops. But England, Russia, Austria, and Prussia 
 sided with Turkey, and a very complicated Eastern ques¬ 
 tion was arising at this period, and threatening serious 
 consequences. 
 
 The English Press at large almost unanimously reprobated 
 the conduct of the accusers and persecutors of the Jews, and 
 
35 2 
 
 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST. 
 
 expressed their belief in the complete innocence of the 
 calumniated Israelites. We may also honourably mention 
 the Malta Times , which warmly espoused the cause of 
 the tortured Jews, and strenuously maintained their inno¬ 
 cence. The English nation, which as a rule is always ready 
 to sympathise with the weak and oppressed, showed in an 
 unmistakable manner their compassion for the Jews. The 
 Lord Mayor convened a meeting at the Mansion House for 
 the purpose of expressing the sympathy of the citizens of 
 London with the Jews of Damascus, and their detestation 
 of the atrocious calumnies which had been circulated against 
 them. Mr Alderman Thompson presided until the arrival 
 of the Lord Mayor, Sir Chapman Marshall. Many friends 
 of justice, humanity, and toleration met together, albeit of 
 different political parties ; and such men as Mr J. A. Smith, 
 M.P. ; Sir Denham Norreys, M.P. ; Mr James Morrison, 
 M.P.; Mr W. Attwood, M.P.; Dr Bowring, Mr Martin 
 Smith, M.P. ; Mr S. Gurney, Lord Howden, Hon. and Rev. 
 Baptist Noel, Sir C. Forbes, Thomas Campbell the poet, 
 Mr David Wire, Mr John Masterman, Mr John Dillon, and 
 the “ great liberator,” Daniel O’Connell, with one voice 
 declared emphatically their utter disbelief of the odious 
 calumnies spread against the Jews. A statement from the 
 Rev. Mr Pieritz, a Jewish convert who had become a 
 Christian clergyman, bore witness to the sufferings of the 
 unfortunate Jews, and strongly confirmed the great aversion 
 of his former co-religionists to the taste of the blood of 
 animals. Several eloquent speeches were made, and were 
 followed by a number of appropriate resolutions setting 
 forth in forcible terms the commiseration felt by all true 
 Christians for the poor persecuted Jews of Damascus and 
 Rhodes; their abhorrence at the use of torture ; their dis¬ 
 belief in the confessions thereby obtained; and their deep 
 regret that in this enlightened age a persecution should 
 have arisen against their Jewish brethren, originating in 
 ignorance, and inflamed by bigotry. Finally, the gratifica¬ 
 tion of the meeting was manifested on perceiving that many 
 persons of distinguished rank, as well as the Government, 
 had testified their willingness to uphold and support the 
 cause of suffering humanity. 
 
 \ 
 
BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST. 
 
 353 
 
 The sympathy of their fellow-citizens greatly encouraged 
 the Jews of England in their exertions. A subscription to 
 defray the expenses of a mission to the East was actively 
 being raised. The Sephardi Congregation handsomely gave 
 £500 from their fund of cautivos; other Synagogues offered 
 according to their means. Contributions came in not only 
 from the London Synagogues, but from several continental 
 congregations ; and from Hamburg to Leghorn funds were 
 collected for the defence of the unhappy Jews of Damascus 
 and Rhodes. Meetings of Jews took place for the same 
 purpose, even in America and the West Indies. In Hew 
 York, Philadelphia, St Thomas, and Jamaica, the Jews 
 showed to the best of their power that they had not forgotten 
 their persecuted and tortured brethren in the far East. 
 
 The Board of Deputies, as the political representative of 
 the Jewish community in England, took the lead in action. 
 At a public meeting held on June 15, 1840, in which there 
 were present not only the Deputies, but the principal 
 ecclesiastical authorities and many of the most influential 
 members of the London Jewish Congregations, it was 
 resolved to send a mission to Mehemet Ali, to intercede 
 on behalf of the Jews of Damascus. The whole community 
 unanimously pointed to one man. Who so zealous, so 
 philanthropic, so earnest, so able and courteous, as Sir 
 Moses Montefiore ? To Sir Moses Montefiore, wdio was 
 President of the Board of Deputies, was entrusted the 
 important task of representing the British Jews, while M. 
 Cremieux accompanied him as the envoy of the French 
 Jews. The subscriptions raised were intended to defray 
 the expenses of, and to remunerate, those who accompanied 
 Sir Moses Montefiore in his errand of mercy. Sir Moses 
 Montefiore, always ready to sacrifice his comfort and to 
 imperil his valuable life in the service of his brethren, 
 accepted the honourable, and what to any one else would 
 have been the onerous, mission. M. Cremieux failed in 
 obtaining the recommendations he had expected from the 
 French Government, and it was then agreed that Sir Moses 
 Montefiore should be the recognised head of the mission, and 
 that M. Cremieux should act as his counsel under his direc¬ 
 tion, and in conjunction with Mr Wire. Mr H. de Castro 
 
 z 
 
354 
 
 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST 
 
 was appointed President of the Board of Deputies in the 
 absence of Sir Moses Montefiore, and a Committee of Corre¬ 
 spondence was elected from the members of that body. 
 
 Sir Moses Montefiore, accompanied by his estimable 
 consort, Lady Montefiore, by Mr Wire and Dr Loewe, left 
 London on the 7th July 1840. In Paris, his party was 
 increased by the additions of M. Cremieux and Dr Madden. 
 Sir Moses Montefiore proceeded to Malta via Marseilles and 
 Leghorn. He had the satisfaction of being able to advise 
 from the very beginning of the journey, that the imprisoned 
 Jews of Rhodes had been released after being honourably 
 acquitted, and that they had commenced proceedings against 
 their persecutors. At Leghorn, the accounts received from 
 Syria by Sir Moses were very discouraging. That province 
 was in open revolt against the rule of Mehemet Ali; 
 Suleyman Pasha, one of the Viceroy’s generals, had been 
 attacked and taken prisoner, and Beirout was blockaded. 
 The dangers of the expedition were pointed out to Sir Moses 
 Montefiore. He declined to return without having achieved 
 success, and he resolved to proceed forward at all risks, rather 
 than desert his unhappy brethren. In pursuance with this 
 noble resolution the Jewish mission proceeded to Malta. In 
 the same packet in which they sailed, were the correspondents 
 of the Times and the Morning Chronicle , who went to seek 
 information on the question of the Jews of Damascus. Sir 
 Moses Montefiore and his party arrived at Malta on the 
 27th July, when hearing that the insurrection in Syria was 
 on the point of being quelled, they continued their voyage 
 to Alexandria. 
 
 On his arrival at Alexandria, Sir Moses Montefiore de¬ 
 livered his despatches to Colonel Hodges, the English 
 Consul-General, who promised to procure him an interview 
 with the Viceroy. At the same time all the foreign Consuls, 
 with the exception of the French Consul, offered their 
 support to Sir Moses Montefiore. Mehemet Ali received 
 the members of the Jewish Mission very courteously, and 
 said he would consider the petition which they presented to 
 him. The petition asked for permission for Sir Moses and 
 his party to proceed to Damascus to obtain evidence on 
 behalf of the imprisoned Jews, with leave to see and inter- 
 
BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST 
 
 355 
 
 rogate the prisoners, and for absolute personal safety for the 
 members of the Mission and for all persons giving evidence. 
 A second and a third interview followed between the suc¬ 
 cessor of the Pharaohs and the champion of the Jews. The 
 Viceroy said he was too much occupied to decide on the 
 question; but on being pressed he agreed to give orders for 
 the better treatment of the prisoners. Sir Moses Montefiore 
 placed himself in communication with Mr Werry, the British 
 Consul at Damascus, who, in conjunction with Mr Merlato, 
 the Austrian Consul, had endeavoured to alleviate the 
 miseries of the Jews, and to defend them against the rabid 
 Hebraeophobia of M. Eatti Menton. Sir Moses had the 
 satisfaction of receiving from Mr Werry a detailed account 
 of the improved condition of the remaining incarcerated 
 Israelites, three of them having died under torture. But 
 the political situation in Egypt was becoming serious. 
 England, Eussia, Prussia, and Austria insisted on the re¬ 
 cognition by the Viceroy of the Suzerainty of the Porte, and 
 on his abandoning Syria. France encouraged the ambitious 
 designs of Mehemet Ali. The four powers despatched an 
 ultimatum to the Viceroy requiring an immediate decision. 
 War seemed imminent, and Sir Moses Montefiore was pre¬ 
 paring to depart from Alexandria. Mehemet Ali rejected 
 the terms offered by the four powers; and these, like the 
 Sybil, who destroyed each time one of her books asking the 
 same price for the remainder, sent back another ultimatum 
 less favourable to Mehemet Ali. 
 
 The French Government, while countenancing Mehemet 
 Ali in his resistance to allied Europe, opposed strenuously 
 the rendering simple justice to the Jews of Damascus. 
 Monsieur Thiers declined to furnish Monsieur Cremieux with 
 letters to the French Consul at Alexandria, and the conduct 
 of Count Eatti Menton was sanctioned by his superiors in 
 Paris. A strange decree of Providence was that which 
 rendered many years afterwards M. Cremieux and M. Thiers 
 —the former the advocate who was a suppliant on behalf of 
 his oppressed brethren, and the latter the minister who re¬ 
 fused to grant his prayer—colleagues in the same govern¬ 
 ment of their conquered and humiliated country! 
 
 The position of Mehemet Ali was becoming complicated, 
 
356 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST. 
 
 and lie determined to get rid of one cause of embarrassment. 
 Mr Briggs, an English merchant, who had taken much in- 
 terest in the fate of the Damascus Jews, waited on Sir Moses 
 Montefiore, and informed him that the Viceroy had expressed 
 an inclination to release the prisoners, provided the whole 
 matter were allowed to fall into oblivion. Now Sir Moses 
 Montefiore, with great courage and patriotism, had demanded 
 not merely the release of the Jews, but a new trial, to enable 
 them to clear their character even from suspicion. He justly 
 required the complete vindication and rehabilitation of his 
 co-religionists. On considering the perturbed political state 
 of the country, Sir Moses Montefiore agreed to waive his 
 demands for a new trial and for compensation, provided 
 Mehemet Ali discharged at once the prisoners and declared 
 in his Firman his complete conviction of their innocence. 
 The Viceroy was also to give his permission for those who had 
 fled to return to their homes, and to express his desire that for 
 the future the Jews should live unmolested in his dominions. 
 At the suggestion of Mr Briggs, these conditions were em¬ 
 bodied in a memorial to be presented to His Highness the 
 Viceroy, to which were appended copies of Bulls from diffe¬ 
 rent Popes, acquitting the Jews of the charge of using blood 
 in their ceremonies; a Firman of the Porte to the same 
 effect; an account of the proceedings at Rhodes against the 
 Jews, and of their acquittal by the Courts of Constantinople, 
 together with some other documents. These documents were 
 not presented to His Highness, for on their being privately 
 submitted to an Effendi, one of his councillors, it was 
 recommended to refrain from so doing, as it was not con¬ 
 sidered that Mehemet Ali would comply with the requests 
 therein contained. 
 
 Then Sir Moses Montefiore resolved to apply for a simple 
 discharge of the prisoners. A petition for that purpose was 
 drawn up, signed by himself, by M. Cremieux, and by ten 
 foreign consuls. Mehemet Ali offered the discharge of the 
 prisoners as an act of grace, which Sir Moses Montefiore 
 declined to accept. Eventually, the discharge was obtained 
 as an act of justice. The demands of Sir Moses Montefioie 
 were in point of fact substantially if not formally conceded. 
 The imprisoned Jews were liberated. The fugitive Jews were 
 
BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST 
 
 357 
 
 permitted to return to their homes unmolested. An order 
 of general protection to the Jews was given. A Firman per- 
 7nitting the members of the Jewish Mission to proceed to 
 Damascus was granted. And the Viceroy personally assured 
 Sir Moses Montefiore of his complete disbelief of the calum¬ 
 nies directed against the Jews. The head of the mission 
 was strongly dissuaded from going to Damascus, owing to 
 the fanaticism of the nominal Christians ; and Mehemet Ali 
 himself pointing out the dangers of the journey, the expedi¬ 
 tion had to be abandoned. An authenticated copy of the order 
 of release was forwarded to Damascus, and the British Con¬ 
 sul was requested to see that the mandate was promptly 
 carried out. 
 
 The Mussulman inhabitants of Damascus manifested their 
 extreme satisfaction at the discharge of the prisoners; and 
 on the return of the latter to their distressed families, the 
 greater part of the Mohammedan merchants hastened to 
 pay to them visits of condolence, and to express cordially 
 the pleasure felt at their liberation. Count Batti Menton, 
 when he heard of the order, stormed and raved, and endea¬ 
 voured to oppose its execution; and to our regret we must 
 record that the Christian population slunk silently and 
 moodily about the streets of Damascus as if a calamity had 
 befallen them. These unhappy Christians had forgotten, if 
 they had ever known, the dearest and most sacred precepts 
 of their own religion. 
 
 The Jewish Mission sent a letter of thanks to the Viceroy, 
 drawn up in the Turkish language by Dr Loewe, and it was 
 received by His Highness before their departure. Mehemet 
 Ali appeared much gratified on hearing the joy experienced 
 by his Mussulman subjects at the happy termination of the 
 sufferings of their Jewish fellow-subjects ; and Sir Moses 
 Montefiore and he parted under mutually favourable impres¬ 
 sions. 
 
 Sir Moses Montefiore, not satisfied with obtaining such 
 noble results, and impelled by an unconquerable love for his 
 race, and by indefatigable philanthropy, decided on extend¬ 
 ing his journey to Constantinople. In the capital of the 
 Turkish Empire, Sir Moses Montefiore was courteously re¬ 
 ceived by Keschid Pasha, the Grand Vizier, and by the 
 
358 BLOOD ACCUSATIONS IN THE EAST. 
 
 Sultan himself, and he succeeded in obtaining the celebrated 
 Hatti Homayoun or Firman, in which the Chief of the Faith¬ 
 ful declared his perfect conviction of the innocence of the 
 Jews against the accusations of which they had been the 
 victims; and he granted them the same protection, rights, 
 and privileges as were accorded to other races in his 
 dominions. 
 
 These are the glorious achievements of that memorable 
 mission ; when by a wonderful combination of qualities on the 
 part of Sir Moses Montefiore, and by the zeal and abilities of 
 the gentlemen who accompanied him, nine persons were 
 saved from a lingering and cruel death. Moreover the posi¬ 
 tion of the Jews in the East was materially raised; despotic 
 Pashas were taught that enlightened humanity knows no 
 distinction of clime or of creed; and the Sultan by his 
 own sign manual decreed the civil rights of the Jews, and 
 established their equality before the law to other classes of 
 his subjects. 
 
CHAPTER XLIX. 
 
 SOME MORE JEWISH AUTHORS 
 
 \ 
 
 The Jews of a former generation may not have reached to 
 the very foremost rank in literature; but many of them 
 assuredly performed meritorious work and attained honourable 
 places among Jewish and among English litterateurs. We do 
 not profess to mention the name of every British Israelite who 
 entered into the thorny path of literature ; our object being to 
 offer a few remarks on those whose productions have acquired 
 most fame, or who appear to deserve especial commendation. 
 
 Many of our readers will probably recollect the modest 
 figure of the Iiev. D. A. de Sola, the senior minister of the 
 Spanish and Portuguese Congregation. Mr D. de Sola, 
 from his unassuming presence and manners, was not gene¬ 
 rally known to possess the learning and abilities which he 
 undoubtedly displayed in his numerous works. He was de¬ 
 scended from an ancient family which emigrated from Spain 
 in 1492 and settled in Holland—a family which seems to 
 have given birth to many scholars of eminence. Isaac de 
 Sola distinguished himself as a preacher in London, between 
 1690 and 1700, and his remains were interred in the Sep¬ 
 hardi cemetery in 1735, while Dr Benjamin de Sola, Court 
 Physician to William V., Prince of Orange, and Stadthouder 
 of Holland, was a practitioner of great repute at the Hague. 
 David Aaron de Sola was born on the 26th December 1796, 
 at Amsterdam, and he was the son of highly educated parents. 
 His uncle, the said Dr Benjamin de Sola, was desirous of 
 training young David to the medical profession, but the 
 future minister preferred to devote himself exclusively to his 
 favourite theology and Hebrew literature. He was admitted 
 a student in the Medrash at the early age of eleven, and 
 continued his attendance there for nine years; during which 
 time he was promoted through all the five degrees up to the 
 
3 6 ° 
 
 SOME MORE JE WISH A UTHORS. 
 
 highest. He became well versed in the superior branches of 
 Jewish theology, and also gained a good knowledge of secular 
 literature. At the same time he learnt several modern lan¬ 
 guages, and wrote fluently in English, German, and Dutch, in 
 addition to Hebrew. 
 
 When the Sephardi Congregation of London desired the 
 services of a second Ilazan or minister—the Rev. Isaac 
 Almosnino being then the first—D. A. de Sola came to 
 London and became a candidate for the vacant post. He 
 was duly elected, and though the position was not very 
 brilliant, the young minister entered eagerly and zealously 
 in his new career, hoping to be able to raise his office by his 
 unwearied exertions. Having become united in marriage to 
 the eldest daughter of Haham Meldola, he devoted him¬ 
 self to a more profound study of the English language. The 
 Rev. D. A. de Sola’s contributions to Jewish literature are 
 too numerous to be mentioned here, and we can only advert 
 to a few of the most important. His first published work 
 was entitled 66 The Blessings,” with an introductory essay on 
 Thanksgiving. The subject and plan of the book originated 
 with Sir Moses Montefiore, to whom Mr de Sola acknow¬ 
 ledged himself deeply indebted for the generous support he 
 bestowed on his work. Mr de Sola, as we have already 
 stated, began, in March 1831, to preach in the Portuguese 
 Synagogue, and his sermons were in all probability the first 
 ever delivered in the English tongue in those precincts. His 
 discourses were received with much approbation, and some of 
 them were published. He translated the whole of the Portu¬ 
 guese Jewish Prayers into English; and he subsequently ren¬ 
 dered the same service to the Germans as regards their Festival 
 Prayers. These versions are more lucid and exact than those 
 of David Levi. Lie began a new edition of the Sacred Scrip¬ 
 tures in conjunction with Dr Raphall, with an English trans¬ 
 lation and critical notes, and he issued the first volume. The 
 work remained incomplete, owing to the removal of Dr Raphall 
 to the pastoral charge of the Birmingham Congregation. 
 
 The Rev. D. A. de Sola was an indefatigable worker, and 
 his pen was seldom idle. In 1845 he brought out the 
 “ Mishna” in conjunction with Dr Raphall, which comprised 
 some of the treatises of that voluminous work, touching on 
 
SOME MORE JE WISH A UTHOR S. 
 
 361 
 
 subjects of daily occurrence. He then produced his well- 
 known u Ancient Melodies of the Liturgy of the Spanish and 
 Portuguese Jews,” in conjunction with Emanuel Aguilar. 
 Mr de Sola, in addition to a number of miscellaneous writ¬ 
 ings and contributions to the Jewish press of England, 
 Holland, and Germany, revised the cheap “ Jewish Library,” 
 a work issued at the expense of a generous and high-minded 
 lady, Mrs Charlotte Montefiore. This publication, which 
 consisted of stories of Jewish life, was intended for the 
 benefit of the humbler classes, and each tale was retailed 
 separately at a penny. Grace Aguilar, who was a favourite 
 pupil in Hebrew of Mr de Sola, and who was greatly guided 
 by his opinion, wrote one of the tales entitled the “ Perez 
 Family. He also was called upon to revise various other 
 works; and he took part in the several movements for ren¬ 
 dering known the rich Jewish literature. In 1830 his co¬ 
 operation was given to the “ Society for the Cultivation of 
 the Hebrew Language and Literature,” his fellow-labourers 
 in that vast field being Michael Josephs, Joshua Van Oven, 
 Arthur Lumley Davids, Morris Jacob Kaphall, and Selig 
 Newman. In 1842 the Rev. D. A. de Sola was instrumental 
 in organising an “ Association for the Promotion of Jewish 
 Literature,” when he was elected a member of the Provi¬ 
 sional Committee with Mr Lindenthal, Dr Benisch, &c. 
 Unfortunately both these societies were short-lived. Mr de 
 Sola left behind him a mass of correspondence of a literary 
 character with most of the highest Jewish scholars of his 
 day, such as Jost, Delitsch, Ffirst, Zunz, Rappaport, &c., in 
 Germany; Belinfante, Isaacson, Bassan, &c., in Holland; 
 Carmoly, Cohen, &c., in France; Loewe, Zedner, Raphall, 
 Dukes, Benisch, &c., in England. 
 
 Mr de Sola closed a blameless and busy career on the 
 29tli October 1860 (13th Hesvan 5621), after much suffer¬ 
 ing. The length of the funeral procession testified to the 
 esteem in which he had been held by his congregation. 
 
 No Jewish female author has attained the general and 
 well-deserved popularity achieved by Grace Aguilar. Her 
 numerous literary productions have been read and appreci¬ 
 ated in England, America, Germany, and France. Her 
 “ Women of Israel ” is a work stamped with the most ardent 
 
2,62 
 
 SOME MORE JE WISH A UTHORS. 
 
 zeal and fervent piety, in every line of which breathe the 
 national sentiment and the true patriotism which are the 
 characteristics of her writings. It is a book teeming with 
 powerful lessons to her own sex, and eloquent exhortations to 
 the opposite sex. She desired to elevate the character of the 
 women of Israel. She has shown that when all the nations 
 of the East degraded females, the Jewish code gave them an 
 equality in civil and religious institutions suitable to women’s 
 mind and to their special mission. She has also demon¬ 
 strated that many women in Israel have been the exponents 
 of the noblest sentiments and the most sublime actions. 
 Her u Spirit of Judaism” and u Jewish Faith” are likewise 
 works of considerable merit, and full of that pious fervour 
 and filial affections which carry the reader along with her, 
 and impress him with profound sympathy for the writer. 
 Her “ Jewish Faith ” displays signs of no mean acquaintance 
 with Jewish and Christian philosophers and divines, and its 
 logical reasoning is far from betraying the sex of the author. 
 With all her abilities, which were of no ordinary range, she 
 was humble and unassuming, tender and genial to all, and 
 greatly attached to her parents. The ambition of Grace 
 Aguilar was neither for wealth, reputation, nor distinction. 
 The pure consciousness of raising the literary and religious 
 character of the Jewish race, and of her own sex in particular, 
 was at the same time her guiding motive and her reward. 
 
 Grace Aguilar was the eldest child and only daughter of 
 Emanuel Aguilar, the descendant of an old Spanish family, 
 and she first saw the light at Hackney, in June 1816. By a 
 not uncommon dispensation of Providence, the strength of 
 her mind was counterbalanced by the weakness of her bodily 
 frame. The shell that confined an over-active intellect was 
 indeed of a frail nature. Grace Aguilar was struggling from 
 childhood upwards through her whole existence with a weak 
 constitution. She was nevertheless very quick of apprehension 
 and learnt easily all she was taught. Her parents seem to 
 have been her principal instructors. In childhood her mother 
 instilled rudimentary knowledge in her bright young mind ; 
 and at the age of fourteen her father began a regular course 
 of lessons. The family, owing to Mr Aguilar’s health, 
 went to reside in Devonshire: and at Tavistock, amid the 
 
SOME MORE JE WISH A UTHORS 363 
 
 beauty of the surrounding scenery, she first gave vent to her 
 tnoughts in verse. She was exceedingly fond of music, and 
 became proficient on the piano. From the age of seven she 
 began to keep a journal, and this practice no doubt fostered 
 a spirit of self-communion. She studied the principles of 
 religion, and she carried its precepts in everyday life, reliev¬ 
 ing sufferings as far as her limited means allowed, and with¬ 
 out inquiring into the theological opinions of the afflicted. 
 She herself endured much physical pain; and in 1835 she 
 had an illness which completely prostrated the small stock 
 of strength at her command. In the midst of much mental 
 distress, caused by the sickness and death of her father and 
 by various domestic troubles, Grace Aguilar produced the 
 “ Spirit of Judaism ” and several other works. 
 
 Mr Moses Mocatta, a gentleman who had himself translated 
 from the Hebrew the work entitled “ Faith Strengthened,” 
 and who was a zealous worker in the cause of Judaism, very 
 liberally came forward, and materially assisted Miss Aguilar 
 in the publication of the “ Jewish Faith.” She worked 
 hard, and, her health breaking down completely, she was 
 ordered rest and change. In June 1847 she visited Frank¬ 
 fort, where her brother was pursuing his musical studies. 
 At first she appeared to rally, but she became soon again 
 exhausted. She tried the mineral waters of Schwalbach, 
 without success; and, after two months of great suffering 
 Grace Aguilar passed aw r ay in September 1847. Her 
 remains were consigned by the hands of tender friends to 
 that portion of the cemetery of Frankfort which is set apart 
 for Jews. She had loved truly her religion, into the depth 
 of which she entered so fully that her spirit could not rest 
 till she publicly taught it to her sisters and brethren. In 
 addition to her religious works, Grace Aguilar was the suc¬ 
 cessful author of several very pleasing novels which had an 
 extensive circulation, and still maintain their reputation. The 
 principal of these are, “ The Days of Bruce,” a tale of Scot¬ 
 tish history, and some domestic stories, entitled “ Home 
 Influence,” “ The Mother’s Becompense,” and “ Home 
 Scenes and Heart Studies.” 
 
 Another energetic labourer in the cause of Jewish litera¬ 
 ture was the late Mr E. H. Lindo. This gentleman, after 
 
3 6 4 
 
 SOME MORE JEWISH AUTHORS. 
 
 spending a considerable portion of bis existence in com¬ 
 mercial pursuits, devoted many years to literary occupations. 
 Mr Lindo compiled the well-known almanac bearing bis 
 name, the usefulness of which is far more extended than 
 would be imagined from the unpretending nature of its title, 
 for it contains a chronological table of the most interesting 
 events in Jewish history. Then in 1842, Mr Lindo published 
 a translation of the “ Conciliator ” of Menasseh ben Israel, 
 a work which endeavours to harmonise the apparent contra¬ 
 dictions in the Bible. The most important production by 
 this gentleman is the “ History of the Jews of Spain and 
 Portugal,” which was issued from the press in 1848. The 
 author took vast pains to acquire original and authentic 
 information on this interesting subject; he visited the 
 Iberian peninsula, he inspected personally the scenes of the 
 events which he described, and examined many valuable 
 MSS. This work displays much painstaking research and 
 considerable erudition, and was favourably reviewed by the 
 most influential journals of the day. Mr Lindo, in addition, 
 prepared a catalogue of the books contained in the library of 
 the Sephardi Medrash (Religious College), and he completed 
 several translations of Hebrew and Spanish works, in both 
 of which languages he was well versed. Mr Lindo died in 
 1865, at an advanced age. 
 
 Among other deceased Jewish writers who deserve honour¬ 
 able mention, we may name Moses Samuel, of Liverpool, the 
 eminent Hebrew scholar and author of several productions. 
 Moses Samuel was a self-taught man, and he possessed con¬ 
 siderable abilities. He was born in London in 1795, and 
 evinced at an early age a singular taste for languages and 
 mathematics. After taking up his residence in Liverpool, he 
 published an address to the missionaries of Great Britain, 
 which was a forcible protest against the attempts of con¬ 
 version societies to lead the Jews away from their ancient 
 faith. He translated the Book of Jasher, and he brought 
 forth a work on the position of the Jews in Great Britain, 
 while his letters to Lord Brougham and Mr Hume, M.P., 
 were highly commended. He then became one of the joint- 
 editors of a monthly magazine, named 66 The Cup of Salva¬ 
 tion.” He was a zealous worker in all that concerned the 
 
SOME MORE JE WISH A UTHORS. 365 
 
 welfare of his co-religionists, and ever ready to wield his pen, 
 not only on their behalf, hut on behalf of the oppressed 
 of all denominations. A rebuke he administered to a 
 member of the bar, and entitled “ The Jew and the Bar¬ 
 rister, was favourably noticed in several magazines. Moses 
 Samuel, whilst attending a meeting on the emancipation of 
 the Jews, in 1840, was attacked with paralysis, from which 
 he never entirely recovered, but he lived in retirement until 
 1860. We must also name A.. Abrahams, an uncle of Serjeant 
 Simon, M.P., and who translated the “ Matinees du Samedi; ” 
 and Morris Jacob Raphall, whose versatility, learning, 
 and literary powders were remarkable. We purposely abstain 
 from adverting to the far greater number of literary English 
 Jews and Jewesses who are flourishing at present in our 
 midst; and whom we do not specify by name for reasons 
 that will easily suggest themselves to our readers. Among 
 the Jews of a former generation who distinguished themselves 
 in sciences and in arts, we must give a place to Benjamin 
 Gompertz, the eminent mathematician; Jacob Samuda, the 
 talented engineer, who perished at an early age, the victim of 
 an accident; and Daniel, a miniature painter who in his day 
 achieved a considerable reputation. 
 
 ISTo chapter devoted to modern Jewish authors would be 
 complete without including the name, familiar to the Anglo- 
 Jewish community, of the late Michael Henry. The history 
 of Michael Henry offers few stirring events, but it affords 
 an example of philanthropy and self-abnegation such as is 
 seldom witnessed in these days of worldly-mindedness and 
 self-seeking. He was born in Ivennington in February 1830 
 his father being a merchant, and his mother the Miss Emma 
 Lyon of whom we have already spoken in this work. Michael 
 Henry was educated in the City of London School, from 
 which he went to Paris, where he was engaged for a short 
 time in a counting-house. Thence he returned to London, 
 and entered the office of the late James Bobertson, patent 
 agent and editor of the Mechanic s’ Magazine . On the death 
 of Mr Robertson, Michael Henry established himself in the 
 same business, which he carried on from 1857 until his death. 
 In course of time he began to assist Dr Benisch in his labours 
 as editor of the Jewish Chronicle; and when that journal 
 
366 SOME MORE JE WISH A UTHORS. 
 
 changed hands in 1868, the editorship, vacated by Dr Benisch, 
 was entrusted to him. Michael Henry was endowed with a 
 strong poetic feeling, which found its vent in fervid verses. 
 At the age of six he composed some lines on a storm; at the 
 age of nine he wrote prayers for his own use; and when he 
 reached thirteeen he produced a short humorous tale. In 
 youth he contributed occasionally to magazines ; subsequently 
 he wrote regularly in the Mining Journal; and he is best 
 known in connection with the Jewish Chronicle. His articles 
 were easy and full of imagination ; his style was warm and 
 impassioned, and at times rose to eloquence. His words 
 carried with them conviction,, for they were the outpour of an 
 honest, zealous nature, and of one who was an earnest believer 
 in Judaism. In his profession he stood deservedly high for 
 his profound knowledge of Patent Law, and for the perfect 
 conscientiousness with which he carried on his avocations. 
 To his community Michael Henry was a great loss. All 
 the leisure hours left to him by his occupations were em¬ 
 ployed in advancing the interests of his favourite charitable 
 and educational institutions. Instruction for the young and 
 help for the needy divided his attention, and he was as well 
 known for his love of boys as for his kindness of heart. He 
 was the founder of the General Benevolent Association; the 
 Jewish Stepney Schools owed little less than their existence 
 to his indefatigable labours; and various other Jewish insti¬ 
 tutions were indebted to him for the support of his forcible 
 pen and eloquent voice. He was modest and unassuming in 
 his deportment; and his geniality and courteousness, added 
 to his other good qualities, won for him a popularity among 
 his race seldom exceeded. When Michael Henry perished in 
 June of the present year, in the plenitude of his mental and 
 physical powers, the victim of a lamentable accident, the 
 respect in which he was held in his community was amply 
 testified, by the presence at the Willesden cemetery of one of 
 the largest assemblages of mourners that for years had fol¬ 
 lowed the remains of a Jew to their last resting-place. As 
 a proof of the esteem and friendship felt for him by his co¬ 
 religionists, we may mention that they hastened to raise a 
 fund to perpetuate his memory in the manner which would 
 have been most agreeable to his feelings. 
 
CHAPTER L. 
 
 THE REFORM MOVEMENT. 
 
 Few religions communities have displayed the complete union 
 for which the Jews have been ever remarkable since the days 
 of their last dispersion from Jerusalem. Properly speaking, 
 with the exception of the small number of individuals known 
 as Samaritans and as Karaites, there are no sects in Judaism. 
 The principles of Judaism appear so simple and incontestable, 
 its dogmas so plain and easily understood, that if the Jews 
 numbered a hundred millions, they could never split into a 
 thousand sects like the professors of other creeds. The only 
 differences of opinion existing among Jews are purely con¬ 
 fined to matters of practice, and do not affect belief in the 
 simple truths of the Mosaic dispensation. We say it in 
 all respect, there is probably less discrepancy between the 
 Jews forming what are called Orthodox Congregations, and 
 those Jews who are members of the Reformed Congregation 
 of London, than is evident within the bosom of a single 
 denomination of Christians. We venture to assert that a 
 wider and deeper gulf yawns between the Ritualist and the 
 Low Churchman, than separates any two congregations of 
 Jews within the four seas in all that regards essentials. The 
 slight variations in the liturgies of the so-called Portuguese 
 and German Jews, and in the mode of pronunciation of 
 Hebrew, are perhaps inevitable consequences of their resid¬ 
 ence among different nations, and their adoption of different 
 languages, but in no degree do they constitute a difference in 
 dogma, doctrine, or practice. 
 
 The establishment of the West London Congregation of 
 British Jews was doubtless a painful event, which caused 
 much heart-burning at the time of its occurrence, and which 
 is the more to be lamented by Jews, as it might easily have 
 
THE REFORM MO VEMENT. 
 
 368 
 
 been avoided by the prevalence of wiser and more conciliating* 
 counsels, and by a truer perception of the spirit of real religion. 
 It is not within our province to decide on which side to award 
 the greater blame for that which cannot be characterised 
 otherwise than as a secession. We shall treat the question from 
 a purely historical point of view. We shall, in so far as we 
 are able, state the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
 the truth. We shall deliver a plain unvarnished tale, adding 
 nought in malice, and extenuating nothing. We shall 
 abstain from offering any comment or remark, even at the 
 risk of rendering our narrative tame and colourless, as we 
 prefer that our readers should form their own conclusions after 
 carefully weighing the facts that we shall bring before their 
 notice. 
 
 We have on several occasions adverted to the slovenly and 
 indecorous manner in which Jewish worship was too often 
 celebrated in English Synagogues at a former period. This 
 evil led to serious reflections on the part of those who fre¬ 
 quented the Synagogue to commune with their Maker, and 
 not to mumble through, in an indistinct and formal manner, 
 certain prayers which they scarcely understood. All parties 
 indeed desired an improvement in the mode of conducting 
 the services, but all parties did not agree as to what shape 
 the improvement should assume. So far back as the year 
 5584 (1824), a committee of the vestry of the Great Syna¬ 
 gogue, under the presidency of Mr Isaac L. Goldsmid, 
 appointed to propose a plan for the training of some young 
 men for the Jewish ministry, stated in their report that 
 u they are convinced that the small attendance in the Syna¬ 
 gogue is, in some measure, to be ascribed to the present 
 mode of reading the service ; that it has led, and, if un¬ 
 changed, will lead, to alterations which they most sincerely 
 deprecate, and which may be fatal to the dearest interests of 
 the Jewish nation.” This committee, which consisted of 
 seven gentlemen, all well known in the community for their 
 zeal for and devotion to Judaism, clearly foresaw a rock 
 ahead which they pointed out to the ruling powers of their 
 congregation. The ministers had a happy knack of reading 
 prayers in a mode calculated to disturb and not to arouse 
 devotion. They preferred absurd or exaggerated displays of 
 
THE REFORM MO VEMENT. 
 
 369 
 
 vocalisation to a solemn rendering of the Jewish ritual. The 
 committee limited themselves, however, according to the 
 restricted nature of their mandate, to recommend the educa¬ 
 tion of some youths for the office of readers, the determina¬ 
 tion of some fixed and regular mode of reading prayers, and 
 the avoidance of all singing not connected with sacred music. 
 These recommendations were acted upon ; but they seemed 
 to have had very little influence on the evils in question. 
 
 In the Sephardi Community, the dissatisfaction felt by 
 many members assumed a tangible shape in 1836. On the 
 4th December of that year, a memorial signed by several 
 Yehidim (members) was laid before the body of elders at 
 one of their meetings. The memorialists stated in that 
 document that they had observed, with regret, the existence of 
 a considerable confusion during a great part of the service; 
 that the irregular singing of the schoolboys and others 
 tended to destroy all harmony, and to impair the solemn 
 effect of the beautiful Jewish hymns; while a constant 
 repetition of some of the prayers seemed to them the cause 
 of a relaxation of the attention and seriousness vitally re¬ 
 quisite to the maintenance of a spirit of reverence and 
 fervour. Without presuming to offer any specific plan, the 
 memorialists ventured to make a few suggestions. The sing¬ 
 ing and recitation of prayers should be confined to the 
 reader, and to a certain number of trained boys ; and the 
 introduction of an organ or other instrument, they thought, 
 would insure harmony, order, and solemnity during the whole 
 service. In view of the constant allusions to instrumental 
 music in the psalms, it was not conceived that there could 
 be anything inherent in the Jewish faith to prevent its adop¬ 
 tion. They respectfully but earnestly solicited an inquiry to 
 be set on foot. They recommended an omission of the 
 repetition of the Amidah and Musoph , and especially of 
 Kadisck (prayers recited during the service). They entertained 
 an opinion that there was no sanction for the observance of 
 the second days of the Festivals, or of the eighth day of 
 Passover, or of the ninth of Tabernacles. They were con¬ 
 vinced that the needless multiplying of holydays was 
 calculated to render the observance of all less strictly 
 attended to; and they ventured to submit the propriety of 
 
 2 A 
 
37 ° 
 
 THE REFORM MO VEMENT. 
 
 instituting an inquiry, in order to ascertain whether some 
 steps could not be adopted for limiting the observance of holy- 
 days to the days specified in the Perasah (portion of the law) 
 read on these occasions. 
 
 This memorial had been signed by members of ancient 
 families, hitherto distinguished for their charity, their libera¬ 
 lity, and their profound love and reverence for their faith. 
 On the other hand, at a subsequent meeting of the Elders, 
 held on the 13th December 1836, a counter memorial signed 
 by forty-five Yehidim was presented in a sense totally opposed 
 to the former petition. These members expressed an equal 
 desire to see great order, solemnity, and harmony established 
 in the religious services, but conscientiously and firmly 
 differed from the other requisitionists, as to alterations which 
 would set aside or change those observances which for ages 
 have been held sacred, and they firmly believed that if the 
 principle of alteration in Jewish religious institutions was 
 once admitted, it would split the Jewish nation into 
 innumerable sects. This view was supported by a letter to 
 which 109 signatures were appended of persons who said that 
 they were contributing members of the congregation, and of 
 the class depending on their daily labour for the mainten¬ 
 ance of themselves and families. They felt at times some 
 hardships and privations from the many observances and 
 ordinances which surrounded them, but which were cheer¬ 
 fully borne; and they declared that, holding in the same 
 veneration as their forefathers the precepts and institutions 
 of their holy faith, they prayed that no measures might be 
 sanctioned or adopted to change them. After much discus¬ 
 sion, a resolution, very moderate in tone, was accepted by the 
 Elders, expressing their readiness at all times to receive with 
 attention and to deliberate with calmness on any representa¬ 
 tions made to them by members of the congregation ; that 
 the Elders gave due credit to the first memorialists for purity 
 of intention ; that the means of promoting greater harmony 
 and solemnity during prayers, and of infusing more order and 
 decorum in the services, were objects of their best considera¬ 
 tion, but that the other suggestions were of a description 
 which they deemed inexpedient to entertain. 
 
 It appears evident that the majority of the members of the 
 
THE REFORM MO VEMENT. 
 
 37i 
 
 Sephardi community were averse to the innovations desired 
 by a portion of the Yehidim. Notwithstanding the decision 
 arrived at by the Elders, one of the gentlemen concerned in 
 drawing up the memorial in question circulated a paper, in 
 which he urged the appointment of a committee to ascertain 
 from the ecclesiastical authorities how far those suggestions 
 could be acted upon consistently with the tenets of the 
 Jewish religion. He then used arguments in defence of 
 the proposals for the introduction of instrumental music in 
 Synagogue, and for the limitation of the holydays to the 
 days specified in Scripture. On touching minor points, he 
 mentioned the wish of some members for fixing the begin¬ 
 ning of the prayers at a late hour on Sabbaths and festivals, 
 to enable those who dwelt at a distance to attend Synagogue 
 at a proper time. The question was not re-opened by the 
 Elders during that session. 
 
 In 1837 attempts were made to introduce greater decorum 
 and order in the Synagogue, and by the assistance of the 
 Rev. I. Almosnino, the senior minister, a choir was in¬ 
 structed. On the 9th December 1837 a joint committee was 
 appointed, together with the Wardens, to extend the measures 
 already taken, and to devise further means of imparting 
 greater order and solemnity to public worship. 
 
 Notwithstanding these slight improvements, the existing 
 feelings between the large conservative party and the less 
 numerous party of intending reformers did not assume a 
 friendly appearance. Some members of the conservative party 
 were disposed to grant the concessions sought in the minor 
 points, which probably appeared to them fair and reasonable. 
 But they were afraid that this was but a prelude to further 
 and more sweeping reforms, and they somewhat reluctantly 
 refused to yield an inch for fear that the proverbial ell might 
 be taken. In 1838 stormy discussions took place among the 
 members at their meetings. An unfortunate spirit of con¬ 
 tention obtained in the community. A proposal was made 
 in the month of Heshvan in the same year for the ap¬ 
 pointment of a committee, in which the Readers were to be 
 included, 61 to inquire into the propriety of altering or curtail¬ 
 ing the prayers, and to supply more regular religious instruc¬ 
 tion.” Those who were present on that occasion assure us 
 
372 
 
 the reform mo vement. 
 
 that the discussion assumed a violent character. Of the 
 formation and subsequent dissolution of the Society of the 
 (( Preservers of Sacred Institutions we have already 
 spoken. Its operations served only to fan the spirit of dis¬ 
 sension unhappily reigning in the community. The odium 
 theologicum temporarily seized members of the same race, 
 of the same religion, of the same family. 
 
 Meanwhile another important grievance was alleged by 
 those gentlemen who were dissatisfied with the existing 
 order of things. The Jews were leaving the districts in 
 which they formerly resided close to their Synagogues, and 
 many of them dwelt in Bloomsbury and other quarters which 
 were then considered fashionable. The German Jews had 
 two or three Synagogues beyond the boundaries of the city. 
 The Portuguese Jews could only pray congregationally 
 within the precincts of their ancient building in Bevis Marks. 
 Some of the more affluent members of the latter community 
 were unable to walk to Bevis Marks, and were equally un¬ 
 willing to infringe the Sabbath or Festivals by driving to 
 Synagogue. Their desire to possess a House of Worship 
 within a walking distance of their abodes, however reason¬ 
 able it may appear to us, was considered an unattainable 
 ambition in those days. The Ascama of the Ixaal No. 1 (1st 
 Law of the Congregation) forbade, under the severest 
 penalties, the assemblage of ten or more men for the pur¬ 
 poses of reciting prayers within a certain radius of the 
 Synagogue. We have seen that this regulation had caused 
 much unpleasantness and ill-feeling on a former occasion, 
 and those who had suffered from its stringency then, were 
 not disposed to treat others with greater leniency than they 
 had themselves experienced. 
 
 The difficulty of reaching a Place of Worship, and the regret 
 on reaching it of finding public service conducted in a manner 
 not consonant with their wishes, induced several Yehidim to 
 contemplate seriously the practicability of celebrating service 
 in their own neighbourhood, and in their own manner. We 
 have reason to believe that this step was decided upon very 
 reluctantly by those who undertook it, and that they fully 
 expected that it would only be of a purely temporary 
 nature. It must doubtless have been very painful to men 
 
THE REFORM MO VEMENT. 
 
 373 
 
 who had hitherto strictly followed the precepts of Moses, to 
 disobey the constituted authorities of their Synagogue, many 
 of whom were their personal and attached friends, and still 
 more painful to appear to secede from the traditions of 
 Orthodox Judaism. 
 
 On the 15th April 1840, a meeting of twenty-four gentle¬ 
 men took place, exactly three-fourths of whom were Sephardim 
 and the remainder Ashkenazim, in which the following 
 declaration was signed by the individuals present, who con¬ 
 stituted themselves into a separate congregation : 
 
 “We, the undersigned, regarding public worship as highly con¬ 
 ducive to the interests of religion, consider it a matter of deep regret 
 that it is not more frequently attended by members of our religious 
 persuasion. We are perfectly sure that this circumstance is not owing 
 to any want of general conviction of the fundamental truths of our 
 religion, but we ascribe it to the distance of the existing Synagogues 
 from the place of our residence, to the length and imperfections of the 
 order of service, to the inconvenient hours at which it is appointed, and 
 to the absence of religious instruction in our Synagogue. To these evils 
 we think that a remedy may be applied by the establishment of a 
 Synagogue at the western part of the metropolis, where a revised 
 service may be performed at hours more suited to our habits, and in a 
 manner more calculated to inspire feelings of devotion, where religious 
 instruction may be afforded by competent persons, and where to effect 
 these purposes, Jews generally may form a United Congregation under 
 the denomination of British Jews.” 
 
 It will be remarked that not a word is here said respect¬ 
 ing instrumental music in Synagogues or the abolition of the 
 second days of Festivals ; the two points most objectionable 
 to those who call themselves strict Jews. 
 
 Resolutions in conformity with the above declarations 
 were adopted at that meeting, when it was decided that the 
 new Place of Worship should be named the West London 
 Synagogue of British Jews. 
 
CHAPTER LI. 
 
 THE WEST LONDON CON GREG A TION OF BRITISH JE WS. 
 
 The gentlemen, forming part of the meeting mentioned in 
 our preceding chapter, proceeded to organise themselves 
 as an independent community. They secured the services of 
 an able and eloquent minister in the person of the Rev. D. 
 W. Marks, to whom was entrusted the preparation of a 
 revised hook of prayers ; and they in due course obtained 
 suitable premises which they converted into a Place of 
 Worship. The conservative members of the oldest congre¬ 
 gation in London felt deeply this more than threatened 
 secession ; and the Wardens of the Sephardi Synagogue in 
 their address to the Elders, delivered on the 16th of May 
 1841, thus expressed themselves :—“ Several valued and 
 influential members of our congregation have associated 
 themselves with members of other communities in this city, 
 for the purpose of establishing a Synagogue westward. This 
 is already an infraction of the fundamental law of the con¬ 
 gregation, which has been our bond of union since our 
 admission into this country, now nearly two centuries since ; 
 still it admitted of excuse and palliation in the acknowledged 
 inconvenience experienced by those respected friends and 
 their families from the distance to our Synagogue and the 
 want of accommodation near them. But it is to be appre¬ 
 hended that their contemplated establishment is to be on 
 principles opposed to the received religious institutions and 
 ordinances of our nation, that it is not to be subject to 
 ecclesiastical discipline in religious matters, and that its 
 promoters are engaged in alterations and abridgments of our 
 established ritual to form a new. order of prayers and service 
 unsanctioned by any competent or regularly-constituted 
 authority. Then their proceedings thus assume a character 
 
THE WEST LONDON CONGREGATION. 
 
 3 75 
 
 of so serious a nature as to call for the united interposition 
 of the Jewish nation.” The document closed with the ex¬ 
 pression of “ an anxious and earnest hope ” that some course 
 might he devised, in conjunction with the ecclesiastical 
 authorities, likely to conciliate discordant feelings and pre¬ 
 vailing opinions, and that “by a temperate and well-digested 
 plan of improvement, and above all, by a cordial and sincere 
 approximation of all parties in so good a cause, the peace 
 and union of the congregation may j^et be restored and per¬ 
 manently established.” Unhappily these fond hopes were 
 not realised. It rests not with us to apportion the blame 
 nor to decide which side was most in fault. What is 
 obvious is, that whatever opinion may be entertained as to 
 the nature of the demands made by the authors of the move¬ 
 ment, some of these demands could scarcely be conceded 
 without proper ecclesiastical sanction. 
 
 The following communication was addressed by some mem¬ 
 bers of the Portuguese Congregation to the Elders, under date 
 of 7th Elul 5601—24th August 1841 :— 
 
 “ Gentlemen,— Having so often expressed onr sentiments, both to 
 your respected body and to the meetings of the Yehidim , on the impor¬ 
 tant subject of the improvements, which in our opinion were so much 
 required in our form of public worship as well as on some other points, 
 and having on so many occasions ascertained your total disinclination 
 to attend to our suggestions, or even to consider our views, we cannot 
 entertain the idea that our present communication will excite any surprise 
 in your minds. In fact, we intimated at the meeting of Yehidim in 
 5599 (1839), on the proposition being made for the abrogation of Law 
 No. 1 of the Yehidim , that our object was to establish a new Syna¬ 
 gogue on the principles we had so long advocated, and that we adopted 
 this as the best, if not the only, course for satisfying our own conscien¬ 
 tious scruples, and for avoiding the repetition of discussions tending to 
 excite and foster ill-feelings. We now proceed before opening the 
 intended Place of Worship to lay a statement of the principles on which 
 it is to be conducted. To secure decorum it is essential that the con¬ 
 gregation should assemble before the commencement of prayers and 
 remain until their conclusion. To facilitate this, more convenient 
 hours are appointed for prayers; these being half-past nine in summer 
 and ten in winter. To enable the attention of the public to be con¬ 
 centrated, the service is on no occasion to exceed two hours and a half. 
 It has been found necessary to abridge slightly the prayers; the daily 
 
376 THE V/EST LONDON CONGREGATION 
 
 and Sabbath prayers have already been carefully revised, and consider¬ 
 able progress has been made with the festival prayers. To familiarise 
 the rising generation with a knowledge of the great principles of our 
 holy faith, religious discourses in the English language will form part 
 of the morning service on Sabbaths and holydays. That offerings 
 should interfere as little as possible with the devotional character of 
 the place, and that they should not by occasioning interruptions to the 
 reading of the law mar its effects, we have decided to discontinue 
 calling up to the law. On the three great festivals, voluntary offerings 
 will be made on the return of the law to the Ark, to be accompanied 
 by personal compliments and limited to two objects : the relief of the 
 poor and the support of the establishment. It is not intended by this 
 body to recognise as sacred, days which are not ordained as such in 
 Scripture ; and consequently the service appointed for Holy Convoca¬ 
 tions is to be read only on the days thus designated. Gentlemen of 
 other congregations have associated themselves with us, but we have 
 resolved to read Hebrew after the manner of the Portuguese, believing 
 it to be more correct: and to abolish the useless distinction now exist¬ 
 ing between those termed Portuguese and German Jews, we have given 
 the intended Place of Worship the designation of West London Syna¬ 
 gogue of British Jews. These views have been carried into effect 
 not with any desire to separate, and through a sincere conviction that 
 substantial improvements in the public worship are essential to the 
 weal of our sacred religion, and that they will be the means of handing 
 down to our children and to our children’s children our holy faith in 
 all its purity and integrity. Indeed, we are firmly convinced that 
 their tendency will be to arrest and prevent secession from Judaism, an 
 overwhelming evil which has at various times so widely spread among 
 many of the most respectable families of our community. Most 
 fervently do we cherish the hope that the effect of these improvements 
 will be to inspire a deeper interest in, and a stronger feeling towards, 
 our holy religion, and that their influence on the minds of the youth of 
 either sex will be calculated to restrain them from traversing in their 
 faith, or contemplating for a moment the fearful step of forsaking their 
 religion, so that henceforth no Israelite born may cease to exclaim : 
 1 Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one 1 ’ We antici¬ 
 pate encountering considerable difference, and even a strong prejudice 
 against our proceedings, but we venture to hope that on further con¬ 
 sideration, our motives and intentions will be duly appreciated, and 
 that those kindly feelings which ought to exist between every com¬ 
 munity of Jews, will be maintained between the small body, whose 
 views we had endeavoured to explain, and the other congregations. 
 We desire to continue to make through the Elders a contribution 
 
OF BRITISH JE WS. 
 
 377 
 
 towards the relief of the poor, and to devote some of our time and 
 attention to the superintendence of the excellent institutions connected 
 with the parent Synagogue. Influenced as we are by a sense of duty 
 to offer our assistance in these works of charity towards our poorer 
 brethren, we should derive no small gratification, if in thus co-opera¬ 
 ting with you to satisfy the claims of humanity, we should find that 
 we are thereby establishing a bond and symbol of connection with the 
 old Congregation ; and assuring you that its welfare will never be a 
 subject of indifference with us, we shall but express the words which 
 we utter so frequently in our daily orisons : ‘ May He who maketh 
 peace in His high heavens, in His mercy grant place unto us all, and 
 all Israel.’ ” 
 
 The innovations adverted to in the above document conld 
 not receive the assent of the old orthodox community of 
 Bevis Marks, and the friendly and truly Jewish spirit 
 breathing through that letter was not so fully responded to 
 as might have been expected, owing to alarm at some of the 
 unfortunate changes mentioned. It was considered desirable 
 at that meeting of the Elders to express strongly its views 
 on the question ; and the following lengthy resolution was 
 adopted. After stating the necessity of making a public 
 avowal of the course it was intended to pursue, the resolution 
 said:— 
 
 “This meeting at once declares that in the event of the gentlemen 
 subscribing that letter, or any other member of our congregation com¬ 
 bining to erect a Synagogue westward, and to carry into effect therein 
 the principles they advocate in the said letter, either by admitting as 
 their ritual the book of prayers forwarded to this Room (which has 
 already been proscribed by authority) or introducing or allowing the 
 introduction of changes in our established forms, customs, and usages, 
 save and except under ecclesiastical authority, such acts will be con¬ 
 sidered as a violation of the Askama of Kaal (law of congregation), 
 and render such and every member of our Congregation so acting, 
 virtually excluded from Yahid, and liable to all the penalties of that 
 Askama. Painful indeed will be such proceedings on the part of this 
 Room, for it cannot lose sight of the fact that the members who have 
 addressed them have always been zealous supporters of our ancient 
 congregation and its valued institutions, and that their rank and 
 station in the community entitles them to every consideration ; a 
 severance, therefore, from such valued and respected friends, number 
 ing amongst them some who may trace their descent from the original 
 
3 7 8 THE WEST L ONE) ON CONG RE GA TIO N 
 
 founders of our establishment, must be considered a deep sacrifice of 
 personal feeling to a sense of religious duty. This meeting, therefore, 
 most earnestly exhorts them as brethren, well-intentioned but mistaken 
 in their views, to yield their individual opinions to the united voice of 
 the congregation, to abstain from all objectionable measures, and to 
 recollect that the Yehidim of this congregation have given proofs of a 
 desire to grant them their great desideratum—a Synagogue westward 
 —and let them, above all, consulting their own interests and welfare, 
 not lightly discard the protection of their ancient and parent Congrega¬ 
 tion ; and if they will but seriously reflect on all this, the meeting may 
 yet entertain the hope that the severance so much to be deplored may 
 still be avoided.” 
 
 Both parties, it thus appeared, professed to be animated 
 by mutual good feeling, which no doubt really existed ; never¬ 
 theless the breach between Jew and Jew became wider every 
 day. Nor was the dissatisfaction manifested by Jewish 
 worshippers expressed only by members of the Sephardi 
 Congregation. In April 1842, a meeting of seatholders of 
 several Synagogues was held under the presidency of Mr H. 
 H. Cohen, when a memorial was drawn up to be presented 
 to the respective vestries of the Ashkenazi Congregations. 
 The evils so often mentioned were forcibly pointed out in that 
 document. The then existing system of saying prayers was 
 described as being “ as unaccountable as it is unseemly; as 
 manifestly inconsistent, obviously indecorus, and clearly 
 adverse to that lifting up of the soul in solemn communion 
 with the Creator, which is the effect that prayer is intended 
 to produce.” Various suggestions for the amelioration of 
 public worship were made, stress being especially laid on the 
 introduction of pulpit instruction in English. It was not 
 until years afterwards that some of their recommendations 
 were carried out; and in the meantime several of the 
 memorialists joined the Reform movement. 
 
 In April 1841, when the movement had been openly 
 declared, the vestries of the various city Synagogues resolved 
 that no member of any Place of Worship not conforming as 
 heretofore in religious matters, and not recognising the estab¬ 
 lished ecclesiastical authorities, should be eligible to the office 
 of deputy. In September of the same year the Chief Rabbi 
 and the Beth Din of the German Jews and the Beth Din of 
 
OF BRITISH JE WS. 
 
 379 
 
 tlie Portuguese Jews drew up a declaration against u the 
 forms of prayer used in the West London Synagogue of 
 British Jews, edited by D. W. Marks, printed bj r J. 
 Wertheimer.” This document stated u that the manner and 
 order of the prayers and blessings have been curtailed and 
 altered and otherwise arranged not in accordance with the 
 Oral Law by which we have so long been guided in the per¬ 
 formance of the precepts of the Lord; ” and further it was 
 said “We hereby admonish every person professing the faith 
 of Israel, and having the fear of God in his heart, that he do 
 not use or in any matter recognise the said book of prayer, 
 because it is not in accordance with our Holy Law, and who¬ 
 ever will use it for the purpose of prayer will be accounted 
 sinful.” This declaration was issued on the 24th October ; 
 prior to its publication on the 9th September 1841, a meet¬ 
 ing had been held at the residence of the Rev. Sol Hirschel, 
 attended by the wardens and honorary officers of the several 
 metropolitan Synagogues and by the members of the London 
 Committee of Deputies of British Jews, when the following 
 “ Caution ” was read and approved, and copies of it were 
 forwarded to the Synagogues :— 
 
 “ Information having reached me, from which it appears that certain 
 persons calling themselves British Jews, publicly and in their published 
 book of prayers, reject the Oral Law, I deem it my duty to declare, that 
 according to the laws and statutes held sacred by the whole House of 
 Israel, any person or persons declaring that he or they reject and dc 
 not believe in the authority of the Oral Law, cannot be permitted to 
 have any communion with us Israelites in any religious rite or sacred 
 act. I therefore earnestly entreat and exhort all God-fearing Jews, 
 especially parents, to caution and instruct all persons belonging to our 
 faith that they be careful to attend to this declaration, and that they 
 be not induced to depart from our Holy Laws. 
 
 “ S. Hirschel, Chief Rabbi.” 
 
 The members of the Beth Din of both German and 
 Portuguese Communities countersigned this document. 
 
 We are informed by unimpeachable authorities that the Rev. 
 S. Hirschel, as well as the Rev. D. Meldola, senior Dayan of 
 the Portuguese Congregation, signed the above paper with 
 the greatest reluctance, knowing that it would cause much 
 
3 8o THE WEST LONDON CONGREGATION 
 
 exasperation, that it would sow dissension when peace was 
 sought and desired, and that it wouid tend to convert a 
 temporary difference into an irreconcilable enmity. But the 
 reverend gentlemen yielded to the powerful influences brought 
 to bear upon them. Even after the Rev. S. Hirschel had been 
 induced to affix his signature to the document, he wished to 
 recall it, and at all events he insisted on its being held back. 
 The “ Caution ” was not promulgated for some time. On 
 Saturday, the 22d January 1842, it was read publicly in the 
 principal London Synagogues by their respective secretaries, 
 and accompanied by proclamations from the local authorities 
 to the same effect. We may state that the members of the 
 new Congregation deny altogether the impeachment of having 
 renounced the Oral Law. Professor Marks and Mr Elkin, 
 in the earlier days of the Reform, strenuously maintained 
 the general fidelity of their congregation to Jewish tradition. 
 
 On the 13th January 1842, the members of the Reform 
 party, before they consecrated their House of Prayer, addressed 
 another communication to the Elders of the Spanish and 
 Portuguese Congregation. In this letter the writers expressed 
 their pain and surprise on perceiving that the conciliatory 
 spirit they had displayed in the former missive had met with 
 so little response; that an Askamah (law), called into exist¬ 
 ence by other circumstances, should have been resuscitated, 
 and that a determination should have been formed to render 
 them amenable to all the pains and penalties of the law of 
 Yehidim No. 1 on their assembling in their new House of 
 Prayer for the performance of divine worship. 
 
 The course had been forced upon them of withdrawing at 
 once their names from the list of the Yehidim of the con¬ 
 gregation. They disclaimed any desire for innovation or 
 schism, and only wished to establish a House of Prayer where 
 they might worship their Creator agreeably to the dictates of 
 their own conscience. They professed an ardent love for the 
 law which they desired to transmit intact to their descendants 
 in perpetuity. They refrained from making the remarks 
 they had intended, relative to the part taken by the Beth 
 Din in the condemnation of their prayer-book, but they 
 avoided doing so, only not to enter into irritating topics. 
 Their communication was thus brought to an end:— 
 
3 Sl 
 
 OF BRITISH JE WS. 
 
 “ In conclusion, we earnestly implore Almighty God, who searclieth 
 the inward workings of the heart, to shed His blessing upon every mem¬ 
 ber of the House of Israel, and so to implant His Spirit amongst us, 
 that love, charity, and kindness may ever distinguish the conduct of one 
 Israelite to another. May He cause us ever to bear in mmd that we 
 are all sprung from one stock, that we embrace one faith, acknowledge 
 
 one Law, one God, one Common Parent ! 
 
 “ To all who may doubt the purity of the intentions that have led 
 us to open our Synagogue, we are content to reply in the words of 
 Scripture—‘ The God of gods, the Eternal, the God of gods,, the 
 Eternal, He knoweth and Israel shall know, if in rebellion or if in 
 transgression against the Lord, may we not be saved this day.’ ” 
 
 This touching peroration apparently exercised little influ¬ 
 ence in the deliberations of the Elders, who in their meeting 
 of the 19th January 1842, in moderate but firm language 
 declared, that the withdrawal from Yehidim did not exone¬ 
 rate the parties from the consequences of the infraction of 
 Ascama of ICaal No. 1, which applied to all Jews of the 
 Spanish and Portuguese Communion, whether Yehidim , con¬ 
 gregants, or even strangers residing in the city. 
 
 & The more moderate portion of the Sephardi Congregation 
 regarded the penalty of Herem —excommunication, or ecclesi¬ 
 astical censure—as opposed to the enlightenment of the age 
 and to the spirit of true religion. Unfortunately less tem¬ 
 perate counsels prevailed among the ruling poweis. The 
 propriety of abolishing Herem altogether was proposed in 
 the assembly of Elders, and lost by a single vote. At 
 meetings held on the 26th February and 4th March, a 
 strong resolution against the retiring members was passed 
 and confirmed. 
 
 The offending parties were declared u to have forfeited all 
 claims to the rights and immunities which they enjoyed as 
 members of our community, that the grants made to them 
 of seats in our Synagogue are rescinded and annulled. They 
 are also declaredineligible to act in any religious office or to 
 perform a Mitzvah of any kind in the Congregation. Neither 
 shall any gift or offering be accepted from them, or in 
 respect of them, in any way or under any form whatever, 
 during the time they remain in contumacy ; they shall not 
 be allowed burial in the carreira of our Beth Haim, nor 
 
382 
 
 THE WEST LONDON CONGREGATION 
 
 receive any of the religious rites and ceremonies paid to 
 departed members 'of our communion.” 
 
 We have stated at the beginning of the preceding chapter 
 that we should offer no opinion and pass no comments on 
 the events which we are relating. We shall therefore refrain 
 from inquiring how far the offence justified the punishment, 
 and whether the authorities of the Orthodox Congregations 
 adopted a just, wise, and conciliatory line of conduct. 
 
 On the 27th January 1842, the Reformers consecrated 
 their Place of Worship, formerly a chapel in Burton Street. 
 The Rev. D. W. Marks, now the Rev. Professor Marks, 
 became their spiritual chief. As the members of this com¬ 
 munity increased in numbers and wealth they removed to a 
 larger building in Margaret Street, and subsequently to their 
 present handsome structure in Berkeley Street. At first the 
 members of this congregation were placed at some incon¬ 
 venience with reference to their marriages, by the Board of 
 Deputies declining to certify that the Rev. Mr Marks was 
 the secretary of a Synagogue. Young couples desirous of 
 being joined in wedlock were constrained to appear before 
 the registrar, and when that functionary made them one 
 before the law, they went to their Synagogue and passed 
 through the religious ceremony. Eight or ten years afterwards 
 on the passing of an Act of Parliament called the u Dissenters’ 
 Chapels Bill,” a clause was introduced in the Bill recognising 
 the Reformers’ Place of Worship as a u Synagogue,” and Rev. 
 Mr Marks as its certified secretary, and empowering the 
 authorities of this Synagogue to certify to the secretaries of 
 other Synagogues which might adopt the same ritual. 
 
 The fact that some of their former friends and relatives 
 might be labouring under Ilerem , or religious disabilities was 
 disquieting to the majority of right-thinking members of the 
 Spanish and Portuguese Congregation. Accordingly, on the 
 14th December 1845, at a meeting of the Elders, it was 
 resolved to ascertain whether the members of that Synagogue 
 who seceded in 1842 were or were not lawfully under Ilerem; 
 and as that body had never sanctioned or desired to sanction 
 the enforcement of that penalty, they appointed a committee 
 to consult with the Ecclesiastical Authorities as to the state 
 of the case. Should it appear that such parties were labour- 
 
OF BRITISH JE WS. 3 83 
 
 ing under excommunication, tlie Committee were empowered 
 to adopt such, measures on behalf of the congregation as 
 might he necessary to absolve them from Herem. 
 
 The Committee rendered their report on the 19th April 
 1846. They had consulted the Beth Din, before whom they 
 had laid several documents. It was explained that the 
 Herem denounced in the Askama was for the offence of sepa¬ 
 rating from the Congregation, and would have applied equally 
 had the offenders formed another Congregation under the 
 old ritual, or joined any other Congregation already formed. 
 The religious offence of altering the ritual had already been 
 the subject of ecclesiastical censure, with which it was not 
 the purpose of that inquiry to interfere. The answer from 
 the Beth Din stated that the parties in question were labour¬ 
 ing under Herem , which would remain in force so long as 
 they neglected or refused to abide by the principles of the 
 Jewish religion. So the question remained in abeyance 
 until the beginning of the following year. On the 17th 
 January 1847, at a memorable meeting, the Yehidim re¬ 
 solved that the continuance of Herem was repugnant to the 
 spirit of modern legislation, and earnestly entreated the 
 Elders to devise some means of effectually relieving the 
 parties implicated from Herem and its penalties. At a 
 meeting of the Elders, held on the 28th February 1847, it 
 was determined to comply with the request of the Yehidim, 
 by a majority of fifteen votes to three. The parties who 
 were in Herem were to be relieved from that penalty, 
 subject to the approbation of the gentlemen of the Beth 
 Din ; and a committee was appointed consisting of the 
 Wardens, the Chairman of the Elders, and the Chairman of 
 the Yelndim , to confer with the Beth Din, and to carry out 
 in the nam eand on behalf of the Congregation any religious 
 formality that might be necessary. This resolution, owing 
 to various causes, was delayed in its execution, and Herem was 
 not formally repealed until later. Several gentlemen con¬ 
 tributed by their exertions to the removal of Herem , and 
 among these we may mention Mr H. de Castro and Mr Haim 
 Guedalla. These gentlemen deserve credit for their efforts 
 in this matter. They experienced considerable difficulty in 
 carrying out their pacific intentions, but they eventually sue- 
 
384 the WEST LONDON CONGREGATION 
 
 ceeded in inducing the seceders, with the exception of two, 
 to sign a request to be relieved from Herein. The ecclesias¬ 
 tical authorities performed, on the 9th March 1849, the 
 ceremony requisite to purge the Reformers of Herein , in the 
 presence of Mr H. de Castro and Mr H. Gfuedalla. This 
 act enabled families which had long ceased holding mutual 
 communication, to resume friendly intercourse ; and one of 
 the leaders of the Reformers paid at once a visit to one of 
 the chiefs of the Orthodox party, between whom family ties 
 had not prevented the birth of a bitter religious feud. 
 
 So ended this the most painful episode in modern Anglo- 
 Jewisli history. We in our day can scarcely understand the 
 heart-burnings, the dissensions it caused among a former 
 generation. It is when the difference is small and has arisen 
 between those who were once near and dear to each other, 
 that unhappily the animosity is greatest. Shibboleth 
 does not spare Sibboleth. The Reformers say they would 
 have returned to the ancient Synagogue, even after their 
 own Place of Worship had been opened, if very moderate 
 concessions had been made to them, and if certain acts 
 which they characterised as harsh and unjustifiable had not 
 been perpetrated. The Conservative party aver that those 
 who had left the fold of Israel would never have been satis¬ 
 fied with what religiously could be conceded to them, and 
 that they would have insisted in disregarding traditions held 
 sacred among the Jews, and in adopting practices repugnant 
 to the conscience of the majority of Jews. It is not for 
 us to decide, and the reader doubtless can form his own con¬ 
 clusions without our assistance. What is certain is that 
 most of the reforms asked for by the so-called seceders have 
 been introduced in our days into the Orthodox Congrega¬ 
 tions. The movement, however, has not greatly spread in this 
 country. A Synagogue was subsequently established on nearly 
 the same principles at Manchester, and in 1874 a small tem¬ 
 porary building for a Congregation following a similar ritual 
 was inaugurated in a southern suburb of London. 
 
 Time, the great healer of wounds, has meanwhile effected 
 its work. Calm reflection could not fail in the end to remind 
 all parties that discord, with its train of evil consequences, 
 lias caused great national disasters, and that Israel, at the 
 
OF BRITISH JE WS. 
 
 385 
 
 present age, needs more than ever union and concord in its 
 onward march tow r ards its glorious future destinies. To 
 forget and forgive is a pre-eminent virtue in the Jewish 
 code of ethics; and we are happy to think that all traces of 
 past animosities are fast disappearing, nay, perhaps, have 
 already disappeared. Wise men have agreed to differ in 
 matters of opinion. Germans, Portuguese, and British Jews 
 meet together to promote the interests of Judaism, of Jewish 
 education, charity, and moral progress. They exchange to¬ 
 gether social amenities, they assemble at the same social and 
 festive tables, at the same institutional boards; and if they 
 worship in different Synagogues, and with slightly different 
 forms of prayer, yet they pray to the same God! 
 
CHAPTER LIL 
 
 THE CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS OF THE JEWS. 
 
 The Jews for many years were subjected to so many disquali¬ 
 fications, that they may be said to have possessed neither 
 civil nor political rights. True, the Jews were not confined 
 in a material Ghetto. But their pursuits were so restricted, 
 the scope of their lives was so cramped, that trading, 
 speculating, huckstering, and bartering, necessarily became 
 the principal occupations of their existence. Not only were 
 they considered unfit to have seats in the national Legislature, 
 but they were thought unworthy of dispensing justice as 
 magistrates, and even of pleading for. others in the law 
 courts of the land. As we have seen in a former chapter, 
 to be a Jew was an insuperable bar to a man being permitted 
 to open business premises within the precincts of the City, 
 and even adjuration of the ancient faith did not quite 
 expiate the crime of being born a Jew. Until modern 
 times, the number of Jewish brokers in the City of London 
 was limited to twelve ; and we have already stated that the 
 office was purchased, when a vacancy occurred, by a douceur 
 to the Lord Mayor, varying from £1000 to £2000, according 
 to the needs or exigencies of that high functionary. The 
 last recorded instance of such a bargain took place in 1826, 
 when Mr J. B. Montefiore bought for 1500 guineas from Sir 
 William Magnay, the then Lord Mayor, the medal which 
 formed the title-deed of the privilege, and which had 
 lapsed by the death of the previous owner. Two years 
 afterwards, this absurd limitation as to number was removed, 
 and Lord Mayors ceased to levy a heavy tax on Jewish 
 brokers. Until the year 1832, a Jew could not be admitted 
 to the freedom of the City of London. Accordingly, he was 
 precluded from opening a retail shop, and was debarred from 
 
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 387 
 
 many other rights and privileges. The removal of these 
 disabilities was owing, to a great extent, to the exertions of 
 Mr Charles Pearson, at that time City solicitor, and of several 
 members of the Common Council. The Court of Aldermen 
 indeed has not always been liberally inclined towards the 
 Jews. We are happy, however, to admit that now, for many 
 years past, the Corporation of the City of London has been 
 justly celebrated for its liberal and enlightened policy, and 
 for its complete freedom from intolerance and prejudice. 
 As evidence of this, we have only to advert to the fact that 
 two Jews have filled the Lord Mayor’s chair, and that several 
 have occupied seats in the Courts of Aldermen and of Com¬ 
 mon Council. 
 
 As the Jews during this century progressed in wealth and 
 education, they began to feel their exclusion from civil and 
 political rights, and resolved to struggle manfully to obtain 
 their due. The Board of Deputies, as the representative of 
 Jewish interests, took the matter in hand; and Mr 1ST. M. 
 Rothschild and Mr Isaac Lyon Goldsmid powerfully sup¬ 
 ported with their great influence the acts of this body. The 
 repeal of the Test and Corporation Act in 1828, previous to 
 which all holders of municipal offices were required to take 
 the Sacrament, aroused the hopes of the Jews. In April 
 1829, Mr Rothschild informed the Deputies that he had 
 consulted with the Duke of Wellington, the Lord Chancellor, 
 and other influential persons connected with Government, 
 concerning the disabilities under which the Jews laboured, 
 and he recommended that a petition for their removal should 
 be drawn up to be presented as the opportunity occurred. 
 
 A deputation waited on Lord Bexley (Right Hon. H. 
 Vansittart) and the Duke of Sussex, and both of them 
 promised to favour the petition. This was prepared by Mr 
 Pearce, the Attorney to the Sephardi Congregation, but the 
 application to the Legislature had to be suspended for that 
 session. Lord Bexley, who was a friend of the Jews, had 
 seen the conqueror of Waterloo, and the result of the inter¬ 
 view had been unfavourable. The grounds of objection on 
 the part of the Duke were, that having recently carried so 
 important a measure as the Catholic Relief Bill, which had 
 excited the feelings of all classes of society in the United 
 
3 88 
 
 CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 Kingdom, lie was averse to the creation of renewed hostile 
 feelings against the Government by giving his support to 
 another Bill of the same description during that session. 
 In point of fact, the Catholics, who were strong and nume¬ 
 rous, having obtained a rightful recognition, it was not worth 
 while to render justice to the Jews, who were weak and few 
 in numbers. Lord Bexley believed that the Duke of Wel¬ 
 lington would certainly vote against the Bill if pressed 
 forward, but that if adjourned to another session the Duke 
 would probably give his countenance to it. So the Bill was 
 withdrawn. 
 
 In January 1830, another petition to Parliament was 
 prepared by Messrs Pearce under the direction of Dr 
 Lusliington ; and it was placed in the vestry rooms of all 
 the Synagogues in London for the signature of British- 
 born Jews. A deputation from the Deputies waited once 
 more upon the Duke of Sussex, who gave the kindest pro¬ 
 mises of support. The petition was presented in February 
 by Mr Robert Grant, the member for Inverness, in the 
 Blouse of Commons, and by Lord Bexley in the House of 
 Lords. The Jews of Liverpool had signed a similar 
 memorial, and had entrusted it to Mr Huskisson, their 
 representative in Parliament. Moreover, Mr Huskisson 
 presented a petition from 2000 constituents in Liverpool, 
 including several clergymen of the Church of England, 
 every banker and every merchant of importance and influ¬ 
 ence. Mr Alexander Baring (the late Lord Ashburton) laid 
 before the House a memorial signed by 14,000 bankers, 
 merchants, and traders of the City of London. On the 
 5tli April 1830, Mr Robert Grant moved for leave to bring 
 in a Bill for the Repeal of the Civil Disabilities of the Jews. 
 He stated that the Jews were excluded from practising law 
 and physic, from holding any corporate office, and from being 
 Members of Parliament; and they might be prevented from 
 voting for Members of Parliament if the oaths were tendered 
 to them. 
 
 In some large towns, such as Liverpool and Exeter, they 
 were allowed to enjoy civil rights, but in the Metropolis 
 they could not obtain the freedom of any of the companies, 
 nor exercise any retail trade. The motion was carried. The 
 
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 3 8 9 
 
 Board of Deputies bestirred themselves to obtain a successful 
 issue. A number of petitions signed by Christians in different 
 parts of England were collected; and memorials on behalf 
 of the Emancipation of the Jews were found in most of the 
 London and provincial taverns. A committee of the Deputies 
 sat daily between ten and four o’clock, at the King’s Head 
 in the Poultry. Nevertheless, on the second reading of the 
 Bill on the 23rd May, it was thrown out by 228 noes against 
 165 ayes. The expenses incurred were considerable, the 
 solicitor’s bill alone amounting to little less than £1000, 
 and the costs were divided pro-rata between the various 
 London Synagogues. 
 
 The Board of Deputies passed a vote of thanks to Mr It. 
 Grant for his generous efforts in favour of the Bill; but they 
 resolved to take no further steps on the question during that 
 session. Strange to say, that while the Jews of England 
 were making strenuous efforts to obtain their Emancipation, 
 Mr David Henriques sent from New York a communication 
 to the Board of Deputies, in which he furnished a long list 
 of names of Jews holding official appointments in that city. 
 The new country had been readier to render justice to the 
 Jews and to recognise them as citizens than the old country,. 
 Some small gain, however, was obtained even in England, 
 for Mr Sugden, afterwards Lord St Leonards, offered to 
 bring in a Bill to enable Israelites to hold land. 
 
 In 1833, Mr Grant made another effort in Parliament on 
 behalf of the Jews. On the 17th of April of that year he 
 moved, in a committee of the whole House of Commons : 
 u That it is expedient to remove all civil disabilities affecting 
 His Majesty’s subjects of the Jewish religion, with the like 
 exceptions as are provided by the Catholic Emancipation Act 
 of 1829, with reference to Her Majesty’s subjects professing 
 the Roman Catholic religion.” Sir R. Inglis, a consistent 
 foe to Jewish Emancipation, spoke in opposition to the 
 motion, which was supported by Mr Macaulay, Mr Hume, 
 and Mr O’Connell; and it was agreed to without a division. 
 On the 22nd May Mr Grant moved the second reading of the 
 Bill, which called forth some discussion. Again, honest, 
 narrow-minded Sir Robert Inglis earnestly resisted the Bill, 
 which was as warmly defended by Dr Lushington; and it was 
 
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 390 
 
 passed by a large majority. The Bill was duly read a third 
 time, and it found its way to the House of Lords under the 
 patronage of Lord Bexley. On the 1st August 1833, this 
 liberal-minded nobleman moved the second reading of the 
 Bill before the hereditary legislators of Great Britain. The 
 Archbishop of Dublin, the Bishop of Chichester, the Lord 
 Chancellor, and the Duke of Sussex expressed themselves 
 strongly in favour of the Bill; while His Grace of Canter¬ 
 bury, the Bishop of London, and the Earl of Winchelsea 
 pronounced against it. Dr Whately, the Archbishop of 
 Dublin, made a logical, impartial, and masterly exposition 
 of the case ; and the Duke of Sussex brought before the 
 Upper House a petition, signed by 7000 inhabitants of West¬ 
 minster, who desired the Jews to obtain their rights. The 
 Dukes of Gloucester and Wellington stated that they could 
 not consent that persons who denounced Christianity should 
 be admitted into the Legislature. The noes conquered, and 
 the Bill was thrown out by 104 votes against 54 in the 
 affirmative. 
 
 In 1834, another effort was made by the friends of religious 
 tolerance to obtain a recognition for the rights of the Jews. 
 A “ Jewish Disabilities Bill” passed through its various 
 stages in the Lower House, and was sent to the Upper House. 
 On the second reading it was supported by Lord Bexley and 
 the Earl of Badnor, and opposed by the Earl of Malmesbury, 
 the Earl of Winchelsea, and the Marquis of Westmeath, who 
 carried the day. The Bill was lost by 130 votes against 38, 
 which were all that the Bill could obtain in that august 
 assembly. 
 
 In the Parliamentary Session of 1836, a great number of 
 petitions were presented to the Legislature in favour of re¬ 
 moving the Civil Disabilities of the Jews. The latter thought 
 the moment favourable to success, and under the guidance of 
 the Board of Deputies, strenuous endeavours were made to 
 achieve the long-sought-for end. The chairman of that 
 body, Mr Moses, now Sir Moses Montefiore, asked for the 
 co-operation of Mr I. L. Goldsmid and his son, Mr F. H. 
 Goldsmid, who were called in to aid the Board with their 
 counsels and influence. The Board placed themselves in 
 communication with the Bight Hon. J. Spring Bice, after- 
 
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 39i 
 
 wards Lord Monteagle, who was preparing a Bill for the 
 Belief of Jewish Disabilities ; and while thanking him for 
 his kindness, they offered to afford him any information he 
 might require as to the sentiments of the Jews; they being 
 the only authorised body by which the opinions of the Jews 
 could be expressed. A petition was drawn up and entrusted 
 to Dr Whately, the Archbishop of Dublin, who had always 
 manifested a friendly spirit for the Jews, to be presented to 
 the House of Lords. In this document it was urged that 
 those Britons who professed the Jewish religion felt it a 
 great hardship that they should be excluded from stations of 
 trust, by the forms of administering oaths employed on some 
 occasions ; and they humbly prayed to be placed in the same 
 condition, as to all rights and franchises, with the other sub¬ 
 jects of Her Majesty dissenting from the Established Church. 
 The Bill for the Removal of Jewish Disabilities, which was 
 introduced by the Bight Hon. J. Spring Bice, was, as on 
 former occasions, carried through the House of Commons. 
 Mr Alderman Thompson, a high Conservative, presented to 
 the House of Commons a prayer for the removal of Jewish 
 Disabilities, signed by 2000 burgesses and inhabitants of 
 Sunderland. Unfortunately, after the first reading it was 
 abandoned in the House of Peers, partly through the late¬ 
 ness of the season, and partly through the small probability 
 of its meeting with success. 
 
 Meanwhile as the struggle for the admission of the Jews 
 into Parliament was proceeding, an important step towards 
 the relief of the Civil Disabilities of the Jews had been 
 gained, by the introduction in 1835 of the Sheriffs’ Declara¬ 
 tion Bill. The credit of this measure was due to Sir J. 
 Campbell, afterwards Lord Campbell, and then Attorney- 
 General. During that year, for the first time in English 
 history, a Jew, in the person of Mr David Salomons, attained 
 the dignity of Sheriff. That office in London was a double 
 office, consisting of the shrievalty for London, which was a 
 Corporation office, and the shrievalty for Middlesex, which is 
 a Crown office. On the repeal of the Test and Corporation 
 Act in 1828, a declaration was substituted for the Sacrament, 
 which declaration could not be made by Jews, owing to its 
 concluding with the words “ On the true faith of a Christian.” 
 
392 
 
 CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 This declaration had to be made either before entering upon 
 the office or immediately afterwards ; while for Crown offices 
 the declaration was usually made six months or a year after 
 entering the office. The result was, that persons unable to 
 make the declaration were practically excluded from the office 
 of sheriff for the county of Middlesex, an office which in 
 itself did not necessitate the previous taking of the declara¬ 
 tion. Sir John Campbell, perceiving the inconsistency of 
 exacting for a non-corporate office a declaration which should 
 have been required only for a corporate office, introduced the 
 Sheriffs’ Declaration Bill to set the question at rest. The 
 Jews were not specially named in the Act. Nevertheless it 
 enabled the followers of that faith to enter into the office 
 without violating their scruples of conscience. After Mr D. 
 Salomons, Sir Moses Montefiore in 1837 graced the dignity. 
 Sir Moses was knighted at the same time. In 1841 Queen 
 Victoria conferred upon him, as a mark of royal favour in 
 commemoration of his unceasing exertions on behalf of his 
 injured and persecuted brethren in the East, and the Jewish 
 nation at large, the right to bear supporters to his coat of 
 arms, a privilege usually limited to peers of the realm. 
 
 The shrievalty appeared for some time the only office to 
 which a Jew might aspire. In the Parliamentary Session of 
 1837-8, a Bill was presented to the House of Commons for 
 the purpose of altering the declaration contained in the Act 
 9 Geo. IV. cap. 17, to be made by persons on their admis¬ 
 sion to municipal offices. This Bill, however, limited the 
 indulgence to Quakers and Moravians. The Board of 
 Deputies made an effort to obtain an extension of the pro¬ 
 visions of the Bill to the Jews. Sir Moses Montefiore placed 
 himself in communication with Lord John Bussell, and 
 expressed a hope that the declaration might be so amended 
 as to be rendered available to all classes of Her Majesty’s 
 subjects. Lord John Bussell, as might have been expected 
 from so consistent a friend to civil and religious freedom, 
 promised his best support to the request of Sir Moses 
 Montefiore. Mr Baines, the originator of the Bill, expressed 
 himself favourable to the claims of the Jews, but he declined 
 to include them in the Bill, for such proceeding would be 
 fatal to its success. He had done so in the Bill proposed in 
 
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. 
 
 393 
 
 the previous session, and the consequence was, that it was 
 violently opposed and delayed in the House of Commons, 
 and finally thrown out by the Lords. On the 4th December 
 1837, on the second reading of the Bill, Mr Grote, the 
 historian, and member for the City of London, moved that 
 the benefit of the Bill be extended to all classes of Her 
 Majesty’s subjects, and the Jews were especially mentioned 
 by him. Most of the speakers that followed upheld these 
 liberal views. Sir J. Duke, who had been Sheriff for London 
 and Middlesex, passed a high eulogy on his predecessor 
 in the office (Mr D. Salomons) and on his successor (Sir 
 Moses Montefiore), and he bore testimony to the high worth 
 of the Jewish race generally. Mr Pattison, Capt. Pechell, 
 Mr Geo. F. Young, Mr O’Connell, Mr Hume, and Lord 
 John Russell spoke in the same sense. Even Sir R. Inglis, 
 the most uncompromising foe to Jewish Emancipation, ex¬ 
 pressed his great pleasure in admitting all the high personal 
 qualifications of the two excellent individuals who had been 
 alluded to by gentlemen on the other side. He opposed the 
 proposition, however, on the ground that those who did not 
 believe in a common Christianity should not legislate for it. 
 Mr Baines was not averse to the relief of the Jews, which on 
 the contrary he thought desirable ; but on that occasion he 
 did not mean to go further than Quakers and Moravians, 
 though he consented to introduce the term Separatists, thus 
 including another sect of Christians. On a division, Mr 
 Grote’s amendment was negatived by 156 ayes against 172 
 noes. And so the Jews fared no better than before. 
 
CHAPTER LIII. 
 
 REMOVAL OF JEWISH DISABILITIES . 
 
 Prior to 184J bat little progress had been made towards 
 the abolition of the especial restrictions hemming in the 
 Jews. The only point gained by them was the passing of 
 Sir J. Campbell’s Bill in 1835, which enabled David Salo¬ 
 mons to serve as Sheriff. The Jews were still excluded from 
 municipal offices and from Parliament. When in 1835 the 
 electors of the Ward of Aldgate chose Mr D. Salomons as 
 their representative at the Court of Aldermen, that body 
 annulled the election; for the first Hebrew Alderman was 
 unable to take the required declaration which was repugnant 
 to his conscience. In 1841, Mr Divett introduced a Bill in 
 the House of Commons “ for the relief of persons of the 
 Jewish religion elected to municipal offices,” which passed 
 through its various stages in that assembly, but was rejected 
 at the second reading by the higher, if not more enlightened, 
 body forming the second estate of the realm. In 1844, the 
 liverymen of Portsoken honoured Mr D. Salomons by elect¬ 
 ing him as Alderman for their ward. The election had the 
 same result as before, the Court of Aldermen pronouncing 
 it null and void. However, soon afterwards that Court 
 displayed a more liberal spirit, and made no further objec¬ 
 tions when Lord Lvndhurst, the Lord Chancellor, introduced 
 in 184o into the House of Lords a measure relieving the 
 Jews fiom this disability. This Act, which became law with¬ 
 out opposition, substituted a declaration of allegiance for the 
 declaration imposed by the Act 9 George IV. cap. 17. The 
 declaration fixed by the Act of George IV. was itself a sub¬ 
 stitute for the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, but could not 
 be taken by a Jew, as it concluded with the words “ On 
 the true faith of a Christian.” 
 
REMO VAL OF JE WISH DISABILITIES. 395 
 
 The benefits conferred by the Act in question were further 
 extended to Jews by the Act of 21 and 22 Vic. cap. 48, in 
 all cases in which Jews were required to make the declara¬ 
 tion contained in the Act of Geo. IV. This Act of Victoria 
 substitutes one oath for the oaths of abjuration, allegiance, 
 and supremacy, which were imposed by an Act of 6 Geo. III., 
 and enables Jews to take such oath, omitting the concluding 
 and to them objectionable words. Before the passing of the 
 Act of 1845, the oath and the declarations were both required 
 of all persons holding any office, civil and military, or any 
 place of emolument or trust under the Crown. The oath 
 alone was deemed sufficient for all persons filling offices at 
 either of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and 
 from all foundation scholars and exhibitioners at either of 
 the Universities ; while the declaration only was demanded 
 from all persons occupying any office or employed in any 
 corporation. 
 
 Mr Phineas Levi, of Devonport, was the first Jew who held 
 municipal office in England; and Mr, now Sir B. S. Phillips, 
 was the first Jewish Common Councilman elected in London. 
 Due credit must be awarded to these gentlemen for their 
 efforts in raising the status of their co-religionists in this 
 country. The attainment of office was not so easy then as it 
 has since become, and to reach even a comparatively humble 
 dignity Mr Levi, and especially Mr Phillips, must have under¬ 
 gone much anxiety and surmounted considerable obstacles. 
 Many Israelites have since achieved civic honours, and have 
 become useful and trusted members of the corporation. 
 They have invariably borne the offices, to which they were 
 appointed by the votes of their Christian fellow-countrymen, 
 with modesty, yet with liberality and dignity. Several 
 Jewish gentlemen, too, received Her Majesty’s Commission of 
 the Peace under the Act, and we may name Baron M. de 
 Rothschild, for Bucks; Sir I. L. Goldsmid, Bart., for Middle¬ 
 sex ; Sir Moses Montefiore and Sir D. Salomons, for Kent; 
 Sir B. S. Phillips, for several counties; Mr J. M. Montefiore, 
 for Sussex ; Mr Benj. Cohen, for Surrey; and Mr Emanuel 
 Lousada, for Devonshire. Some of these gentlemen, how¬ 
 ever, had already been appointed magistrates before, and 
 they had taken office under the Indemnity Act, which was 
 
39 ^ REMOVAL OF JEWISH DISABILITIES. 
 
 annually passed, and which afforded exemption in some 
 instances when only an oath was required. Mr D. Salomons 
 in 1845, to commemorate his former election to the office of 
 Sheriff, and as an acknowledgment of the honour conferred 
 upon him, founded a scholarship in the city of London 
 School. Mr Salomons conveyed to the trustees of that 
 institution £1666, 13s. 4d., 3 per cent, consols, to establish 
 an exhibition of £50 per annum, open to members of every 
 religion, towards providing a maintenance of four years at 
 either Oxford, Cambridge, the London University, or King’s 
 College, London. 
 
 The bar had at this period already admitted Jews to its 
 privileges. The first Jewish barrister was Mr, now Sir F. 
 II. Groldsmid, who was called to the Chancery Bar on 31st 
 January in the year 1833; the second being Mr John Simon, 
 LL.B., of Jamaica, now Mr Serjeant Simon, M.P. for 
 Dewsbury, who was summoned to the Common Law Bar by 
 the Hon. Society of the Middle Temple in November 1842. So 
 many Jews have since that period attained forensic honours 
 in England, that it would be difficult as well as needless to 
 enumerate them here. 
 
 In 1846 the “ Beligious Opinions Relief Bill” became 
 a law of the land. This Act began by repealing the Acts of 
 Elizabeth enforcing attendance at church, all Acts requiring 
 schoolmasters and tutors to obtain a bishop’s licence, and the 
 exception against Jews contained in the Naturalisation Act 
 of 23 and 24 G-eo. III. The Bill then enacted u that all Her 
 Majesty’s subjects professing the Jewish religion, in respect 
 of their schools, places of religious worship, education, and 
 charitable purposes and the property held therewith, should 
 be subject to the same laws as Her Majesty’s Protestant 
 subjects dissenting from the Church of England.” It also 
 provided “ that there should be extended to them (the Jews) 
 the protection of the law against the wilful, malicious, and 
 contemptuous disturbance of religious assemblies and 
 teachers.” 
 
 A Jew could now become an Alderman, a Sheriff, or a 
 Magistrate. He could administer the laws, but he could not 
 participate in making them. Numerous and prolonged were 
 the efforts necessary to break the last barrier of intolerance. 
 
REMO VAL OF JE WISH DISABILITIES. 
 
 397 
 
 The first Jew who endeavoured to penetrate into Parliament 
 was Mr D. Salomons, who in 1837 canvassed the constituency 
 of Shoreham. This attempt led to no result. During the 
 general election of 1847, Baron Lionel de Rothschild became 
 a candidate for the City of London. The Liberal party 
 strenuously supported his cause, though it was well known 
 that a Jew could not take his seat in the House of Commons. 
 There were nine candidates on this occasion for the honour 
 of representing the City in the Legislature. The Jews 
 naturally struggled hard to give a good position in the poll 
 to their candidate. A body calling itself the Jewish Asso¬ 
 ciation for the Removal of Civil and Religious Disabilities 
 issued an address to the electors and inhabitants of the City 
 couched in eloquent language, and it is certain that the 
 sympathies of friends of religious toleration were enlisted in 
 favour of Baron Rothschild. The Baron was elected after 
 an arduous contest; but he only became a nominal legislator, 
 for he could not vote in consequence of the required oath. 
 There was no direct prohibition to the admission of Jews 
 into Parliament: possibly as some of the opponents to their 
 Emancipation asserted, because it was never dreamt that 
 Jews would claim such a privilege. Only all new members 
 were required to take the oath of allegiance which had been 
 directed against another class of religionists, and which ended 
 in the customary form objectionable to a Jew. 
 
 To obviate the difficulty, Lord John Russell, on the 16th 
 December 1847, moved in the House of Commons u That the 
 House resolve itself into a Committee on the Removal of 
 Civil and Religious Disabilities affecting Her Majesty’s Jewish 
 subjects.” Lord John Russell made an able and exhaustive 
 speech, and the motion was carried by 256 to 186 votes. 
 The Bill brought in, received in the second reading 277 
 against 204 votes, and at its third reading it was adopted by 
 234 against 173 votes. Sir Robert Peel, who had at first 
 declared himself against the Bill, finally altered his opinion ; 
 and he fully explained to the House the reasons that had 
 induced him to favour the proposition of Lord John Russell, 
 and had placed him in painful collision with many of those 
 friends with whom he had always acted. The House of 
 Lords took a different view from the House of Commons, 
 
398 REMOVAL OF JEWISH DISABILITIES. 
 
 and at tlie second reading the Bill was lost by 163 to 128 
 votes. Lord Lansdowne had been sponsor to the Bill in 
 the Upper House, and Dr Thirlwall, Bishop of St David’s, 
 warmly supported it in a speech remarkable for critical acu¬ 
 men, research, and impartiality. Moreover, Lord Brougham, 
 the advocate of liberty, gave his powerful eloquence to 
 the Jews. On the other side the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 mildly spoke against the Bill, and the Earl of Winchelsea 
 more strenuously opposed it. But the bitterest and most 
 uncompromising foes to the measure were Lord Stanley 
 (late Earl of Derby), the Bishop of Oxford, and the Earl of 
 Ellenborough. In the House of Commons, Sir B. Inglis, 
 Lord Ashley (Lord Shaftesbury), Sir Thomas Acland, Mr 
 Uewdegate, Mr Stafford, and Mr Walpole foresaw the direst 
 calamities from the admission of the Jews into Parliament. 
 Mr Gladstone, Mr Disraeli, and Mr W. P. Wood (Lord 
 Hatherley), on the contrary, looked upon the measure as a 
 simple act of right and of justice, only likely to render still 
 more loyal and more attached to the throne, a section of the 
 community already remarkable for its good conduct and 
 patriotism. The arguments on both sides of the question 
 have been urged so many times since that period, and they 
 must be so fresh in the mind of the reader, that it would be 
 tedious and unnecessary to repeat them. Mr Faudel pub¬ 
 lished a masterly reply to the allegations of Sir B. Inglis; 
 and the alleged fear of Judaising the Legislature, by permitting 
 half a dozen Jews to take their seats in an assembly com¬ 
 posed of 658 members, disappeared under the weight of well- 
 deserved ridicule. A medal, in commemoration of the services 
 rendered to their cause by Lord John Bussell, was struck by 
 some grateful members of the Jewish community. 
 
 Mr David Salomons, not deterred by the unsuccessful re¬ 
 sult of the election of Baron Bothschild, displaj^ed his public 
 spirit by coming forward as candidate for the borough of 
 Greenwich in 1851. Having secured his return to Parlia¬ 
 ment, Mr Salomons entered the House of Commons,, and 
 insisted on taking the oath on the Old Testament, and without 
 the concluding words. He then ventured to take his seat; 
 he spoke and voted upon a division on the very question of 
 his right to remain in the House. Many members and the 
 
REMO VAL OF JE WISH DISABILITIES . 
 
 399 
 
 Speaker himself loudly denounced his conduct; while a 
 number of other members, among whom were Lord John 
 Russell and Mr Bethell (Lord Westbury), strongly supported 
 him. Mr Salomons was ultimately constrained to withdraw ; 
 and an action was brought against him in the Court of 
 Exchequer (Miller v. Salomons) for the recovery of a penalty 
 of £500, alleged to have been incurred by him for voting 
 without being duly sworn. After a lengthy argument this 
 action was decided for the plaintiff, when the defendant 
 appealed to the Exchequer Chamber, where the case was 
 reargued and the previous verdict confirmed. The judges 
 present on that occasion were Chief Baron Pollock, Baron 
 Parke, Baron Alderson, and Baron Martin. Mr Baron 
 Martin, it may perhaps be remembered, differed from his 
 brother Barons, and upheld the claim of Mr Salomons. 
 
 Several Bills for the repeal of Jewish Disabilities were 
 again brought before Parliament at different periods, but 
 with the same result as in the first attempt in 1847. The 
 House of Commons invariably passed the Bill; while, the 
 Upper House, in direct opposition to the will of the people, 
 gave grounds to certain enemies of religious freedom to thank 
 Heaven with the Duke of Wellington that there was still a 
 House of Lords. Finally in 1858 an Act became law (21 and 
 22 Yic. cap. 49), which empowered the House to modify the 
 oath required of members, by omitting in the case of Jews the 
 concluding words of the oath. Baron Rothschild assumed 
 his seat in Parliament for the first time on the 26th of 
 July 1858. Two years afterwards, by the exertions of the 
 Jewish members, another Act was passed (23 and 24 Yic. 
 cap. 63), dispensing in the case of oaths to be taken by 
 Jews with the words “ On the true faith of a Christian,” in 
 certain cases not comprised in any of the former Acts. 
 Another Act beneficial to Jews also became law (29 and 30 
 Yic. cap. 22), abolishing for many offices the declaration re¬ 
 quired by the Act 8 and 9 Yic. cap. 52, and providing an in¬ 
 demnity for those who had omitted to make such declaration. 
 
 Happily in our day a Jew is scarcely subject to any prac¬ 
 tical disqualifications. Jews have been considered worthy 
 of filling positions of trust. The highest legal offices, with 
 the exception of that which entitles the incumbent to preside 
 
400 
 
 REMO VAL OF JE WISH DISABILITIES. 
 
 over the deliberations of the House of Lords, and to carry the 
 great seal of England, are within the reach of Jews. The 
 Mastership of the Lolls is worthily borne by a Jew, and we shall 
 probably soon see a Jew occupy a seat in the Common Law 
 Bench. Several constituencies have returned Jewish repre¬ 
 sentatives. Social prejudices have disappeared and are dis¬ 
 appearing ; and the Jew, like the member of any other sect, 
 may till such place as he wins by his industry and his talents. 
 
 The cause of Jewish Emancipation was materially assisted, 
 and a favourable issue was hastened, by the unwearied exer¬ 
 tions of some eminent members of the community, who made 
 sacrifices of time and wealth to promote the noble aim they 
 had in view. The great philanthropist, Sir Moses Montefiore, 
 did much to secure to the Jews their civil and political rights, 
 albeit his unceasing efforts were principally devoted to their 
 protection from oppression, to their enjoyment of religious 
 freedom, and to the improvement of their general condition 
 in England and in foreign countries. The services rendered 
 by the Gfoldsmid family to the removal of Jewish Disabilities 
 are of high importance. Sir I. L. Goldsmid and his son, Mr 
 F. H. Goldsmid, worked strenuously and zealously on behalf 
 of their co-religionists. Sir I. L. Goldsmid, in conjunction 
 with Mr Apsley Pellatt and other members of the Common 
 Council, contributed materially to the admission of Jews to 
 the freedom of the City of London. He zealously urged for¬ 
 ward the several Bills brought at different periods before the 
 House of Commons for the relief of Jewish Disabilities, and 
 he spared neither labour nor expense to secure a successful 
 issue. Mr F. H. Goldsmid practically demonstrated that a 
 Jew might be called to the bar : and he wrote several able 
 pamphlets on behalf of Jewish Emancipation. The numerous 
 services rendered by Sir F. H. Goldsmid to the community 
 in latter times are too recent to need recalling to the mind 
 of the reader. 
 
 The late Sir David Salomons was the first Jew who 
 obtained the post of Sheriff. He struggled for the civil 
 and political rights of the Jews ; he worked hard for the 
 aldermanic gown, and we have already spoken of the great 
 services he rendered to the cause of civil and religio-us liberty 
 by his election for Greenwich in 1851, and his bold proceed- 
 
4oi 
 
 REMOVAL OF JEWISH DISABILITIES. 
 
 ings in the House of Commons. Ho man deserves more of 
 his brethren than the late Sir D. Salomons, of whom the 
 Times said: “At last we have for the first time a Lord 
 Mayor who can speak the Queen’s English with propriety.” 
 Due credit must also be awarded to Baron L. de Rothschild 
 for his repeated efforts in the same cause, and to Alderman 
 Sir Benjamin Phillips, who has shown to the world that a 
 Jewish Lord Mayor may make an excellent civic magistrate, 
 and may occupy with dignity and becoming modesty the 
 highest office in the wealthiest Corporation in the world. We 
 must not omit to give honourable mention also to Mr Henry 
 h audel and Dr Barnard Man Oven, who by their energies 
 and talents materially contributed to a successful issue. 
 Some of these able champions of civil and religious freedom 
 are now in a region where all spirits commune alike before 
 their Creator. But those who happily are still amongst 
 their families may look round with pride, and see the posi¬ 
 tion their co-religionists have achieved, as they think of their 
 early struggles for what was deemed by many as almost 
 beyond the reach of probability. 
 
 2 c 
 
CHAPTER LIY. 
 
 THE JEWISH PRESS. 
 
 For many years the Jews dwelt in England contented to 
 remain in obscure silence, and without the smallest endea¬ 
 vour to make their voices heard. As this century advanced, 
 and the Jews progressed in numbers, in affluence, and in 
 enlightenment, the want began to be felt of a press which 
 should serve to make known the requirements of the Hebrew 
 community, and should prove a bond of union between its 
 different branches. In 1822, three or four enterprising 
 young men resolved to establish a medium for the circula¬ 
 tion of Jewish news, and the first number of the publication 
 was announced for the 1st January 1823. The advent of a 
 newspaper written by Jews for Jews was expected with some 
 curiosity, which was set at rest when the twopenny postman 
 on New Year’s Day punctually left the Hebrew Intelligencer 
 at the doors of intending subscribers. A copy of this 
 curiosity of literature lies before us at this moment. It 
 bears the same resemblance to the Jewish Chronicle of 1874 
 as the London Chronicle of a century ago bears to the Times 
 of to-day. The Hebrew Intelligencer is a solitary sheet of a 
 small quarto size, and was sold for the sum of sixpence. 
 On the front page of the first number we perceive an Address 
 to the Readers, from which we gather that the journal was to 
 be published monthly. The editors speak of the publication 
 as “ a work novel in its nature, and we trust, amusing and 
 useful in its tendency.” 
 
 The readers are also informed that the writers in the new 
 journal were not moved by a spirit of speculation, for they 
 purposed devoting the gains derivable from the enterprise, 
 after payment of printing and other expenses, to some 
 charitable institution. 
 
THE JE WISH PRESS. 
 
 403 
 
 This address is followed by an essay very much in the 
 style of Queen Anne’s time. 
 
 We then come to the news of the day. We learn that 
 the annual dinner of the Society for the distribution of 
 bread, meat, and coals to the Jewish poor during the 
 winter months had been postponed, owing to a number of 
 tickets having been returned by the subscribers. Happily 
 such an untoward occurrence is impossible in our days. 
 Indifference to the calls of charity is one of the things that 
 have been changed since that time. After some editorial 
 comments on this subject, we meet with a short article 
 headed “ Proposal of Mr Rothschild to the Committee of 
 the Great Synagogue.” We gather from it that Mr Roths¬ 
 child (of whom we have spoken in a preceding chapter) had 
 suggested to the authorities of the Duke’s Place Synagogue 
 the establishment of a fund for advancing to the Jewish 
 industrious poor sums of money to be repaid in small instal¬ 
 ments. Mr Rothschild had liberally offered to subscribe 
 £500. We are unable to say whether the fund was actually 
 called into existence, but if so it was certainly not placed 
 on a sound and useful footing. Then under the title of 
 Miscellanies, we have a number of short paragraphs giving 
 scraps of information of a personal nature. The following 
 paragraph we give in extenso , as a specimen of the kind of 
 news likely to have been interesting to our grandfathers, or 
 rather to our grandmothers :— 
 
 “ We are informed that Edward Goldsmid, Esq. of Finsbury Square, 
 is about leaving that neighbourhood for Park Lane, where he has 
 purchased an elegant mansion, which it is supposed with the furniture 
 will cost £10,000.” 
 
 Finally we have births and deaths. Among the latter we 
 perceive the following :—- 
 
 “ At his house in Finsbury Square, Asher Goldsmid, Esq., aged 70 .” 
 
 “ On Thursday, 26 th December, Rabbi Luria, aged 76 .—(Mr Luria 
 was Senior Dayan in the Sephardi Congregation).” 
 
 We cannot tell whether the sanguine expectations of the 
 editors of the Hebrew Intelligencer as to the financial success 
 of the venture would have been realised. Their philan¬ 
 thropic designs were certainly frustrated; a great man in 
 
404 
 
 THE JE WISH PRESS. 
 
 the community considered himself aggrieved by some re¬ 
 marks made concerning him. He exercised some pressure 
 on the printer, J. Wertheimer of Leman Street; and after 
 the issue of three numbers the Hebrew Intelligencer came to 
 a sudden and untimely end. 
 
 A more serious and important effort to establish a Jewish 
 publication was made in 1835 by the Rev. M. J. Raphall, an 
 accomplished scholar, whose name we have already men¬ 
 tioned. This gentleman, in his Hebrew Review and Maga¬ 
 zine of Rabbinical Literature , aimed at fostering a love for 
 the higher branches of Jewish literature among his co¬ 
 religionists. The Hebrew Review was a monthly magazine ; 
 and taking no cognizance of the small talk of the day, or 
 even of communal events, it devoted its columns to disquisi¬ 
 tions on learned Jewish authors of past times ; to essays of 
 a philological, exegetical, theological, and literary nature, 
 scarcely likely to be attractive to a circle of promiscuous 
 readers. The Hebrew Review was written for the few. It 
 did not seek popularity, and with all its merits it certainly 
 did not achieve it. It continued its career until 1840, when 
 the publication expired for want of support. The magazine 
 was revived in 1859 under the title of the Hebrew Review 
 and Magazine for Jewish Literature , but we do not think 
 that much success attended its re-appearance. 
 
 The Voice of Jacob was the first Anglo-Jewish journal 
 which offered a record of passing events. It was started for 
 the promotion of certain objects, such as the training of a 
 Jewish ministry; the organisation of desultory charities; 
 educational union; the championship and defence of 
 Judaism at home and abroad ; the interchange of 
 Jewish opinions with other countries, &c. The founder 
 of the Voice of Jacob still survives, and in deference to his 
 known desire, we refer rather to his work than to his indi¬ 
 viduality. Several accomplished Hebrew gentlemen, all men 
 well known in their community, assembled together at a 
 conference, to meet Mr. J. A. Franklin, who had invited 
 them to attend. They were Mr Sampson Samuel, the Rev. 
 D. de Sola, the Rev. M. J. Raphall, and Dr A. Benisch. 
 Mr Franklin had undertaken to provide funds for the estab¬ 
 lishment of the journal, which was to be conducted by the 
 
THE JEWISH PRESS. 
 
 405 
 
 Rev. D. de Sola and the Rev M. J. Raphall. However, 
 these two ministers withdrew immediately from the enter- 
 
 V 
 
 prise, owing to a fear of wounding certain susceptibilities. 
 
 The journal made its appearance on the 16th September 
 1841, and it continued its unbroken course for five eventful 
 years, 5602 to 5606 a.m., inclusive. The first number con¬ 
 tained, in addition to the contributions of Jacob , its editor 
 and proprietor, some verses by u S. S.” (Sampson Samuel), 
 an essay on the vocation of the British Jews by a 66 For¬ 
 eigner 99 (Dr Beniscli), and an article proving that Chris¬ 
 tianity, not Judaism, had first incurred the calumny of using 
 human blood sacrificially, by u T. T.” (Professor Theodores). 
 All literary aid was, and continued to be for some time, 
 gratuitous. The undertaking was in no sense a commercial 
 one. Pecuniary losses were foreseen from the beginning, 
 though after a time they were relieved to some extent by a 
 guarantee fund, originated by the late Hananel de Castro. 
 Eventually the journal, except for some of the literary work, 
 became self-supporting. Its founder, after five years of 
 incessant labour, was called upon to proceed to the continent 
 on a filial mission, when he transferred the copyright to Mr 
 H. Guedalla, and Mr Henry Jessel. Dr Beniscli was to have 
 conducted the Voice of Jacob , but the combination did not 
 work well. After the issue of one or two numbers under 
 the new proprietorship, the Voice of Jacob ceased to appear. 
 
 The mission of the Jewish Press, always high, had an 
 especially extended scope at that period. Those were stirring 
 times among the Jews. There was a division in the com¬ 
 munity. Party spirit was rife, and differences of opinion 
 were rendered more irreconcilable by intemperance of lan¬ 
 guage and a spirit of intolerance. There was peace to be 
 restored in Israel, there was goodwill and amity to be preached 
 to all parties, and mutual concessions to be urged. Then 
 the Jewish Press had the opportunity of becoming the medium 
 of communication between Judaism and Christianity, between 
 the descendants of the patriarchs and the outer world. 
 There were civil and political rights to be claimed, and the 
 barriers of disqualification encircling the Jews to be re¬ 
 moved. 
 
 In most of these directions did the Voice of Jacob labour. 
 
406 
 
 THE JE WISH PRESS. 
 
 That journal was an advocate of authority as based on 
 Jewish tradition, but was far from favouring religious fana¬ 
 ticism. It made known to sincere Christians the religious 
 belief of the Jews ; and in a remarkable instance it altered 
 a zeal for conversion to Christianity into a staunch friend¬ 
 ship for Israel. It demonstrated the fitness of Jews for civil 
 and religious equality, which was to be considered, not as a 
 boon to an excluded race, but as a gain to the nation at 
 large. The Voice of Jacob made for itself some reputation in 
 different quarters of the globe. It was reprinted at Sydney, 
 translated into Judeo-Spanish at Gibraltar, and followed in 
 other parts of the world. 
 
 Soon after the establishment of that journal, Dr Ashen- 
 heirn became one of its contributors, and then its sub-editor. 
 Dr Benisch had not long arrived from Germany then, and he 
 was not familiar with the English tongue; but he quickly 
 acquired a mastery over it, as the readers of that and other 
 journals can testify. 
 
 Shortly after the Voice of Jacob had spoken, the Jewish 
 Chronicle began to note the events of the day. On the 5th 
 of November 1841, one of the Dayanim of the Portuguese 
 Synagogue, the Rev. D. Meldola, a son of the late Haham 
 Meldola, asked permission of his wardens to contribute to a 
 new weekly paper entitled Sepher Aziccaron , which was con¬ 
 ceded to him. The names of Mr Moses Angel and the Rev. 
 D. Meldola appeared as those of the conductors of this new 
 literary venture, which was not destined to enjoy a prolonged 
 existence. After a few months the Synagogue authorities 
 took umbrage at some remarks made by Mr Meldola, and 
 requested him to discontinue his connection with it, and 
 though Mr Angel was really the editor and principal writer, 
 he did not think himself justified in continuing the 
 periodical. 
 
 Mr Angel subsequently joined the Voice of Jacoby and 
 undertook the post of its joint-editor with Dr Benisch, under 
 the supervision of Mr Franklin. Mr Angel fulfilled his 
 functions for several years, when he resigned owing to his 
 engagement at the Jews’ Free School, the head mastership 
 of which establishment had been for some time under his 
 charge. The contributions of Mr Angel to the Anglo-Jewish 
 
THE JEWISH PRESS. 407 
 
 Press, usually signed “ A,” display great erudition and 
 marked literary powers, and they are most interesting. His 
 u Law of Sinai ” which has been reprinted in a separate 
 form, is a valuable addition to Jewish literature. 
 
 The Voice of Jacob was published fortnightly. Subse¬ 
 quently it was desired to issue a monthly magazine in con¬ 
 nection with it, but this part of the programme was not 
 carried out. The journal ranked among its contributors 
 several able scholars and accomplished writers. It has been 
 alleged that the Voice of Jacob represented only one section 
 of the community. The problem as to whether one Jewish 
 organ may suffice to reflect the views of all classes of Jews 
 in°London has not yet been solved. It is probably impos¬ 
 sible to please at the same time Whitechapel, Bayswater, 
 Berkeley Street, and the United Sjmagogue. At all events, 
 the disappearance of the Voice of Jacob left a void in the 
 Jewish world of London. The disinterested efforts of Mr 
 Franklin to maintain an independent and well-conducted 
 Anglo-Jewish Press, have scarcely been sufficiently appre¬ 
 ciated. 
 
 In 1844 the Jewish Chronicle was revived by Mr Mitchell, 
 and started in opposition to the Voice of Jacob. At first the 
 new organ sailed under the banners of ultra-orthodoxy, but 
 it gradually adopted more liberal views, until eventually it 
 leant towards Burton Street. The Jewish Chronicle at that 
 period was as different from the present Jewish Chronicle as 
 the Mercuries of old were unlike our Times and Daily News. 
 Mitchell secured the services of M. A. Bresslau, a ready writer 
 and a man of some attainments. The journal was conducted 
 with ability, but it did not acquire a reputation for independ¬ 
 ence. Bresslau several times had broken his connection with 
 it, to resume it again at the earliest opportunity. Commer¬ 
 cially speaking, the Chronicle did not flourish under that pro¬ 
 prietorship. On the death of Mitchell, Bresslau proposed to 
 continue the periodical, which happily soon afterwards passed 
 into better and abler hands. 
 
 The Anglo-Jewish Press is much beholden to Dr Benisch. 
 No man, next to the founder of the Voice of Jacob , 
 has worked so much in its behalf. Dr Benisch, an able 
 scholar and man of letters, perceiving the unpromising 
 
408 
 
 THE JEWISH PRESS. 
 
 condition to which, the Anglo-Jewish Press had been reduced 
 after the discontinuance of the Voice of Jacob , determined to 
 devote his time and talents to its elevation. We need 
 scarcely advert here to the numerous literary productions 
 of Dr Benisch, which probably are known to our readers, 
 and by them fully appreciated. Dr Benisch established 
 the Hebrew Observer , which was subsequently embodied with 
 the third series of the Jewish Chronicle. He proposed 
 rendering the new organ honourably self-supporting, and at 
 the same time he did not desire to espouse the opinions of 
 any particular class or section of the community. He advo¬ 
 cated a broad Judaism, moderate progress with the age, 
 the spread of education, the study of Hebrew literature, 
 and conciliatory views on religious questions. He aimed at 
 rendering the Hebrew Observer the medium for intercom¬ 
 munion between the Jews of the different parts of the 
 British Empire, and, when practicable, the connecting link 
 between them and their continental brethren. The services 
 performed by this gentleman to Jewish journalism in parti¬ 
 cular, and to the advancement of Jewish interests in general, 
 are too fresh in the minds of his co-religionists to require 
 enumeration here. Resolved to maintain the perfect freedom 
 of his journal, Dr Benisch declined all proffers of assistance, 
 preferring to retain absolute liberty of action. The struggle 
 was doubtless arduous. He purchased the copyright of the 
 Jewish Chronicle from the heirs of Mr Mitchell, and he 
 adopted the name as the first title of his journal. With the 
 assistance of his wife, he became his own editor, writer, 
 printer, and publisher. After some years of partial loss, he 
 succeeded in rendering his publication self-supporting; and 
 eventually, assisted as he was by the abolition of duties on 
 paper and advertisements, he placed the Jewish Chronicle , 
 for the term Hebrew Observer was dropped, on a safe and 
 sound basis. The judgment, moderation, and scholarship 
 displayed by Dr Benisch in the conduct of his journal, have 
 been fully recognised by Jewish and Christian readers. 
 
 Another publication devoted to Jewish interests was the 
 Hebrew National , started by Mr Filipowski in 1867. It did 
 not, however, enjoy a prolonged existence. 
 
 A creditable effort was made in 1868 to establish a Jewish 
 
THE JEWISH PRESS. 
 
 409 
 
 journal, entitled the Jewish Record , intended for family and 
 popular reading, but the venture was not successful, and the 
 periodical did not live long. Since the extinction of the 
 Record, another Jewish paper, called the Jewish World , has 
 been started. It appears to possess a good circulation, and 
 to be increasing in popularity. 
 
 The journal in which these papers were originally pub¬ 
 lished was for some years under the management of an 
 editor to whom the work so admirably performed by Dr 
 Benisch was transferred, and by him as admirably con¬ 
 tinued. Of the labours of the late Mr Michael Henry in 
 this direction, we have already spoken. He conducted the 
 Jewish Chronicle with ability and judgment, until after his 
 death the direction of the periodical reverted to Dr Benisch. 
 
 1 
 
CHAPTER LY. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 “ Farewell! a word that must be, and hath been, 
 
 A sound which makes us linger ; yet—farewell.” 
 
 —Childe Harold's Pilgrimage. 
 
 Any act performed avowedly for the last time can scarcety 
 fail to leave behind in the human heart a tinge of sorrow. 
 The prisoner who leaves his gloomy cell, and the emigrant 
 who lands at his destination from an overcrowded and narrow 
 ship, look hack wistfully on the stone walls and wooden walls, 
 inside which they suffered many privations, and which they 
 quit for a freer and happier existence without. To look for 
 the last time on any familiar scene or object is painful; and 
 the writer who ends his work which for a considerable period 
 has engaged his attention, and which he has grown to love, 
 feels like a father about to part from his offspring. Even 
 the attentive reader of a book of this nature, however much 
 he may be disappointed at its numerous shortcomings, may 
 possibly feel some slight regret at the conclusion of these 
 chapters, whence at least he has acquired some information 
 he did not possess before, and where he may recognise in 
 earnestness of purpose some atonement for the absence of 
 higher qualities. 
 
 Our task is ended. We have endeavoured to follow closely 
 the fortunes of Israel in England. We have seen a handful 
 of Jews immigrate into this country, trembling with misgiv¬ 
 ings and fears, and we leave them now a peaceful, wealthy, 
 and important community of nearly fifty thousand souls, 
 enjoying the rights and privileges of British-born subjects, 
 and having their full share of public honours and influence. 
 The successors of the few Jews who assembled to pray in 
 
CONCLUSION 
 
 411 
 
 1663 in a room in King Street, find now a dozen Synagogues 
 insufficient. Handsome new structures Lave of late years 
 been erected in London, and yet the cry is for more extended 
 Synagogue accommodation. We Lave LeLeld a Jew debarred 
 from opening a sLop in tbe City of London; and we Lave 
 witnessed a Jewish Lord Mayor presiding gracefully over tLe 
 Lospitalities of tLe City of London. 
 
 We Lave caugLt a glimpse of MenasseL ben Israel elo¬ 
 quently pleading the cause of Israel before the Lord Pro¬ 
 tector. We have observed the Jews tolerated by Charles II., 
 and favoured by him, possibly aided by the influence of the 
 Queen’s Portuguese surgeon, Antonio Mendes. We Lave 
 found them remaining unmolested under James II., and 
 wisely befriended by William of Orange. Good-tempered 
 Queen Anne, as we know, did not alter their condition, and 
 during the reigns of the Three Georges, we have watched 
 them increasing in numbers and in enlightenment, albeit 
 still excluded from civil and political rights. It was not 
 until the reign of Queen Victoria, as our readers are well 
 aware, that the Jews obtained full justice. 
 
 The descendants of the ancient Spanish and Portuguese 
 Jews did not retain their lead in Jewish affairs; and at the 
 end of the eighteenth century they found themselves out¬ 
 stripped in numbers and wealth by the more numerous immi¬ 
 grants from Germany and Poland. With congregations it 
 happens as with families, with cities, and with empires. The 
 glories of Egypt and of Babylon have disappeared. Greece 
 scarcely deserves the name of nation, and Spain has sunk 
 into a seventh-rate power. So the Sephardi Jews, for reasons 
 to which we have adverted on several occasions, no longer 
 occupy the proud position which they once enjoyed, though 
 they are still an important and influential community. Ancient 
 and noble lineage does not necessarily go hand-in-hand 
 with much opulence. The energy, enterprise, and financial 
 genius which, in combination with various other incidental 
 causes, have increased to so great an extent the preponder¬ 
 ance of the Ashkenazi Jews, are at least as praiseworthy 
 qualities as Spanish sangre azuL The decrees of fate are 
 immutable, and have been recognised as such by all Israel¬ 
 ites. Feelings of envy and jealousy have, happily, long 
 
412 
 
 CONCL USION 
 
 ceased to exist among tlie different sections of tlie Jewish 
 community in London. The greatest amity and concord 
 prevail now, and we trust the day may come—though it may 
 not be in our time—when the terms Sephardi and Ashkenazi 
 will have disappeared, and when all children of Israel will be 
 known by one name—that of Jew. 
 
 We have endeavoured to present to the reader a brief view 
 of the Jews most distinguished for their piety, wealth, high 
 position, or talents, or for the services they have rendered to 
 their co-religionists. The shadows have passed before us of 
 the philosopher, physician, and scholar, Menasseh ben Israel, 
 as he argued on behalf of his brethren before Cromwell, the 
 Privy Council, and the eminent magistrates and learned 
 divines summoned to the presence of the Protector; of 
 Sir Solomon de Medina, the financier, making army 
 contracts with John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, and 
 paying him a pension of £6000 a year; of Menasseh Lopez, 
 who made a fortune while panic-stricken speculators were 
 rushing to sell stock at Jonathan’s under the belief that 
 Queen Anne was dead; of Sampson Gideon, in his thread¬ 
 bare garments, negotiating a loan with Walpole, becoming a 
 millionaire, living like a Christian, and dying like a Jew—a 
 man who wished to be a Christian on earth and a Jew in 
 heaven; of Joseph Salvador, the loan-contractor and patriotic 
 Jew, whose chequered career would serve to adorn a tale; of 
 Abraham Goldsmid entertaining Loyalty, and dying rather 
 than the slightest speck should rest on his honour; of Isaac 
 D’Israeli leaving the faith of his fathers on account of a dis¬ 
 agreement with the authorities of the Synagogue ; of Nathan 
 Meyer llothschild advancing funds to the principal powers 
 in Europe; of Sir David Salomons firmly maintaining the 
 rights of a Jew to sit in the House of Commons, against the 
 shouts of opposing and intolerant members of the popular 
 assembly. 
 
 We have seen a succession of learned men preside over the 
 Spanish and Portuguese Community from the days of Haham 
 Jacob Sasportas to those of Dr Artoru; and over the German 
 Community from the time of Uri Phaibul to that of Dr Adler. 
 We have shown the love for his race and faith on the part 
 of Moses Hart, to whose generosity the Great Synagogue 
 
CONCL USTOiV. 
 
 4 i 3 
 
 owes partly, if not entirely, its existence; and we have not 
 allowed to remain unnoticed the liberality of numerous other 
 members of the same congregation. We have striven to be 
 just and impartial; and even the extravagances of Ephraim 
 Lopes Pereira, Baron D’Aguilar, have been recorded in these 
 columns. Some account has been given of the laws and cus¬ 
 toms governing the Jews ; of their former numerous disquali¬ 
 fications, and of their struggles for the removal of their civil 
 and political Disabilities. A brief history of the original con¬ 
 stitution, and of the principal Acts of the Board of Deputies, 
 has been laid before the reader. We have accompanied Sir 
 Moses Montefiore in his glorious mission to the East in 1841, 
 and we have set forth the numerous obstacles he had to con¬ 
 tend with, and which were so happily surmounted. We have 
 adverted to the foundation of the principal charitable and 
 educational institutions in the community. 
 
 We have devoted several chapters to the development of 
 German Congregations; and if in the earlier part of these 
 articles we have dwelt more fully on the affairs of the 
 Sephardi Congregation, it is, as our readers must recollect, 
 because for a century and a quarter the Sephardi Jews 
 played the principal part in London. It was they who were 
 the wealthiest, most enlightened, and best known. Until 
 the rise of the Goldsmid family, such Jews as were tolerated 
 in high Christian society were, with rare exceptions, members 
 of that Congregation. Necessarily, therefore, the Jews who 
 most deserve a place in the history of those days belonged 
 to the Sephardim. 
 
 We have glanced at those Jews who gained a place in 
 literature in England, or who by their writings contributed 
 to the advancement of their co-religionists. We have spoken 
 of the marriage laws that govern the Jews, and of the enact¬ 
 ments that refer to them in the statute-book of the country. 
 The Jewish Press has not been forgotten, and a due acknow¬ 
 ledgment has been made of the eminent services rendered by 
 Jewish periodical literature to their community. Finally, 
 the division that arose a generation since among the Jews of 
 London, and the separation of a small body into a distinct 
 Congregation, has been narrated as impartially as it may be 
 accomplished by fallible human nature. 
 
414 
 
 CONCL USION. 
 
 We have not continued the history of the Jews until our 
 day, for our task would have entailed upon us discussions 
 and expressions of opinion which we preferred avoiding. 
 Moreover, the present generation of the Jewish community 
 has scarcely witnessed in its midst any stirring events. 
 Indeed, there is little for the Anglo-Jewish historian of the 
 second half of the nineteenth century to chronicle, beyond a 
 steady increase on the part of his co-religionists in numbers, 
 in wealth, in intelligence, in material prosperity, and in 
 moral influence. New Jewish schools have been opened, 
 new Synagogues consecrated, new charities founded, new 
 associations for the advancement of Jewish interests estab¬ 
 lished. Jewish young men have distinguished themselves at 
 college, at the bar, in literature, and in the varied pursuits 
 of modern civilisation. Social prejudices against Israelites 
 are fast vanishing, and the Jews have rendered themselves 
 completely worthy of their improved position, and kept full 
 pace with their Gentile neighbours in the onward march of 
 progress. 
 
LIST OF AUTHORITIES AND SOURCES WHENCE THE 
 FACTS AND INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS 
 WORK HAVE BEEN GATHERED. 
 
 Annual Biography and Obituary. London, 1817 to end. 
 
 Annual Register, from 1758 to end. 
 
 Apology for the Naturalisation of the Jews, An. 1753. 
 
 Archives of the Congregation of German Jews, Duke’s Place, The, 
 from the Middle of the Eighteenth Century. 
 
 Archives of the Congregation of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews, 
 The, from the Foundation of their Synagogue, beginning 1662. 
 Goldsmid, B. of Roehampton, Memoirs of the Life and Commercial 
 Connections of the late. London, 1808. 
 
 Biographie Universelle, Ancienne et Moderne. Nouvelle Edition. 
 
 Mechaud, Paris, 1843. 
 
 Blunt, John E., History of the Jews in England. London, 1830. 
 Burnet, Gilbert, Bishop of Salisbury, History of His Own Time. 
 London, 1766. 
 
 Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary. London, 1812. 
 
 Collection of the Best Pieces in Prose and in Verse Concerning the 
 Jews, A. London, 1753. 
 
 Colquhoun, Patrick, LL.D., A Treatise on the Police of the Metro¬ 
 polis. London, 1797-1800. 
 
 Colquhoun, Patrick, LL.D., The State of Indigence, and the Situa¬ 
 tion of the Casual Poor in the Metropolis Explained. London, 
 
 1799. 
 
 Confutation of the Reasons for the Naturalisation of the Jews, A. 
 1753. 
 
 Be Cheaumont French Ambassador at Constantinople, A ISew 
 Letter concerning the Jews. London, 1664. 
 
 Egan, Charles, The Status of the Jews in England from the Time of 
 the Normans. London, 1848. 
 
 European Magazine. 
 
416 
 
 LIST OF AUTHORITIES, ETC. 
 
 Evelyn, John, Memoirs comprising his Diaries, &c. London, 1818. 
 Francis, John, Chronicles and Characters of the Stock Exchange. 
 London, 1855. 
 
 Gentleman’s Magazine, or Monthly Intelligencer, from 1731. 
 Hansard’s Parliamentary Reports. 
 
 Harleyan Miscellany, The. 
 
 Historical Treaty concerning Jews and Judaism in England, An. 
 London, 1820. 
 
 Hume and Smollett’s History of England. 
 
 Jewish Chronicle. London, 1841-5. 
 
 Jews, A Review of the Proposed Naturalisation of the Jews, being 
 a Dispassionate Inquiry. London, 1753, 
 
 Margoliouth, Rev. M., History of the Jews in Great Britain. 
 London, 1851. 
 
 Milman’s, Dean, Llistory of the Jews from the Earliest Days. 4th 
 Edition. London, 1866. 
 
 Nouvelle Biographie Generate. Firmin Didot Freres. Paris, 1855. 
 Political Mercurius. London, 1655-6. 
 
 Records of the London Committee of Deputies of British Jews, The. 
 Scialitti, R. Mois6, Breve Discurso Politico solve las Espulsiones de 
 los Judios, Letter, &c., 1663, 1675. 
 
 Tovey D’ Blossiers, Anglia-Judaica. Oxford, 1738. 
 
 Universal Museum, and numerous other Periodical Publications of 
 the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, The. 
 
 Voice of Jacob. London, 1841-5. 
 
 Wraxall, Sir Nathaniel, Historical Memoirs of His Own Time. Lon¬ 
 don, 1818. 
 
 Considerable Information has been obtained from the Inspection of 
 Private Letters and Documents , and from Traditional 
 
 Family History. 
 
INDEX 
 
 o 
 
 Aben Ezra, 9 
 
 Abendana, Jacob and Isaac, 55 
 Abraham, Eliakim ben, 227 
 Abndiente, see Gideon, Sampson 
 Adler, Rev. Dr, 291 
 Act, of 1715, 65 ; of 1723, 66 ; of 
 1740, 67, 87; Naturalisation, 69 ; 
 Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage, 102, 
 105-112; of 1695, 102; Sir John 
 Barnard’s, 219 ; Prohibiting Mar¬ 
 riages of Consanguinity, 128; 
 Marriage and Registration, 112; 
 Test and Corporation, Repeal of, 
 388, 389 ; Religious Opinions 
 
 Belief, 394 
 
 Alien Duties, the, 46-51; Aguilar, 
 Baron Ephraim d’, 97-99, 110; 
 Grace, 361-364 
 
 Almosmino, Hasdai, 193, 271 ; Solo¬ 
 mon, 321 
 Altona, 319 
 
 Amsterdam, Jews of, 25, 31, 35, 
 43, 45, 53, 58, 145, 169 
 Andreas, Mrs, 104 
 Angel, Mr Moses, 404 
 Anne, Queen, 57, 59 
 Anti-Gall lean Monitor , the, 231 
 Argus, the, 231 
 Army, Jews in the, 54, 275 
 Ascamoth, 38, 40, 191, 296 
 Ascher, Rev. Simon, 334, 339 
 Ashenheim, Dr, 404 
 Ashkenazim, the, 55, 230, 243, 258, 
 262, 265, 266, 291, 307, 325, 332, 
 340, 372, 377, 409 
 Azevedo, Moses Cohen de 192 
 
 Baal Shem, the, 245 
 Banishment of the Jews in 1290, 23 
 Baring, Sir Thomas, 253 ; Mr Alex¬ 
 ander, 386 
 
 Barnard, Sir John, 81 
 Barrow, Joseph, 273 
 Basevi, Joshua, 300 
 Bedford, Jews in, 289 
 Belisario, Mendes, 107 
 
 Benevolence, Jewish, 268, 331, 342 
 Benisch, Dr, 404 
 Bensaken, Mr Samuel, 323 
 Bequests, Jewish, 323 
 Beracha, 37 
 
 Bernal, Jacob Israel, and Isaac, 157 
 Beth-Din, 107,111, 170, 208, 214, 294, 
 322, 377, 382 
 Betting, 77 
 208 
 
 Bevis Marks, 57, 63, 74, 114, 150, 
 161, 164, 169, 176, 319 
 Bexley, Lord, 385 
 Bible, Hebrew, Text of, 172 
 Body-snatcliing, 194 
 Bonaparte, Napoleon, 69, 273, 275, 
 281, 234, 319 
 Braliam, John, 231 
 Bristol, Jews of, 10, 77 
 Brougham, Lord, 397 
 
 Cambridge, Duke of, 267 
 Campbell, Sir John, 390 
 Caorsini, the, 15-17, 20 
 Catherine of Braggnza, 44, 103 
 Cemeteries, Jewish, 226, 235, 320 
 Charities, Jewish, 75, 76, 136, 176, 
 245, 260, 273, 323, 332, 401 
 Charles IT., 30, 43, 46 
 Charlestown, Jews in, 271 
 Cholera, the, 327, 334 
 Cohen, Levy Barent, 267; Joseph, 
 269 
 
 Colquhoun, Patrick, 257-260 
 “ Committee of Diligence,” 114 
 Congregation of British Jews, 
 Conversions, 34, 54, 65, 143, 176, 
 196, 206, 208, 220, 295, 303-306, 
 335 
 
 Costa, Emanuel Mendes da, 32, 95 ; 
 Benjamin Mendes da, 89, 95, 155 ; 
 Moses or Anthony da, 103 ; Jacob 
 Mendes da, 103 
 
 Crimes, Serious, Rare amongst the 
 Jews, 180 
 
 Cromwell, Oliver, 25-29 
 
 D 
 
418 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Cumberland, Richard, 238-240; Duke 
 of, 207 
 
 Curry, Elias, 206 
 
 Damascus, Jews of, 130, 338, 347-349 
 Dash wood, Sir James, 87, 88 
 Davids, Arthur Lumley, 317 
 Deputies, Board of, Origin, 115, 1 IS ; 
 Early Proceedings, 118-121, 385- 
 390; German Jews first admitted, 
 124 
 
 Disabilities, Jewish, 198, 3S4; Re¬ 
 moval of, 392-399; Divorces, 110, 
 294 
 
 D’Israeli, Isaac, 295-301 ; Right 
 Hon. Benjamin, 300, 396 
 Dublin, Jews of, 77, 168, 225 
 Dupass, Mr, 34, 54 
 
 Edward I., 20-24, 52 
 Egmont, Earl of, 88 
 Elias, D., 333 
 Elizabeth, Queen, 24 
 Emigration, Proposed, of Poorer 
 Jews, 153 
 
 Ergas, Haham Joseph, 56 
 Exeter, Jews of, 386 
 
 Falk, Rabbi de, 245-248 
 Foreign Jews, Relief of, 159,166, 164, 
 291, 319, 335 
 
 France, Laws respecting Jews in, 27, 
 84, 177 
 
 Frey, Rev. C., 342 
 Funeral Ceremonies, 193, 309 
 Furtado, Isaac Mendes, 206 
 
 Gascoigne, Sir Crisp, 81 
 George II., 92 
 
 George IIP, 115, 122, 173, 222, 252, 
 268, 276-278 
 George IV., 119 
 
 Germany, Jewish Immigrants from, 
 54, 132, 176, 258 
 
 Gibraltar, Jewish Immigrants from, 
 190 
 
 Gideon, Sampson, 60-64, 84, 113 
 Goldney, Edward, 143 
 Goldsmid, Isaac L., 129-131, 254-256; 
 Aaron, 249, 385, 398 ; Abraham, 
 252-254, 259; Benjamin, 249-252 ; 
 George, 249 
 Goldsmith, Lewis, 230 
 Gordon, Lord George, 181-189 
 Grant, Mr Robert, 386 
 Grote, Mr George, 391 
 Guizot, M., 351 
 
 Halevy, Yehuda, 56 
 Hamburg, Jews in, 319 
 Hardwicke, Lord, 105 
 
 Harley, Lord, 88 
 Hart, Moses, 133 
 Hartog, Nurna, 317 
 Hebrew, Difference in Pronuncia¬ 
 tion of, by German and Portuguese 
 Jews, 157, 262, 291, 366 ; Instruc¬ 
 tion in, 170, 327, 361 ; Knowledge 
 of, 279 
 
 Helbert, Jacob von, 287 
 Henry I., 2 
 Henry II., 4, 8 
 Henry III., 11-20 
 Herem, 37, 78, 181, 380-382 
 Hirschel, Rev. Solomon, 265, 307- 
 310, 350, 378 
 Hospitals, Jewish, 263 
 Hunter, Dr 
 
 Immigrants, List of the first Jewish, 
 32 
 
 Incledon, Charles, 232 
 Inglis, Sir Robert, 387 
 Inter-marriage of German and Portu¬ 
 guese Jews, 157, 265, 325 
 Interment, Jewish, 216-218, 292 
 Isaacs, Rev. D. M., 340 
 
 Jamaica, Jews in, 53, 120, 353 
 James II., 46, 47, 67 
 Jeffreys, Chief Justice, 52 
 Jewel, Derivation of, 280 
 John, King, 9-11 
 Jose I. of Portugal, 320 
 Josephs, Michael, 314, 316 
 
 Kennicott, Rev. B., 172 
 King, J., 302 
 
 Laguna, Daniel Israel, 56 
 Langton, Stephen, 12 
 Languages, the Jews usually possess 
 two, 153, 311, 317, 364, 402, 410 
 Lara, Mr, 323 
 
 Learning, Jewish, 8, 26, 55, 56, 95, 
 146, 227, 230, 314 
 Lecture, General, 274 
 Legacy Fund, the, 267 
 Leghorn, Jews of, 320 
 Lemoine, Henry, 229, 278, 280 
 Levi, David, 228 
 
 Levy, Mrs Judith, 96, 147; Mr 
 Phineas, 393 
 Lincoln, Jews in, 18 
 Lindo, Miss Esther, 107 ; Alexander, 
 273, 328 ; E. H., 364 
 Lithuania, Jews from, 54 
 Literature, the Jews and, 296, 313— 
 318, 359-365 
 Liverpool, Jews of, 386 
 London Jews’ Society, the, 342 
 Lopez, Menasseh, 59 
 
INDEX. 
 
 419 
 
 Lopez, Rodrigo, 24 ; Mordecai Rodri¬ 
 guez, 304; Menasseh, 304 
 Loughborough, Lord Chief Justice 
 328 
 
 Loyalty, Jewish, 07-69, 221, 142, 207, 
 276 
 
 Lushington, Dr, 387 
 Luzzatto, Pliiloxene, 317 
 Lyndhurst, Lord, 392 
 Lyon, Myer, 147 ; Solomon, Rev., 
 285, 314; Miss Emma, 314 
 
 Macaulay, Mr, 3S7 
 Mahamad, the, 36, 78, 139, 152, 178, 
 181, 205, 272, 294, 322, 338 
 Mahmoud II., Sultan, 319 
 Marks, Rev. D. W., 373 
 Marlborough, Duke of, 58, 59 
 Marriage, Three Legal Modes of, 100; 
 Jewish Cases relating to, 106-111 ; 
 Ceremonies in, 107, 135, 286; Ir¬ 
 regular, 107, 293 
 Matthew Paris, 14, 236 
 Meat, Measures concerning Butcher’s 
 158, 169, 214-216, 271, 287 
 Medina, Solomon de, 50 
 Mehemet Ali, 351, 353-357 
 Meldola Raphael, 271 ; Rev. D., 404 
 Menasseh ben Israel, 25-30 
 Mendes, Antonio and Andrea, 44, 
 95; Catherine, 103 
 Mendoza, Samuel, 212 
 Menton, Count Ratti, 351 
 Merchants, Jewish, in London in 
 1753, List of, 93 
 Mile End Cemetery, 235 
 Mocatta, Mr Moses, 326, 363 
 Mombach, Mr Julius, 340 
 Montefiore, Sir Moses, 127, 323, 331, 
 338, 350, 353-358, 388, 390; Abra¬ 
 ham, 343 
 
 Morocco, Jews in, 173 
 Myers, Dr Joseph Hart, 222 
 
 Naturalization Bill of 1753, the, 80- 
 85; Repealed, 86-91 ; Squibs on, 
 90, 91; the Press on, 88 ; Irish, 114 
 Navy, Jews in the, 54 
 Netto, Moses, 151 
 Newcastle, Duke of, 80, 86 
 Newdigate, Sir Roger, 87 
 Nieto, David, 55 
 Norwich, Jews of, 3, 5, 13, 18 
 
 O'Connell, Daniel, 352, 387 
 Oxford, Jews of, 2, 18, 24 
 
 Palmerston, Lord, 351 
 Parliament, Jews in, 305, 395, 396, 
 398 
 
 Parliamentum Judaicmn, 14 
 
 Patna, Jews in, 144 
 Pauperism, Jewish, 152, 257 
 Paz, Moses de, 179 
 Pearson, Mr Charles, 3S5 
 Peel, Sir Robert, 395 
 Peerage, Jewish Connections with 
 the, 104, 158, 233 
 Pelham, Mr, 80, 88 
 Pepys, Mr, 39 
 
 Pereira, Eliau Lopes, 193 ; Abraham 
 Lopes, 273 
 
 Pereire, M. Jacob Rodriguez, 177 
 Persecutions, Jewish, 3-7, 10, 12-24, 
 46, 237, 347 
 
 Phillips, Sir Benjamin, 399 
 Pimentel, Jacob Abenatar, 258 
 Pitt, Mr, 88 
 
 Poland, Immigrants from, 258, 267, 
 341; Jews in, 307 
 Pombal, Marquis de, 320 
 Port Mahon, Jews in, 120 
 Portugal, Jews in, 320 
 Portuguese Congregation, Founda¬ 
 tion of, 36-38 ; Original Laws of, 40 
 Press, The, on the Jews, 28, 88, 123, 
 250, 278, 283, 351, 399 
 Press, Jewish, 400-407 
 Pretender, Advance of the Young, 
 60, 67 
 
 Priestley, Dr, 228 
 
 Prisoners, Jewish, Exempted from 
 Labour on Sabbaths and Festivals, 
 243 
 
 Prize-fighter, a Jewish, 212 
 Proselytism, Christian, 143, 203, 241, 
 283 
 
 Provinces, Jews in the, 77 
 Prynne, 27, 100 
 Purim Riots, the, 205 
 
 Quakers, The, and the Jews, 124 
 
 Raphall, Rev. Morris Jacob, 365, 402 
 Rebello, David Alves, 230 
 Reform Movement, the, 366-372 
 Reid, William Hamilton, 280-282 
 Return of the J ews to England, 25-30 
 Rhodes, Jews in, 349, 354 
 Ricardo, Abraham Israel, 220; David, 
 220 
 
 Rice, Rt. Hon. J. Spring, 388 
 Richard, I., 4 
 Robins, George, 309 
 Rochambeau, General, 274 
 Rome, Jews of, 197 
 Rothschild, Mr Nathan Meyer, 125, 
 266, 292, 343-346, 385, 401 
 Rothschild, Baron Lionel de, 395, 397 
 Royalty and the Jews, 268, 252 
 Russell, Lord John, 390, 395, 397 
 Sabbath, the, 272 
 
420 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Salomons, Sir David, 3S9, 392, 39G 
 Salvador, Joseph, 162-163 
 Samuel, Moses, 364 
 Sarmiento, Jacob de Castro, 56 
 Saxon Kings, Jews in England under 
 the, 1 
 
 Schism, The, in the Portuguese Con¬ 
 gregation, 330, 366-383 
 Schools, Jewish, 41, 154, 170, 201, 
 261, 270, 321, 332 
 Scialitti, Moises, 34 
 Sedition Bill, 123 
 
 Sephardim, the, 31,258, 262, 266,272, 
 320, 322, 325, 338, 368, 372, 409 
 Sermons, 340 
 Serra, Isaac Gomes, 342 
 Services, Jewish Mode of Conducting, 
 202 , 270, 290, 302, 325-327, 367, 381 
 Shechita, Board of, 271 
 Sheva, Cumberland's, 238 
 Shomere Meshmeret IlaJcJcodesh, the, 329 
 Shylock, Shakespeare’s, 238 
 Singing, Jewish, 339, 368 
 Sola, Rev. D. A. de, 327, 359-361 ; 
 
 Dr Benjamin de, 359 
 Solomons, E. P. Mr, 217, 220 
 Solomon, Simon, 341 
 South Sea Bubble, 60 
 Starrs, 8 
 
 Statutum de Judaismo, 21, 100 
 Stephen, 3 
 Stowell, Lord, 107 
 Surnames, Jewish, 40 
 Sussex, Duke of, 267, 285, 385-3S8 
 Sweden and the Jews, 167 
 Sweetmeats, Throwing at Marriages, 
 135 
 
 Synagogues in King Street, 30, 33, 39; 
 New, in 1676, 42; in Bevis Marks, 
 42, 57 ; Number of, in 1804, 266 
 
 Talmud, the, 179 
 Temple, Earl, 86 
 Terefa, 159, 214, 287 
 Thiers, M. 357 
 Thirlwall, Dr, 396 
 Thomas, Father, 347 
 Tucker, Rev. Josiali, 90 
 
 University College, 255 
 University, London, 255 
 
 Van Oven, Joshua, 259-263, 268, 280, 
 285, 291 
 
 Victoria, Queen, 128, 390 
 Villareal, Isaac da Costa, 75; Mrs 
 Catherine da Costa, 103-104 
 Volunteers, Jewish, 69, 276 
 
 Wales, the Prince of, 277 
 Walpole, Sir Robert, 60 
 Way, Louis, 284 
 Wealth, Jewish, 93, 279 
 Wellington, Duke of, 385 
 West London Congregation, the 
 Foundation of the, 372 
 Wliately, Dr, 388 
 Wilkes, John, 180 
 William the Conqueror, 2 
 William Rufus, 2 
 William III., 48-50, 52, 67, 219 
 William IV., 328 
 Witherby, Thomas, 280, 284 
 Wordsworth, Rev. Christopher, 2S4 
 Wynne, Sir William, 106 
 
 Nimenes, Sir Maurice, 303 
 
 York, Jews of, 5, 6, 7 
 
 
 PRINTED BY BALLANTYNE AND COMPANY 
 EDINBURGH AND LONDON 
 

Date Due 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■V 
 
 
 
 ■ » > ^ t '611 
 
 ? 
 
 
 
 ‘ l - tJl * p 
 
 •> 
 
 - 
 
 f 
 
 Uteto^w.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■... —" ■»“ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ® 
 
 PRINTED 
 
 IN U. S. A.