ENGLAND UNDER THE HEEL OF THE JEW
A TALE OF TWO BOOKS
ARRANGED BY
THE AUTHOR
0F
"THE CALL OF THE SWORD."
London
C. F. ROWORTH, 88, FETTER LANE, E.C.
OF ALL BOOKSELLERS.
Price 1/- net.
THE CALL OF THE SWORD.
A
SPIRITUAL AND POLITICAL DIAGNOSIŞ
PRESENT STATE of THE WORLD in GENERAL
AND ENGLAND IN PARTICULAR.
"The author begins well on the subject of the conflict of the two ideals of 'race religion' and 'the religion of Humanity."
The Times
"In the mad race for wealth, says the author, aliens have elimbed to influence in our midst, and bought power with money or money's equivalent. The Sword has flashed its light none too soon, and will not have completed its task for our country 'until it has broken in pieces the decrepit and corrupt political machine at its head, cut out of it every alien element, and cleared the way for a living, clean tribunal."
-Sunday Times.
"A virile and outspoken utterance on subjects of first-rank moment for the nation and the Empire at large, and in that sense it is a substantial contribution to what we may call the Literature of the Awakening."
- Financial News
Published by "THE FINANCIAL NEWS,"
- Queen Victoria Street, E.C. 4.
ENGLAND UNDER THE HEEL OF THE JEW
A TALE OF TWO BOOKS
ARRANGED BY
THE AUTHOR
OF
"THE CALL OF THE SWORD."
London
C. F. ROWORTH, SS, FETTER LANE, E.C. 1918.
Stadtbibliothek Frankfurt am Main.
CONTENTS
T
THE PROMISE.
$\Pi$
THE FULFILMENT.
III
ILLUSTRATION.
1۷.
RESULT
V.
THE VOICE OF THE ETERNAL PROPHET
$\nabla T$
A PRAYER FOR OLD ENGLAND
.
HE PROMISE.
The God of this World.
When Our Lord rebuffed the Tempter for the third time in the Wilderness there was one hard by who overheard the Devil's offer. The Devil was speaking the truth when he said that the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them were in his gift. And when he left Our Lord, Simon, the Father of Judas Iscariot, fell down at his feet exclaiming, "My Lord and my God, is the offer open still?" And the Devil replied, "Yes; my son, I confer the gift on thee, if thou wilt serve me with thy whole heart and soul." "How can I prove my loyalty?" said Simon. The Devil answered, "Compass the death of Him who has affronted me: He is thine Enemy as He is mine." "How shall I do this?" said Simon. The Devil replied, "Attach thy son Judas to His person."
When Judas had accomplished his mission of betrayal, and, smitten with remorse, had hanged himself, Simon made complaint to his patron, who replied: "Fear not, Simon, thou hast other sons: the kingdoms of the World are thine. Judas is dead; but the Tribe of Judas lives. It is better that one traitor should die rather than that the whole Tribe should lose its kingship. In compassing the death of Lucre's eternal Foe, Judas has given his life; but the Sceptre of Lucre shall not depart from the Tribe of Judas until the Day when the Betrayed shall return."
1
THE FULFILMENT
Lucre's Conquest
Told in the words of Werner Sombart, Professor in the Handelhochschule in Berlin, in his work entitled "The Jews and Modern Capitalism," translated by M. Epstein, M.A., Ph.D., and published by E. P. Dutton & Company, New York, in 1913. Headings have been added to the sections quoted, and in a few instances italics and capitals. The figures at the end of each section denote the pages in Sombart's work from which the passage is quoted.
Synopsis.
cream of the Jews remained in Babylon.—The Modern City is the New Promised Land: it suits the Jew because it is actually desert.—From Pastoralism to Capitalism: from counting sheep to counting sheekels.—The different types of Jews: Jews of the Ghetto and Free Jews: Ashkenazim, Sephardim and Marannos; all equally Jewish.—The Tribe of Judas seizes Lucre's sceptre and mounts the Throne of the World.
THE
JEWS AND MODERN CAPITALISM.
R.
WERNER SOMBART
The Jews' Gospel of Greed.
We find that the Jew rises before us unmistakably as more of a business-man than his neighbour; he follows business for its own sake; he recognises in the true capitalistic spirit, the supremacy of gain over all other aims. (131)
Usury, the Means of Enslaving Others: Success the only Criterion.
Money-lending contains the root idea of capitalism; from money-lending it received many of its distinguishing features. In money-lending all conception of quality vanishes, and only the quantitative aspect matters. In money-lending the contract becomes the principal element of business; the agreement about the quid pro quo, the promise for the future, the notion of delivery are its component parts. In money-lending there is no thought of producing only for one's needs. In money-lending there is nothing corporeal (i.e., technical), the whole is a purely intellectual act. In money-lending economic activity as such has no meaning; it is no longer a question of exercising body or mind; it is all a question of success. Success, therefore, is the only thing that has a meaning. In money-lending the possibility is for the first time illustrated that you can earn without sweating; that you can get others to work for you without recourse to force. (189)
Jews the Parents of the Stock Exchange
We possess a report of the French Ambassador in the Hague, written for his government in the year 1698, wherein he distinctly states that the Jews had the Stock Exchange business in their hands, and shaped its development as they willed. The most salient passage here follows in full:—
"In this State (Holland) the Jews have a good deal of power and according to the prognostications of these pretended political speculators, themselves often unreliable, the prices of these stocks vary so considerably that they cause transactions to take place several times a day, transactions which merit the term wager or bet rather than business; the more so, as the Jews who dominate this kind of business are up to all manner of tricks which take in people even if they be ever so skilled." . . . . "Their Jewish brokers and agents, the cleverest of their kind in all the world." . . . . . "Bonds and shares, of all of which they hold large amounts." (87)
The Jew is THE International; but the Tribe is Solid in Spite of Dispersion.
Was it not significant that the Jews were predominant in Leghorn, which in the 18th century was spoken of as "one of the great depôts in Europe for the trade of the Mediterranean," significant that they forged a commercial chain binding North and South America together, which assured the North American Colonies of their economic existence, significant above all, that by their control of the Stock Exchanges in the great European centres they were the means of internationalising public credit?
It was their distribution over a wide area which enabled them to do all this.
An admirable picture of the importance of the Jews from this point of view was drawn by a clever observer, who made a study of that people two hundred years ago. The picture has lost none of its freshness; it may be found in the Spectator of September 27, 1712:—
"They are so disseminated throughout all the trading parts
of the World, that they are become the Instruments by which the most distant Nations converse with one another and by which mankind are knit together in a general correspondence." (171-2)
Lines of Communication within the Tribe give Prior Information: Jews, Instructed by their Rabbis, Utilise the Christian Sunday to prepare their Monday Pounce.
How the Jews utilised for their own advantage the special knowledge that their scattered position gave them, how they regulated their activities on the Stock Exchange, is related in all detail in a report of the French Ambassador in The Hague, written in the year 1698. Our informant is of opinion that the dominance of the Jews on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange was due in a large degree to their being so well-informed. This piece of evidence is of such great value that I shall translate the whole of the passage:—
"They carry on a correspondence on both these subjects (news and commerce) with those they call their brotherhoods (congregues). Of these, Venice is considered to be the most important (although neither the richest nor the most populous) because it is the link, by way of the brotherhood of Salonica, between the East and the West as well as the South. Salonica is the governing centre for their nation in these two parts of the world and is responsible for them to Venice, which, together with Amsterdam, rules the northern countries (including the merely tolerated community of London, and the secret brotherhoods of France). The result of this association is that on the two topics of news and commerce they receive, one might almost say, the best information of all that goes on in the world, and on this they build up their system every week in their assemblies, wisely choosing for this purpose the day after Saturday, i.e. the Sunday, when the Christians of all denominations are engaged in their religious exercises. These systems, which contain the minutest details of nows received during the week, are, after having been carefully sifted by their rabbis and the heads
of their congregations, handed over on the Sunday afternoon to their Jewish stockbrokers and agents. These are men of great eleverness, who after having arranged a preconcerted plan among themselves, go out separately to spread nows which should prove most useful for their own ends; ready to start manipulations on the morrow, the Monday morning, according to each individual's disposition: either selling, buying, or exchanging shares. As they always hold a large reserve of these commodities, they can always judge of the most propitious moment, taking advantage of the rise or fall of the securities, or even sometimes of both, in order to carry out their plans." (172—3)
Jews' Linguistic Abilities gain for them Access to Courts and Prepare the Way for Loans to Monarchs and Governments.
Equally beneficial was their dispersion for winning the confidence of the great. Indeed, the progress of the Jews to la haute finance was almost invariably as follows. In the first instance their linguistic ability enabled them to be of service to crowned heads as interpreters, then they were sent as intermediaries or special negotiators to foreign courts. Soon they were put in charge of their employer's fortunes, at the same time being honoured through his graciousness in allowing them to become his creditors. From this point it was no long step to the control of the State finances, and in later years of the Stock Exchanges. (173)
Special Position of Jews-Jews as Aliens.
During the last century or two Jews were almost everywhere strangers in the sense of being newcomers. . . . The Jews were everywhere colonists, and as such learned the lesson of speedy adaptation to their new surroundings. . . . Newcomers must have an observant oye in order to find a niche for themselves amid the new conditions. . . . Closely interwoven with their status as strangers was the special legal position which they occupied everywhere. (175-7)
Jews as Semi-Citizens: Wars their Harvests.
At first glance the legal position of the Jews would appear to have had an immense influence on their economic activities in that it limited the callings to which they might devote themselves, and generally closed the avenues to a livelihood. But I believe that the effect of these restrictions has been over-estimated. I would even go so far as to say that they were of no moment whatever for the economic growth of Jewry. . . . . During the period which is of most interest to us the laws affecting Jews differed greatly according to locality. For all that we note a remarkable similarity in Jewish influence throughout the whole range of the capitalistic order.
At one point, however, industrial regulations made themselves felt as very real checks on the progress of the Jew, and that was wherever economic activities were organised on a corporate basis. The Guilds were closed to them.
But if exclusion from public life was of benefit to the economic position of the Jews in one direction, it was equally beneficial in another. It freed the Jews from political partisanship. Their attitude to the State and the particular Government of the day was wholly unprejudiced. Thanks to this, their capacity to become the standard-bearers of the international capitalistic system was superior to that of other people. For they supplied the different States with money, and national conflicts were among the chief sources from which Jews derived their profit. Moreover, the political colourlessness of their position made it possible for them to serve successive dynasties or governments in countries which, like France, were subjected to many political changes. The history of the Rothschilds illustrates the point. (177—183)
The Wealth of the Jews.
Among the objective conditions which made possible the economic mission of the Jews during the last three or four centuries must be reckoned that at all times and in all places where their rôle in economic life was no mean one, they disposed of large sums of money. (183)
Christian Trade-Ethics of the Middle Ages Forbade Profiteering.
During the whole of the period which I have described as the "early capitalistic age," and in which the Jews began to make their influence felt, the same fundamental notions generally prevailed in economic life as characterised the Middle Ages —feudal relationships, manual labour, three estates of the realm and so forth.
The centre of this whole was the individual man. Whether as producer or consumer his interests determined the attitude of the community as of its units, determined the law regulating economic activities and the practices of commercial life. Every such law was personal in its intent; and all who contributed to the life of the nation had a personal outlook. Not that each person could do as he liked. On the contrary, a code of restrictions hedged about his activities in every direction. But the point is that the restrictions were born of the individualistic spirit. Commodities were produced and bought and sold in order that consumers might have their wants sufficiently satisfied. On the other hand, producers and traders were to receive fair wages and fair profits. What was fair, and what sufficed for your need, custom and tradition determined.
And so, producer and trader would receive as much as was demanded by the standard of comfort in their station of life. That was the mediæval view current in the early capitalistic age, even where business was carried on along more or less modern lines. We find its expression in the industrial codes of the day, and its justification in the commercial literature.
Hence, to make profit was looked upon by most people throughout the period as improper, as "unchristian"; the old economic teaching of Thomas Aquinas was observed, at least officially. The religious or ethical rule was still supreme; there was as yet no sign of the liberation of economic life from its religious and ethical bonds. Every action, no matter in what sphere, was done with a view to the Highest Tribunal—the will of God. Need it be pointed out that the attitude of Mammon was as opposed to this as pole is to pole?
Producer and trader should receive sufficient for their need. One outstanding result of this principle was to circumscribe each man's activity in his locality. Competition was therefore quite out of the question. In his own sphere a man might work as he willed—when, how, where—in accordance with tradition and custom. But to cast a look at his neighbour's sphere—that he was forbidden to do. Just as the peasant received his holding—so much field with pasture and woodland, as would keep him and his family, just as he never dreamt of adding to his possessions, so, too, the craftsman and the merchant were to rest content with their portions and never covet their neighbour's. The peasant had his land, the town-dweller his customers: in either case they were the source whence sprang his livelihood; in either case they were of a size sufficient for the purpose. Hence, the trader had to be assured of his custom, and many were the ordinances which guarded him against competition. Besides, it was commercial etiquette. You did not run after your customers. You waited until they came, "and then" (in the words of De Foe's sermon), "with God's blessing and his own care, he may expect his share of trade with his neighbours." The merchant who attended fairs did not do otherwise: "day and night he waits at his stall." (120—2)
In the Talmud the Jew Lives and Moves and has His Being.
When the Jewish State was destroyed the Pharisees and Scribes—i.e. those who cherished the traditions of Ezra and strove to make obedience to the Law the end and aim of life—the Pharisees and Scribes came to the head of affairs and naturally directed the course of events into channels which they favoured. Without a State, without their sanctuary, the Jews, under the leadership of the Pharisees, flocked around the Law (that "portable fatherland" as Heine called it), and became a
religious brotherhood, guided by a band of pious Scribes, pretty much as the disciples of Loyola might gather around the scattered remnants of a modern State. The Pharisees now led the way. Their most distinguished Rabbis looked upon themselves as the successors of the ancient Synhedrium, and were so regarded, becoming the supreme authority in spiritual and temporal affairs for all the Jews in the world. . . . For a very long period religious teaching was enshrined in the Talmud, and hence Jews through many centuries lived in it, through it, and for it. (193)
Jewish Religion is Identical with Jewish Finance. It is a Product of Intellect, without Inspiration and Anti-Natural.
Let me avow it right away: I think that Jewish religion has the same leading ideas as Capitalism. I see the same spirit in the one as in the other. In trying to understand the Jewish religion we must never forget that a Sofer was its author, a rigidly minded scribe, whose work was completed by a band of scribes after him. Not a prophet, mark you; not a seer, nor a visionary nor a mighty king; a Sofer it was. Nor must we forget how it came into being: not an irresistible force, not as the expression of the deepest needs of contrite souls, not as the embodiment of the feelings of divinely inspired votaries. No; it came into being on a deliberate plan, by clever deductions and diplomatic policy which was based on the cry, "Its religion must be preserved for the people." The same calm consideration, the same attention to the ultimate goal were responsible in the centuries which followed for the addition of line to line and precept to precept. . . . .
The traces of the peculiar circumstances which gave it birth are still visible in the Jewish religion. In all its reasoning it appeals to us as a creation of the intellect, a thing of thought and purpose projected into a world of organisms, mechanically and artfully wrought, destined to destroy and conquer Nature's realm and to reign itself in her stead. Just so does Conitalism
appear on the scene; like the Jewish religion, an alien element in the midst of the natural, created world; like it, too, something schemed and planned in the midst of teeming life. This sheaf of salient features is bound together in one word: Rationalism. Rationalism is the characteristic trait of Judaism as of Capitalism; Rationalism or Intellectualism—both deadly foes alike to irresponsible mysticism and to that creative power which draws its artistic inspiration from the passion world of the senses. The Jewish religion knows no mysteries, and is perhaps the only religion on the face of the globe that does not know them.
The kinship between Judaism and Capitalism is further illustrated by the legally regulated relationship—I had almost said the business-like connection except that the term has a disagreeable connotation—between God and Israel. The whole religious system is in reality nothing but a contract between Jehovah and his chosen people, a contract with all its consequences and all its duties. God promises something and gives something, and the righteous must give Him something in return. Indeed, there was no community of interest between God and Man which could not be expressed in those terms—that man performs some duty enjoined by the Torah and receives from God a quid pro quo. Accordingly no man should approach God in prayer without bringing with him something of his own or of his ancestors' by way of return for what he is going to ask. . . . . Two consequences must of necessity follow: first, a constant weighing up of the loss and gain which any action needs must bring, and secondly, a complicated system of book-keeping, as it were, for each individual person. . . . . Whether one is accounted "righteous" or "wicked" depends on the balance of commands performed against commands needected (205—9)
The Divine Duty of Profiteering and Adding to One's Possessions.
Another conception is bound up with this of divine bookkeeping and is closely akin to a second fundamental trait of capitalism—the conception of profit. Sin or goodness is regarded as something apart from the sinner. . . . No consideration whatever is had for the personality of the sinner or his ethical state, just as a sum of money is separated from persons, just as it is capable of being added to another abstract sum of money. The ceaseless striving of the righteous after well-being in this and the next world must needs, therefore, take the form of a constant endeavour to increase his rewards. Now, as he is never able to tell whether at a particular state of his conscience he is worthy of God's goodness or whether in his account the rewards or the punishments are the more numerous, it must be his aim to add reward after reward to the end of his days. The limited conception of all personal values thus finds no admission into the world of his religious ideas and its place is taken by the endlessness of a pure quantitative ideal. (212)
Parallel with this tendency there runs through Jewish moral theology another which regards the getting of money as a means to an end. . . . "A true Israelite," remarks one of the most popular of modern "helps to faith," "avoids covetousness. He looks upon all his possessions only as a means of doing what is pleasing in the sight of God. For is not the entire purpose of his life to use all his possessions, all enjoyment as the means to this end? Indeed, it is a duty to obtain possessions and to increase one's enjoyments, not as an end in themselves but as a means to do God's will on earth." (212) . . . . .
Look through Jewish literature, more especially through Holy Writ and the Talmud, and you will find, it is true, a few passages wherein poverty is lauded as something higher and nobler than riches. But on the other hand you will come across hundreds of passages in which riches are called the blessing of the Lord, and only their misuse or their dangers warned against.
. . . Nothing is said against riches; and never is it stated that they are as a leaving tree to be Lord.
Let us quote a few Talmudic sayings on the subject:-
"Seven characteristics are there which are comely to the righteous and comely to the world. One of them is riches."
"In prayer a man should turn to Him who owns wealth and
possessions. . . . . In reality both come not from business but from merit."
"R. Eleazer said, "The righteous love their money more than their bodies.'"
"Rabba honoured the wealthy, so did R. Akiba."
'In time of scarcity a man learns to value wealth best."
Doctrines concerning wealth such as these could not but encourage a worldly view of life. This the Jewish view was, despite the belief in another world. . . . . As often as riches are lauded in the Old Testament they are damned in the New, wherein poverty is praised. The whole outlook of the Essenes, turning its back on the world and the flesh, was incorporated in the Gospels. One can easily recall passage after passage to this effect. "It is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God." This is the keynote of Christianity on the point, and the difference between it and Judaism is clear enough. There is no single parallel to the saying of Jesus in the whole of the Old Testament, and probably also none in the entire body of Rabbinic literature. (216—221)
Profiteering Piety
Let us imagine old Amschel Rothschild on a Friday ovening, after having "earned" a million on the Stock Exchange, turning to his Bible for edification. What will be found there touching his earnings and their effect on the refinement of his soul, an effect which the pious old Jew most certainly desired on the eve of the Sabbath? Will the million burn his conscience? or will he not be able to say, and rightly say, "God's blessing rested on me this week. I thank Thee, Lord, for having graciously granted the light of Thy countenance to Thy servant. In order to find favour in Thy sight I shall give much to Charity and keep Thy commandments even more strictly than hitherto?" Such would be his words if he knew his Bible, and he did know it.
For his eye would rest complacently on many a passage in the Holy Writ. In his beloved Torah he would be able to read again and again of the blessing of God. . . . . He would rejoice with Job when on concluding the story of his trials he found that the latter end was more blessed than the beginning, and that he had 14,000 sheep, 6,000 camels, 1,000 yoke of oxen and 1,000 she-asses, and the rest. (Happily our friend Amschel knew nothing of modern Biblical criticism, and was not aware therefore that this particular portion of Job is a later interpolation in the story.) . . . A beautiful illustration of the way religion and business were fused in the mind of pious Jews may be found in the delightful memoirs of Glueckeln von Hameln, to which we have already referred. "Praise be to God, who gives and takes, the faithful God, who always made good our losses," she says. And again, "My husband sent me a long comforting letter, urging me to calm my soul, for God, whose name be blessed, would restore to us what we had lost. And so it was."
There is no need to expatiate on the different attitude of the good Jew and the good Christian towards economic activities. The Christian is forced by all manner of gymnastics to interpret away the Essene conception of riches from his Scriptures. And what anxious moments must the rich Christian live through as he thinks of Heaven locked against him! Compare with him the position of the rich Jew, who, as we have seen, "in the name of the Lord God" gathers gold as tin and silver as lead. (217—222)
The Position of Woman among the Jews: a People so "furiously prone to Lust," that they had to be controlled by Hundreds of Ordinances: Jewish Men not even trusted with their own Wives: Sex-Lust restrained converted in them to Money-Lust.
A rugged Dualism—the terrible dualism which is part and parcel of our constitution—characterises the Jewish conception of ethical worth. Nature is not unholy, neither is she holy. She is not yet holy. She may become holy through us. All the seeds of sin are in her; the serpent still lurks in the Garden of Eden.
Deum respice et cura is still the motto of the Jew. If he meets a king or sees a dwarf or a negro, passes a ruined building, or takes medicine or his bath, notes the coming storm or hears its roaring thunder, risés in the morning and puts on his clothes or eats his food, enters his house or leaves it, greets a friend or meets a foe—for every emergency there is an ordinance which must be obeyed.
Now what of the contents of the ordinances? All of them aim at the subjugation of the merely animal instincts in man, at the bridling of his desires and inclinations and at the replacing of impulses by thoughtful action; in short, at the "ethical tempering of man."
It is just the strongest instincts of man that must be curbed, directed into right channels, deprived of their natural force and made to serve useful ends. In short, they must be rationalised.
Take the instinct which desires to satisfy hunger. It is forbidden to appease the appetite merely because it happens to be there; it should be appeased only for the body's sake. . . . .
Finally—and this of course matters most—just like hunger, Love also must be rationalised, that is to say, its natural expression must be held in check. Nowhere more than in the erotic sphere does the hard dualism show itself so well. The world, and certainly the civilised nations, owes this conception of the sexual to the Jews (through the agency of Christianity, which was infected with the idea). All carlier religions saw something divine in the expression of sex, and regarded sexual intercourse as of the nature of a heavenly revelation. All of them were acquainted with Phallus-worship in a grosser or finer form. None of them condemned what is sensuous, or looked upon women as a source of sin. But the Jews from Ezra's day to this held and hold the opposito view. . . . .
But the point of it all must not be overlooked. Other religions also show signs of being terrified at women. Ever since the notion became prevalent that woman brought sin into the world there have always been morbid souls who spent their lives exciting themselves with all manner of lascivious imaginings but avoiding women as if they were the devil incarnate. In other religions the man fled to the hermit's cave in the wilderness, or to a monastery. In either case, his religion florced "chastity" upon him, with all the horrid resultants well known to students of monastic life. Not so Judaism. Judaism does not forbid sexual intercourse; it rationalises it. Not that it does not regard sexual intercourse as sinful. Sinful it must always be, but its sinfulness may to some extent be removed by sanctification. Hence Judaism advocates early marriages and regulates the relationship between husband and wife as something "ever in the great Taskmaster's eye."
Such was the Jewish view of marriage, which has continued for more than two thousand years. It is well illustrated in that touching story in the book of Tohit
It may be asked, why have I treated this aspect of Jewish life at such great length? My answer is simple. I really believe that the rationalisation of life, and especially sexual life, which the Jewish religion effects cannot be too highly estimated for its influence on economic activities. If it is at all to be accounted a factor in Jewish economic life, then certainly the rationalisation of conduct is its best expression.
To begin with, a number of good qualities or virtues which are indispensable to any economic order owe their existence to rationalisation—e.g. industry, neatness, thrift. But the whole of life, if lived in accordance with the ordinances of the "Wise," ministers to the needs of wealth-getting. Sobriety, moderation and piety are surely qualities which stand the business man in good stead. In short, the whole ideal of conduct preached in (Jewish) Holy Writ and in Rabbinic literature has something of the morality of the small shopkeeper about it—to be content with one wife, to pay your debts punctually, to go to church or synagogue on Sunday or Saturday (as the case may be) and to look down with immeasurable scorn on the sinful world around. . . . .
It may be necessary to look below the psychological influences to the physical ones. How curiously moulded must the constitution of the Jew become through the rationalisation of his married life! We see this phenomenon—that a people with strong sexual inclinations (Tacitus speaks of it as projectissima ad libridinem gens) is forced by its religion to hold them in complete restraint. Extra marital connexions are absolutely forbidden; every one must content himself with one wife, but even with her intercourse is restricted.
The result of all this is obvious. Enormous funds of energy were prevented from finding an outlet in one direction and they turned to others. . . . . It is quite possible to prove that restrained sexual desires and the chase of profits go hand in hand. . . . . . We see then that a good deal of capitalistic capacity which the Jews possessed was due in large measure to the sexual restraint put upon them by their religious teachers. (225—237)
A New Species of the Genus Homo: "Homines Rationalistici Artificiales."
One other point in conclusion. The rationalisation of life accustomed the Jew to a mode of living contrary to (or side by side with) Nature, and therefore also to an economic system like the capitalistic, which is likewise contrary to (or side by side with) Nature. What in reality is the idea of making profit, what is economic rationalism, but the application to economic activities of the rules by which the Jewish religion shaped Jewish life? Before capitalism could develop the natural man had to be changed out of all recognition, and a rationalistically-minded mechanism introduced in his stead. There had to be a transvaluation of all economic values. And what was the result? The homo capitalisticus, who is closely related to the homo Judeus, both belonging to the same species, homines rationalistici artificiales.
And so the rationalisation of Jewish life by the Jewish religion, if it did not actually produce the Jewish capacity for capitalism, certainly increased and heightened it. (237—238)
The Alienism of the Jew
One of the causes to which the Jew owed his economic progress was the fact that Israel was for generations a stranger and an alien. If we seek to account for this aloofness we shall find its roots in the ordinances of the Jewish religion, shall find that this religion always maintained and broadened the line of separation. . . . As Leroy-Beaulieu, who has studied this aspect of Jewish history with great success, has so well said, "La loi leur donnait l'esprit de clan." The very fact that they had their Law forced the Jews to live apart from the Gentiles. For if they desired to observe the Law they must needs keep to themselves. The Jews created the Ghetto, which from the non-Jewish point of view was a concession and a privilege, and not the result of enmity.
But the Jews wished to live separated from the rest because they felt themselves superior to the common people round them. They were the Chosen Race, a People of Priests. The Rabbis did all that was required to fan the flame of pride—from Ezra, who forbade intermarriage as a profanation of Jewish purity, down to this very day, when the pious Jew says every morning, "Blessed art Thou, O Lord, King of the Universe, who hast not made me a Gentile (stranger)." . . . .
What was the effect on economic life of this seclusion and separation of the Jewish socialism? Directly the Jews stepped outside the Ghetto gates their intercourse was with strangers. We have already dealt with the point elsewhere; my reason in calling attention to it again is to show that this attitude was a direct consequence of the teaching of Judaism, that in treating the people among whom they lived as "others," the Jews were but obeying a divine behest. Here, too, their conduct was hallowed, and it received a sanction from the peculiar system of laws relating to "strangers." (238—242)
Jewish Usury and Elastic Commercial Ethics.
The most important and most frequently discussed legal ordinance in this system was that relating to the taking of interest. In the old Jewish theorracy, as in every society in early civilisation, loans without interest were the regular means of rendering assistance by a man to his neighbour. But it may be observed that even in the earliest collection of laws interest was allowed to be taken from "strangers."
The Jewish code was no exception. The best example of this may be found in Deuteronomy xxiii. 20: "Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury." . . . . The pious Jew was allowed to take interest from non-Jews—that is the significant thing so far as we are concerned. . . . The Deuteronomic command has been received as one of the laws that regulate the life of the Jew. . . . Of the 613 commandments this is the 198th, and may be found likewise in the Shulchan Aruch. Modern Rabbis to whom the perfectly clear ordinance in Deuteronomy is somewhat inconvenient (one cannot quite understand why), attempt to explain it away by asserting that "strangers" in the passage is intended not for all non-Jews, but only for heathens and idol-worshippers. . . . (But) the pious Jew who has committed the 198th command to memory is not likely to draw the fine distinction urged by the learned Rabbis. Sufficient for him that the man to whom he has lent money was no Jew, no "brother," no neighbour, but a Gentile.
Now think of the position in which the pious Jew and the pious Christian find themselves in the period in which money-lending first became a need in Europe, and which eventually gave birth to capitalism. The good Christian who had been addicted to usury was full of remorse as he lay a-dying, ready at the eleventh hour to cast from him the ill-gotten gains which scorched his soul. And the good Jew? In the evening of his days he gazed upon his well-filled caskets and coffers, overflowing with sequins of which he had relieved the miserable
Christians or Mohammedans. It was a sight which warmed his heart, for every penny was almost like a sacrifice which he had brought to his Heavenly Father.
Apart from this particular question, the stranger was accorded special consideration in the Jewish legal code. Duties towards him were never as binding as towards your "neighbour," your fellow-Jew. . . . That has remained the same from the day the Torah first became current to our own. . . . .
What was the importance in economic life of the laws concerning strangers? It was twofold. First, intercourse was bereft of all consideration, and commercial morality (if I may so put it) became elastic. (242—5)
Equal Rights for Jews: No Rights for Strangers. Free Trade and Free Cheating: Talmudic Equivoques.
The theory of price in the Talmud and the Codes, in so far as it affected trade between Jew and Jew, is exactly parallel to the scholastic doctrine of justum pretium which prevailed in Europe throughout the Middle Ages. But as between Jew and non-Jew there was no just price. Price was formed as it is to-day, by the "higgling of the market."
Be that as it may, the important thing to observe is that in the Talmud, and still more distinctly in the Shulchan Aruch, conceptions of the freedom of industry and enterprise, so entirely alien to the Christian law of Medieval Europe, are met with . . . . I can do no more here than refer to a few instances. But few though they be they seem to me to be conclusive evidence on the point in question. My first reference is to a passage in the Talmud which fully recognises free competition among sellers.
Mishna.—"R. Judah was of opinion that a shopkeeper should not distribute nuts among children, because by so doing he gets them into a habit of coming to him. But the Rabbis allow it. Moreover, it is not lawful to spoil prices. But the Rabbis say, 'Blessed be his memory.'"
Gemara .- "The question at once arises, what was the reason
for the attitude of the Rabbis in the first case? The answer is that the shopkeeper may say to his competitor, 'I give the children nuts, you can give them plums.' And what is the reason of the Rabbis in the second case? The Mishna forbids price alteration, and yet they say, 'Blessed be his memory.' The answer is, they bless his memory because he reduces prices.'
In the Codes the reasons have been omitted, and the dry statement of law only is found. "A shopkeeper is allowed to make presents of nuts and other things to the children who come to purchase in his shop, in order to win their custom. Moreover, he may sell at a price below the current one, and the competing tradesmen can do nothing."
Similarly, in the laws regulating the conduct of traders who bring their goods to the market town, the following may be read: "Should the strangers sell more cheaply than the native dealers, or should their goods be of a better quality, the natives may not prevent them, for the Jewish public derives benefit therefrom."
Once more. "If a Jew is prepared to lend money to a non-Jew at a lower rate of interest than someone else, the latter can do nothing against it."
Finally, Jewish law favours industrial laissez-faire. So we find in the Shulchan Aruch: "If any one commenced a handicraft in his street and none of his neighbours protested, and then one of the other residents in the street wishes to carry on the same calling, the first may not complain that the newcomer is taking the bread out of his mouth, and try to prevent him."
Clearly, then, free trade and industrial freedom were in accordance with Jewish law, and therefore in accordance with God's will. What a mighty motive power in economic life! (242-5)
Puritanism Practically Identical with Judaism
A complete comparison between the two "isms" is not within my province here. But I believe that if it were made, it would be seen that there is an almost unique identity between Judaism
Unlike most other writers on the subject, I will begin by noting a Jewish quality which, though mentioned often enough, never received the recognition which its importance merited. I refer to the extreme intellectuality of the Jew. Intellectual interests and intellectual skill are more strongly developed in him than physical (manual) powers.
The most valuable individual is the intellectual individual; humanity at its best is intellectuality at its highest. Listen to what a sensible Jew has to say when he pictures the ideal man, the superman if you like, of the future. "In place of the blind instincts . . . . civilised man will possess intellect conscious of purpose. It should be every man's unswerving ideal to crush the instincts and replace them by will-power, and to substitute reflection for mere impulse. . . . Civilisation should have but one aim—to liberate man from all that is mystic, from the vague impulsiveness of all instinctive action, and to cultivate the purely rational side of his being." Only think. Genius, the very essence of instinctive expression, conceived as the hishest form of the rational and intellectual!
The intellectuality of the Jew is so strong that it tends to develop at the expense of other mental qualities, and the mind is apt to become one-sided. . . . . The Jew lacks the quality of understanding; he responds less to feeling than to intellect.
The Jew certainly sees remarkably clearly, but he does not see much. He does not think of his environment as something alive, and that is why he has lost the true conception of life of its oneness, of its being an organism, a natural growth.
Proofs will be found in the neguliarities of Lawish law
which, as we have already seen, abolished personal relationships and replaced them by impersonal, abstract connexions or activities or aims.
As a matter of fact, one may find among the Jews an extraordinary knowledge of men. They are able with their keen intellects to probe, as it were, into every pore, and to see the inside of a man as only Roentgen rays would show him. They muster all his qualities and abilities, they note his excellencies and his weaknesses, they detect at once for what he is best fitted. But seldom do they see the whole man, and thus they often make the mistake of ascribing actions to him which are an abomination to his immost soul. Moreover, they seldom appraise a man according to his personality, but rather according to some perceptible characteristic and achievement. Hence their lack of sympathy for every status where the nexus is a personal one. . . . Politically he is an individualist. A constitutional State in which all human intercourse is regulated by clearly defined legal principles suits him well. He is the born representative of a "liberal" view of life in which there are no living men and women of flesh and blood with distinct personalities, but only citizens with rights and duties. And these do not differ in different nations, but form part of manhorphous units. . . . .
It comes to this, that they behold the world not with their "soul," but with their intellect. The result is that they are easily led to believe that whatever can be neatly set down on paper and ordered aright by the aid of the intellect must of necessity be capable of proper adjustment in actual life. . . . . .
The conception of the universe in the mind of such an intellectual people must perforce have been that of a structure well-ordered in accordance with reason. By the aid of reason, therefore, they sought to understand the world; they were rationalists both in theory and in practice. (254—265)
The Jew has always an End in View; which is, His End and not Yours.
The Jew's outlook is teleogical or that of practical rationalism. No peculiarity is so fully developed in the Jew as this. Most other observers start out with the teleology of the Jew; I for my part regard it as the result of his extreme intellectuality, in which I believe all the other Jewish peculiarities are rooted. Take any expression of the Jewish genius and you will be certain to find in it this teleological tendency.
which has sometimes been called extreme subjectivity. Certain it is that the Jews are the most subjective of peoples. The Jew never loses himself in the outer world, never sinks in the depth of the cosmos, never soars in the endless realms of thought, but as Jellinek well puts it, dives below the surface to seek for pearls. He brings everything into relation with his ego. He is for ever asking why, what for, what will it bring? (265)
Jewish Mobility, Moral and Intellectual.
Mobility of mind—quick perception and mental versatility—all Jews possess. These four elements, intellectuality, teleology, energy, and mobility, are the corner-stones of Jewish character, so complicated in its nature. I believe that all the qualities of the Jew may be easily traced to one or more of these elements. . . . .
In the words of Goethe, "No Jew, not even the most insignificant, but is busy towards the achievement of some worldly, temporary or momentary aim." This activity often enough degenerates into restlessness. He must for ever be up and doing, for ever managing something and carrying it to fruition. He is always on the move, and does not care much if he makes himself a nuisance to those who would rest if they could. All musical and social "affairs" in our large towns are run by Jews. The Jew is the born trumpeter of progress and of its manifold blessings. And why? Because of his practical-mindedness and his mobility combined with his intellectuality. The last more especially, because it never strikes deep root. All intellectuality is in the long run shallowness; never does it allow of probing to the roots of a matter, never reaching down to the depths of the soul or of the universe. Hence intellectuality makes it easy to go from one extreme to the other. That is why you find among Jews fanatical orthodoxy and unenlightened doubt.
But to this shallow intellectuality the Jew owes perhaps the most valuable of his characteristics—his adaptability—which is unique in history. The Jews were always a stiffnecked people, and their adaptability and their capacity to maintair their national traits are both due to the one cause. Their adaptability enabled them to submit, for the time being, it circumstances so demanded, to the laws of necessity, only to hark back to their wonted ways when better days came. From of old the Jewish character was at one and the same time resistant and submissive, and though these traits may appear contradictory, they only seem so. As Leroy-Beaulieu well said. "The Jew is at once the most pliant of men, the most self-willed and the most malleable."
That a Felix Mendelssohn should write German music, that a Jacques Offenbach French, and a Souza Yankee-doodle; that a Lord Beaconsfield should set up as an Englishman, Gambetta as a Frenchman, Lassalle as a German; in short, that Jewish talent should so often have nothing Jewish about it, but be in accord with its environment, has curiously enough again and again been urged as evidence that there are no specifically Jewish characteristics, whereas in truth it proves the very opposite in a striking fashion. It proves that the Jews have the gift of adaptability in an eminently high degree. The Jew might go from one planet to another, but his strangeness among his new surroundings would not continue for long. (268—270)
How mobile the Jew can be is positively astounding. He is able to give himself the personal appearance he most desires. As in days of old through simulating death he was able to defend himself, so now by colour adaptation or other forms of mimicry. . . . . .
Easier still, on account of his mental and moral mobility, is it for the Jew to make the intellectual atmosphere of his environment his own. His mental mobility enables him quickly to seize upon the "tone" of any circle, quickly to notice what it is that matters, quickly to feel his way into things. And his moral mobility? That enables him to remove troublesome hindrances, either ethical or æsthetical, from his path. And he can do this with all the more facility because he has only to a small degree what may be termed personal dignity. It means
little to him to be untrue to himself if it is a question of attaining the wished-for goal.
Is this picture faithful to life? The obvious adaptability of the Jew to the changing conditions of the struggle for existence is surely proof enough. But there is further proof in some of the special gifts which the Jew possesses. I refer to their undoubted talent for journalism, for the Bar, for the stage, and all of it is traceable to their adaptability. . . . .
The actor's calling, no less than the barrister's, depends for success on his ability to place himself quickly in a strange world of ideas, to take a right view of men and conditions without much difficulty, to form a correct estimate of them for his own end. The Jew's gift of subjectivity stands him here in good stead, for by its aid he can easily put himself in the position of another, take thought for him and defend him. To be sure, jurisprudence is the bulk of the contents of Jewish literature. (272—3)
Capitalism and the Jew: Liberalism is Judaism.
How and in what way did the Jewish characteristics enable Jews to become financiers and speculators? . . . Speaking generally, the fundamental ideas of capitalism and those of the Jewish character show a singular similarity. . . . We have the triple parallelism between Jewish character, Jewish religion and capitalism. Organising ability springs from intellectuality, and in the capitalistic system we find the separation between head and hands, between the work of directing and that of manufacturing. "For the greatest work to be completely done, you need of hands a thousand, of minds but only one." . . . The purest form of capitalism is that wherein abstract ideas are most clearly expressed. . . . . The quality of abstraction in capitalism manifests itself in the substitution of all qualitative differences by merely quantitative ones (value in exchange). Before capitalism came exchange was a manysided, multi-coloured and technical process; now it is just one specialised act—that of the dealer: before, there were many
relationships between buyer and seller; there is only one now—the commercial. The tendency of capitalism has been to do away with different manners, customs, pretty local and national contrasts, and to set up in their stead the dead level of the cosmopolitan town. In short, there has been a tendency to uniformity, and in this capitalism and Liberalism have much in common. Liberalism we have always known to be a near relative of Judaism, and so we have the kindred trio of Capitalism, Liberalism and Judaism. (273—5)
Moneyolatry creates Drab Uniformity
How is the inner resemblance between the first and the last—Capitalism and Judaism—manifested? Is it not through the agency of money, by means of which capitalism succeeds so well in its policy of bringing about a drab uniformity? Money is the common denominator, in terms of which all values are expressed; at the same time it is the be-all and end-all of economic activity in a capitalistic system. Hence one of the conspicuous things in such a system is success. Is it otherwise with the Jew? Does he not also make the increase of capital his chief aim? And not only because the abstractness of capital is congenial to the soul of the Jew, but also because the great regard in which (in the capitalistic system) money is held strikes another sympathetic note in the Jewish character—its teleology. Gold becomes the great means, and its value arises from the fact that you can utilise it for many ends. . . . Capitalism is constantly on the look-out for something new, for some way of expanding, for abstaining to-day for the sake of to-morrow. Think of our whole system of credit. Does not this characteristic show itself clearly enough? (275)
Nothing Organic or Natural—All Mechanical and Artificial.
The Jew is well fitted for the part of undertaker because of his strength of will and his habit of making for some goal or other. His intellectual mobility is accountable for his readiness to discover new methods of production and new possibilities of marketing. He is an adept at forming new organisations, and in these his peculiar capacity for finding out what a man is best fitted for stands him in good stead. And since in the world of capitalism there is nothing organic or natural but only what is mechanical or artificial, the Jew's lack of understanding of the former is of no consequence. Even undertaking on a large scale is itself artificial and mechanical; you may extend a concern or contract it; you may change it according to circumstances. . . . The Jew can easily grasp impersonal relationships. . . . He has the feeling of personal dependence only in a slight measure. Hence he . . . pays little attention to the dash of sentimentality which is still sometimes found in labour contracts. In all relations between sellers and buyers, and between employers and employed, he reduces everything to the legal and purely business basis . . . .
But if the Jew is well fitted to be an undertaker, still more is he cut out for the part of the trader. His qualities in this respect are almost innumerable.
The trader lives in figures, and in figures the Jew has always been in his element. His love of the abstract has made calculation easy for him; it is his strong point. Now a calculating talent, combined with a capacity for working always with some aim in view, has already won half the battle for the trader. (275)
Origin of the Jews: A People of the Desert.
They are an Oriental people—that is to say, one of those peoples whose habitat was in that part of the globe lying between the Atlas Mountains in the West, and the Persian Gulf in the East; one of those races baked by the sun in the dry, burning climate of the great deserts of North Africa, Arabia and Asia Minor, or of their border-lands; the races which brought their special characteristics to maturity amid their peculiar environment which had never altered since the Ice Age, a period of some twelve to sixteen thousand years.
The whole of this region, from which the Jews hailed, is an extensive sandy desert, with here and there an oasis where man and beast can dwell. In the larger of these valleys arose, as is well known, the earliest civilisations of the world—in Egypt, in Mesopotamia, and in Palestine. All three are comparatively small fertile patches; all are true oases in the desert, and theirs was an essentially oasis civilisation. The cultivable area of Egypt was about as large as the Prussian Province of Saxony is to-day (about 5,500,000 acres); Mesopotamia at its widest extent was only about half the size of the plain of Lombardy (about 4,500 square miles); Palestine, the land of the whole people of Israel, was smaller still, being no larger than perhaps Baden (about 5,000 square miles); while Judea, the southern kingdom, and therefore the home of the Jews, was as the Duchies of Anhalt and Saxe-Coburg and Gotha together (about 1,600 square miles). But these oases, and Palestine more especially, were themselves broken by deserts, Judea being particularly badly treated by Nature. Its southern end extended past Hebron and Beersheba, right into the modern sandy waste.
All agriculture in these countries was the tillage of oases. What does this mean? It means that the soil collected by almost artificial means, and that the great aim of the farmer was to gather the water necessary for the growth of vegetation. This was the case in Palestine, where the cultivation of the soil depended on the water supply. Drought is the scourge that the farmer fears most. Every year he trembles lest the arid waste should stretch its arms and embrace his strip of land, tended with so much care and tribulation. Every moment he is in dread lest the desert send him its scorehing winds, or its locust swarms. And, above all, he fears the desert wastes because of the marauding bands who may fall upon him, robbing, killing, pillaging as they cross the country, sometimes even taking possession of the holding if the fancy seize them. These children of the desert, whom we now call Bedouins, and of whom the oasis-dwellers were once themselves a part, were nomadic shepherds. Their raids hastened the rise of strong cities with stout walls, behind which the inhabitants of the plain
could take refuge. Sometimes the desert crept right into them, and so at all times they were filled with the spirit of the sandy wastes. (324—5)
Conquest and Enslavement of Canaan.
Such a tribe of restless wandering Bedouins were the Hebrews, when about the year 1200 s.c. they fell upon Canaan, plundering and killing as they went, and finally deciding to settle there, and rest from all their wanderings. Which meant, that if possible they would do nothing, but that the natives would work for them—the aim of every conquering people. Such was Jehovah's promise: "I will lead you into the land which I promised you, a land of great and goodly cities which thou buildedst not, and houses full of all good things which thou filledst not, and cisterns hewn out which thou hewedst not, and vineyards and olive-trees which thou plantedst not, and thou shalt eat and be full "(Deut. vi. 10, 11). (325—6)
How the Conquerors Behaved
Once there, what did the Hebrews do in this promised land? What sort of economic organisation did they establish? We cannot, of course, speak as to the details, but one or two things we may imagine. Probably, as we have seen, the powerful and mighty among them, after having conquered large tracts of land, instituted a sort of feudal society. Part of the produce of the land they took for themselves, either by way of rent in kind, by farming it out to tax-collectors, or by means of the cash nexus. In any case, a large number of Hebrews lived in the towns, receiving rent or interest from the subject population who worked on the soil, either as "colonists" or "free peasants," or whatever term was used in the Orient for this class. Some of the conquering tribes may have become impoverished and themselves sunk to the level of unfree farmers, but they were hardly the influential ones. This position was held by those who inhabited the West Jordan lands, principally Judah, sections of Simeon and Levi and others. In those districts cattle farming only was possible: "Judah's teeth are white with
milk." Other tribes, such as Reuben and Gad, remained east of the Jordan as semi-nomads, rearing cattle, and half the tribe of Manasseh crossed the Jordan to return thither. But all the tribes alike must have been impregnated with the nomadic spirit. Were this not the case, it would be exceedingly difficult to understand the rise and growth of the Jewish religious system. (326)
The Old Testament is a Literature of Wandering Shepherds.
It should not be forgotten that the Holy Scriptures of the Jews in which their religion is embodied, especially the Pentateuch, is the literature of a nomadic people. Their God, who triumphs over the false gods, is a desert and pastoral divinity. The traditions of the nomad state were maintained by Ezra and Nehemiah in the conscious re-establishment of the Jehovah cult, in doing which they paid no heed to the intervening period of agriculture. The priestly Code "takes care not to mention the settled life in Canaan . . . it strictly limits itself to the wanderings in the wilderness, and in all seriousness wants to be regarded as a desert Code." Open the historical books or the majority of the prophets, that desert choir, include the Psalms also, and you everywhere find metaphors and similes taken from shepherd life. Only occasionally do you meet with the peasant "sitting contentedly at the door of his house in the shade of the fig-tree." Jehovah is the good Shepherd who will gather the remnants of Israel "as a flock in the midst of their pasture" (Micah ii. 12). And what does the Sabbatical year mean but that you cease being a peasant for the time being, and become an Israelite of the old sort? . . .
Even if we were inclined to assume that the Children of Israel lived a settled life for five hundred years after the conquest of Canaan, it is perfectly clear that all the powers on earth have conspired together not to allow this state to become permanent. Scarcely had the plant taken root (so far as it could in so hot a country) than it was pulled up. The Jew's inherent "Nomadism" or "Saharaism" (if I may coin a word) was always kept
alive through selection or adaptation. Throughout the centuries, therefore, Israel has remained a desert and nomadic people.
The term nomad is not meant to imply obloquy or disgrace. At most objection may be taken to the robbing. But why should there be any dishonour attached to a brave Bedouin tribe which, under such a doughty leader as, say, King David, lived on plunder? Why should they appear less worthy, or call forth less sympathy, than an agricultural tribe of negroes somewhere in the wilds of Africa? (326—9)
The Jews were never Agriculturists, and after the Exile the Cream of the Jews Remained in Babylon.
We have already mentioned the possible effect of the Exile in calling forth slumbering nomadic instincts. . . . Whoever the exiles may have been, it is pretty certain that the actual agriculturists were not among them. These remained behind even after the second batch of exiles had been carried away captive. The passage in Jeremiah (Jer. xxxix. 10) would seem to lend probability to my view that the soil was tilled by unfree villeins who, when their lords were led to Babylon, became independent husbandmen. It is not assuming too much to regard these men as the descendants of the original inhabitants whom the Hebrews had conquered. From the age of the Captivity, therefore, the population of Judea had a thinner stream of Jewish blood in their veins than the Babylonian exiles, who were more or less the Jewish aristocracy, the cream of the people, as it were. This was indeed the view that obtained currency in later times. Even in Judea itself it was admitted that the Babylonian Jews were the very best stock, and an old Jewish saying helped to confirm the belief. "The Jews in the Roman Diaspora compared as to their descent with those of Judea are like the mixed dough to the pure flour, but Judea itself is only dough compared with Babylon." And R. Ezekiel excuses that good man, Ezra, for having returned to Palestine
by saying that he took the families of doubtful origin away with him, and so left those that remained free from the danger of mixing with them.
We come then to this conclusion. The Exile was a kind of selective process whereby the best elements of Jewry, never favourable to an economy of settled life, were forced to revive the inherent nomad instincts within them, and to gain their livelihood as townsmen, i.e. traders. . . . We never find these wandering Jews, be their origin Judea or Palestine, establishing colonies or independent settlements of any sort, as most other emigrants did. But what do we find? That Jewish settlers scattered themselves in all corners of the inhabited globe among foreign nations, preferably in large towns, where they sought their livelihood. We never hear of their return to their native hearth after having saved up enough money to keep them in affluence, as the Swiss, Hungarian, or Italian emigrants do to-day. (330—1)
The Modern City Suits the Jew because it is actually a Desert: The New Land of Promise and Profits.
Now the modern city is nothing else but a great desert, as far removed from the warm earth as the desert is, and like it, forcing its inhabitants to become nomads. The old nomadic instincts have thus through the centuries been called forth in the Jew by the process of adapting himself to his environment, while the principle of selection has only tended to strengthen those instincts. . . . This hot-blooded, restless people that had wandered not forty, but four thousand years in the wilderness, came at last to its Canaan, to its promised land, where it should be able to repose from all its travels—it came to the Northern countries, meeting nations there who, while the Jews were hurrying from one oasis to another, had dwelt on their soil and smelt of the earth. (334)
From Pastoralism to Capitalism: From Counting Sheep to Counting Shekels.
From the endless wastes of sand, from the pastoral pursuits, springs the opposite way of life—Capitalism. Economic activities here are not circumscribed for each man, but are those of the breeder (shepherd) with his boundless outlook, where to-morrow may undo the work of to-day, but where also in a few years' time stock may increase tenfold. Sheep and kine multiply quickly, but as quickly they may be decimated by hunger or disease. Hence, only in the shepherd's calling, never in the farmer's, could the idea of gain have taken root, and the conception of unlimited production have become a reality. Only in the shepherd's calling could the view become dominant that in economic activities the abstract quantity of commodities matters, not whether they are fit or sufficient for use. Only in the shepherd's calling was counting a prime necessity.
The Different Types of Jews: Jews of the Ghetto and Free Jews; Ashkenazim, Sephardim and Marannos; all equally Jewish.
At one time in their history the contrast between the Ghetto Jew and his liberated brother found tangible expression in the attitude of the Sephardim (Spanish Jews) towards the Ashenazim (German Jews). The former looked down on the latter with contempt, regarding them as importunate beggars who were a nuisance. This is the vein of bitter sareasm in which a German Jew wrote to a Portuguese co-religionist about the middle of the 18th century (when the relations between the two sections were most strained): "I am aware, sir, that the Portuguese Jews have nothing in common with those of Germany except a religious rite, and that their upbringing and their manners utterly differentiate between them as far as social life is concerned. I am also aware that the affinity between the two is a tradition of a very ancient date, and that Vercingentorix, the Gaul, and Arminius, the German, were neare
relations to Herod's father-in-law than you are to the Son of Ephraim." Pinto, the Sephardi Jew, expresses himself in a similar tone in his well-known reply to the attacks which Voltaire made on the Jews as a whole. Pinto is anxious that the Spanish Jews should not be put in the same boat as the German Jews; they are two distinct nations. "A Jew of London," he says, "as little resembles a Jew of Constantinople as the latter does a Chinese Mandarin. A Portuguese Jew of Bordeaux and a German Jew of Metz have nothing in common." "Mons. de Voltaire cannot ignore the delicate scruples of the Portuguese and Spanish Jews in not mixing with the Jews of other nations, either by marriage or otherwise." Pinto proceeds to say that if a Sephardi Jew in Holland or England were to make a German Jewess his wife, his relations would disown him, and he would not be given burial in their cemetery.
This opposition very often found practical expression, more especially on the part of the Sephardim, who in their own eyes were the aristocracy of Jewry, and who were afraid lest their social position should be endangered by the arrival of Jews from more easterly countries. Thus, in 1761, the Portuguese Jews (or Marannos) of Bordeaux were able to get an order passed to the effect that within fourteen days all alien Jews were to leave the city. Pinto and Pereira were the prime movers in the matter, and they used every endeavour to rid themselves of the "vagabonds"—their own co-religionists from Germany and France. In Hamburgh the Sephardim occupied a position of official superiority over the German Jews; the latter having to give undertakings to the former that no shady commercial practices would be carried on.
We have here possibly touched on a chord which will help us to appraise at its true worth the influence of the Ghetto for Jewish life. Perhaps the conception of noblesse oblige held by the Spanish and Portuguese Jews—their aim to make the highest values theirs—may explain why they had no Ghettos, and will not need to be regarded as an effect of Ghetto life. In other words, perhaps a section of the Jews lived the Ghetto life because they were by nature inclined that way. . . . . It is
assuming too much to say that differences in their vicissitudes are traceable to differences in their natures. These differences, however, must not be made too much of. Their Jewishness was little influenced by them. Jews they were all, whether Sephardim or Ashkenazim. But in the case of the latter, Ghetto life produced certain habits, certain mannerisms which always clung to the Ghetto Jew, and often affected his economic activities. In part they were the habits of low social grades generally, but in Jews, with their peculiar temperament, they assumed curious features—a tendency, for instance, to potty cheating, obtrusiveness, lack of personal dignity, tactlessness, and so on. These things must have played some part in the Jewish conquest. (347—9)
The Tribe of Judas seizes Lucre's Sceptre and Mounts the
Desert and wandering, though they influenced Jewish character in no small degree, were not the only forces which moulded the Jewish spirit. . . . There were others. . . . . The first was money, of which the Jews were the guardians. This left its mark on their nature, but at the same time it was in consonance with it. For in money the two factors which go to make up the Jewish spirit are united—desert and wandering, Saharism and Nomadism. Money is as little concrete as the land from which the Jews sprang; money is only a mass, a lump, like the flock; it is mobile; it is seldom rooted in a fruitful soil like the flower or the tree. Their constant concern with money distracted the attention of the Jews from a qualitative, natural view of life to a quantitative, abstract conception. The Jews fathomed all the secrets that lay hid in money and found out its magic powers. They become lords of money, and, through it,
III. LLUSTRATION.
THE SWAY OF THE SCEPTRE.
LUCRE LORDS IN ACTION.
Lucre's Rule
Described in the words of the Second Book of our Story— "A Thousand Millions Pounds—for Us or Germany?" By W. E. Bleloch, author of several works on South African mining, member of Lord Milner's Gold Law Commission, and A. E. O'Flaherty, Editor of "The Standard and Diggers' News," formerly Editor of "The South African Mining Journal."
Foreword.
In tracing the conquest of the Kingship of the World by the Children of Israel, Werner Sombart has shown that the practice of usury has been the mainspring of their power. Inspired by a religion of Scribes and Lawyers, which makes the attainment of riches the supreme and constant end in life, which has double-dealing for its ethic—one law for the Jew and another for the Gentile—freedom from all restraints of personal honour or the dictates of common honesty—all these advantages, combined with tribal solidarity, tribal ubiquity, and a natural aptitude for all that money connotes, carried them surely and inevitably to their place on the Throne of the World.
But this achievement was only rendered possible to them by one condition—the more or less complete conversion of the Christian world to their own religion.
Sombart shows that the entire fabric of modern capitalism is Jewish in origin, Jewish in form, Jewish in spirit; and whether we approve or disapprove, we are in it, and for the timebeing, at least, we are of it.
In "The Merchant of Venice" Shakespere has drawn the eternal portrait of the unchanging Jew. And Shakespere was truly prophetic in making Portia change the sentence of death which Shylock had richly deserved into one of conversion to Christianity. "I am content," said Shylock; and well he might be! It is converts of this description who have been the ruin of Christianity, and who have turned the name of Christian into a by-word. The Jew touches nothing he does not pollute. Shylock has converted Christians by the million into soulless ducat-hunters like himself. But there is a difference between the Jew and the converted Christian, as Sombart points out, and it is this—the native Shylock feels his conscience smite him when he fails to get his pound of flesh, and the Shylockised English Christian feels his conscience smite
him when he gets it. But with a good grace or an ill grace the whole world now worships submissively side by side with Shylock at Mammon's shrine.
The Ashkenazim-Who Are They?
The most comprehensive definition of the term "Ashkenazim" is, perhaps, this—Jews who speak Yiddish. Yiddish—i.e. Jüdisch—is a low German dialect written or printed in Hebrew characters. Ninety per cent. of all Jews are Ashkenazim. They include "English," "French," "Dutch," "Russian," "Polish," "Scandinavian," "Austrian," "Roumanian" Jews, and, in fact, all European Jews outside Spain and Portugal. "Ashkinaz" is the Rabbinical name for Germany as Sepharad is the Rabbinical name for Germany as Sepharad is the Rabbinical name for Germany as Sepharad enables then to publish newspapers in German unintelligible to any but members of their own tribe. It is easy to understand that the Ashkenazim generally should desire and work for a German victory, which would be, after all, an Ashkenazim victory. For whilst an "English" Jew is by no means an English man; or a "Polish" Jew, a Pole; or a "Russian" Jew, a Russian; they are all Ashkenazim, German Jews, and a German Jew is, in very deed, a German.
"The Spirit of England"-in Yiddish!
How far flung is the influence—and the insolence—of the Ashkenazim in their conquest of the British Empire may be realised by an incident recently communicated in a letter from Toronto. "I shall never forget the shock I got a year or two ago," says the writer, "when I went to a Canadian Club lunch to hear 'the Spirit of England' presented, and had to listen to a Yiddish address from Alfred Mond"! At this time Mond was busy arranging for the exploitation of Canada's minerals in close co-operation with his Ashkenazi brethren of the German Metal Octopus.
Ashkenazi Lawyers.
Sombart points out how admirably the Jew is fitted for the profession of the Law. He can plead equally well for either side, especially for the side which pays best. But the power of the Ashkenazi lawyer to plant the Jewish heel on England's neck is greater, possibly, than even Sombart realises. The end of every lawyer is to win his case. Justice is not in question. The more unjust the case the greater the lawyer required to win it. This is a game which admirably suits the Jew. A firm of Jewish lawyers, who have been for two generations a veritable City of Refuge for high-placed delinquents of this country fleeing from the claims of justice, comes in course of time to possess all the secrets of all persons of importance in our ruling classes. Their office thus becomes a perfect mausoleum of family skeletons, all ready to be exhumed when occasion—and interest—may require. The "moral mobility" of the Jew serves him in good stead here. When by chance he has had a client with justice on his side, and has been entrusted by him with an incriminating document which he is directed to use for the rescue of the client's son, he sees nothing shameful, years afterwards, in using the document against the son, whose rescue it was entrusted to him to effect.
The present head of the firm of Lewis and Lewis is Sir George James Graham Lewis, Bart., whose father, the first Baronet, Sir George Henry Graham Lewis, Bart., the son of one, Löwe or Levy, of Stuttgart, married first a daughter of Philip Kann, of Frankfort-on-Main, and secondly Elizabeth, daughter of F. Eberstadt, of Mannheim, mother of the present Baronet. The latter has married Marie, daughter of Emil Hirsch, of Rheinstrasse, Mannheim, so that the German connections of the firm are of the most potent. When it is further considered, that in addition to possessing the secrets of their private clients, the firm are solicitors to the German Banks and important newspapers like the Morning Post and the Daily News, it is not difficult to see how strong the pressure of the Heel of the Jew has become on England's neck. And when the
head of England's Judicial Bench is a company-mongering political Ashkenazim, who is all-potent with the ruling politicians, it would appear that England's chance of recovery iwell-nigh desperate.
Bismarck on the Help of the Jews.
Early in his political career, speaking in the Prussian Parliament against a motion for extending the civic rights of the Jews, Bismarck uttered these profoundly significant words:
"I believe that the realisation of Christian teaching is the end of the State; I do not believe that we shall more nearly approach this end by the help of the Jews."
That Bismarck himself fell later under the sway of the Jew, that he made use of the Jew in creating his reptile press, and in developing the machiavellian policy of his subsequent career is part of the world's tragedy; and the result only confirms the truth of his words. Prussia and Germany are not Christian but Judaic nations: Lucre is their deity and Shylock their High priest. War is the element in which they live and thrive. The German Empire is one huge predatory Judaeo-German Trust. German trade is war, as Jewish trade is war. German finance is Jewish finance, and that is war on all non-Jews and non-Germans. Judaeo-German friendship is war, as our one-time guests, Ballin and Rathenau, have proved. German peace is German penetration; and peaceful penetration is the very worst form of German war.
"The Stain of Blood."
As the authors presently to be quoted truly say, it needed "the stain of blood" to bring the truth of this home to the minds of Englishmen. And the stain is not even yet deep enough or broad enough to make the full truth plain to them. Money is like blood in this, that it carries with it the spirit of its source. Finance has become international, and international finance is Jewish finance, and Jewish finance is German finance. These two,
become one, are penetrating the veins of all the nations of the earth, poisoning their life-blood and sapping the life out of them
The Ashkenazi-Kaiser-Bund
in Proper England to save his Sodom and Gomorrah from exposure and destruction.
"Absolute War"
The Gospel of the German nation has been written by Clausewitz, and it preaches the doctrine of "absolute war." It is this doctrine the meaning of which our Government and people obstinately refuse to recognise, in spite of all the horrors, all the lies, all the treacheries the Hun has been able to perpetrate. These horrors, these lies, these treacheries are as essential a part of "absolute war" as are rifles, bayonets and guns.
According to the prophet, Clausewitz, any consideration of humanity in a soldier is a crime against the Military Art. This likewise is the doctrine of all the Shylocks in all their operations. Capitalism bears the same relation to the honest use of money that militarism bears to honest soldiering, and that pacificism bears to peace. There is no weapon that the Ashkenazi-Hun finds too low for his handling or too small for his consideration. The same agencies—Rasputineries and all—as have proved the downfall of Russia are in intense operation in our own islands. And whilst our Rulers are in semblance "all out to win the war" on land and sea, they are not even waging a "sort of a war" against the thousand-andone agencies by which the Hun is waging absolute war against us. Our "improved" rulers would seem to have made secret treaties with the enemy to protect his vice, his commerce, his finance, his socialists, his pacifists, his Ashkenazi-Bolsheviks, his criminals, his blackmailers and all the rest of his "Government-improvers" in the pay and under the control of the Lords of Lucre.
For it must never be left out of sight that first and last this war is a war of Jewish finance. It has been said of the British Empire that with it, "Trade follows the Flag." With the German Empire the reverse is true: "Empire follows the Trade-Bank." The Trade-Bank is the soul and sinews of German war. The Shylocks of Frankfort, like Commission Agents on the Turf of the World, had made up their books in neutral and enemy countries before they gave their word to the Kaiser that the Race might be started. Then, no matter which animal lost, they were bound to win, and if their favourite failed they knew they would be ready to train and start him on a new Race. First and last this is Lucre's war, and Treason is his Chief of Staff.
The Magic Powers of Lucre
"The Jews," says Sombart, "fathomed all the secrets that lay hid in money and found out its magic powers. They became lords of money, and, through it, Lords of the World."
The magic powers of money as wielded by the Lords
of Lucre are powers of Black Magic at its blackest. The book now to be quoted lifts a corner of the veil which shrouds these occult powers and brings some of them into the light of day. The authors of the book, Messrs. W. E. Bleloch and A. E. O'Flaherty, have given it the title of "A Thousand Million Pounds—For Us or Germany?" and they plead with the South African Government and the Imperial Government to take charge of the resources of the Transvaal—such as are left of them—and not allow them to be filched by Germany and Germans, as has hitherto been the case. The German exploiters of South Africa have been and are predominantly Ashkenazi; and it is quite impossible to draw a dividing line between Germans and German Jews. The German nation is solid as the Jewish tribe is solid. The two tribes make one solid, and whoever deals with a unit of either deals with the two tribes combined. They have one and the same religion—the religion of Gain without scruple: Gwinner, Ballin, Rathenau are its inspiration; Hindenburg, Tirpitz, Ludendorf its military executants, and the Kaiser is the figure-head of both.
A quotation from von Buelow's "Imperial Germany," which fitly graces the volume as a frontispiece, explains to the world how lovingly German war and Judaeo-German commerce and finance march hand in hand. Savs von Buelow:
"Weak and incapable nations must look on while foreign nationalities gain in numbers and importance within the borders of their States. There is no third course . . . one is the victor and the other is the vanquished. . . . Nations of military ability and skill, and of superior culture, will expend their energy in making the national conquest follow in the wake of the political, and every considerable industrial interest ultimately finds political expression in one way or another. . . . . When employers and princely merchants like Stumm and Krupp, Ballin and Rathenau, Kirdorf and Borsig, Gwinner and Siemens were found to take advantage of these favourable conditions the successes of the immediate future were bound to fall to industry and commerce."
The Ashkenazi Vulture.
Said the Poet:
"When nations grow old the Arts grow cold, And Commerce settles on every tree."
This has happened. Commerce, the Vulture of the Ashkenazi breed, has settled not only on every tree, but on every ear of corn and on every blade of grass, on every man, every woman and every child. There is nothing alive that is not paying in some form or other a usury-toll to the Shylocks who have gripped the world in their claws.
Exploitation of others is not of the essence of the English nature as it is of the nature of the Hun and of the Jew; but the Englishman is quite capable of acquiring the malady. By nature the Englishman wishes to produce something which it value corresponds to that which he receives in exchange. But the Cult of the Coin has infected him deeply, and now he is struggling in the raging fever it has brought upon him. He may defeat Hindenburg and Tirpitz on land and sea, but unless he can defeat Shylock in his own country, in his own commerce and in his own heart, the other victory will be unavailing. "The Merchant Canaanite" has not yet taken possession of the entire British Temple. Though he is seated on the High Altar of England's Parliament, there are still a few side-chapels uncontrolled by him, and from one of these must go forth the Scourge that is to "scourge the Merchant Canaanite from out the Temple of the Nation's Mind."
England must return to the Christian ethic of Industry and Trade which makes Life the end of all human effort and not money with its devilish powers. When Christian England becomes Christian in fact as well as in name she will give an opening for her true King to return. So long as she accepts the Jewish Code of faith and commerce she bars the Temple door against His entrance.
Government by Aliens.
* Of Wernher, Beit & Co
† That the appointment is an unpaid one makes it all the more potent as a means of exerting "influence."
false Blockade; it is these who are responsible for the appointments and "honours" of Mond, Rufus Isaacs, Churchill, Phillips and Samuel Montagu; it is these who supported Premier "Wait-and-see" as they now support Premier "Toolate"; it is these who betrayed Serbia and Roumania, who embraced and enlarged Irish rebels when they might have conscripted Ireland; it is these who sent Ashkenazi-Bolsheviks with English pacifists to France and Italy on errands of treason; it is these who have kept the German banks alive and are now, apparently, setting them up in active business again in the centre of the British Empire.
The reason why Sir William Plender was chosen for the task of "winding up" the German banks becomes, perhaps, plain from a perusal of "A Thousand Million Pounds." Sir William, it seems, is the head of a firm of accountants who are the auditors of a number of Ashkenazi mining and banking Houses in South Africa. There are two meanings attached to the term "winding up"; we wind up a watch in order to keep it going; and we usually wind up a business in order to make it stop. Sir William Plender may have been persuaded by his Ashkenazi clients that the former was the sense in which he should interpret his instructions regarding the German banks.
Messrs. Bleloch and O'Flaherty shall now tell in their own words how true is the picture Werner Sombart has drawn of our Conquerors and their South African Conquest.
A THOUSAND MILLION POUNDS
Synopsis.
The Peace Aspect of German War.—German invasion of the Transvaal no recent affair.—The uncanny powers of Gold: Exploiting methods of the Lords of Lucre.—Banking, English and German.—The perilous position of an exploited country.—Gold-power distinct from Capital.—Control, not money, supplied by Germany.—The Cloverfield example: British shareholders find the money and when they lose the German "Control" thrives.—Germany depends on our Gold.—The German State claims and uses all monies and securities deposited in German banks.—The Perils of unprepared Peace.—Democracy, Xenocracy or Shylockracy?—"South Africa First."—The Germans of Johannisburg and the Rebellion.—The Made-in-Germany South African Gold Law is pro-German in aim and operation, and anti-Boer and anti-British.—The sum of the matter: The State Gold Basis must be freed from gambling and treated as a whole.—A Lucre Lady and a friendly Germany.—The patriotic Lady preaches Hun doctrine.—Lady Phillips eulogises the German Bagdad Railway scheme.—The German System controls the British Empire.—Germans without capital get control of all capital.—State-owned enterprises. A German trader is not an individual but an item of the indivisible German nation.—Adjustable German Transport Rates.—British policy and not the British manufacturer at fault.—Principles and Practices of our Ashkenazim conquerors: How Parliaments are "Improved" and controlled.—Ashkenazi Origin of the Jameson Raid.
A THOUSAND MILLION POUNDS.
By
W. E. BLELOCH AND A. E. O'FLAHERTY
The Peace Aspect of German War.
All over the world, by this time, people have been harshly awakened to the danger which lurks in the organised German use of commercial privilege. And, primā facie, it will not be imagined that the political agent, who is never separate from any concern where two or three Germans are gathered together, has neglected South Africa. From India and Persia, through Turkey, Egypt and North Africa generally southwards, the politico-commercial German influence has left its organism, which needed the stain of blood to make it evident to the unsuspecting Englishman. If desert tribes and remote Asiatic and Mahommedan agencies were considered worth preparing for the Anglo-German struggle, is it likely that the obvious political and financial conditions of South Africa would be overlooked, where recent war and rebellion had been succeeded by peace, when party-politics seemed to be resumed on a basis of racial cleavage, when neighbouring German colonies had long been administered on a purely military system, and when the German Banks had already established a powerful lien on a population numbering a great number of German descent? (5)
German Invasion of the Transvaal no Recent Affair.
It is now many years since the higher political command of Prussia determined to possess itself of the gold of the Transvaal. Nor was it quite without significance that the gold mines during the Anglo-Boer war were placed under the protection of German "Special Police"! (6)
The Uncanny Powers of Gold. The Exploiting Methods of the Lords of Lucre.
Gold has strange powers which are not described in an analysis which regards it as a commodity, a "token of value" or a "medium of exchange." As a commodity merely its value is determined like that of any other commodity: it falls with over-production and rises with increased demand. We see that happening in "high prices," which means that there is a fall in the value of gold compared with other commodities in the process of exchange. But at the same time while "high prices" are showing that gold is cheap, we often see that "money is dear." A man with an immense stock of boots will not get more for a pair than a man gets who has a small stock; but it is notorious that a man with a "million of money" can obtain a higher relative return for his investments than a small capitalist can, or a depositor in a Savings Bank. The protean mobility of gold gives it a power of a kind no other commodity possesses. "To him that hath shall be given" is truer of gold than of anything else. They call money "liquid capital," perhaps, because it is so hard to hold. It finds its own level; but its level is in the Banks, and no sooner has it got there than it acquires new power as potential capital. . . . In the late eighties of last century 3 per cent. was
. . . In the late eighties of last century 3 per cent. was reckoned as a sound percentage for a non-professional investor in England. At the same time the purchase-power of gold was not less than 50 per cent. more than it is to-day. To-day, however, when it purchases so little it commands twice as much "interest." In other words, one has to pay twice as much gold for the use of gold while it is less than half its value in goods. A great time for the lender, the man with the gold power! . . . Two values at the same moment! The value in use small, the value in credit (or profit) large. It is
this power that has justified the age-long and instinctive hatred of "usury." It is this that brought the world to a season of strikes and revolutionary activities shortly before this war. As we shall see in a later chapter, this gold-power, organised at the expense of the nation in every country but Germany—where the organisation is national—had not only oppressed the workers and led them to revolutionary acts and thoughts, it had also invaded the process of exchange, preyed upon producer and consumer, and made the old skilled employer and useful distributor (middleman) the servants of impersonal agencies behind which lay the gold-power. (27)
Banking, English and German.
The Banking System of England or South Africa (based on gold) is merely a "Safe Deposit" for the "moderately" well off; for the financier it is a source of immense power. By means of bills, overdrafts, bankers' references and credit of all kinds, magnified by an adroit combination of the services of several different banks, the bankers are able to use the deposits and savings of the rest of the nation. A generation or two ago the private banks advanced money to clients on their character. A man's banker was his confidant and counsellor. The financiers with the gold-power have invaded that quiet realmy, they have amalgamated the small banks into huge machines, whose boards they control for their own purposes. Private businesses have been floated into limited companies controlled by financiers. In America the banks are even more the instruments of the conquering millionaires. . . . In Germany the organisation of the national resources is far more complete. It is consciously national. For that reason it not only advances the fortunes of the Gwinners and Rathenaus: it aids the credit of every industrialist who comes within its wide-sweeping system. (28)
The Perilous Position of an Exploited Nation
Because the German financier appears to have the gold of the German banks at his service we give him our mines and trust him with our money! (29)
Gold-Power Distinct from Capital
Gold-power, then, is distinct from capital, though allied with it. It is enhanced by state-organisation and banks. By use of the joint-stock company and company laws it eats up the weaker. Finally, only a complete national organisation of all resources can withstand a similar organisation of the gold-power which has already become national. . . . Only Germany had organised the Gold-power on a national basis before the war, and it is the only belligerent which has increased its gold resources during the war. (30)
Control, not Money, Supplied by Germany.
By observing one example of the treatment of our assets by a German control, our enquiry into gold and capital and money may be joined with the main thesis, viz. the necessity of South Africa uniting with the rest of the Empire to build up the most powerful instrument of gold-power under the guidance of the State. This example illustrates the truth of the average man's belief that money, not machinery, is capital. It also shows that money is not needed in a German control of a South African company. Their capital remains "nominal." It also enables us to see the far-fling of German interlocked finance. (30)
The Cloverfield Example: British Shareholders Find the Money and when they Lose the German "Control" Thrives.
The Cloverfield Control came into possession because they undertook to find the money to equip and develop the mine.
76
Their bank's promise was all that was required. The plant they ordered has not earned its feed, let alone an ambrosial amortisation, the people who "put up" that plant closed it down at their discretion. Do they cease to earn money when their engines are idle? We shall see. Only the ordinary shareholders lose under such conditions; the gold-power makes as much when a property is proved bad as when it is proved good.
The property was originally got for nothing from the State. Later it was acquired by S. Neumann and Co., who sold it for £200,000 fully-paid shares in the company which was registered as British in the Transvaal in 1903. The chairman represents Neumann, and so does the secretary. On the Board we see the names of Messrs. I. H. Guinsberg, Max Francke (alternate J. H. Kuhlmann), C. S. Goldman (alternate P. Dreyfus).
Mr. Francke represented Goertz and Co., or, rather, the German banks behind Goertz and Co. . . . . We can now return to Cloverfield, having seen that it had expert management, and behind it the resourceful skill of a German bank upon whose flag the sun never sets. Its plant has earned nothing, and its representatives, as well as the Chamber of Mines, have made a special case of it, as showing how "risky" these Far East Rand areas are. . . They have a right to say the mine (and therefore the plant) is worthless, because they have, during thirteen years, proved at enormous cost, that neither has paid.
Well, you would think that this had been a worthless investment. Whatever it may have been for the "outside" investor, it would not appear that the control was exactly ruined. . . . . After all these years the original control still controls and the idle plant has earned its cost many, many times. The German bank methods do not approve of paying for machinery which brings no return. . . . It was not the plant that produced the revenue, but the attractive force of Gold-power. . . . In this typical case the mere association of a German control with a South African property draws the British public to subscribe millions of pounds. In the thirteen years of its life Cloverfield has not produced an ounce of gold; the market record indicates
that any capital expended has been supplied over and over again by the public. The Control has been in clover.....
A similar instance has occurred on another property during the sitting of the Commission. The German house promised to lend £150,000. On the strength of this the public, duly informed, rushed to buy the shares. The House gratified their desire by letting them have the shares at the high level. Having thus igot £200,000 from the public, it was an easy matter to lend £150,000 to the mine! That is gold-power. (31—34)
Germany Depends on Our Gold.
The German national control is an economic fact that dominates the world's trade and production. It forces national control on other nations even against their will. If Germany obtains the mastery of the colossal output of South Africa that domination will be invulnerable and complete.
Later we have to show the tremendous, nay, irresistible, power of such a combination against the individual or ill-grouped trades of any country, whose puny resources, even though organised in the biggest private combination the world has yet seen, cannot compete and live against a competition in which the rival is no less than a Great Power. The competitor without State aid has to face the whole of the German national resources and credit, its railways, shipping and meticulated co-operation between industries requiring one another's products, the whole backed and at every moment of the day reinforced by a specialist educational system, education bureaux, the operation of its banks and agencies, penetrating, usurping or destroying rivalries in other countries, and finally quelling the unorganised by the threatening prestige of its arms and the horrors of war. In the German case the insufficiency of gold has been more than compensated by investing every transaction with the whole national credit. An ounce of gold in Germany does more work than many ounces in any other country. But war, at least an unsuccessful war, "calls the hand." When payments have to
meet universal demand and neither the gold is there nor the goods ready . . . . then the whole monster of aggression falls as the insane paralytic falls—an obscene ruin, haunted by the hallucinations of megalomania, boasting a name defamed . . . . Nor has the German been at all unaware of the chances of such ruin. He took the chance. He called it "Weltmacht oder Niedergang"—the whole world or nothing . . . .
So long as industry and trade are based on competition the minimum unit that can survive in these generations is a unit that has nothing less than sovereign power. . . . .
It is here, in South Africa, that the main attack on the British "Gold basis" has begun. Even in Lord Milner's time an English director of an essentially German "House" in Johannisburg threatened to have the gold market removed to New York. That was, of course, ludicrously premature. (34—5)
The German State Claims and Uses all Monies and Securities Deposited in German Banks.
Sir Lionel Phillips has confessed that his "House," as well as groups in the Chamber of Mines in which that House exerts a chief influence, have not avoided the "mistake" of depositing available cash in the enemy banks just before the war. The threat (to have the gold market removed from London) would not be so empty now, when the warlike expenditure has altered all previous international relations, when huge quantities of British specie have been expended, and when a thousand millions of gold may be poured into the banks of Germany to reconstitute the local and international credit of those banks which have surrendered every asset to the State which claims and exercises the right to control them. The State has expended those assets—the savings of the people, collected by the banks and used to pay for the war. With what will the State repay the banks? Their own economists admit that bankruptcy threatens to overwhelm them. But they are arranging to get our South African gold against a banking guarantee—a gift of millions for a scrap
of paper which South African gold will make good. The gold power will be theirs. . . . With this gold safe the Germans can escape the "inconveniences" of too much gold and can inflict great inconveniences on others. Banking and discount rates, arbitrage and a dozen other financial devices may be employed to divert even the former gold to German treasuries—to usurp the place of London in the world. (34—36)
The Perils of Unprepared Peace.
The Germans have already begun to create special machinery to control the export and import of commodities and provide for the distribution of material on a national economic system, which their pre-war organisation has made comparatively simple. They can offer peace terms because they alone are prepared for peace. . . . .
It seems to be agreed on all sides that this war of "men munitions and money" is to be succeeded by a no less intense struggle. In this the German "objective" will remain the same, being, as we will show, an essential part of the German national fabric, and dating from long before the war. They have made no disguise. Buelow told us of the folly of the classes who "want to base all economic policy on an imaginary permanent peace." German economic policy is based on a real permanent war. But in that war hitherto they have succeeded by devices which are "legitimate" indeed, but legitimate only because we have allowed them to hoist our own flags on the privateers carrying letters of marque from the Reichsbank. And we continue to respect that flag! The Limited Company is "incorporated in England" or in some other host. The apparent officers are nominees, also British. The "outside public" also subscribes to pay the expenses and take the risks. But the real control and the profits with none of the risks remain in Germany. (37—8)
Democracy, Xenocracy, or Shylocracy?
No civilised country in these days of national organisation will divest itself of its chief assets. The controlling opinion in South Africa—that is to say, the controlled opinion—is that the foreign investor must be "the first consideration" for any reputable government. The tradition is that the assets of the State must be leased, pawned, conceded, "'conveyed' the wise do call it," away. The lobbyists who used to manage this were wont to make their commission, the politicians were complimented, the receivers were entitled the "Leaders of Industry," "the Men who made the Country."...
The spokesmen of this Xenoracy—a new word is needed to describe the novelty of government by Foreigners—allege two main reasons to justify their claims to the State assets. First, they depose before Select Committees that General Botha's Government is so incompetent or so corrupt that it cannot be trusted with valuable State property. . . . The second main reason for giving State assets to Xenocrats, also deposed in evidence before the Commission, and evidently carrying weight there, is that only the Nationalists and the Labourites are in favour of conserving the public property. . . . At the last General Election it was impossible to induce the Labour party to take up the matter. They were so concerned to defend themselves against the well-advertised charge of disloyalty—owing, of course, to the former inclusion of International Societies—that they neglected the real issue. The Nationalists had no means of learning that the treasure was there and was the immediate object of the "foreign fortune-seekers." . . . . (43—4)
South African Racial Strife the Work of Lucre Lords from Germany.
The first thing to be said about Nationalism and Racialism in South Africa is: it is the deliberate creation of a covetous race which is neither Dutch nor English, but German. It is
notorious that the white men of the country have always got on pleasantly together side by side, and still do. There was, for instance, never a word of racialism in the Orange Free State till the Raid, which was organised in the Corner House by Germans, and ended the typical co-operation of Rhodes and Hofmeyr. It is the witness of all Englishmen who have travelled in the country during the last fifty years that the distinguishing characteristics of their treatment by Boers have been courtesy, kindness and hospitality. This has been the experience of both the writers on the veldt, and on the battle-ground, too. (45)
"South Africa First."
When General Herzog declared his policy in these three words the Anglo-German press fell upon him furiously as a traitor who had thrown off the mask at last. General Boths used the text with effect in English-speaking constituencies. But no one dares question the justice of the dictum. In South Africa the local interest is the first, and always the first consideration. It is more. It is the only just criterion of policy. Canadian and Australian have the same cry. But it is not an anti-English declaration. It is as English as Magna Charta. . . . . Many Nationalists have declared that honour demanded that they should support the Empire in this crisis, but they objected to be dragged at the wheels of the Prime Minister's chariot, in which the "foreign fortune-seeker" was seated. (45—7)
The Germans of Johannisburg and the "Rebellion."
The story of the "Rebellion" has not yet been fairly written. . . . What is most striking is that the rebellion fell so flat. It had passed its crisis before General Botha fired a shot. But there was something in it. It is stated that Colonel Francke, the commander-in-chief of the German forces in South-West Africa, was in Johannisburg on the night that
General de la Rey was accidentally shot, in the company of General Beyers, and that he attended a secret meeting of Germans. It is certain that the German population of Pretoria and Johannisburg, together with agents through the country, behaved in a way that no-one could mistake. In Rhodesia they tampered with the natives, and General Botha made the same complaint about their missionaries within the Union. But financiers make poor rebels, as we learnt at the time of the Raid, and this time the Boer was not gulled like the Reformers.
The misfortune of the Nationalists is not that they have no military leaders, but that they have no effective political leaders. In a word, they are poor, and they attribute their poverty to a national policy which they believe, and say, is directed to the aggrandisement of the rich, and especially the rich foreigners. . . . .
The truth of the South African difficulty is this. It has always been the object of the Anglo-German press [that is, the Judaeo-German-controlled press in the English language] to create racial discord. . . . The quarrel between Dutch and English is chiefly artificial, and is fomented by the same agencies as have provoked riot and discord, rebellion and treachery in other parts of the Empire and in the countries of
South Africa's interest in this Treasure Trove of hers comes first. Although great exception has been taken in some quarters to General Herzog dictum "South Africa First," he is unquestionably right. (47—50)
The Made-in-Germany South African Gold Law is Pro-German in Operation and Anti-Boer and Anti-British.
The Gold Law was written and amended especially for the purpose of making it hard for the Boer and for the Englishman to own a gold mine. For this purpose the prospector has from the first been harassed by fines and charges imposed by the State and by obstacles erected by the "Groups," which in
almost every case led to his abandonment of the ground he has proved to the verge of success. (53)
The Sum of the Matter: The State Gold Basis must be Freed from Gambling and Treated as a Whole.
The private gamblers (that is, the "Houses" controlling the mines) have no national interest, but are absentees, and for the most part under the control of hostile banks.
They exert powerful influence on political parties and officials to wrest the laws in their favour, and alter the tariffs to their advantage and to the disadvantage of the resident population. They have been associated with raids and wars and foreign intrigues, and have threatened Governments that they will wreck their public loans and make borrowing conditional on ransom.
They have brought about convulsions in the labour markets, white and black, raising and lowering wages at their caprice and opposing the national will by introducing Chinese.
Their attention to the Share Market and neglect of sound industrial conditions have disgraced us with a mortality of miners, black and white, whose magnitude is even now conccaled, though it is known as appalling.
They have succeeded in shifting on to the State the burden of compensating the living victims of a preventable occupational disease.
They have negotiated and amended a law which is now in process of branding some thousands of white men and a hidden multitude of natives with a mark of permanent unemployability owing to silicotic disease contracted in the unhealthy mines.
Even then you have not exhausted the black list of booms and slumps and undesirable practices which have set off bombs and rifles in our streets and dragooned unoffending citizens by troops from the country inflamed by the belief that they, were quelling another "Jameson Raid." (55–6)
A Lucre Lady and a Friendly Germany.
In South Africa we have the old and the new German, and it is safe to say that the children born of German parents in this country are more German than their parents. . . . The Boers were quick to notice the changed attitude of the younger generation, and resented their growing insolence. In a little volume written in 1913 by Lady Phillips (wife of one of the partners of the Central Mining and Investment Corporation) this fact is stated clearly but in an amusing context. The volume was obviously conceived and composed under German suggestion, for it has all the clichés which the pre-war pro-German and the German apologist made us familiar with. The book itself was evidence, not only of the increasing German pressure in South Africa, but of the increased German control in her husband's "House."
"A Friendly Germany: Why not?" the volume in question, asks, "What are we to give Germany as a dot on the bridal day?" The reply to this is prefaced by a threatening letter from a German saying that Germany does not want to be at the cost of making colonies for herself, but she insists on the right to exploit the colonies of others—"Unser Feld ist die Welt." "Nothing could be fairer than this," says the conciliatory authoress. But, however fair, it had the flaw that there is another section in Germany which wants more earth and must also be conciliated. "A great German party," she writes, "thinks that Germany should have colonies; well, if we are in earnest we must accept this view, express ourselves willing to remake the map of the world."
The Patriotic Lady Preaches Hun Doctrine.
"With a single exception I do not suggest that an acre of British soil should pass under German hands: no such demand is implied in the cry for a 'place in the sun.' With all respect for German necessities I am compelled as a patriot to maintain that we owe those countries we have taken under our protection a continuance of our trusteeship. But there are other lands and other States whose Imperial destinies are ended. There are vast expanses of territory now in the hands of effete Europeans who would gladly shelve their responsibilities. There are, too, Mahommedan countries in a state of decay, but great in potential wealth. Walfish Bay and Portuguese territory and Angola, the Congo, Asia Minor and, perhaps, South America, these are the sign-posts to a better understanding."... Having overcome trifling English and Dutch objections, the enthusiastic Financière goes on: "So much then for Angola and Mozambique. But Angola should not be the limit of German ambition in the eyes of a nation which controls a greater number of human beings than any existing Power (sic). I want Germany to have more than Colonial possessions; it must have a Colonial Empire: the fairest jewel thereof would be the Congo.... We should accept that a German Empire extending over the whole of Central Africa would, by giving our neighbours scope and occupation, prove a perpetual guarantee of international peace. An incidental British advantage would be scientific Colonial co-operation with Germany. Herr Dernburg, a former Colonial Secretary, did us the honour of studying our methods on the spot, and was, I know, given every facility when he visited South Africa."
It is quite true that Mr. Dernburg had these privileges; it was his right to command them, for he has the Director's pass of the Deutsche Bank and the Bank fuer Handel und Industrie. Mr. Dernburg came to South Africa with very serious intentions. He came to advise the Kaiser on the garrison of South-West Africa. . . . As Lady Phillips says with justice, "he was given every facility in South Africa." Johannisburg and Pretoria saw to that! (79—80)
Lady Phillips eulogises the German Bagdad Railway Scheme.
"Lastly, there is the Bagdad Railway. . . . . The object of Germany is to build a line viâ Bagdad, from the Mediterranean to Bassora, on the Persian Gulf. The system, now past Eregli and planned for another 520 miles, involves many branch lines. When it is constructed and connected viā Ispahan and Teheran, in Persia, with the Russian line at Merv, it will give Germany a special position" (this a typical German diplomatic phrase, and here the authoress is well-informed) "in Asia Minor." She sees that it would make our position difficult with Italy, France, Russia, and create difficulties for Austria and jar ambitions of the Balkan States; but "let us recognise that special position and grant that Germany may look upon the remains of the Turkish Empire as a legitimate sphere of influence, where it will carry the blessings of civilisation which the Turk has shown himself so unfit to apply. . . . It is for Germany to decide whether it can compensate or dominate, but it is for us to declare that we have no fundamental objection, etc." (80)
The conclusion is that "hand in hand Germany and England may lead the world to a realisation of glorious ideals. There alone can the true interests of humanity be served, and Western civilisation will thus form a bulwark against the encroaching hordes."
If Lady Phillips were a European of Europe this sort of stuff would be of no more importance than Mr. Morel's propaganda. . . . . But the inspired authoress is the wife of a financier whose advice General Botha declared that he had been accustomed to take. We have seen the use his firm has made of its moneys in investments in what are now enemy countries. When in Johannisburg, Lady Phillips is given the lead by the Women's Unionist Association. Her book was favourably reviewed and widely advertised in the [Ashkenazim-controlled] Press. During the war she visited South Africa and wrote a bitter attack upon General Botha and his connection with the campaign in German South-West Africa in the Cape Times. (80—1)
The German System controls the British Empire.
The following letter was written by General Smuts to Miss Hobhouse and published in the Daily News. . . . . The occasion was the introduction of Chinese labour.
"They (the Crown Colony Government) think that the mining industry must be saved at all costs, and it cannot and will not be saved, for the major part of it is bogus and a sham. If all the mines that have no reasonable chance of working at a profit—that is about 80 per cent. of them—are allowed to go into the Bankruptcy Court, the country will once more return to a normal condition. The Transvaal will cease to be the happy hunting ground for the fraudulent company-promoter, and all will yet be well. Now, however, we have a bogus gold industry; its reputation is kept going for the purpose of still further swindling the investing public of Europe. The general good of this country, and I may say of South Africa, is sacrificed for this sham industry—and so we are all merrily spinning to perdition." (56)
During his examination by the Commission one of the members exhibited a good deal of incredulity at the position taken up by a witness that, although one might have a gold mine of ascertainable value, it was next to impossible to obtain the financial support necessary to develop it without recourse to Germans
"Is it," he was asked, "your opinion that the British and Dutch in this country are so defective in their methods that their organisation must be done through the State?"
After explaining that the conditions of competition and the German system of finance were all-powerful against individual effort, the witness concluded: "It is strongly advisable to rescue this community, especially in the case of the Far East Rand, otherwise we shall have Germans sitting on our necks for the next hundred years."
"What is to prevent these people prominent in the realms of finance from controlling the State?"
"They do control it." (178)
Germans without Capital get Control of all Capital.
The Germans who came to these fields after their discovery by British and South African prospectors could never have acquired their large possessions and dominant influence if they had not behind them a machine more powerful than themselves. They were for the most part men without means, but they had the power to "float" companies, to invade and reconstruct existing companies, and then to obtain from the British and French investors the funds they were pledged to provide. This German control, in fact, was the result of an economical attack on South Africa by the organised credit of all Germany. . . . . (184—5)
State-Owned Enterprises. A German Trader is not an Individual but an Item of the Indivisible German Nation.
An extremely well-informed American, in presenting the results of his study of the German railway policy some years ago, wrote as follows:—
"The non-German trading upon a frontier of the world has the uneasy sense that in competing with a German he is not opposing an individual but a nation. The American in the Levant, South Africa or the Far East may be supported by a corporation powerful at home; with wide-spread alliances, yet he becomes dimly aware that while he after all only represents an individual company, somehow behind the German competitor is the German nation in a real and co-operating sense. It is the inter-action of Government business, the conscious adjustment by directing mind of one part of national endeavour with another, that makes possible much of the narrative of trade conquest told quarterly in the thin brochures of the Imperial Statistical Office." (186) . . . .
Adjustable German Transport Rates
The fundamental condition of successful competition abroad is an intelligent, and, if you like, aggressive transport system. The German Imperial Government uses both private and State-owned lines to this end with amazing power even in the smallest detail.
Exceptional rates are quickly devised to meet competition in foreign markets. . . . .
Once a shipper consigns by rail, the Railway Administration takes all the responsibility for the delivery by ship and rail, obtains for him a bill of lading at the port upon which the shipper may obtain his money at a bank, or, if he prefers, will forward the bill to the consignee. Even the smallest as the largest concerns, can deliver their quotations and consignments at secure competitive rates with as little trouble as we have in posting a letter. Everything is worked out for him. When you add to that your German has his nominees in your Chambers of Commerce and Town Councils the whole business is easily understood. (188—9)
British Policy and not the British Manufacturer at Fault.
Nothing is more provoking to one who knows how the game is played than to hear the constant patronising sermons of public men and newspapers upon the "conservative," "unadaptive" ways of the British manufacturers. It is beyond his power to adapt himself to a competition against a rival supported by all the forces of the German Empire. The German Government has made a special study of South African trade and of the Levant, and has long made Turkey and South Africa the chief objects of her ambition. Although rate-books have been compiled for all parts of the world, only those for the Levant and South Africa are published. The places chosen are significant of the imperial aggressive views of the German Government when they are set out to establish its market control in those two places. Although they employ all the
methods of the "trusts," discriminating rates, rebates, exceptional treatment for localities and individuals, and charging all the traffic will bear for one set of conditions and extraordinarily low rates for other conditions, no one in Germany is offended, because the basis of control is national equity to the gain of all. (189)
Principles and Practices of our Ashkenazim Conquerors: How Parliaments are "Improved" and Controlled.
If you search the records of the Raid Inquiry by the Cape Parliament you will see clearly that Rhodes and Jameson were tricked—that Rhodes had no will to resort to arms. You will find there that our friendly Germans, as usual, floated a company to run the Raid, and that they made money out of it, too! And not only a parent company but a subsidiary, the "Wolff Syndicate," according to practice. And then they let the "Reformers" in "blind" at top prices for cash! You shall read then that when Rhodes was for constitutional agitation, in which he would have had the support of all Africa, imperative telegrams came demanding the gallop of armed men at once. In the cant of their code the message came on the 18th December, 1895, "Urge immediate flotation"—that is insurrection. And again on the 20th: "Immediate flotation is the thing most desired, as we never know what may hinder it if now delayed." And from whom, think you, did these telegrams come? From Beit—from Alfred Beit at the head of The Corner House.* (304)
* It will, perhaps, be as well to explain that "The Corner House" is the home of the Central Mining and Investment Corporation, Limited, and that Beit was at this time the head of it. The real nationality of the Corner House will be evident from the names of some of its 1914 directors: P. G. Eckstein, Louis Reyersbach, C. E. Rube, Ludwig Wagner, Max Francke, Octave Homberg, R. W. Schumacher (who has recently changed his name to Pfennell), and its present head, Sir Lionel Phillips. This is the institution which holds a large controlling interest in the chief South African newspapers, which, in the words of Mr. Julius Jeppe—who ought to know—" are controlled by naturalised and unnaturalised Germans." These are samples of the Xenocrats who control not only mines and newspapers but the Law, the Law-makers and the State itself.
When one reads in "The Transvaal from Within" of the bitter feelings occasioned by the Dynamite Concession and sees how it was used to foment another crisis, one may wonder at a singular omission from the book. Mr. Beit, we see, was urging an insurrection against the Dynamite Concession after his quarrel with Lippert. Now turn to the Report of the Concession Commission and you will find that the prime mover in all this agitation, whose presence was "necessary to arrange respective interests" was himself, the would-be partner at the outset, when the concession was first plotted. . . There is the picture of Beit, the chief of Fitzpatrick's chiefs, at work; and the unconscious Kruger about to become the victim. (305)
The Lyttleton Commission reported that "The Transvaal Dynamite Company is a creation of the German Group. Its head office is nominally at Pretoria, but it has an office in Hamburg, and it was provided in the articles of association that the local directors at Pretoria should be bound absolutely, by the decisions of the European Council of Advice which meets in Hamburg." You had there the German in partnership with the Government, and of the gross profits the Government received about one-fifth. You had precisely the same kind of control as Koppels had, and as many more of these registered "British" firms have still. But what the reader will note is that the quarrel between two Germans for the lion's share of this monolopy led straight to the Anglo-Boer War and the slaughter of many English and Dutch. (307)... Read again in "The Transvaal from Within" of the bribery and note the name of the agent. That same agent was not long after the Anglo-Boer War President of the Chamber of Mines
Sir Lionel Phillips, who not long ago advertised for British partners, has recently been given a position under the Minister of Munitions. . . . He is going to organise the mineral exploitation of England. For what qualities is this post given him? What does he know about minerals? His short career in Kimberley will hardly be regarded as a school of metallurgy, nor his long career in company-work in the Transvaal and
92 ENGLAND UNDER THE HEEL OF THE JEW.
London. Read this lotter of his in the same Cape Blue Book and judge whether the choice has been rightly made:—
June 16 1894
"MY DEAR BEIT.
"The bewaarplatsen question will, I think, be settled in our favour, but at a cost of £25,000. . . . . It is proposed to spend a good deal of money in order to secure a better Raad, but it must be remembered that the spending of money on elections has by recent legislation been made a criminal offence, and the matter will have to be carefully handled. . . . .
I am also informed that he said he (the President) was very angry with the Ecksteins, that Nellmapius was the best friend the State ever had, and now he has gone his widow has nothing while we have made a large fortune out of him.
(Signed) LIONEL PHILLIPS."
That is how the bewaarplatsen (the gold claims which belonged to the State) was to be settled. Is that how the mining leases are to be negotiated too?
And read this:
Private
July 15, 1894
"MY DEAR BEIT,
Potatrics.
"Just got your cable reading, 'Do not see Khodes, etc.,' of which I am rather glad. . . . . We don't want any row. Our trump card is a fund of £10-15,000 to improve the Raad (Transvaal Parliament). Unfortunately the Companies have no secret service fund. I must divine a way. We don't want to shell out ourselves.
(Signed) LIONEL PHILLIPS."
It was well to avoid seeing Rhodes just then, when the "Flag question was a brewing." For what reason did Phillips want to avoid seeing Rhodes? The letter he wrote to Beit on 16th June gives the answer: "My dear Beit,—Naturally whatever we do must be done through others, but I do not think the
vested interests can afford to let things drift with indifference. If you trust Rhodes and cable 'See Rhodes,' I will run down. My own feeling is to wait and watch, and spend our money in trying to improve the Raad (Transvaal Parliament)."
There you have the German system in four Corner House
- (1) "Whatever we do must be done through others."
- (2) "Spend money in improving parliament."
- (3) "We don't want to shell out ourselves."
- (4) "Now he has gone his widow has got nothing and we have made a large fortune out of him."
- (1) Nominees; (2) Corruption of public men; (3) Victims to pay; (4) Profit for the Germans and widowed despair for the rest. Splendid "improver" of Parliaments. On était chevalier comme on était citoyen. This latter-day nobility has "changed all that." (307—8)
Ashkenazi Origin of the Jameson Raid
Rhodes we are proud to know was not to be trusted with so base a secret. . . . .
The origin of the Raid is very clearly set out in the letterbook of Phillips long before Jameson was brought into the ready-made fiasco. "My dear Beit," runs the letter of 12th August, 1894, "I will also see whether it is not impossible without creating undue alarm here or active steps in Pretoria to get the Companies (serviceable subsidiaries) to possess themselves of a few rifles, etc."
That is to say, that Phillips, who made himself useful to his German employers through his skill in bargaining mining properties from the men who had been impoverished by their intrigues, is preparing to arm men, a year and a half before the Raid, in order that the people may be shot down—for what purpose? Not for civic rights, for he himself denied that any-body wants such rights. But to enable the Germans to gain also the bewaarplatsen which their cupidity had not yet provided for when they wrote the Gold Law, that they might yet
94 ENGLAND UNDER THE HEEL OF THE JEW.
wrest the control of Dynamite from their fellow-conspirator (Lippert), who had kept that control to himself after they had quarrelled over a bank fraud.
If that is not murder of the foulest kind Barabbas was a saint. For Jameson and his troopers; for the men of the Rand, who would never have "left them to their fate" had they known anything of what was happening; for the Boers who defended themselves with such quiet determined skill and behaved so mildly afterwards; for men like Karri Davis and Wools-Sampson, who took their gruelling uprightly—for all these we can have sympathy and admiration, too. There was romance, adventure, patriotism, courage. But for the cowardly, murderous avarice revealed in the German camp, and enshrined in the letter-book of Phillips we reserve something more than sympathy; we give him a place in the British ministry, and that, too, in time of war against the nation whose blackguards he has served. (309)
V DESIII 1
EFFECT.
"When war broke out there were twelve million people in Great Britain living on the verge of starvation."
WILLIAM MORRIS HUGHES, Premier of Australia.
CAUSE.
"What is the good of our being a wealthy Nation, if the wealth is all in the hands of German Jews?"
WILLIAM MORRIS HUGHES, Premier of Australia.
٧
THE VOICE OF THE ETERNAL PROPHET.
UNDER WHICH GOD?
1
All nations believe the Jews' Code and worship the Jews' God, and what greater subjection can be?
TT
Man must and will have some religion; if he has not the religion of Jesus, he will have the religion of Satan, and will erect the synagogue of Satan, calling the Prince of this World "God," and destroying all who do not worship Satan under the name of God.
TTT
"Pray'st thou for riches? Away! Away! This is the throne of Mammon grey."
Said I, "This sure is very odd; I took it to be the throne of God.
- "I am in God's presence night and day, He never turns His face away. The Accuser of Sins by my side does stand, And he holds my money-bag in his hand.
- "For my worldly things God makes him pay, And he'd pay for more if to him I would pray And you may do the worst you can do; Be assured, Mr. Devil, I won't pray to you.
- "He says, if I don't worship him for a god, I shall eat coarser food, and go worse shod; But as I don't value such things as these, You must do, Mr. Devil, just as God please."
IV.
Since all the riches of the world
May be gifts from the devil and earthly kings,
I should suspect that I worshipped the devil
If I thanked my God for worldly things,
The countless gold of a merry heart,
The rubies and pearls of a loving eye,
The indolent never can bring to the mart,
Nor the cunning hoard up in his treasury.
V.
He who loves his enemies betrays his friends. This surely is not what Jesus intends; But the sneaking pride of heroic schools, And the Scribes and Pharisees' virtuous rules; For He acts with honest, triumphant pride, And this is the cause that Jesus died. He did not die with Christian ease, Asking pardon of his enemies.
If He had, Caiaphas would forgive: Sneaking submission can always live. He had only to say that God was the Devil, And the Devil was God, like a Christian civil, Mild Christian regrets to the Devil confess For affronting him thrice in the wilderness; He had soon been bloody Cæsar's elf, And at last he would have been Cæsar himself.
VI A PRAYER FOR OLD ENGLAND
A PRAYER FOR OLD ENGLAND.
Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς,
άγιασθήτω τὸ ὅνομά σου, ἐλθέτω
ἡ βασιλεία σου, γενηθήτα τὸ θέλημα
σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς τῆς ;
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον
καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τα ὁφειλήματα ἡμῶν,
ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφὶεμεν τοῖς ὁφειλέταις ἡμῶν
καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκης ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμὸν,
κλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς απὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ
ὅτι σου ἐστὴν ἡ βασιλεία, καὶ ἡ δύναμις,
καὶ ἡ δόζα, εἰς τοῦς αιῶνας ἀμήν.
110 ENGLAND UNDER THE HEEL OF THE JEW.
Which is being interpreted—
Which art in the Heavens,
Let Thy Name be hallowed,
Thy Kingship come,
Thy will be done, in Earth, as it is in Heaven.
Give us this day our Daily Bread of Life;
And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.
And lead not us into Temptation in the Wilderness; but
Rescue us from the Evil One, the God of this World; for
The Kingship is Thine,
And the Power,
And the Glory,
To the World's End.
Amen.
LONDON:
RINTED BY C. R. BOWORTH SS. FETTER LANK, P.C.
Price 21/-
A THOUSAND MILLION POUNDS— FOR US OR GERMANY?
THE GOLD OF THE FAR-EAST RAND.
RΨ
W. E. BLELOCH.
Author of "The New South Africa"; "The Witwatersrand System":
Member of Lord Milner's Gold Land Commission: of the
Geological Society of South Africa; and of the
Chemical and Metallurgical and Mining Society of South Africa;
AND
A. E. O'FLAHERTY.
Scholar of Oriel College, Oxford: Muir Prizeman Sansorit, Edin.
Editor of "The Standard and Diggers' News."
Formerly Editor of "The South African Mining Journal."
Compiled from Official Documents, and Illustrated with Maps and Plans of Mining Areas.
PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHORS AT THEIR OFFICES.
17, TRANSVAAL BANK BUILDINGS, FOX STREET, JOHANNESBURG.
1917.
Arrangements are being made for the issue of an English edition; in the meantime copies of this edition have been sent to London and may be ordered from—
MR. R. BLELOCH, 65, VICTORIA STREET, WESTMINSTER, S.W.
The price in London, as in South Africa, is ONE GUINEA.
ENGLAND UNDER THE HEEL OF THE JEW
A TALE OF TWO BOOKS
ARRANGED BY
THE AUTHOR
OF .
"THE CALL OF THE SWORD."
T 52 509 13t
London
C. F. ROWORTH, 88, FETTER LANE, E.C.
1918.