Through 1914 and 1915 (and beyond…) the Jewish Chronicle and Jewish Exponent closely focused news coverage upon the experiences, travails, and suffering of Eastern European Jewry, in the context of the social dislocation and suffering engendered by the military and political leadership of Russia, and to a lesser extent, the military forces of the Central Powers. This took the form of relatively brief news items, and, lengthy analyses and editorials. The commonality of this material being, that these were direct, relatively (well, in the context of a century ago!) “real-time” news reports, closely linked in time and space to the events at hand.
On Friday, February 11, 1916, the Chronicle published a lengthy news item that approached the tragedy of the Jews of Eastern Europe from another context: The newspaper reported on a meeting that took place in Whitechapel, London, a few days earlier (on Sunday, February 6, to be specific) at the Pavilion Theatre. There, significant figures in British Jewry spoke before attendees – largely from the East End of London – in an effort to exhort them to make charitable donations in support of their suffering brethren, the majority of those in attendance doubtless having immediate family in the East, and thus having a direct and urgent connection to the issue at hand.
Those present at the gathering included (comments quoted from Wikipedia, thus there might be some oversimplification as well as ideological bias here…):
Elkan Nathan Adler – “English author, lawyer, historian, and collector of Jewish books and manuscripts.” “Adler was extremely active in English-Jewish communal affairs, especially in education, and was an ardent Zionist; he was an early member of the Hovevei Zion in England. Per his will, his personal archives are now at the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America“
Joseph Herman Hertz – “British Rabbi and biblical scholar. He held the position of Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom from 1913 until his death in 1946, in a period encompassing both world wars and the Holocaust”
Louis Samuel Montagu, 2nd Baron Swaythling- “prominent member of the British Jewish community, a financier, and a political activist”
Claude Joseph Goldsmid Montefiore – “founding president of the World Union for Progressive Judaism, a scholar of the Hebrew Bible, rabbinic literature and New Testament. He was a significant figure in the contexts of modern Jewish religious thought, Jewish-Christian relations, and Anglo-Jewish socio-politics, and educator. Montefiore was President of the Anglo-Jewish Association and an influential anti-Zionist leader, who co-founded the anti-Zionist League of British Jews in 1917″
Nahum Sokolow (Nahum ben Joseph Samuel) Sokolow – “Zionist leader, author, translator, and a pioneer of Hebrew journalism”
And – as you can read below – the meeting was opened with Baron Swaythling’s reading of a letter from Leopold de Rothschild (“British banker, thoroughbred race horse breeder, and a member of the prominent Rothschild family“.
Though I have little familiarity with significant figures in the history of British Jewry, I think it notable that the six men above span a spectrum of opinion regarding Jewish nationalism and Zionism, from Montefiore (by whom and especially about appeared many opinion pieces in the Chronicle throughout the Great War) on one end to Adler and Sokolow on the other. As to the attitude of the other figures mentioned, I do not know if they were indifferent, noncommittal, or simply silent.
Notably, the article was one of the very few times that The Jewish Chronicle (as opposed to The Jewish World) published a photograph in association with an article. The image – you can view it below – shows a young boy seated between an elderly man covered in blankets, to his left, and a woman – his grandmother? – his mother? – on his right. Both the boy and woman (a basket before her – the family’s only remaining possessions?) have their attention focused directly on the photographer, while a woman and young girl (a mother and daughter?) are seated in the background.
Is he the same boy who appeared in the photograph that was published in The Jewish World on October 27, 1915?
There’s no way of knowing, and certainly one hundred and three years later in 2019, no way of ever knowing.
There are numerous statements in this post that bear deep consideration and contemplation, and if attention was accorded to all, “this” introduction would be lengthier than the article itself. So… Perhaps the most telling comment, appropriately reserved by the Chronicle’s anonymous reporter for the article’s conclusion, was that of Nahum Sokolow, who stated, “If there were two parties in Jewry to-day, it would be those who had given and those who had not, those who worshipped the Jewish God and those who bowed down to the golden calf; the party of Moses and the party of Korach. They had to choose between God and Baal. The party of God would accept the resolution.”
________________________________________
“Seven million Jews – a population exceeding that of Belgium by one million, have borne the brunt of the war… True all the peoples of this area suffered the ravage and pillage by the war, but in no degree comparable to the suffering of the Jews… Hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes on a day’s notice, the more fortunate being packed and shipped as freight – the old, the sick and insane, men, women and children, shuttled from one province to another, side-tracked for days without food or help of any kind – and the less fortunate being driven into the woods and swamps to die of starvation. Jewish towns were sacked and burned wantonly. Hundreds of Jews were carried off as hostages into Germany, Austria, and Russia… These Jews, unlike the Belgians, have no England to fly to.”
THE RUSSO-JEWISH WAR-VICTIMS
MEETING IN THE EAST END
THE DUTY OF ANGLO-JEWRY
The Jewish Chronicle
February 11, 1916
A large gathering crowded all parts of the Pavilion Theatre, Whitechapel, on Sunday afternoon.
Pavilion Theatre, 191-193 Whitechapel Road, London, England)
The meeting was held in connection with the fund that is being raised for the benefit of the Jewish sufferers in the Russian and Polish war zone.
Lord SWAYTHLING, Treasurer of the fund, who presided, read the following letter from Mr. Leopold de Rothschild, the President: –
DEAR LORD SWAYTHLING,
I shall be very grateful if you will kindly express to the meeting on Sunday next my great regret that I do not feel able to attend, since after a week of work in the City, a rest seems necessary for me. There are two things in connection with our fund for the relief of the Jewish sufferers by the war to which I should like to refer. The one is the manner in which the people of the East End have supported it. It is not the first time that I have had reason to admire their splendid sympathy and their generousity when their feelings had been touched by the misfortunes of their coreligionists in other lands. I should like also to pay my tribute of gratitude to what our colonies have done. All will agree that they have responded nobly.
With best wishes for a successful meeting in so good and urgent a cause.
I remain,
Yours very truly,
LEOPOLD DE ROTHSCHILD
Leopold De Rothschild
The CHAIRMAN said he would like to associate himself with that expression of gratitude, not only to the East End of London but to the Provinces and Colonies for the magnificent way in which they had responded to the appeal made by the Committee. That meeting was intended not solely and only for the East End of London, but was intended also as an appeal to the West, North and South, the Provinces and the Empire. One of the objects of the gathering was to call attention to the close union between the Fund for the Relief of the Jewish Victims of War in Russia and the Central London Committee for the Relief of the Polish Jews. From that day onward all official receipts from the combined Committee would either bear the signature of himself or of Mt. Otto Schiff, and would contain a portrait of their President, Mr. Leopold de Rothschild. Specimens of these receipts were to be obtained at that meeting, and they would be a guarantee that the money would be properly applied. He had received during that week two letters from Baron Gunzburg, President of the Petrograd Committee which acted as the distributing agents in Russia. In the first letter he wrote that the Russian Government in certain large districts where there were a large proportion of Jewish refugees were providing kosher meat for the benefit of all classes so that the Jews could partake of the food provided freely. In the second letter the Baron reported that in certain large districts the Government had not been able to provide sufficient food, and the Petrograd Committee had had to relinquish some of their cherished schemes for the permanent benefit of the Jewish refugees in order to meet their immediate wants in the shape of food. This was a pity, because the Committee in London were hoping that more permanent relief might be given. But this fact could only spur them on to renew their efforts to first meet the immediate needs and provide them large funds for permanent assistance. His late father used to tell him – he did not know whether he had Rabbinical authority for it – that one of the great objects of the Day of Atonement was that every Jew and Jewess during the day suffered the pangs of hunger and were therefore made more sympathetic towards those who were really hungry on more than one day of the year. In this case, judging from all the letters received by those who had correspondents with Russia, they knew that their coreligionists there were hungering and were also suffering from another form of physical pang, that of cold. The Jewish refugees were ill-fed, ill-clothed, and were compelled to find shelter where they could. He appealed to them to continue and increase their efforts on behalf of their poor brethren. (Cheers.)
The CHIEF RABBI said that that was the second time he had spoken to that hall and the fourth occasion that he had been called upon to address a large meeting called for the purpose of helping their suffering brethren in the war zone. He felt, however, that the honour of British Jewry was at stake, and it was for him to convince them and the larger audience that would be reached through the newspapers that there was a sacred duty confronting them and that very much more must still be done if they were to discharge their obligations to their suffering brethren. To realise what British Jewry should do he invited them to glance for a moment at the manner in which the Jewry in the United States had faced and grappled with this problem. When fifteen months ago, a few weeks after the outbreak of the war, tales of distress in the Polish provinces reached America various private attempts at relief were made. These were started all over the country, usually from the poorest classes and gradually a sum amounting to about £ 300,000 was collected in the United States for the benefit of the sufferers in the war zone. Some months ago the leaders of American Jewry realised that a sum like £ 300,000 from a population of three million Jews was hopelessly inadequate. They felt that the fund would never grow as it ought to grow, and that moneys commensurate with the evil would not be collected unless the wealthy classes could be interested in the movement. A new committee was organised, and it was decided to hold a general mass meeting for this cause towards the middle of December. Only a few days before his death Dr. Solomon Schechter was asked either to be present at the meeting or to send a message. He (the Chief Rabbi) wished to quote one or two sentences from the message from this appeal from the grave sent to the meeting by that great scholar. He spoke of the sacrifices that the poor had made, and went on to ask: –
Rabbi Joseph Herman Hertz in 1913
Unfortunately this cannot be said of our better situated classes whom the Lord has blessed with wealth and with all the good things of this world. Many, it is true, have made smaller or larger contributions, but none, almost, has responded in the way hoped for, considering the fortunes this class commands, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the terrible dimensions of this disaster. It is not for me to pass judgement upon my people, but I cannot refrain from remarking that it would seem to me that we have not realised the greatness of the disaster, which has overwhelmed our people, nor have we comprehended the full extent of our duty.
This was absolutely true. Only the relatives of those suffering in the war zone had realised what was happening there, and when this new committee appealed to the large Jewish public and to the non-Jewish public and acquainted them with the facts the response was encouraging. At the meeting to which he had referred, in the course of one evening no less than £ 160,000 was collected. The meeting determined that during 1916 the sum of £ 1,000,000 should be New York’s contribution towards the amelioration of that vast ocean of suffering. (Cheers.) The effect of that meeting was educational. Tens of thousands of Jews and non-Jews heard of what was going on. Speeches were delivered by the Bishop of New York, United States Senators, Presidents of Universities – and these addresses opened the eyes of the Jewish and non-Jewish public. The Chief Rabbi went on to say: This is not a political meeting. Nothing is further from the objects of this gathering. We know THERE ARE TWO RUSSIAS.
There is the Russia of the future, the Russia of democracy, the Russia of freedom, and everything that is good and noble in Russia belongs to that class. That Russia is heart and soul with us and with the suffering Jews in this ordeal, in this martyrdom. Thus recently at Petrograd a non-Jewish Committee was formed, with Count Tolstoi, ex-Mayor of Petrograd, as President, to help the suffering Jews in this war zone. But it is criminal to hide the fact that there is, unfortunately, besides this Russia of Tolstoi, the Russia of Ivan the Terrible, and a great deal of the woes in the war zone are attributable to this dying Russia. Proceeding, the Chief Rabbi cited a passage, quoted at the New York meeting by Senator W.J. Stone: –
Seven million Jews – a population exceeding that of Belgium by one million, have borne the brunt of the war… True all the peoples of this area suffered the ravage and pillage by the war, but in no degree comparable to the suffering of the Jews… Hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes on a day’s notice, the more fortunate being packed and shipped as freight – the old, the sick and insane, men, women and children, shuttled from one province to another, side-tracked for days without food or help of any kind – and the less fortunate being driven into the woods and swamps to die of starvation. Jewish towns were sacked and burned wantonly. Hundreds of Jews were carried off as hostages into Germany, Austria, and Russia… These Jews, unlike the Belgians, have no England to fly to.
The only England to which they could appeal was their charitable hearts. (Cheers.) The American newspapers published lists of promises of weekly and monthly contributions ranging from 10 cents to 1,000 dollars. He had before insisted on the necessity of the relief being of a continuous character. It was no use saving a man from starvation in October and allowing him to starve again in January or February. The Chief Rabbi then referred to the institution of a Jewish Relief Day in the United States, and read President Wilson’s proclamation relating thereto. The American papers, continued Dr. Hertz, had not yet come to hand showing what response had been made to the appeal to the President. They had read only one cable, which revealed the fact that £ 400,000 was collected in one day, among the Jews and non-Jews of New York City alone. (Cheers.) After describing what had been done in England, and the response made especially by the provinces and the colonies, the Chief Rabbi repeated his view that nothing less than £ 500,000 should be the response of British Jewry to the appeal. He pointed out that not hundreds of thousands but millions were dependent on the Petrograd Committee for every crust of beard they ate. The Petrograd community, numbering only between 15,000 and 20,000 Jews, had collected £ 100,000 for local help and had contributed a similar sum for general relief. If Petrograd could do this, how much more should be done by London and the other Jewish communities in Great and Greater Britain. He urged them all nobly to discharge their duty. (Cheers.)
MR. HERMAN LANDAU pointed out that the contributions of British Jewry did not amount to 10s a head, which was not a great sacrifice in view of so much misery and suffering. He made the interesting confessions that since the war he had not bought s single new article of clothing but had devoted the money he would have spent to the refugees. He appealed for general self-denial. They hoped to be able to send Baron Guznburg 75,000 roubles weekly. He stated that the Central Committee had paid £ 3,000 for the refugees from Palestine and a further £ 2,500 had gone for the same purpose. Some support had also been extended to the Yeshiva at Mir, which had received the pupils of other Yeshiboth. He urged that on the coming festival of Purim generous gifts should be made to the fund.
MR. CLAUDE G. MONTEFIORE moved the following resolution: –
Claude J.G. Montefiore (from PaintingStar.com)
That in view of the ever-increasing distress of the Jewish population in the Russian and Polish war zone, this meeting pledges itself to make every sacrifice to enable the existing organisations to carry on its relief work.
He said that it might seem wrong to spur the willing horse, but the need was imperative. He referred to the united character of that meeting, at which every section of the community was represented. The distress they were endeavouring to meet was of appalling magnitude, appalling in its quantity and degree. The resources the refugees might have had at first were becoming exhausted, and more and more claims were being made on the relief fund. The charity of the Russian Jews has its limits, and the spread of the war zone added to the distress. He was glad to think that some help had been given by the Russian Government, but it was nevertheless a fact that the Government was not giving to the Jews in the same proportion as to other refugees, and therefore distress among the Jews was greater. He stated emphatically, that every penny contributed would go straight to Russia.
MR. LEONARD L. COHEN seconded the resolution, and referred to the fact that three-quarters of the refugees were in need of clothing, and those who were familiar with a Russian winter would know what that meant. Mr. Elkan Adler had gone to Petrograd to see the way in which the money was being administered, and he had no doubt he would bring back a satisfactory report. He regarded the representative character of that meeting as a very happy augury for the future.
Elkan Nathan Adler (from geni.com)
M. NAHUM SOKOLOW, who was enthusiastically received, supported the resolution in an eloquent speech in Yiddish.
Nahum Sokolow
He said that it was a bitter thing to have to appeal for his fellow-Russian Jews who did not want to be dependent on “the gifts of flesh and blood.” But it really was not charity they were asked to give, but an insurance premium for the future of Judaism. The Russian Jews were the depositories of the spiritual and intellectual treasures, of the traditions of the Jewish people, and that gave them a right to ask for help in the time of their need. He compared the present crisis with the expulsion from Spain. The horrors of 1492 were but child’s play when set besides the sufferings of the Russian Jews. He gave a vivid description of the varied character of the relief work that was being conducted, not only for the purpose of satisfying the material needs of the refugees but also for maintaining their commercial life. He pointed out that the artisans were easier to help than the students and those who followed intellectual pursuits. The great danger they had to avoid was that of pauperization, and the relief in a good many cases was afforded in the shape of loans rather than of gifts. The crisis had united all parties. The East was working with the West. If there were two parties in Jewry to-day, it would be those who had given and those who had not, those who worshipped the Jewish God and those who bowed down to the golden calf; the party of Moses and the party of Korach. They had to choose between God and Baal. The party of God would accept the resolution. (Loud Cheers.)
The resolution was carried unanimously.
On the motion of Mr. H.G. LOUSADA, seconded by Dayan FELDMAN, a vote of thanks was passed to the colonies and provinces for their help, and a vote of thanks to the Chairman was passed on the motion of Dayan CHAIKIN, seconded by Dayan HILLMAN.
References
– People –
Adler, Elkan N., at Wikipedia
de Rothschild, Leopold, at Wikipedia
Hertz, Joseph Herman, Chief Rabbi, at Wikipedia
Montagu, Louis S., 2nd Baron Swaything, at Wikipedia
Montefiore, Claude G., at Wikipedia
Montefiore, Claude G., at PaintingStar
Sokolow, Nahum ben Joseph Samuel, at Wikipedia
– Places –
Pavilion Theatre in Whitechapel, at Wikipedia