"Soul
had they none, nor lineage; "Ye are
of your father the devil and the lusts of your father ye will do. "In
order to destroy the prestige of heroism for political crime, we shall send it
for trial in the category of thieving, murder, and every abominable and filthy
crime. Public opinion will then confuse in its conception this category of crime
with the disgrace attaching to every other and will brand it with the same
contempt." "If I am killing a rat with a
stick and have him in a corner, I am not indignant if he tries to bite me and
squeals and gibbers with rage. My job is, not to get angry, but to keep cool, to
attend to my footwork and to keep on hitting him where it will do the most
good." INTRODUCTION ON 15th July, 1936, Mr. Oliver Locker-Lampson, M.P., a childhood friend of
the Rothschild family, asked in the House of Commons whether the
Attorney-General proposed to institute legal proceedings against the authors or
publishers of The Fascist, the issue of that paper for July containing
allegations against the Jews of the practice of ritual murder. The
Attorney-General replied that the matter was under a consideration. As an ultimate result of this "consideration," I was sentenced to six months'
imprisonment among Under the law of libel, the truth of my statements with reference to Ritual
Murder could not be used as an argument in my defence; it was deemed sufficient
under the law that the statements had been written, and that they "rendered His
Majesty's subjects of Jewish faith liable to suspicion, affront and boycott" and
so amounted to a Public Mischief. I came to Court very fully prepared, if the truth of my statements was
challenged, to justify the statements I had made in The Fascist, and was
even ready to demand that "Rex," the prosecutor, should produce from the Public
Records Office certain Close and Patent Rolls of the State wherein Jewish Ritual
Murder is recorded as an established fact in this country! But I was forbidden
by the Judge to use this line of defence; it did not matter who else had charged
the Jews with ritual murder, or how often, or what historic facts proved it, or
how many convictions there had been under proper juridical authority; thus, when
I asked Inspector Kitchener, the only witness who appeared against me, "When you
brought this case, were you under the impression that Ritual Murder was a thing
of the past?" and he replied "Yes," the Judge intervened with the remark "The
truth of a libel is no defense, I must point out again." Again, the Attorney-General, who was acting as Prosecuting Counsel,
interrupted another question of mine to the same witness, by the remark: "In my
submission, it is correctly laid down that the defendant is in no case allowed
to prove the trash of a seditious libel as a justification for having published
it." The Judge then said, "That is the law as I understand it." He made it clear
to me that to proceed further in such a line of defence would be contempt of
court, as the "truth" of the "libel" was "irrelevant" to the issue of the trial!
Such may be the law, but it is not justice! The last thing the Judaeo-Masonic Hidden Hand wanted was the truth about
Ritual Murder! Since I came out of prison on 6th February, 1937, I have, until recently,
been too busy to write on the subject of Ritual Murder; but finding that there
are, even among anti-Jewish workers, people who, never having investigated the
matter for themselves, still imagine that Jewish Ritual Murder not only has not
existed and does not exist, but is a fiction invented by crazy anti-Jewish
fanatics, and as such, exploited by me, in my campaign against the Jews, it
becomes necessary for me to take steps to defend my own reputation as a man of
good faith by compiling and publishing this book. What the court procedure prevented me from doing in my own defence, I do now
in these pages, and I have no anxiety concerning the conclusions at which my
readers will arrive on the matter.
The subject of Ritual Murder has always been one that the Jewish Money Power,
which controls this country as well as most others, has taken all possible steps
to suppress. The reason is that Ritual Murder was the dynamite which finally
blew the Jew out of England in 1290, out of Spain in 1492, and out of Germany in
our time. The Jews know it; and I know it too! But there is no British law, and no 11th Commandment, which makes Ritual
Murder by Jews a forbidden topic in this country. Sir Richard Burton's book
about it was published shortly after his death near the end of the last century;
Strack's book, defending the Jews against the accusation, was translated and
published in England in 1909; whilst the Jew, C. Roth, published his Ritual
Murder Libel and the Jew in 1935. In France, as in Germany, there is free speech
on the subject. I challenge and defy the Judaeo-Masonic Power, which rules this country, by
publishing the present The maintenance of Free Speech demands that Jewish Ritual Murder shall be a
subject for open discussion, like Suttee and Thuggee and the sacrifices of Aztec
Mexico, all of which were ritual murders which, like the Jewish variety, would
be practised to-day if the Aryan had not interfered to prevent them. If the
world thinks that I have not, in this book, proved my case, let it laugh ! I can
bear it ! But can the Jews? The Jewish Chronicle (25th September, 1936)
complained after my trial was over that there had been no opportunity for the
Jews to refute the charge of Ritual Murder. Well, they have one now! ARNOLD LEESE
CHAPTER 1
HUMAN SACRIFICE IT is incontestable that the ancient "Semites" manifested a peculiar leaning
towards the practice of bloody sacrifices to their gods. Typical is the Jewish story of Abraham offering to slay with a knife his
first-born, Isaac, as an offering to Yahweh who had commanded him so to do. More
typical still is the Semitic idea that his god would require such a murder to be
done. In Excavations at Gezer, R. A. S. Macalister tells us that the bodies of
sacrificed young children were Isaiah charges the Jews with "enflaming themselves with idols under every
green tree, slaying the children in the valleys under the clifts of the rocks" (lvii,
5). There are many other Old Testament references to the practice of sacrificing
children to Moloch. Says the Rev. J. Kitto in the Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature 1895, "their
altars smoked with human G. A. Dorsey writes in Civilization (Hamish Hamilton): "Historically their
temple at Jerusalem, like a Hindu or Aztec temple, was a shambles--one sacrifice
after another."
The Jewish Encyclopedia (1904, Vol. VIII, p. 653) says: "The fact, therefore,
now generally accepted by critical scholars, is that in the last days of the
kingdom human sacrifices were offered to Yhwh as King or Counsellor of the
Nation and that the Prophets disapproved of it ...." Jesus Himself speaking to the Pharisees (St. John, viii, 44) charges them
with being hereditary murderers, which term can have no other meaning than
ritual murderers. "Ye are of your father the "Rabbinism was but an unfolding of Pharisaism, the full and swelling stream
of corrupt doctrines, views and practices, of which the rivulets run up to the
days of Christ and stretch back to those of Ezra until they are lost in the
fountain-head, the Religious Philosophy of a debased Zoroastrianism." (Rev. J.
Kitto, Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature.) The trail of the tradition, then, is complete and leads to Rabbinism. CHAPTER II
THE RACIAL URGE SOME people say that it is the Talmud that made the Jew what he is. I take
another view. I say that it is the Jew that made the Talmud. I believe that the urge for human sacrifice comes not through religion but
through race; the idea is, I think, an original one, and came to me from
observation on one race in particular, that known as the Armenoid or Hither
Asiatic race, which I consider has a decided instinct towards sadism. It is, I believe, the strong Armenoid or Hither Asiatic strain which exists
in the Jewish Nation upon which we have to lay the responsibility for many
unpleasant Jewish traits and practices, among them Ritual Murder. The Jews are a nation without a home, not a race; they are a mixture of
races, and the racial constituent which is most frequently to be found among
them is the Armenoid, or, as it is sometimes called, Hither Asiatic. The other
races which have contributed most to the Jewish types, whether Ashkenazim or
Sephardim, are the Mongoloid, Negroid, Oriental and (White) Alpine. The Armenoid race seems to have concentrated in Asia Minor, where it
predominates not only in Jews, but in Armenians, and affects the blood of many
"Turks," "Syrians," "Georgians" and even Kurds. From this Asiatic centre, a
veritable plague of Armenoid blood has spread in every direction.
Northward, in the early centuries A.D., it advanced through the Khazar Empire
which flourished about 730 A.D., the ruler becoming a converted Jew and forcing
his people to do the same. Southward, the race spread over the territories of
Arabia, Egypt, the Sahara and Southern Algeria. Westward, it has poisoned the
populations of the Balkan States and Greece, Crete, Southern Italy, Sicily and
Spain. Eastward, it has penetrated into Afghanistan and the Punjab. Through the Jewish nation, as everyone knows, it has contaminated almost
every country in the world. The Armenoid Race has the following physical characters: Height and build,
medium; head short In temperaments the Armenoid is the reverse of candid. He excels in low
cunning, as his expression Every nation which contains a considerable proportion of people of Armenoid
Race soon establishes for itself a reputation for cruelty treachery, dishonesty
and delight in power for the sake of power. That is why such nations never
flourish for long in their own territory. They are not allowed to by their
neighbours. I hold that it is not primarily the Jewish Religion which makes the Jewish
Nation hated all the world A characteristic of the religions which appeal to Armenoid people (Jews,
Mahommedans and Yezedis) is that the initiation ceremonial usually involves some
sort of mutilation, such as circumcision. The religious laws governing the
slaughter of animals for food are framed and practised without consideration for
the unnecessary pain inflicted on the animals by the methods prescribed. The ancient Assyrians were Armenoids by race, and were notorious for their
wanton cruelty. Wherever the Hither Asiatic or Armenoid Race predominates, there is
organised cruelty to prisoners of war; in Afghanistan, the women come out after
a battle to search for the enemy wounded on whom they practise horrible
mutilations; in Southern Algeria, there is a similar practice against French
wounded, whilst recent operations in Abyssinia prove that there is a craving for
the same sort of thing. The Turks of Armenoid race seem to revel in cold-blooded
cruelty, whilst the Bolshevik Jews of Russia, Hungary, Spain and elsewhere have
established the twentieth century as being as barbarous as the twelfth . . .
simply because of the racial instincts possessed by imported Armenoids. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. IV. p. 99, when performing
the operation of circumcision on children, the mohel (operator) "takes some wine
in his mouth and applies his lips to the part involved in the operation, and
exerts suction, after which he expels the mixture of wine and blood into a
receptacle provided."
Surely this "religious rite" stamps the Armenoid as something basically
different from ourselves?
All is Race; there is no other truth.
The Aryan mind grasps with difficulty the idea that any human race can have
an instinct towards sadistic sacrifice, for the Aryan has himself no such
instinct. The Englishman does not realise that the Jew, the Afghan, and the
Armenian are differently constituted from himself, and it is his own good-nature
which has largely been responsible for the Judaisation of mind which he himself
has acquired by allowing Jews to control him for so long. I am convinced that it is to the Race rather than to the Talmud or the
Kabbala that we must look before we can understand the urge for Ritual Murder
and the love of torture which crops up in individuals in all countries into
which the Hither Asiatic or Armenoid Race has penetrated.
CHAPTER III
HUMAN SACRIFICE & THE JEWISH
RELIGION I AM not a student of the Talmud. I have no intention of becoming one. For
the same reason, I shall not become a student of Occultism or of Drainage
Systems. I smell the bad smells and remain aloof.
Nevertheless, because the advocates of Jewry use a certain line of argument
in denying that there has ever been any such thing as Ritual Murder of
Christians by Jews, I am obliged to quote a few unimpeachable authorities on the
subject. This "argument" is that the Jewish religious law not only-does not sanction
the practice of Ritual Murder, but forbids the consumption of blood altogether.
It is an argument that has been used throughout the ages, and is used now, and
has even been the foundation for the verdict "Not Guilty," in cases where Jews
have been on trial for ritual murder! It was the argument used by the Sultan of Turkey when, for money bribes, he
issued a firman (1840) But it is known that there have always been two methods of instruction among
the Jews: one Exoteric, which openly taught the Laws of Moses and the Rabbinical
traditions; the other Esoteric, or mysteries confided only to certain persons
bound to secrecy. This latter, the Esoteric teaching, is associated with
Occultism and what is known as Black Magic, and the Mystical Cabbala is its
source, for certain rites and ceremonies blood is necessary; and secret rites
exist which are known only to the few.
Even if the written Jewish Laws do not sanction the practice it does not
prove that Jews have not done Murder in accordance with some Occult Ritual. Let
a Jew speak for us here: -- Bernard Lazare, a Jew who was stated (Jewish Encyclopaedia 1904, Vol. VII, p.
650) to be "without "To this general belief are added the suspicions, often justified, against
the Jews addicted to magical It is well known, as will be shown in Chapter VI, that Occult Rituals exist
in which all sorts of abominable practices are carried out, and that they arise
from the Jewish Cabbala.
How ridiculous then is the "argument" that because the Mosaic Laws and the
Talmud do not demand Ritual Murder, and even forbid the use of blood, Isaac
Abrahams cannot be guilty of any sort of Ritual Murder! Take an analogous case. The Eighth Commandment forbids stealing. Have you
ever heard that fact So stupid is this hysterical shriek, "Our Laws do not permit it," that I, as
a scientific investigator, would be willing to concede it as a fact, without
further investigation of the Jewish laws, that Ritual Murder is contrary to
these laws. I would concede it because the point is of no importance whatever to
my case against the Jew. If the point were established what difference does it
make to the verdict of the Trent affair, the Damascus affair, or to the scores
of cases I am going to bring before you in later chapters? Another point. Is it likely that we should find clear sanction for such a
crime as Ritual Murder in the Dr. Erich Bischoff, the chief German authority on Jewish law and religion,
claims to have laid his finger on a passage authorising Ritual Murder in the
Thikunne Zohar (Edition Berdiwetsch), a book of cabbalistic theosophy. The
passage runs: "Furthermore, there is a commandment pertaining to the killing of strangers,
who are like beasts. This killing has to be done in the lawful method. Those who
do not ascribe themselves to the Jewish religious law must be offered up as
sacrifices to the High God."
Dr. Bischoff may be right. I venture no opinion. Nevertheless, the Jewish Laws do tell us something; without any direct
sanctioning of Ritual Murder, they show us without any possibility of doubt,
that the Jew is normally at war spiritually with the rest of mankind, and upon
this argument I base my statement that Jewish Laws show ample foundation for the
scientific investigator to take the view that there is nothing improbable in the
reality of Jewish Ritual Murder I am not going to take the same line as other
anti-Jewish investigators have done about this matter; I am not going to quote
any Mosaic Laws nor any Talmudic tenets. I am simply going to quote the great
explorer and orientalist, Sir Richard Burton, a Briton who made it his business
to Study the Talmud closely and recorded his conclusions on the relations it
revealed as existing between Jew and Gentile. I quote now from his The Jew,
the Gypsy and El Islam, edited by W. H. Wilkins, and published by Messrs.
Hutchinson in 1898. Page 73. "The most important and pregnant tenet of modern Jewish belief is
that the Ger, or stranger, in fact all those who do not belong to their
religion, are brute beasts, having no more rights than the fauna of the field."
I have long known this to be the Key of International Politics; and it shows
that what would be Murder to an Aryan is only Slaughter to a Talmudic Jew. Page 81. "The Talmud declares that there are two kinds of blood pleasing to
the Lord, viz: (1) that of I suppose every nation has the God it deserves and admires. What sort of a
people is this whose God Ends the blood obtained from mutilations of human
genital organs as "pleasing"?
Sir Richard Burton comments: Page 115. "Obviously such cruel and vindictive teaching as that recounted in
the previous chapter must bear fruit in crime and atrocities." The Jewish Schulchan Aruch, which codified the teachings of the
Talmud, goes much further in sanctioning shameful practices against the Gentile;
I do not quote it because my object is not to excite retaliation, but to mark
down the Jews as having been There is good reason to think that it is the "Chassidim" sect to which most
recent Jewish Ritual CHAPTER IV
MOTIVE & NATURE OF JEWISH RITUAL
MURDER THE motive of Ritual Murder of Christians by Jews is almost certainly hate.
It is in fact the same motive that Disraeli admitted to be the cause of
revolutionary activities against Gentile governments; to use his words (from
Life of Lord George Bentinck, 1852):
"The people of God co-operate with atheists -- the most skilful accumulators
of property ally themselves with Communists; the peculiar and chosen Race touch
the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe -- and all this because they
wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes to them even its name,
and whose tyranny they can no longer endure." Hatred of Christianity is a tradition among the Jews: just as hate of England
is a sort of perverted religion among an inferior class of Irishmen. It must be
remembered that the Hymn of Hate which was debited to the Germans during the war
was actually written by the Jew Lissauer. One of the principal Jewish feast-days is that of Purim. This feast is an
orgy of hate against Haman, the story of whom is found in the Book of Esther of
the Old Testament. The story, which is probably a myth, is that Xerxes, King of
Persia, became enamoured of a Jewess, Esther, and made her Queen in place of his
rightful wife. Haman, the King's sister, complained to him of the conduct of the
Jews who, he said did not keep the laws, and obtained from the King an order to
slay them. Esther pleaded with the King and prevailed upon him to summon Haman
to a banquet. There, Queen Esther further prevailed upon the King to spare the
Jews and hang Haman on a gallows prepared for the execution of her guardian.
Instead of the Jews being destroyed, their enemies were slaughtered, including
Haman's ten sons, who were hanged. This feast is often celebrated by an exhibition of gluttony, intoxication,
and curses on the memory of Haman; and even to this day in London, the Jewish
bakers make cakes in the shape of human ears which are eaten by the Jews on this
day, and are called " Haman's Ears," revealing once again the inherent hate and
barbarism of the Jew in our midst. The two principal feast-days associated with Ritual Murder have been (1)
Purim, and (2) Passover, the latter at Easter and the former about one month
before it. When a Ritual Murder occurred at Purim, it was usually that of an
adult Christian who was murdered for his blood; it is said that the blood was
dried and the powder mixed into triangular cakes for eating; it is possible that
the dried blood of a Purim murder might sometimes be used for the following
Passover. When a Ritual Murder was done at Passover, it was usually that of a child
under seven years old, as perfect a specimen as possible, who was not only bled
white, but crucified, sometimes circumcised and crowned with thorns, tortured,
beaten, stabbed, and sometimes finished off by wounding in the side in imitation
of the murder of Christ. The blood taken from the child was mixed either in the
powdered state or otherwise into the Passover bread. Another festival at which it is thought that Ritual Murder has sometimes been
indulged in is Chanucah, which occurs in December, commemorating the recovery of
Jerusalem under the Maccabees in B.C. 165. Examples of Purim murders are those of Damascus, Rhodes, Xanten Polna,
Gladbeck and Paderborn. Although hate is the principal motive, superstitious traditions are also
involved, one being the association of blood-sacrifices with the idea of
atonement; some Jews have confessed that Jewry cannot be saved or return to Zion
unless every year the blood of a Christian is obtained for the purpose of ritual
consumption. Political murders, such as the Jewish murder of the Tsar and his family and of other Russians, have sometimes been accompanied by features suggestive of ritual, but I do not wish to complicate this book by guessing at the meaning of signs left symbolically by the murderers.
CHAPTER V
A RELIC OF THE DAYS OF WITCHCRAFT
AND BLACK MAGIC ON 6th May, 1912, The Times published a letter, signed by many men of
authority, protesting against what they called the revival of "the hideous
charge of Ritual Murder" which was being brought against a Jew at Kiev. "The
Blood Accusation," they said, "is a relic of the days of Witchcraft and Black
Magic."
Unfortunately for the signatories of this letter, who numbered among them the
Archbishops of Canterbury, York and Armagh, the Cardinal Archbishop of
Westminster, Bishops galore, Dukes, Earls, Justices, Masters of Colleges and
Editors, of that period, the Blood Accusation has nothing medieval about it at
all; it was more rife in the 19th century than it was in medieval times! Unfortunately also, Black Magic is in the same category. It is not medieval
either; there never was a wider cult of Black Magic than there is in the year of
Our Lord 1938! How extraordinary it is that influential men can be induced to sign such a
statement as I have quoted! And how strange it is that, where Jewish interests
are at stake, these same influential Christian men will see nothing improper in
attempting to prejudice the course of the criminal trial of the Jew Beiliss at
Kiev, a course which they would never pursue in any other cause! Let us confound the signatories of The Times letter out of the mouths
of Jews themselves. The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. III, pp. 266-7, gives a
list of Accusations of Ritual Murder made against the Jews through the
centuries; 122 cases are listed in chronological order, and no less than 39 of
them were made in the 19th century! There were far more than double the number
of Blood Accusations made in the 19th century than in any previous century,
according to this authoritative Jewish list.
Let us examine the list of Ritual Murder Accusations made by a converted Jew,
Cesare Algranati, in 1913, and published in Cahiers Romains; here are listed 101
accusations, of which 28 were made in the 19th century and only 73 for all the
eight preceding centuries! Even the Jew Roth gives the argument away, for he
says (p. 16 of his Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew, 1935), "The
nineteenth century proved little less credulous than those which preceded it." "Anti-semitic" authors' lists of Blood Accusations agree in this respect with
the lists made by Jews; Der Sturmer, the paper of Julius Streicher, in a
special Ritual Murder issue published in 1934, shows that in the 19th century 32
charges of ritual murder were made, which is ten more than in any other century
in European history recorded by it. The fact that the charges increase in number as the age becomes more and more
enlightened is particularly significant, because the Jewish Money Power and its
silencing activities are more developed than ever before and might have been
expected to reduce the number of charges. Sufficient has now been said to expose the absurdity of any attempt to
consign the Blood Accusation to any medieval limbo. It lives today; I may say with the great Sir Richard Burton (The Jew, the
Gypsy and El Islam, 1898, P. 129): "At any rate, sufficient has been
advanced in these pages to open the eyes of the student and the ethnographer; it
will stand on record until Elijah."
CHAPTER VI
COULDN'T HAPPEN NOW? THIS argument, "It couldn't happen now," seems quite good enough for a lot of
people when it is applied to the matter of Jewish Ritual Murder. It is, perhaps,
comforting to the democratic mind to think that "Progress" ensures that such an
evil practice, even if it occurred in unenlightened days, could not have
survived to-day. I wish I could see any comfort in this argument, but I don't.
There are no facts to support it. That the Aryan peoples have progressed I do-not deny; but I do not think
there is any evidence to show any like progress among some of the other races. Compare the following two happenings, noting the dates: A.D. 117. From the account of Dio Cassius in 78th Book of his history Chapter
32: "Then the Jews in Cyrene (on the modern Tripoli coast of North Africa)
choosing as their leader one Andreas, slew the Romans and Greeks, and devoured
their bodies, drank the blood, clothed themselves in the flayed skins, and sawed
many in half from the head downwards; some they threw to wild beasts and others
were compelled to fight in single combat, so that in all 220,000 were killed. In
Egypt they did many similar things, also its Cyprus, led by one of them named
Artemion; and there another 40,000 were slain." A.D. 1936. From Daily Mail, 17th September (describing the horrors of the Red
Revolution in Spain): "Baena (Cordoba Province): Ninety-one assassinations, mostly by shooting,
hatchet blows, or strangling. Others were burned alive. Two nuns who had been
dragged from the convent of the Mother of God, had their religious medals with
the figure of the Virgin, nailed into the sockets of their eyes. "La Campana (Seville): Reds, led by a woman, Concepcion Velarde Caraballo,
who either killed or was responsible for killing 11 persons in prison. The
prisoners were fired on until they fell, covered with petrol, and set on fire.
Some were still writhing in the flames when the city was entered. "Lore del Rio (Seville): 138 assassinated. They were dragged to the cemetery,
lined up, and shot in the legs, being buried alive as they fell in a trench.
When the town was entered hands could still be seen writhing above the ground." I cannot see much difference in outlook between the Jewish devils responsible
for both these massacres, even though there are 15 centuries between them! In view of that, why boggle at the idea of Jewish Ritual Murder still
surviving? Why make such a fuss when Jews are charged with the practice of Ritual
Murder? Other Asiatics are known to have practised it until 1850, and, if left
to themselves, would doubtless have maintained the custom. In India, from 10,000 to 50,000 murders were perpetrated every year by a
religious body known as the Thugs. They were mostly people of Mahommedan
extraction, but a number of Hindus were also involved. They used to worship
Kali, the Hindu goddess of destruction. Their custom was to club together,
generally as travellers, when they would slowly gain the confidence of some
innocent person, and at a given signal, would strangle him in a prescribed
manner, which they regarded as a religious duty; then they would rob him if he
had anything to be robbed of, and bury the body with such skill as to leave no
trace. The Thugs actually received the protection of some of the native princes
and chiefs who were thoroughly frightened of their power as a secret religious
sect. How this reminds us of the attitude of the influential men in this country
who adopt the same view of Masonry and Jewry! Then the British Government decided the thing must stop. After many years of
investigation, Sir W. H. Sleeman stamped out the Thug sect, and no Thuggee
murders are on record since 1850. He found that Thuggee was hereditary among
male members of a family, and he achieved his object by confining in segregation
for life all male members of Thug families.
Now my point is that Thuggee happened; and happened in the 19th century until
the British put an end to it under Sleeman. It was a long time before the
British administration learned of the existence of Thuggee, so carefully was it
concealed; another analogy with Jewish Ritual Murder! "It couldn't happen now." Why not? And on 13th September, 1937, a telegram was sent to The Times from
Delhi reporting the sacrifice of a 17-year-old youth to propitiate the rain-god,
in Sirmoor State. The youth was led through the village of Gunpur by a crowd of
people headed by a priest and the village headman, and beheaded on a special
altar to the accompaniment of devotional songs. The head was found by the police
at the foot of the deity in the village temple. As Aryan rule over India relaxes, Thuggee and other human sacrifices will
re-appear. "It couldn't happen now." Why not, again? Here is an extract from Magick by the "Master Therion", published in
1929 by the Lecram Press, 26 Rue d'Hautpool, Paris, pp. 94-5: ". . . it was the theory of the ancient magicians that any living being is a
storehouse of energy varying in quantity according to the size and health of the
animal, and in quality according to its mental and moral character. At the death
of the animal this energy is liberated suddenly. The animal should therefore be
killed within the Circle, or Triangle, as the case may be, so that its energy
cannot escape.... For the highest spiritual working one must accordingly choose
that victim which contains the greatest and purest force. A male child of
perfect innocence and high intelligence is the most satisfactory and suitable A footnote on p. 95 says "(4) It appears from the Magical Records of Frater
Perdurabo that he made this particular sacrifice on an average about 150 times
every year between 1912 e.v. and 1928 e.v." This footnote refers to the last sentence in the paragraph quoted above. "It couldn't happen now." Why not, in the Devil's name? Sir Richard Burton show us that the disappearance of children at Passover was
talked of in Rome and in the other towns of Italy throughout the early part of
the 19th century when efficient policing was unknown, as also throughout the
century at Smyrna and other places in the Levant and in Turkey. It couldn't happen now? But the Jewish method of cattle slaughter happens now
and is specially exempted from the objects of the Slaughter of Animals Act,
1933, which Act orders that all cattle for Gentile food must be stunned with a
mechanically-operated instrument before the throat is cut. The Jewish method is
cutting the throat from ear to ear without any previous stunning. It has been
condemned by a Government Commission held in 1904 as failing in rapidity,
freedom from unnecessary pain and instantaneous loss of sensibility. Yet it
"happens now" and is protected in this our England, by an English Law, and
remains unattacked by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals. Why couldn't it happen now? To this day, we learn from Jewish sources (B'nai B'rith Messenger,
California, 3rd April, 1936) that the Samaritans, an unorthodox Jewish sect who
keep Passover by solar computation, indulge in bloody sacrifices of animals on
that feast-day; an account is given of a visit to the scene of sacrifice on
Mount Gerizim in the 20th century, and these word, are used: "I have heard the wild, primitive scream of triumph as the knife is withdrawn
from the neck of the lamb of sacrifice." Here is a paragraph from a periodical which shall be unnamed, of 1936,
showing that the urge to the "Mysteries" is not dead: "The sophisticated Pharisee of the 20th century unceasingly gives thanks that
he has outgrown the fables and rituals of the Ancients. The worldly-wise man
loves the evident and is exasperated by that which is not evident. Plutocrat and
proletarian alike regard themselves as victimised by that person whose words or
actions they do not understand. We love the obvious because it flatters us, and
hate the mysterious because it damns our intelligence with faint praise. Riddles
are irksome. The modern cry is for facts. Yet, with facts for his fetish, the
modernist is more foolish than his forebears. Decrying superstition, he is most
superstitious; rejecting fancies, he is the fanciful product of a fictitious
age. The modern world is bored with its own importance; life itself has become a
botheration. Suffering from chronic ennui, how can a world ever become
interested in anything but itself? Smothered in their self-complacency, these
all-sufficient ones ask for facts. But what facts are there that fools can
understand? How can the helpless superficial grasp the hopelessly profound, for
are not realities reserved for the wise?" Alongside this clotted nonsense was a picture of a ritual murder, with the
victim crucified, below it, a portrait of the author, an obvious Jew. I take it that- "it would happen now" if this Jew had his way!
CHAPTER VII
JEWISH RITUAL MURDER IN ENGLAND
BEFORE THE EXPULSION OF 1290 THE first known case happened in 1144; after that, cases cropped up from time
to time until the Jews were expelled from the realm by Edward I. The most famous
of these cases was that of Little St. Hugh of Lincoln in 1255. I record these
cases in chronological order; and I do not deny the possibility of some of them
in which details are lacking, being "trumped-up" ones, where death may have been
due to causes other than ritual murder and the Jews blamed for it; but the case
of St. Hugh, particularly, was juridically decided, and the Close and Patent
Rolls of the Realm record definitely cases at London, Winchester and Oxford.
There seems no reason to doubt that many cases of ritual murder have been
unsuspected and even undiscovered. In J. C. Cox's Norfolk Churches, Vol. II, p. 47, as also in the
Victoria Country History of Norfolk, 1906, Vol. II, is an illustration of an old
painted rood-screen depicting the Ritual Murder of St. William, the screen
itself is in Loddon Church, Norfolk, unless the Power of Jewish Money has had it
removed. No one denies this case as a historical event, but the Jews of course
say it was not a Ritual Murder. The Jew, C. Roth, in his The Ritual Murder
Libel and the Jew (1935) says: "Modern enquirers, after careful examination
of the facts, have concluded that the child probably lost consciousness in
consequence of a cataleptic fit, and was buried prematurely by his relatives."
How these modern enquiries arrived at a conclusion like that after all these
years, Mr. Roth does not say; nor is it a compliment to the Church to suggest
that its ministers would allow the boy's death to be celebrated as a martyrdom
of a saint without having satisfied themselves that wounds on the body confirmed
the crucifixion and the piercing of the side. And why the relatives should bury
the boy in a sack and then dig it up and hang it in a tree would puzzle even a
Jew to explain.
John Foxe's Arts and Monuments of the Church records this ritual
murder, as did the Bollandists and other historians. The Prior, William Turbe,
who afterwards became Bishop of Norwich, was the leading light in insisting that
the crime was one of Jewish Ritual Murder; in the Dictionary of National
Biography (edited by a Jew!) it is made clear that his career, quite apart
from this Ritual Murder case, is that of a man of great strength of character
and moral courage. 1160- Gloucester. The body of a child named Harold was found in the river
with the usual wounds of crucifixion. Sometimes wrongly dated 1168. Recorded in
Monumenta Germania Historica, Vol. VI (Erfurt Annals); Polychronicon,
R. Higdon; Chronicles, R. Grafton, p. 46. 1181- Bury St. Edmunds. A child called Robert was sacrificed at Passover. The
child was buried in the church and its presence there was supposed to cause
'miracles.' Authority: Rohrbacher, from the Chronicle of Gervase of
Canterbury. 1192- Winchester. A boy crucified. Mentioned in Jewish Encyclopedia as being
a false charge. Details lacking.
1232- Winchester. Boy crucified. Details lacking. Mentioned in Hyamson's
History of the Jews in England; also in Annals of Winchester; and
conclusively in the Close Roll 16, Henry III, membrane 8, 26.6. 1232. 1235- Norwich. In this case, the Jews stole a child and hid him with a view
to crucifying him. Haydn's Dictionary of Dates of date 1847, says of this
case, "They (the Jews) circumcise and attempt to crucify a child at Norwich; the
offenders are condemned in a fine of 20,000 marks." Further authority Huillard
Breolles Grande Chronique, III, 86. Also Close Roll, 19 Henry III, m 23. 1244- London. A child's body found unburied in the cemetery of St. Benedict,
with ritual cuts. Buried with great pomp in St. Paul's. Authority: Social
England, Vol. I, p. 407, edited by H. D. Traill. 1255- Lincoln. A boy called Hugh was kidnapped by the Jews and crucified and
tortured in hatred of Jesus Christ. The boy's mother found the body in a well on
the premises of a Jew called Joppin or Copinus. This Jew, promised by the judge
his life if he confessed, did so, and 91 Jews were arrested; eventually 18 were
hanged for the crime. King Henry III himself personally ordered the juridical
investigation of the case five weeks after the discovery of the body, and
refused to allow mercy to be shown to the Jew Copinus, who was executed. Hugh was locally beatified, and his tomb may still be seen in Lincoln
Cathedral, but the Jewish Money Power has evidently been at work, for between
1910 and 1930, a notice was fixed above the shrine as follows: "The body of Hugh was given burial in the Cathedral and treated as that of a
martyr. When the Minster was repaved, the skeleton of a small child was found
beneath the present tombstone. There are many incidents in the story which tend
to throw doubt upon it, and the existence of similar stories in England and
elsewhere points to their origin in the fanatical hatred of the Jews of the
Middle Ages and the common superstition, now wholly discredited, that ritual
murder was a factor of Jewish Paschal Rites. Attempts were made as early as the
13th century by the Church to protect the Jews against the hatred of the
populace and against this particular accusation." At a recent visit to Lincoln of the Jewish Historical Society, in 1934, the
Mayor, Mr. G. Deer, said to them: "That he (St. Hugh) was done to death by Jews
for ritual purposes cannot be other than a libel based upon the prejudices and
ignorance of an unenlightened age." The Chancellor on the same occasion said:
"It was quite obviously one of the very many cases of slander spread about the
Jews from time to time. No doubt, the child died or fell down the well."
These people, Jews and Gentiles, bring no evidence whatever for their
statements; it couldn't have happened, they say. Why not? Was Henry III, weak in character as we know him to have been, ever charged
with being an immoral man? Did the judges not examine the body, which was only
four weeks dead? Is Haydn's Dictionary of Dates (1847 edition) medieval
and superstitious when it said of this case "They (the Jews) crucify a child at
Lincoln, for which 18 are hanged"? There are no 'ifs' and 'buts' here! Or does
Copinus's confession not tally with that of Theobald, quoted above in the first
Norwich case? Copinus said, "For the death of this child, nearly all the Jews in
England had come together and every town had sent deputies to assist in the
sacrifice." No one questions the historical facts in this case; but Jews and Judaised
Gentiles unite in denying the fact of Ritual Murder. Strack, in his The Jew and Human Sacrifice, written in defence of the
Jews against the Blood Accusation, omits all mention of this famous case, which
is the subject of the Prioress's Tale (Canterbury Tales) of Chaucer and is
referred to in Marlowe's Jew of Malta. Hyamson's History of the Jews
in England devotes the whole of Chapter IX to "Little St. Hugh of Lincoln,"
showing the importance of the Ritual Murder issue in the Jewish mind today. The following Close Rolls of the Realm refer to the case of St. Hugh: Henry
III, 39, m. 2,7.10 1255; 39, m. 2,14.10.1255; 40, m. 20, 24.ii.. 1255;
40,m.13,13.3.1256; 42, m. 6; 19.6.1258. And the Patent Rolls, Henry III,
40,m.20,26.11.1255; 40,m.19,9.12.1255; 40,27.3.1256; and 40,m.5, 20.8.1256. 1257. London. A child sacrificed. Authority: Cluverius. Epitome Historia,
p. 541. Details lacking.
1276. London. Boy crucified. Authority: The Close Roll of the Realm, 4,
Edward I, membrane 14, 3.3.1276. 1279. Northampton. A child crucified. Haydn's Dictionary of Dates,
1847, says of this case: "They (the Jews) crucify a child at Northampton for
which 50 are drawn at horses' tails and hanged." Further authorities: Reiley,
Memorials of London, p. I5; H. Desportes, Le Mystere du Sang. 1290. Oxford. The Patent Roll 18 Edward I, mem. 21, 21st June, 1290, contains
an order for the gaol delivery of a Jew, Isaac de Pulet, detained for the murder
of a Christian boy at Oxford.
Only one month after this, King Edward issued his decree expelling the Jews
from the Kingdom. There is, then, every reason to believe that it was the Oxford
murder which proved the last straw in toleration. The reader will see (p. 20) that it was a similar ritual case which was one
of the main stimulants to the King and Queen of Spain to expel professing Jews
from that country in 1492. The Jews, in attempting to escape responsibility for these deaths by Ritual
Murder, do not hesitate to impugn the probity of two of the Kings of England,
against whose moral character no one else has dared to cast a slur. Here are
some examples. From the Jewish Chronicle Supplement, April, 1936, p. 8 (speaking
of the Lincoln case in the reign of Henry III): "Henceforth and especially under the zealously Christian Edward I, the Crown
and its officers became almost a worse peril to the Jews than mobs intent on
loot and led on by fanatic priests and knightly spendthrifts who had borrowed
Jewish money. When 18th century writers of history began to examine the old
records in a new sceptical temper, some may be found venturing on such unkind
surmises as that the alleged crucifictions of Christian children only seemed to
happen when kings were short of money." The foul accusation against men of
upright character is repeated by the Jew Hyamson (History of the Jews in
England, 1928 edition, p. 21), writes: "it has also been pointed out that
the Blood Accusation was as a rule made at a time at which the Royal Treasury
needed replenishing." To deny that the cases of St. William of Norwich and St. Hugh of Lincoln were
Jewish Ritual Murders is to accuse certain English Kings, certain English
Clergy, and certain English administrators, known to be men of good morals, of
murdering and torturing Jews to get their money, after accusing them of horrible
crimes. In the case of St. Hugh, the sentence was juridical; in the case of St.
William, the mob took the matter into their own hands because the Sheriff would
take no action himself.
Whom do you believe the Jews or the English? "It is difficult to refuse all credit to stories so circumstantial and so
frequent." So says Social England concerning Ritual Murders in England
Vol. I, p. 407, I893, edited by H. D. Traill. A significant fact is that Haydn's Dictionary of Dates, at least up to
1847, quoted the Ritual Murders in Norman and Plantagenet England as undisputed
facts. In later editions in the sixties, all mention of them is extirpated! We
may take it that the Jewish Money Power began to dictate to the Press in England
somewhere in the fifties of the last century.
CHAPTER VIII
WELL AUTHENTICATED CASES IN EARLY
AND MEDIEVAL TIMES 1171 TO 1510 IN this, and subsequent chapters, I place descriptions of cases in
chronological order, in which there seems to me to be no reason whatever to
dispute the historical accuracy of the facts given. The following abbreviations are used in this Chapter among the references to
authorities: Magd. Cent. for Magdeburg Centuries, a Protestant History of the
Christian Church compiled at Magdeburg, sixteenth century. Chron. Hirsaug. for Chronicon Hirsaugiense, a history produced by
Abbot J. Trithemius, 1514. Cosm. Munst. for Sebastian Munster's Cosmographia Universalis, 1544. Spec. Viva. for Vincent of Beauvais's Speculum Historiale, of 13th
century. 1171 Blois, France. At Passover, a Christian child was crucified, his body
drained of blood and thrown into the river. A number of Jews were executed.
Authority: Monumenta Germania Historica, VI, 520; Magd Cent., 12, C. 14
and 13, C. 14. 1179. Pontoise. The authorities for this case are the Bollandists (Acta, Vol.
III, March, 591); Madg. Cent., 23, c. 14; Spec. Vinc, 129, C. 25; and Cosm.
Munst., 23, C. 14. A boy named Richard was tortured, crucified and bled white.
Philip Augustus's chaplains and historians, Rigord and Guillaume l'Armoricain,
attested this case. The body of the boy was taken to the Church of the Holy
Innocents in Paris and he was canonised as St. Richard. Under date 1080, Haydn's Dictionary of Dates, 1847, p. 282, says:
"Thinking to invoke the divine mercy, at a solemnisation of the Passover, they
(the Jews) sacrifice a youth, the son of a rich tradesman at Paris, for which
all the criminals are executed and all Jews banished France." 1192. Braisne. Philip Augustus attended to this case personally, and had the
criminals burnt. It was a case of the crucifixion of a Christian sold to the
Jews by Agnes, Countess of Dreux, who considered him guilty of homicide and
theft. Authority: Histoire des Ducs et Comtes de Champagne, IV, 1st part,
p. 72, Paris, 1865) by A. de Jubainville; Sped. Vinc., 129, c. 25; Gaguin. L. 6,
De Francis; Magd. Cenf., 12, C. 14, col. 1670. 1235. Fulda, Hesse-Nassau. Five children murdered; Jews confessed under
torture, but said the blood was wanted for healing purposes. Frederick II
exonerated the Jews from suspicion, but the Crusaders had already dealt with a
number by putting them to death. Frederick II called together a number of
converted Jews, who denied the existence of Jewish ritual murder. But
Frederick's bias is evident in his own words when, in publishing his decision,
he gives his objects in calling these people together, "although our conscience
regarded the innocence of the aforesaid Jews adequately proved on the ground of
several writings." Had Frederick II lived today, he would have relied little
upon religious literature in deciding whether Jewish Ritual Murder exists or
not. Authority: Chron. Hirsaug., and Magd. Cent., 13, C. 24. 1247. Valreas, France. Just before Easter, a two-year-old girl's body was
found in the town moat with wounds on forehead, hands and feet. Jews confessed
under torture that they wanted the blood of the child, but did not say that it
was for ceremonial purposes. Pope Innocent IV said that three of the Jews were
executed without confessing, but the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. III, p.
261, says they confessed.
1250. Saragossa. A boy crucified, afterwards canonised as St. Dominiculus.
Pius VII, 24th Nov., 1805, confirmed a decree of the Congregation of Rites of
31st August, according this canonisation. 1261. Pforzheim, Baden. An old woman sold a seven-year-old girl to the Jews,
who bled her, strangled her and threw the body into the river. The old woman was
convicted on the evidence of her own daughter. A number of Jews were condemned
to death, two committing suicide. Authorities: Bollandists, Acta, Vol. II, p.
838; Rohrbacher, L' Histoire Universelle de l'Eglise Catholique, Vol. XVIII, pp.
697-700; Thos. Cantipranus, De ratione vitae Vol. II, xxix. The child was
canonised as a saint. 1287. Berne. Rudolf, a boy, was murdered at Passover in the house of a rich
Jew called Matler. Jews confessed that he had been crucified; many were put to
death. The boy was canonised as a martyr, and his name can be found in several
martyrologies. Documental authorities: Bollandists, Acta, Vol. II, April;
Helvetia sancta (H. Murer); Karl Howald, Die Brunnen zu Bern, 1848, p. 250;
Cosm. Aims., 13, p. 482. But a stone monument still exists in Berne
commemorating the crime. It is called The Fountain of the Child-Devourer, and is
now on the Kornhausplatz. It represents a monster, with a Jewish countenance,
eating a child. The figure wears the Judenbut, the hat prescribed for the Jews
to wear by decree of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. This monument was first
placed in a street of the Jews' quarter as a reminder of the monstrous crime and
as a punishment for the whole of Berne Jewry. Later, it was removed to its
present situation. 1288. Troyes, France. Some Jews were tried for a ritual murder and 13 were
executed by burning. Authority: Jewish Encyclopedia, 1906, Vol. XII, p. 267. 1286. Oberwesel, on the Rhine. A boy named Werner was tortured for three days
at Passover, hanged by the legs and bled white. The body was found in the river.
This boy was beatified in the diocese of Treves, and his anniversary is on 19th
April. A sculptured representation of this ritual murder is still to be seen in
the Oberwesel Church. Authorities: Aventinus, Annals of Bavaria, 1591, 17, p.
576; Chron. Hirsaug., Magd. Cent., 13, c. 14. 1462. Rinn, Innsbruck. A boy called Andreas Oxner was bought by the Jews and
sacrificed for his blood on a stone in the forest. The body was found by his
mother in a birch-tree. No Jew was apprehended because, the border being near,
they had fled when the crime was made known. The Abbe Vacandard, defender of the
Jews, says there was no trial. Well, of course there wasn't. Even in 1937 there
is no trial for a crime where the criminals have escaped! The boy has been
sanctified by Pope Benedict XIV in his Bull Beatus Andreas, Venice, 1778, which
says he was " cruelly assassinated by the Jews in hatred of the faith of Jesus
Christ." This last is admitted by Pope Clement XIV, who wrote his report on the
investigation he made into the matter of Jewish Ritual Murder when, as Cardinal
Ganganelli, he had been commissioned by Pope Benedict XIV to go into the matter;
and in this report, he says "I admit the truth of another fact, which happened
in the year 1462 in the village of Rinn, in the Diocese of Brixen, in the person
of the Blessed Andreas, a boy barbarously murdered by the Jews in hatred of the
faith of Jesus Christ." No one questions the historical occurrence or this case.
An engraving on wood representing the Ritual Murder still exists in the church. 1468. Sepulveda, Segovia, Spain. The Jews sacrificed a Christian child on a
cross. The Bishop of Segovia investigated the crime, and ordered the culprits to
Segovia, where they were executed. It is important to know that this Bishop was
himself son of a converted Jew; Jean d'Avila was his name. Colmenares's History
of Segovia records the facts of the case, which was juridically decided by a man
of Jewish blood. That may be the reason that one finds no mention of it in
Strack's book in defence of the Jews, The Jew and Human Sacrifice.
1475. The Case of St. Simon of Trent. In 1475, a three-year-old boy named
Simon disappeared in the Italian town of Trent; the circumstances were such that
suspicion fell upon the Jews. Hoping to averr this suspicion, they themselves
"found" the child's body in a conduit where they afterwards confessed to having
thrown it. Examination of the body, however, revealed that the boy had not been
drowned; there were strange wounds on the body, of circumcision and crucifixion.
About seven Jews were arrested; they were tortured and confessed that the boy
had been ritually murdered for the purpose of obtaining Christian blood to mix
with the ceremonial unleavened bread; these confessions were made separately and
agreed in all essential details. The Jews were tried and were ultimately
executed. The officer in charge of the investigation of the crime, Jean de Salis
de Brescia, had before him a converted Jew, Jean de Feltro, who described how
his father told him that Jews of his town, Lanzhat, had killed a child at
Passover to get the blood of which they partook in wine and cakes. No one has ever dared to try and deny the historical events of this case;
only the Jews invent "reasons" why it was not Ritual Murder! But there is no
escape from the opposite conclusion. In 1759 in answer to a Jewish appeal from
Poland, the Inquisition sent Cardinal Ganganelli (later he became Pope Clement
XIV) to investigate and report on the whole subject, with particular reference
to the many cases then being reported in Poland; although this man went out with
a biased mind in favour of the Jews (in his report, he says: "With my weak
faculties I endevoured to demonstrate the non-existence of the crime which was
imputed to the Jewish nation in Poland," hardly the spirit in which to enter
upon such an investigation, he actually says of this Trent case (see Report of
Cardinal Ganganelli, in C. Roth's The Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew,
1935, p. 83): "I admit then as true the fact of the Blessed Simon, a boy three
years old, killed by the Jews in Trent in the year 1475 in hatred of the faith
of Jesus Christ (although it is disputed by Basnage and Wagenseil); for the
celebrated Flaminio Cornaro, a Venetian Senator, in his work On the Cult of
the Child St. Simon of Trent (Venice, 1753) disposes of all the doubts
raised by the above-mentioned critics." The Jews try to throw discredit on the judges who condemned the Jewish
murderers by quoting Pope Sixtus IV who refused to sanction the cult of St.
Simon; but the reason for this was that the cult was not then authorised by
Rome, but was a popular movement without authority and contrary to Church
discipline; this same Pope later expressed his approval of the verdict on the
Jews in the Papal Bull XII Kal. July, 1478. We have not only the testimony as to the correctitude of the proceedings from
Sixtus IV; but also that of several other Popes; such as Sixtus V, who
regularised the popular cult of St. Simon by ratifying it in 1588, as cited by
Benedict XIV in Book I, Ch. xiv, No. 4 of his On the Cononisation of the
Saints; also by this same Pope Benedict XIV in his Ball Beatus Andreas
of 22nd February, I755, in which he confirms Simon as a saint, a fact omitted
from the arguments of that advocate for the Jews, Strack (The Jew and Human
Sacrifice); Gregory XIII recognised Simon as a martyr, and even visited the
shrine; and, as already stated, Clement XIV was obliged to recognise that it was
a case of Jewish murder in hatred of Christianity. St. Simon's shrine is in the Church of St. Peter, Trent; relics of him are
still shown, among them the sacrificial knife. In short, the Ritual Murder of St. Simon at Trent is supported by such
evidence that those who doubt it are thereby condemning without reason high
juridical and ecclesiastical authorities whose probity and intelligence there is
not the slightest excuse to deny. 1480. Venice. This case, as admitted in the Jewish Encyclopedia, I906, Vol.
XII, p. 410, was settled by trial. Three Jews were executed. 1485. Padua, Italy. The victim in this case was canonised as St. Lorenzino,
Pope Benedict XIV mentioning him as a martyr in his Bull Beatus Andreas. This
case was attested by the Episcopal Court of Padua 1490. Toledo. This is a most important case, the circumstances of which have
been clarified for us by W. T. Walsh in his interesting book on Isabella of
Spain, 1931 (Sheed & Ward), in which he devotes pp. 441 to 468 to his
researches on this Ritual Murder charge. Had it not been for Mr. Walsh, I might
have been influenced by the Jewish Encyclopedia's statement (1903, Vol. II1, p.
262) that "Modern historians even deny that a child had disappeared at all" in
this case! Strenuous efforts were made by Loeb and H. C. Lea to clear the Jews
from guilt of this murder; as also by Abbe Vacandard. Walsh shows that on 17th
October, 1490, a Jew named Yuce confessed to having been present at the
crucifixion of a boy called Christopher at La Guardian near Toledo. He made this
confession without the "aid" of any torture; he was not even threatened with
that for one year after his confession. On 19th July, 1491, Yuce was promised
immunity from punishment for himself and described the whole crucifixion and
gave the names of his accomplices. On 25th October, 1491, a jury of seven noted
Renaissance scholars who occupied the Chairs at Salamanca University examined
the case and were unanimous in finding Yuce guilty. Not until after this did
Yuce undergo torture. This torture was applied to make him say for what reason
the boy Christopher had been crucified instead of being killed in any other way;
but no "leading" questions were employed in the examination. After this, the
case went before a second jury of five learned men of Avila, who considered the
evidence concerning Yuce's accomplices, who had been arrested and under
examination; they unanimously declared them guilty. Eight Jews (some of them
Marranos. or pretended converts to Christianity) were executed. Writing of the efforts made to discredit the trials in this case, Walsh says
(p. 464): "Must we assume that they (the two learned juries) were all murderous
fanatics, willing to sacrifice innocent men, and that Dr. Leob, Dr. Lea, and on
the Catholic side the somewhat too credulous Abbe Vacandard were better
qualified to weigh the evidence after the lapse of four centuries?" Walsh is not an "anti-semite." He is a historian, and has not suggested that
ritual murder is part or any official Jewish ceremony. But he says: "The
historian, far from being obliged to make wholesale vindication of all Jews
accused of murder, is free, in fact, bound to consider each individual case upon
its merits."
Walsh states (p. 441) that this case of Ritual Murder was "one of the chief
factors, if not the decisive one, in the decision of Fernando and Isabel" (for
the expulsion of the Jews from Spain). He shows that the complete record of
testimony in the trial of one of the accused has been available since it was
published in 1887 in the Bulletin of the Royal Academy at Madrid (Vol. XI, pp.
7-160), from the original manuscript. (This was, of course, before the Red
revolution!) Walsh charges Lea, the pro-Jewish author, of intellectual dishonesty (p. 628)
in writing in his Inquisition in Spain decrying the influential men who
were jurors in this case. "If the Inquisitors sent eight men to a shameful death without being
convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of their guilt, the honest verdict of
history cannot shrink from finding not only Torquemada and his judges, but King
Fernando and Queen Isabel, Cardinal Mendoza and several of the most illustrious
professors of Salamanca University guilty of complicity in one of the most
brutal judicial murders on record?" (Walsh, p. 442.) Those who shrink from charging the Jews with the practice of Ritual Murder
thereby condemn some of the finest characters on the stage of European history. Finally, we must record that the murdered boy was canonised as St.
Christopher on the authority of Pope Pius VII.
1494. Tyrnau, Hungary. A boy was bled white and killed. The Jew culprits were
betrayed by the confession of women, who were persuaded to do so by the sight of
some instruments of torture, which however were not applied to them. The Jews,
arrested after this confession, themselves confessed that this was the fourth
child they had killed for the blood, but they said they wanted this for medical
purposes. Authority: Bollandists, Acta, April, Veil. II, 838. 1510. Brandenberg. Several Jews were accused in Berlin of buying a small
Christian boy, bleeding him and killing him. They confessed, and 41 were
executed Authorities: Richard Mun, Die Juden in Berlin; Sir Richard
Burton, The Jew, the Gypsy and El Islam, 1898, p. 126.
CHAPTER IX
WELL AUTHENTICATED CASES IN
SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES NATURALLY, here we get a number of juridically decided cases, as might be
expected. 1603. Verona. A Jew was tried on a charge of killing a child to get its blood
for an infamous purpose. He was acquitted. The sentence of acquittal, dated 28th
February, 1603, given in full in the Jew Roth's The Ritual Murder Libel and
the Jew (p. 78), released the accused "because the Hebraic witch abhors the
shedding of blood" and "various Princes held this rumour of the use of blood to
be vain and false?" We hold that such absurd reasoning as all excuse for
acquittal is clear proof that the Court was bought. 1670. Met. As this was a very strongly established case, one does not find
any mention of it in Strack's book in defence of the Jews! A three-year-old boy
was lost by his mother on the way to a well. The boy was wearing a red cap, and
witnesses had seen him carried away by a Jew mounted on a horse. This Jew was
Raphael Levi. At first, the boy's body could not be traced. The Jews, becoming
frightened, spread the report that wolves must have killed him in the forest.
The forest was searched and eventually the head, neck and ribs of a boy were
found, together with clothes which were identified as the missing boy's, red cap
and all, by the boy's father. But as these clothes were neither torn nor bloody,
it was concluded that the wolf story was a "blind," and then witnesses came
forward who had seen Raphael Levi with the boy in such places and at such times
as to remove all doubt of his guilt. Levi was sentenced to death by the order of
the Parliament of Metz, and was burned alive. Authority: La France Juive,
by Drumont. 1698. Sandomir, Poland. Authority: The Jew Cecil Roth, in Ritual Murder
Libel and the Jew, p. 24. The highest tribunal in the land, that of Lublin,
condemned a Jew for Ritual Murder. the local court having exculpated him. 1748. Duniagrod, Poland. Jews condemned for Ritual Murder by Episcopal Court.
Mentioned by Roth. 1753. Pavalochi, Poland. Jews condemned for Ritual Murder by Episcopal Court.
Mentioned by Roth. 1753. Zhytomir, Poland. In this case, a three-year-old boy was murdered; Jews
were tried by the Episcopal Court of Kiev and condemned to death. A painting
supposed to commemorate this murder is even now visited by pilgrims to the
Carthusian Monastery at Kalwarya near Cracow. Authority: The Jew Cecil Roth, in
Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew, p. 25. Of course, the Jew Roth denies that the cases quoted were Ritual Murders.
CHAPTER X
WELL-AUTHENTICATED CASES IN THE
NINETEENTH CENTURY AMONG these are the famous cases at Damascus, 1840; Tisza Eszlar, 1882; and
Polna, 1899. In this century, the Jewish Money Power had obtained control over
the finances of many European countries, and the reader will see for himself how
it was exerted on Rulers, Governments, Courts and "public opinion" whenever the
Blood Accusation was brought against the Jews. 1823. Velisch, Russia. On Easter Sunday, a 21 year old boy disappeared. His
body was found in a marsh one week later; there were punctured wounds all over
the body and the skin was scarified. There were wounds of circumcision; the feet
were bloody and a bandage had been tied around the legs. The body had been
undressed, washed, and again dressed. No blood was found near the body, which
was drained of blood. Doctors gave evidence on oath that the child had been
tortured to death. Some years later, five Jews were arrested together with three
Russian women who had become Jewesses; these three women confessed that they
had, one week before Passover in 1823, been made drunk by a Jewess who kept an
inn and that the latter had bribed one of them to procure a boy. One of these
converted Jewesses described how the boy had been forcibly circumcised by the
Jews and rolled about in a barrel until his skin was scraped all over. The boy
had been taken to the school where a number of Jews were assembled, laid in a
trough, and all present had made stabs with a nail in his side and temples. When
the boy died under this torture, his body was taken to a wood by two of the
converted Jewesses; and the third woman took a bottle of the blood of the boy to
the Jewess innkeeper aforesaid. Next day, the Rabbi's wife took the three women
again to the school where the Jews were gathered; bottles were filled from the
trough by means of a funnel, and the Rabbi dipped a nail into the blood and
dropped a little onto a number of pieces of cloth, one piece of which was given
to everyone present. The case went to the Imperial Council at St. Petersburg,
all the lower courts which dealt with the case having found the Jews guilty. The
Imperial Council reversed the verdict and, on 18th January, 1835, the three
Russian Jewish convert women were sent to Siberia whilst all the Jews were
acquitted of the crime! Authorities: Recorded in the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903,
Vol. III, p. 267; described in Der Sturmer, May, 1934. 1831. St. Petersburg. The daughter of a non-commissioned officer was the
victim in this case. There were five judges, of whom four recognised the ritual
character of the murder. The Jewish murderers were transported to Siberia.
Monniot says the facts of this case are not contested. 1840. Rhodes. On the eve of Purim a small Greek boy was missed; he had been
seen entering a house in the Jewish quarter; after that he was never seen again.
It is interesting to note that the time of this event was the same as in the
famous Damascus case, which see. Yusuf Pasha, Governor of the island, took
depositions of witnesses and sent to Constantinople for instructions as to what
to do next. Meanwhile, "at the instigation of the Greek clergy and the European
consuls" (admits the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1905, Vol. X, p. 401) the Jewish
quarter was blockaded and the leading Jews arrested. The Austrian Consul,
however, supported the Jews, Austria being in need of loans from the
Rothschilds. But "owing to the efforts of Count Camondo, Cremieux and
Montefiore" (to quote again from the Jewish Encyclopedia) "a firman was obtained
from the Sultan which declared all accusations of ritual murder null and void."
The Jews were released! Now Camondo, Cremieux and Montefiore were all rich Jews.
Cremieux and Montefiore figure in the Damascus case, which see. Count Camondo
"exercised so great an influence over the sultans Abdal-alMajid and Abd-al-Aziz
and over the Ottoman Grand Viziers and ministers that his name became
proverbial. He was banker to the Ottoman Government...." (All this is from the
Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. III, p. 521) There cannot be a shadow of doubt
that the proceedings in this case were stopped by the force of the Jewish Money
Power, in spite of all the efforts of "the Greek clergy and the European
consuls." Authorities: M. P. -N. Hamont in Egypt under Mehemet Ali, and the
Jewish Encyclopedia as cited. 1840. The Damascus Case. Achille Laurent, a Member of the Societe Orientale, brought together the full
details of the trial of the culprits as reported in Arab newspapers at the time,
and he published the whole facts of the case in Relation historique des
Affaires de Syrie, 1840-1842 (Historic Account of Syrian Affairs,
1840-1842), which was produced in France as a Yellow Book in two volumes, in
1846. The Jewish Festival of Purim fell on 15th February, 1840. Father Thomas, a
Catholic monk disappeared in Damascus on 5th February. His servant went to look
for him and disappeared also. The French Consul, Comte Ratti-Menton, began to make enquiries, and got the
Sherif Pasha to investigate. After a while seven Jews were arrested. They
confessed, some after receiving chastisement with the bastinado, to having
murdered Father Thomas for the sake of his blood. Four of them were promised
pardon if they would speak the truth; these were Mousa Abou-el-Afieh, who became
a Mahomedan, explaining that that was necessary before he could confess about
the crimes of other Jews; Aslan Farkhi; Suliman, a barber; and Mourad el Fathal.
They confessed very fully. Sixteen Jews were found to have been involved, and
all were arrested. Several of the Jews, including Mourad el Fathal, Mousa Abou-el-Afieh, Isaac
Arari and Aaron Arari, described how the blood was required and collected from
the cut throat of the victim to send to a Rabbi for use in preparing ceremonial
bread (pains azymes). The Grand Rabbi was brought before the Court of Investigation; his name was
Yakub el Entabi. He was required to listen carefully to the examination of Mousa
Abou-el-Afieh, and to the answers of that Jew, and to confirm or deny each
statement made by Mousa. In this way, the Rabbi admitted that blood was required
for the ceremonial bread. He also confessed to having received Father Thomas's
blood. According to the Turkish custom, the bastinado was freely applied to make the
Jews speak. The Jewish Money Power has endeavoured to make the world believe
that it was only the torture which enforced confession from innocent men. Unfortunately for the Jewish Money Power, one of the questions asked was
about the place where the remains of Father Thomas had been disposed of; and the
remains were found where the prisoners said they were -- that is, in a covered
conduit. These remains were identified by European doctors as being those of
Father Thomas. Further, the wretches confessed to serving Father Thomas's servant in the
same way, i.e., cutting his throat, collecting his blood, and disposing of the
remains, this time in a latrine.
No amount of bastinado or torture could wring from an innocent man
information as to the whereabouts of the remains of the victim of a murder. We spare the reader the sickening details of the crime according to the
confessions and admissions of the depraved Jewish murderers; long extracts from
the trial's proceedings can be obtained in the following French book: Le
Crime Ritual chez les Juifs, by A. Monniot, prefaced by the celebrated
Edouard Drumont, 1914, from P. Tequi, 82 Rue Bonaparte, Paris, price 10 francs.
This book shows that the confessions made by the culprits agreed in every
detail, and that the questions they had to answer were not "leading questions". Fourteen Jews were found guilty, and ten were condemned to death, two having
died. Our business is not to horrify; it is to expose the methods of Jewish
intrigue and corruption which were used to conceal the guilt of the culprits in
fear of the natural reaction of the Gentile to the facts if they became
generally known. As soon as the first reports of the case reached the West of Europe the
Jewish Money Power rose like one man to try and cover the obvious tracks made by
the obvious criminals. Money can, as we know only too well, accomplish wonders
on a democracy as also on the Endings and policy of Eastern (and alas! often
also Western) potentates. It will perhaps be best to deal with each of these matters separately: 1. The Press Agitation 2. Agitation by Public Meetings. 3. Bribery of the Khedive of Egypt by Money. Note the result. The Jews proclaimed everywhere that the Khedive had reversed
the verdict! He had done nothing of the kind. There was no reversal and no
re-trial. The words of the Khedive's firman which he issued to release the
Jewish murderers give the whole thing away: "From the account and demand of Messrs. Moses Montefiore and Cremieux, who
came to us as delegates of all Europeans professing the religion of Moses, we
have recognised that they desire the liberation and safety for the Jews who have
been detained or who have taken flight in the case of the examination of the
affair of Father Thomas, monk, missing in Damascus; he and his servant, Ibrahim. "And as, because of their numerous population, it would not be convenient
(convenable) to refuse their demand and request, we order that the Jew prisoners
shall be released and that the fugitives be given safety for their return. And
you will take all possible measures that none are badly treated and that they
are left undisturbed everywhere. Such is our will. Mehemet Ali." He released the Jews therefore because of the numbers of Jews in the
population . . . and undoubtedly for cash received. He knew their guilt, and
never denied it. Yet the Jewish Encyclopaedia (1903, Vol. IV, p. 420) actually
ventures to assert that the three rich Jews secured from the 'Khedive a
"recognition of the innocence" of the condemned men. The Khedive's price for
releasing them is stated to have been half a million piastres. A converted
Rabbi, Chevalier P. L. B. Drach, wrote in his The Harmony between the Church
and the Synagogue (1844, Paris, p. 79): "Money played a great role in this
business." 4. Bribery of the Sultan. The Sultan Abd-ul-Mejid's firman said "that a thorough examination of the
religious books of the Hebrews has demonstrated the absolute prohibition of the
use of either human or animal blood in any of their religious rites. It follows
from this defence that the charges against them and their religion are
calumnies." This, as shown in Chapter III, is mere sophistry, but even in 1936 a
Miss C. WI. Finn had the effrontery to bring forward the firman as "evidence"
that the Blood Accusation is false; this was in a letter to the Jewish
Chronicle, 2nd October, 1936. The wording of the firman is quoted in the Jewish Encyclopaedia, Vol. I, p.
47 (1906). On his way home, Montefiore tried to get an audience with the Pope, Gregory
XVI, but Bras refused an audience.
5. Attempted Bribery of the French Consul. 6. Bribery of Austrian Diplomats. "Following the policy of the House [of Rothschild] in other countries, where
it obtained privileges for the Jews in return for loans --in Rome, the abolition
of the Ghetto, and in England, Jewish emancipation-- Solomon [Rothschild]
obtained from Metternich concessions to the Jews in legislation. It was he who
influenced the Chancellor to take a favourable stand in the Damascus
blood-accusation case of 1840."
There you have it; Rothschild's money power; the Austrian Chancellor,
Metternich; the Austrian Consul at Damascus; the Consul's attitude towards the
Ritual Murder charge. A continuous chain of Jewish corruption by Money. 7. Suppression of the Reports of the Trial. But, the reader may ask, what about the official dossier of the affair? This
naturally reposed in the archives of the French Foreign Office. But Desportes in
his Mystere du Sang reported that under the Ministry of Cremieux (one of
the Jews who went East to bribe the Khedive to release the ritual murderers of
Damascus) it disappeared (in 1870)! As this report aroused comment, the
Chancellerie made a declaration (5th May, 1892) that it was incorrect and that
the dossier remained complete at the Ministry. However that may be, when Albert
Monniot in 1913 desired to consult the documents themselves to assist him in
writing his Le Crime Rituel chez les Juifs, he found that he was refused
permission to peruse them. Whether they are still extant or not, therefore, we
cannot tell; all we know is that the secrets of the Jew are well guarded. But
not well enough, as I hope the reader will by now agree. Sir Richard Burton. the great explorer and orientalist who was English Consul
at Damascus 30 years after the Ritual Murder, studied the whole question of the
Blood Accusation, and: eventually wrote The Jew, the Gypsy and El Islam,
of which I have the edition edited by NS. H. Wilkins and published by Hutchinson
in 1898. This work contains a damning indictment of the Talmud, and a list of
Jewish Ritual Murders, but Wilkins in his Preface (p. x) writes: "In the
exercise of the discretion given to me, I have thought it better to hold over
for the present the Appendix on the alleged rite of Human Sacrifice among the
Sephardim and the murder of Padre Tomaso (Father Thomas); the only alternative
was to publish it in a mutilated form." Let us follow therefore (1) the Book, (2) the Appendix on Ritual Murder. (1) The Book. This is easy. It is well nigh unobtainable. (2) The Appendix on Ritual Murder. What happened to it? This is what happened
to it. See D. L. Alexander versus Manners Sutton, King's Bench Division, 27th March,
1911, reported in The Times the following day. Herein D. L. Alexander, a
Jew and President of the Jewish Board of Deputies was able to show that he had
obtained an assignment of the manuscript from the surviving executors of Sir
Richard Burton. The executors had sold them to a bookseller, who, in turn, sold
them to Manners Sutton; and he (Sutton), not knowing of any assignment, made
arrangements for the publication of the Appendix. D. L. Alexander brought the
action to stop this publication from taking place, claiming copyright and
delivery to him of the manuscript. The Jew won his case. 1852 and 1853 Saratov. Two ritual murders are involved this time; one, a
10-year-old boy in December, 1852; the other, 11-year-old, in January, 1853.
After a flood, both bodies were found on the bank of the Volga, pierced with
many wounds. Eight years afterwards, two Jews, Schiffermann and Zourloff, were
duly tried for these murders and convicted. They were sentenced to 28 years'
labour in the mines, and they died during their imprisonment. This, being a
juridically decided case, the sentence in which was passed for "killing two
Christian boys and having made them endure marytrdom" by the Senate and
submitted to the Russian Empire Council, is, of course, not mentioned in
Strack's book! Authority: Monniot's Le Crime Rituel chez. les Juifs,
1914, P. 257. 1880. Smyrna. Many Jews were massacred after a missing child's body had been
found on the beach covered with punctured wounds at Passover. Authority:
Moniteur de Rome, 15th June, 1883.
1882. The Tisza Eszlar Case in Hungary Esther Solymosi, 14 years old, disappeared on 1st April; the five-year-old
son of the Jewish sexton told some women that his mother had enticed the girl
into their house, whence she had been slipped by some Jews into the synagogue
premises. This report came to the ears of Mrs. Solymosi, Esther's mother, who
immediately reported to the police. An enquiry was set on foot, on 19th May,
under Dr. Josef Bary, and it is largely from a book written 50 years later by
Dr. Bary, who became President of the Supreme Court of Justice in Hungary, that
the facts of the enquiry have come to light. This book is of over 600 pages, and
is called A tiszaeszlari bunper (The Tisza Eszlar Murder Trial). These
facts can also be checked from the diary of the Hungarian Minister for Justice
of the period, Theodor Pauler, which diary had been kept in the Hungarian
National Museum. Another son of the Jewish sexton was Maurice Scharf, aged 14. He admitted
that he had seen through the keyhole of the synagogue door that Esther had been
murdered by certain Jews and bled white, her blood being collected in a vase. It
was found by ocular view on the spot that the place where these events were said
to have occurred was actually in sight to anyone looking through the keyhole.
Witnesses also said they had heard cries from the synagogue on the day when the
girl was first missing.
To test the veracity of the 14-year-old Maurice, the Judge told him that his
tale could not be true as Esther was alive; the boy replied that "no one could
be alive after being cut on the neck like that." A number of Jews were arrested, and confessed that they had taken part in the
ritual murder of Esther to get her blood for the Passover. One would think that there would be little more to report. But no! All Israel got to work with its Money Power, and the Press of every
country in Europe was employed to throw calumny on the Hungarian Court and on
Hungarian Justice. The Public Prosecutors were bribed and set to work to
discredit the honourable Judge who presided over the Court. No stone was left
unturned, no filthy corrupting action left untried, to defeat the course of
justice; and the Jews won. Here are some of the minor methods by which the Jews
with their money tried to confuse the issue:
By paying the debts of, or bribing the officials. By offering Esther's mother a bribe to say that her daughter was alive and in
a situation elsewhere. This was done by the Jew Reiszmann. By trying to steal the Court records from the house of the Judge. By altering the synagogue lock, so that it was no longer possible to see the
place of the murder by looking through the keyhole. By spreading reports that Esther had run away; or had been drowned. The
Examining Judge caused the river to be dragged without result. By arranging that a corpse should turn up and be "identified" as Esther's. On
18th June, a girl's body dressed in Esther's clothes, which were far too small
for the purpose, was drawn out of the River Theiss by Jewish raftsmen. The
mother denied that the corpse was Esther's although she recognised Esther's
clothes. A committee of experts examined the body, and found that the hair and
eyebrows had been shaved off, obviously to conceal identity. They also found
that the body was that of a girl 18 years old (Esther was only 14) and that
death was due not to drowning but to tuberculosis. It became so obvious that the
body had been "found" for a purpose, that the Jewish raftsmen were interrogated;
and they confessed that the corpse had been taken over by them from a Jew called
Herschko, that it had been dressed in Esther's clothes, put in the river, and
then "discovered" and landed. Then it was found that on 21st July, 1883, Baron Bela Orczy, the Hungarian
Minister, had visited Minister for Justice Pauler and had told him that
Goldschmidt, the Budapest representative of Rothschild's, had demanded that the
charges be withdrawn! At this time, debt-conversion was a serious matter for
Hungary, and chiefly depended on the Rothschild Money Power. Later, Baton Orczy
told Pauler that Goldschmidt actually demanded that the two Public Prosecutors
who had made condemnation of the prisoners impossible should be decorated! The sort of thing that had been "worked" against all the evidence may be
explained by giving one example: In November, 1882, a new Committee of Experts
was formed to make a further examination of the body found in the river five
months before, and this committee declared that the findings of the former
committee had no scientific basis, that the body was Esther's and that as the
throat was not cut, it could not have been a case of ritual murder! So ends a dismal tale of the foulest Jewish trickery to enable a few
miserable degenerates to escape from well-merited punishment. 1891. Xanten, Prussia. A five-year-old boy called Hegmann was murdered, his
threat cut and the body bloodless. "The Government did all in its power to
suppress the rumor" of ritual murder (Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. I, p. 645). The
doctor who examined the body said (29th June) that: "The trace of blood appears
as an after-bleeding." On 9th July, he retracted this and explained that his
mistake was due to it being dark at the time of his examination! I think by this
time the reader will guess what happened between 29th June and 9th July to his
banking account. The Minister of Justice, de Schelling, was a Jew. The accused
Jewish ritual slaughterer, who had been arrested, was acquitted.
1899. The Polna Case (Bohemia). A man called Peschak had seen a Jew Hilsner with two other Jews on the day of
the murder on the spot where the body was found. Hilsner was arrested and tried;
another witness testified that he had seen the prisoner very agitated on 29th
March, coming from the spot where the body was found. The Court, whilst recognizing that Hilsner must have had accomplices, found
him guilty and condemned him to death. He then confessed, and implicated two
other Jews, but later retracted these statements, as also his confession. The
two men produced satisfactory alibis. By the Power of Jewish Money and the agitation it was able to raise, a new
trial was ordered. Meanwhile Dr. Baxa, attorney for the murdered girl's mother,
had in a speech in the Bohemian Dict, 28th December, accused the Government of
showing partiality to the Jews in the way they handled this case. Then, another girl's body was found, too decomposed to show the cause of
death; this was the body of Maria Klima) who had disappeared 17th July, 1898.
Hilsner was charged with both murders when the case came on again in November.
This time, a witness stated that at the time of the first murder, Hilsner had a
ritual slaughterer's knife. Dr. Baxa insisted that it was a case of Ritual Murder. The Court found the
prisoner guilty, without however alleging ritual reasons, and the prisoner was
sentenced to death on 14th November 1900. However, the Emperor intervened, and
the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. The prisoner's counsel at this trial was Masaryk, later President of Czecho-Slovakia,
this work seems to have stood him in good stead in after life! Hilsner was released from prison by the Marxists in the rioting of 1918; he
died a few years later. CHAPTER XI
WELL-AUTHENTICATED CASES IN THE
PRESENT CENTURY THE best known of these is the Beiliss case at Kiev, 1911-13. It will be
noticed that there are several cases also in Germany at the time when the Jews
were the supreme power there previous to Hitler's success. 1900. Konitz, West Prussia. A 19-year-old youth, Ernst Winter, was murdered
in March. His body had been dismembered and parts of it were found in different
localities. The culprits were never discovered, but two Jewish agents were
sentenced to imprisonment for false witness and for the subornation of witnesses
during the enquiry! The post mortem examination was said to have shown death due
to suffocation, but the county physician had previously pronounced death to have
occurred from loss of blood. A large assembly of foreign Jews visited the town
the night of the murder and left next day. This case aroused the country against
the Jews, and its description occupied 2 pages of the Jewish Encyclopedia. 1911-13. Kiev, Russia. This is by far the most important proved ritual murder
case of the 20th century and is generally known as the Beiliss Case. In 1911, a 13-year-old boy's body was found at Kiev with curious wounds and
drained of blood. A Jew named Beiliss was arrested on suspicion. It was proved that the murder took place inside the premises of a Jewish
brick factory to which only Jews had access. This factory contained a Jewish
hospice with a secret synagogue attached.
After long-drawn-out preliminaries, Beiliss, who was proprietor of the
factory, was tried; the jury found that there was no proof that he himself was
the culprit, although half of them considered he was; the verdict therefore
having to be unanimous, he was declared Not Guilty. But the jury agreed as to
the cause of the boy's death; their verdict about this was as follows: The boy "after being gagged, was wounded with a perforating instrument in the
nape of the neck, temples and neck, which wounds severed the cerebral vein, the
left temporal and jugular arteries, producing thus profuse hemorrhage; and
afterwards, when Joutchinski (the boy's name) had lost about five glasses of
blood. his body was pierced with the same instrument, lacerating thus the lungs,
the liver, the right kidney and the heart, where the last wounds were inflicted,
in all 47 wounds, causing acute suffering to the victim and the loss of
practically all the blood of the body, and finally death." Thus, although the murder could not be fixed upon any particular individual,
its ritual character was quite certain, the boy being first bled and then
killed. There were many strange features about this trial, viz.: (1) On 17th October, 1913, the presiding Judge had to warn the Jewish
pressmen against persisting in reporting perverted renderings of the evidence,
and said that if they continued in this practice, then would be refused
permission to attend the Court. (2) Two children, Genia and Valentine Tcheberiak, who were important
witnesses against Beiliss, died suddenly shortly after his arrest. This was
after they had eaten sweetmeats given to them by a degraded police agent called
Krassowsky. They were examined by two Jewish doctors at the hospital and were
certified to be suffering from dysentery the bacilli of that disease having been
found in them according to the report.
Next, it was discovered that their mother had been offered (and had refused)
a bribe of 40,000 roubles by a Jew lawyer to take upon herself the guilt for the
murder of the stabbed boy Joutchinski.
Finally, the Jews actually suggested she had poisoned the two children, the
Jews having characteristically forgotten for the moment those dysentery bacilli
that had been reported to have been discovered! (3) Several important witnesses gave expert opinion that the Jews use
Christian blood to mix with the unleavened bread at certain feasts, and that
Christian children are killed by Jews for the purpose. One of these was Father Pranaitis, theologian and Hebraist, who considered
that the evidence showed every sign of it being a Jewish ritual murder. Father
Pranaitis said that the Zohar, the cabbalistic book of the Chassidim sect of
Jews, described the ritual of murder, prescribing thirteen stabs in the right
temple seven in the left one, which is exactly how the head of the murdered boy
had been treated. Another expert witness was Professor Sikorski of Kiev
University, a medical psychologist, who also regarded the case as one of Ritual
Murder. After the Jewish Bolshevik revolution, the Cheka shot the Judge, the Public
Prosecutor and many of the witnesses, including Father Pranaitis, the medical
expert Kozoratov, and Professor Sikorski. Professor Pawlow, who was a witness
for the defence, became a leading scientist in Bolshevik Russia! The ex-General Alexandre Netchvoldov of the Russian Imperial Army, tells us
the rest in an article, "La Russie et les Juifs," in Le Front Unique,
published at Oran, 1927, p. 59: Quoting Evrijskaja Tribuna of 24th
August, 1922, he says "that at a visit of the Rabbi of Moscow to Lenin, the
first word Lenin said to his visitor was to ask him it the Jews were satisfied
with the Soviet tribunal which had annulled, the Beiliss verdict, saying that
Joutchinksy had been killed by a Christian!"
Yes, Bolshevism is Jewish! (4) A "British protest," published in The Times, dated 6th May, 1912,
signed by the usual Archbishops and bishops, together with dukes (such as the
late Duke of Norfolk who had been married to a Jewish woman), earls (such as
Rosebery, married to a Rothschild), and people like the late Rt. Hon. A. J.
Balfour, fulminated against the "revival" of the Ritual Murder charge; the
"Blood Accusation" was described in this protest as "a relic of the days of
witchcraft and black magic, a cruel and utterly baseless libel on Judaism." Is it not amazing that where Jewish interests are concerned, Englishmen of
standing will try to influence the course of justice by thus interfering before
Beiliss had even been tried?
Beiliss died in America in 1934, and his funeral was made that of. Jewish
national hero. 1928. Gladbeck, Germany. This occurred at the time of Purim; twenty-year-old lad called Helmuth Daube was found dead in front of his home, with his throat cut, his genital organs missing, whilst there were wounds on the hands and stabs in the abdomen. There was no blood about where the body was found and it was bloodless. Experts said in Court that the throat showed the Jewish ritual cut. The Jews set to work and eventually a young Gentile called Huszmann was accused of the murder, unnatural lust being alleged as a feature in the crime. The case was conducted against Huszmann by a Jew called Rosenbaum, and special police had been sent from Berlin to enquire about the circumstances; the President of the Police at Berlin was the Jew Bernhard Weiss. These special police did what they could to convince the Court that it was a "lust-murder," but Huszmann was acquitted. The Bochumer Abendblatt and Der Sturmer both gave their opinion that it was a Ritual Murder by Jews, and the latter paper was suppressed for a time, and its editor imprisoned.
1929. Manan, Germany. [see picture at right] A five-year-old boy named Kessler disappeared on 17th
March. The body was found in a wood, with throat cut from ear to ear
superficially whilst there was a deep stab in the neck cutting the main vessels.
The body was bloodless and there was no blood found near it. It was just before
Passover, and the local Jewish butcher had suddenly disappeared. Dr. Burgel, the
Court doctor, said it was a case of Ritual Murder. The Jew Money Power got to
work to influence the authorities and public opinion. Before the official
inquiry, the Public Prosecutor announced that it was not a case of Ritual
Murder. The Judge decided the boy had met with an accidental stab from the
branch of a tree or from an animal's horn, and the case was dropped. No one was
ever arrested for the crime. 1932. Paderborn, Germany. Martha Kaspar was the Gentile servant in the
household of a Jewish butcher named Meyer. This man had a son Kurt, and this
Kurt had had sexual relations with the servant who became pregnant. She demanded
that he should marry her, and the father and son promised that this should
happen, but secretly decided to make away with the girl. On 18th March, near
Purim, she disappeared. Two days later some human flesh was found on the road,
and the Jewish Press began to spread the idea that there had been a
"lust-murder." Investigation revealed blood on Kurt's clothes and in a hayloft
of Meyer's, and both the Meyers were arrested. Dr. Frank, a Jewish lawyer,
succeeded in getting the father certified as a lunatic and sent to an asylum,
but he was soon freed and fled the country. The son, Kurt, said he had attempted
to procure abortion, and that he had cut the girl's body up and distributed it
in various places; a doctor told the Court that some litres of blood must have
been taken. Later, Kurt said he had killed the girl in a fit of temper. The
Court brought in a verdict of manslaughter, and sentenced Kurt Meyer to 15
years' imprisonment. The general newspapers did not report the case; Der
Sturmer said it was Ritual Murder, and was suppressed for a time. These
circumstances cause me to include this case among the "well-authenticated" ones. It will be noted that the last three cases occurred at a time when the Jews
were supreme in Germany just before the Hitler revolution, when it was easy to
suppress all expression of opinion as to the true nature or the murders.
CHAPTER XII
THE JEWISH DEFENCE THE Jews and their advocates use sundry arguments whereby they seem to have
successfully camouflaged and almost obliterated in this country the trail of
historic fact concerning the practice of Ritual Murder. When the author was
proceeded against in 1936 for daring to mention Jewish Ritual Murder, the trial
was reported in some newspapers under the heading "Amazing Story," as though he
had invented it! Let us list the Jewish "arguments" and answer them: 1. That the confessions made by the accused Jews were extracted by torture. This is true of many medieval cases; it is unlikely that the Jews would
confess without such aids to memory, because of the certain dire consequences
that would follow the confession. But I have shown in Chapter 13 (which see) that many confessions of the
practice of Ritual Murder by Jews have been made by those who have been
converted to the Christian faith and made freely; many confessions have been
made by accused Jews without torture, or by their relations without torture;
whilst at Damascus, where the bastinado was used to aid the memory of the
accused, it inspired them to reveal where the fragments of the bodies of the
murdered men were to be found, and they were found in the indicated spots; I
take it that Jews do not allege that the bastinado endowed the culprits with
telepathic second sight? There is thus nothing in the argument.
2. That the Jewish laws not only do not sanction the practice of Ritual
Murder, but forbid the use of blood.
In other words, John Smith cannot be guilty of theft from William Brown
because the Eighth Commandment says 'Thou shalt not steal.' There is nothing in this argument, dealt with in Chapter III. 3. That the Blood Accusation is the result of mediaval and ignorant
superstition. In Chapter V, I show that there were, according to the Jews themselves, more
Blood Accusations in the 19th century than in any previous one. There is therefore nothing in this argument. 4. That the guilt of the Jews was not juridically established. The emptiness of this statement is shown in Chapter XIV, where a number of
cases are quoted in which, through the centuries, competent and full authority
decided the guilt of the accused or approved the verdict. There is nothing in this argument
5. That it couldn't happen now.
Chapter VI is devoted to meeting this objection. It will be seen that there is nothing in the objection. The objection appeals to the good-nature of the Aryan mind which cannot
conceive anything so alien as a desire to commit Ritual Murder. It is the false
teaching of Equality of Race, spread by Masonry, perverted religion and
democracy, that is responsible for this attitude of mind. 6. That Papal Bulls refuse credence to the charge of Ritual Murder. This matter is dealt with in Chapter XV.
There are Popes who obviously wished to register their disbelief in the
practice of Ritual Murder by Jews, and did so.
There are other Popes who equally registered by their actions and Bulls that
they did believe in the charge.
So there is nothing in the argument.
7. That Pope Gregory XIV's report of 1758 (made when he was Cardinal
Ganganelli) is a final and incontrovertible refutation of the charge. In Chapter XV, I have shown how actually this report by the Cardinal is
proved utterly unreliable as he says in it that "he endeavoured to demonstrate
the non-existence of the crime," which shows that he did not endeavour to
demonstrate the truth, which is all that an investigator has any right to do;
whilst he specifically admits that St. Simon of Trent and St. Andreas of Rinn
were killed by Jews in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ. Thus, Pope Gregory
XIV is that most valuable witness in the support of the Blood Accusation--the
unwilling witness. 8. The charges are unworthy of credence because they have been brought by
anti-semites. This is an argument used by the Jew, Israel Abrahams, in his article on
Ritual Murder in the 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, in which he
writes: "The literature on the other side is entirely anti-semitic and in no
instance has it survived the ordeal of criticism." How strangely the Jewish mind works! How could anyone fail to be
"anti-semitic" if they believed that that Jews commit ritual murder of Gentile
children? If there is not a glut of literature on the subject in English, it is not any
ordeal of criticism which has brought about the scarcity, but the Jewish Money
Power which has been brought to bear on that literature, making it so scarce
that no one can get hold of it. Instance, Sir Richard Burton's The Jew, the
Gypsy and El Islam, by an author of unimpeachable integrity and illustrious
fame, a book the fate of which has been described on page 28, which see. So much for the Jews' methods of defence by argument. Now let us see what
other methods of defence they adopt. These are: 1. The killing of authors or witnesses, or of others with knowledge of the
subject. On page 27 are recorded the circumstances surrounding the death of Gougenot
des Mousseaux, author of Le Juif, le Judaisme et la Judaisation, etc.; on
page 32 is registered the fact of the death of child witnesses in the Kiev case,
1911-13; on p. 33 is given the fate of the Judge, counsel and expert witnesses
in the same case, all murdered by the Jewish Bolsheviks. 2. Violent abuse of lawyers, witnesses for the prosecution or accusers. This is a modern development since the Jews obtained control over the Gentile
press. It was marked in cases of the 19th and 20th centuries. The Jewish Press in this country has succeeded in so reviling the name of
Herr Julius Streicher, editor of Der Sturmer, that many decent citizens
take it for granted that Herr Streicher is a kind of crazy and sadistic devil
instead of (as we know him to be) a gallant and faithful German officer. 3. Disappearance of books containing evidence of Ritual Murders. Under the description of the 1840 Damascus case, I give particulars of the
fate of the Official Dossier, and of Gougenot des Mousseaux's and Sir Richard
Burton's books. The suppression of reports of trials has been noted in pre-Hitler
Jew-controlled Germany in the 20th century.
4. The silencing of reference to Ritual Murder The penal laws are stretched in the Jew-run countries to secure the
imprisonment of anyone daring to break the Jew-imposed silence on the subject of
Ritual Murder. Herr Julius Streicher was imprisoned in 1928 for this "offence,"
and the author of the present work was sentenced by a 31st degree Scottish Rite
Masonic Judge in 1936 to six months imprisonment among criminals on a trumped-up
charge of the same nature.
Nevertheless there is no law in England forbidding reference to Ritual
Murder. 5. Deliberate misrepresentation of the statements of athoritative people. A good example of this is described on p.p. 43-44, where the late Baron
Rothschild endeavoured to use Cardinal Merry del Val's confirmation of the
authenticity of a certain Papal letter as a confirmation of a false
interpretation of the contents of that letter made by Baron Rothschild himself.
Another example is in the case of the Jewish Encyclopedia, Hyamson's History
of the Jews in England and Lucien Wolf's Essays in Jewish History,
all of which assert that the Khedive of Egypt declared the condemned Jews in the
Damascus murder to be innocent; he simply released them contemptuously for spot
cash, without any such declaration. 6. Bribery of the witnesses for the prosecution, the officials of the courts,
or the Potentates who could overrule those courts. Examples of this are the cases of Rhodes and of Damascus in 1840, Tisza
Eszlar in 1882, Konitz in 1900, and Kiev, 1911-13. 7. False accusations of innocent people.
As in the cases of Kiev and of Gladbeck.
8. The production of a corpse supposed to be that of the missing victim, but
actually that of someone who died from a cause other than Ritual Murder; this
was done in the Tisza Eszlar case.
9. Refusal or threatened refusal of loans to governments. From Jewish sources, I give on p. 27 an instance where Rothschild influence
in the matter of loans clearly governed the attitude of the Austrian consul at
Damascus through the Chancellor Metternich, in the 1840 case. On p. 30 is shown how the same Rothschild family were able to threaten the
Government of Hungary so as to induce it to cause the acquittal of the accused
Jews in the 1882 case at Tisza Eszlar.
In all methods of propaganda, the Jew Money Power ends ready allies among the
gullible Gentiles, particularly among Archbishops, politicians, and even with
Royalty. These rely chiefly on the idea that the Blood Accusation is a relic of
the dark and wicked ages of the past, an idea which I have shown to have no
foundation in fact. How is it that influential Gentiles so readily lend themselves in support of
the Jews against the Blood Accusation? The answer to this question deserves a
short chapter to itself. (See Chapter XX.) There have been a number of books published from time to time refuting the
Blood Accusation; some of these are written by Jews, others by Gentiles. Among
such, the best known are those of Strack and Cecil Roth. The works of Drs. Loeb
and Lea are proved worthless; these concerned the Toledo case of 1490. The Jew and Human Sacrifice, by H. L. Strack, Regius Professor of
Theology at Berlin, went through eight editions before it was published in
English in 1909. Strack was a Gentile, but his French edition was prefaced by
the Jew Theodore Reinach, who was both son-in-law and nephew to Baron Jacques
Reinach, who was found dead in bed after a warrant for his arrest had been
issued in connection with the Panama Canal scandal. The English edition is a book of 289 pages, of which only pp. 160 to 274 are
relevant to the issue. The book is damned because there is no mention of the case of St. Hugh of Lincoln;
CHAPTER XIII
EVIDENCE OF CONVERTED JEWS Jews who have professed conversion to Christianity have sometimes denied that
there is any practice of Ritual Murder of Christians among people of the Jewish
faith. On the other hand, many "converts" have confessed that Jews practice
Ritual Murder. It would be interesting to know whether those converts, who have admitted the
fact of Ritual Murder, were people with a mixture of either the Aryan or of the
Alpine racial strain in their blood. But that knowledge is denied to us. The cases which have come to light in which Jewish converts to Christianity
or to Mahomedanism have confessed that: Ritual Murder is practiced by Jews are
chronologically arranged below:
1144. Theobald, a monk and a Jewish convert, of Cambridge, came forward at
the time when enquiry was being made into the death of St. William of Norwich,
and said that as a Jew in Norwich he himself had known that a child was to be
sacrificed at that place in 1144. He said that the custom of the Jews was to
draw lots as to where the deed should be done, and that it fell to Norwich to
supply the blood which was required by them in the year 1144; the Jews believed
that without the shedding of human blood, they could never gain their freedom
and return to Palestine. 1468. Bishop Jean d'Avila, himself the son of a converted Jew, actually
investigated the Ritual Murder case in Segovia, Spain, and himself found the
Jews guilty, who were afterwards executed (see page 18). 1475 Hans Vayol, converted Jew, charged the Rabbi of Ratisbon with Ritual
Murder for the sake of the blood. Authority: Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. II, p. 16
(1903). 1475 Wolfkan of Rutisban, Jewish convert to Christianity, charged the Jews
with the Ritual Murder of St. Simon of Trent for the sake of the blood they
required for their Passover celebrations. Authority: Ibid, Vol. XII, p. 554
(1906). 1475. A converted Jew, Jean de Feltro, described to the officer investigating
the Ritual Murder of St. Simon of Trent, how his father had told him that the
Jews of his town had killed a child at Passover to get the blood for their
Passover bread. 1490. Torquemada, himself of Jewish blood (Roth, History of the Marranos,
1931, p. 39), must have confirmed the sentence of death against the Jews
responsible for the Toledo ritual murder, and it would be through him that
Ferdinand and Isabella would learn about it. The Ritual Murder case was one of
the main factors which disposed the King and Queen to expel the Jews from Spain. 1494. Alonzo de Spina, stated by a Jew historian to have been of Jewish blood
(History of the Marranos, Roth, 1932, p. 34) accused the Jews of
murdering children for ritual purposes. He occupied the high position of Rector
of Salamanca University, and his accusation was made in his work Fortalitium
Fidei. 1555. Hananel di Foligno, of Rome, Jewish convert to Christianity, accused
the Jews before Pope Marcellus 11 of the Ritual Murder of a boy. Enquiry under
the auspices of a Cardinal resulted in a Mahomedan apostate, guardian of the
murdered boy, being charged with the crucifixion of his ward "for the sake of
getting possession of some property." This sounds like the usual cock-and-bull
story which, under the powerful influence of Jew Money, is resorted to when
Courts are faced with the difficult job of shielding Jews from "the Blood
Accusation." Why on earth should the man crucify the boy instead of quietly
getting rid of him in a more usual manner? Authority: Jewish Encyclopedia
(1903), Vol. V, p. 423. 1614. Samuel Friedrich Brenz, a Jew, who was converted in I610, wrote a book
revealing the Ritual Murder practice of the Jews. It was called Judischer
Abgestreifter Schlangenbalg and was published at Nuremberg. The title
translated is The Jewish Serpent's Skin Stripped. The Jewish Encyclopedia's
description of the author speaks of his "crass ignorance, hatred, falsehood and
pernicious fanaticism." The book was republished in 1680 and again in 1715. 1720. Paul Christian Kirchner, converted Jew, admitted in his Judisches
Ceremoniel, Frankfurt, that dried Christian blood was considered useful as a
remedy for certain diseases of women.
18--. Paulus Meyer, converted Jew, accused the Jews of Ritual Murder in his
Wolfe in Schafsfell, Schafe in Wolfspelz (Wolf in Sheep's Clothing,
etc.). He had a libel action brought against him by the Jews he accused of being
involved in a case of alleged ritual murder, and was sentenced to four months'
arrest. The Jewish Encyclopedia describes all these last three authors as "malicious
and ignorant enemies of their people." 17--. A converted Jew, Serafinovicz, wrote a book admitting Ritual Murder as
a Jewish practice. Authority: The Jew, C. Roth Ritual Murder Libel and the
Jew, 1935, p. 24. 1759. A converted Jew, J. J. Frank, formed a sect called the Frankists at
Lemberg. These people were all Jews who had become Christians in revolt against
the evils taught in the Talmud. They said that it was the Talmud which was the
root of all the troubles between Jews and Gentiles. Prince Etienne de
Mikoulissky, administrator of the archidiocese of Lemberg, instituted public
debates between the Frankists and the Talmudic Jews. A debate held in July took
place in which various matters were dealt with point by point until six points
had been settled; the seventh one was the Frankists' declaration that "the
Talmud teaches the employment of Christian blood and he who believes in the
Talmud ought to make use of this blood." The Frankists said they had learned
this in their youth as Jews. Under the heading Baruch Yavan, the Jewish
Encyclopedia, 1903) Vol. II, p. 563, admits that the Frankists brought the
blood accusation against the Talmudists; also in Vol. VII, p. 579, under Judah
Lob ben Nathan Krysa.
The Frankists completely defeated their opponents in these debates.
Ultimately they became assimilated into the Christian community. There is a large bibliography with reference to the Frankist community, of
which the following two works may receive mention here: La malfaisance juive,
by Pikulski, Lvov, 1760; and Materiaux sur la question relative aux
accusations portees contre les Juifs a propos des crimes rituels, by J. O.
Kouzmine, St. Petersburg, 1914.
1803. A converted ex-Rabbi wrote a book in the Moldavian language in I803
which was published again in Greek in I834 by Giovanni de Georgio under the
title Rain of the Hebraic Religion. This converted Rabbi called himself
by the name Neophyte. Extracts from his book were quoted in Achille Laurent's
Relation Historique des Affaires de Syrie depuis 1840 a 1842, a book
described on p. 24 under the Damascus case. This extract gives very full
information, confirms the murder, crucifixion and bleeding of Christians by Jews
for Ritual purposes and the use of the blood for mixing with the Passover bread;
and says that the practice is handed down by oral tradition and that nothing
appears about it in writing in the Jewish religious books. Monniot in his Le
Crime Ritual chez les Juifs copies long extracts from Laurent's quotations
from Neophyte. 1826. Paul Louis Bernard Drach, ex-Grand Rabbi of Strasburg, published a
Deuxieme lettre d'un rabbin converti, Paris, 1827. On page 7 he said: "The
zeal of these Rabbis goes as far as dedicating to death all those who follow the
doctrine of the Trinity, and consequently all Christian Israelites." 1840. Ex-Rabbi Mousa Abou-el-Afieh, who became a Mahommedan during the
Damascus Ritual Murder trial, gave evidence that the blood of the murdered
Father Thomas had been ordered by the Grand Rabbi Yakoub el Entabi, and was
required for the use of zealous persons who sent Yakoub their flour for
Passover, in which he mixed the Christian's blood. The employment of the blood
was a secret of the Grand Rabbis. 1913. A converted Jew, Cesare Algranati, enumerated a number of ritual murders for a book Cahiers Romains, 1913, a Catholic publication of Rome. Its date was 29th November, 1913. Over 100 cases are cited, of which 27 were in the 19th century. Authority: A. Arcand, in Le Miroir, Montreal, September, 1932, p. 12.
CHAPTER XIV
CASES CONFIRMED BY CONSTITUTED
AUTHORITY THE Jews are wont to pretend that the Blood Accusation, as they call it, is
the product of medieval superstition and credulity, and anti-Jewish prejudice.
They bring forward as examples cases where Jews have been wrongfully charged
with Ritual Murder or against whom there was insufficient evidence, the mob
taking the initiative and lynching every Jew it could lay hands on. There is an exact analogy in more modern times in the case of the negroes of
the Southern States of the U.S.A. Everyone knows that lynching has been resorted
to where negroes have been suspected of certain outrages against white women and
children. Everyone knows also that sometimes the mob, in its racial thirst for
vengeance, and in its impatience of the slow and corrupt legal procedure, has
lynched innocent men. But no one will argue on such grounds that negroes guilty
of such offences have not frequently met with the rough justice they deserved at
the hands of the mob, or that negroes never attack white women and children! Yet
the Jews bring forward this same rotten argument to shield themselves from the
charge of Ritual Murder! Because innocent Jews have been lynched, no Jew ever
does a Ritual Murder!
We have, fortunately, many cases on record in which constituted authority has
duly tried the Jewish murderers and found them guilty, or has, sometimes without
finding the culprit, given a verdict concerning the cause of death which leaves
no doubt as to its ritual character. Let me enumerate some of these: 1192. Jews convicted after personal investigation by Philip Augustus, a
sagacious man of good judgment. 1255. The case of "Little St. Hugh" at Lincoln, duly tried by proper
authority and the judgment approved of by King Henry III. 1288. Jews tried by proper authority for ritual murder at Troyes. 1468. Jews tried by the Bishop of Segovia, himself son of a converted Jew. 1475. Jews tried at Trent by proper authority. 1480. Jews tried at Venice by proper authority. 1485. Jews tried at Padua by proper authority. 1490. Jews tried for the Toiedo ritual murder by the most learned men of the
Universities of Salamanca and of Avila, under proper authority. 1494. Jews tried by proper authority for ritual murder at Hungary. 1670. Jew tried by proper authority at Metz. Sentenced by order of
Parliament. 1698. Jew tried by the highest tribunal of the land for a ritual murder at
Sandomir, Poland. 1748. Jews tried for ritual murder at Duniagrod, Poland, by Episcopal Court. 1753. Jews tried by Episcopal Court at Kiev for a ritual murder at Zhytomir. 1753. Jews tried by Episcopal Court for ritual murder at Pavalochi, Poland. 1831. Jews tried by proper authority at St. Petersburg for ritual murder. 1840. Jews tried by proper authority at Damascus for the ritual murder of
Father Thomas and his servant. 1852 and 1853. Jews tried for two ritual murders at Saratov. Actual trial
eight years after the murder. 1899. Jew convicted of the Polna murder by proper authority. 1911-13. Verdict of the Court in the Kiev case that the victim had been first
bled and then killed; murderer not identified. See p. 32. Finally we may also mention the case at Breslau in 1888 (see Chapter XVIII)
where a rabbinical student was found guilty of extracting blood from a Christian
boy without intention to cause fatal injury. It is interesting to note that when the Jew, Jacob Selig, made his appeal to
the Pope in 1758 complaining of "persecution" of Jews in Poland by means of the
blood accusation, he admitted that the cases he complained of had been brought
before the Courts!
In pre-Hitler Jew-controlled Germany, there were several cases in which the
Courts were obviously made use of for the smothering of the Ritual Murder
Accusation, just as the Old Bailey was made use of in 1936 in an endeavour to
silence me on the same matter. CHAPTER XV
THE ATTITUDE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
TOWARDS JEWISH RITUAL MURDER THE Jew, Cecil Roth, in Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew, 1935, p. 20,
says: "The Catholic Church never gave the slightest countenance to the calumny"
(the blood accusation). This seems to be very inaccurate, as we shall
demonstrate. Let us first take the case of Innocent IV, who has issued Bulls about the
matter on 28th May and 5th July, 1247, and again on 25th September, 1253. Now
the first of these simply demands that no action should be taken against Jews on
a Ritual Murder charge unless they have been tried and found guilty; the Bull of
1253 defended the Jews against the charge of Ritual Murder because the Old
Testament did not sanction that practice! But the views of Innocent IV are dealt with in the Catholic Bulletin,
Dublin, August, 1916, pp. 435-8, from which I shall quote. The late Lord
Rothschild was greatly perturbed about a Ritual Murder trial which; was going on
at Kiev in 1913, and which we describe fully in this book (see p. 32). He wrote
a letter to Cardinal Merry del Val, asking him to state whether the Bull of
Innocent IV dated 5th July, 1247, was authentic; Lord Rothschild said that this
Bull declared that Ritual Murder was "an unfounded and perfidious invention."
When the Cardinal replied that the letter was authentic, this was taken to mean
that Innocent IV had denied the existence of ritual murder by Jews! But note
that no such statement as Baron Rothschild imputed to Innocent IV was contained
in the Bull! Let the Catholic Bulletin deal with the matter in its own words: "The document [the Bull] consists of two parts, one part sums up the case as
presented by the Jews themselves. The Pope states that he has received a
complaint that the Jews are being oppressed and pillaged by both ecclesiastical
and secular princes, that they are being cast into prison, and even put to
death, without trial or confession of guilt, that they are being falsely accused
of ritual crime which they assert is manifestly opposed to their law, namely the
Divine Scriptures. The second part, which alone expresses the Pope's mind, is as
follows: "not wishing, therefore, that the said Jews be unjustly harassed, whose
conversion God expects in his mercy . . . we wish that you should show
yourselves benign and favourable towards them. Restore to their proper state
those of the mentioned matters that you find to have been rashly attempted by
the said Nobles against the Jews, and do not permit that in the future they
should be for those or similar pretexts unjustly molested by anyone." "Jews must consider Christians to be very uncritical and gullible if they
think they can he induced to accept this document as a papal declaration that
ritual crime does not exist. It is obvious that the Sovereign Pontiff merely
gives instructions according to general principles, ordering that the Jews
should not be unjustly oppressed or molested. He makes no pronouncement whatever
regarding the truth or falsehood of the specific charges. Naturally, he must
leave the decision regarding this point to the judgment of the bishops to whom
he writes. Least of all was he likely to be impressed by the sophistry that
ritual crime could not exist among the Jews because it was forbidden in the
sacred Scriptures. None could know better than he that it was not the teaching
of the Scriptures, but the infamous teachings of the Talmud that caused people
to look upon Jews as a grave danger to society. Only three years before the
appearance of his letter, namely in 1244, he showed plainly what he thought of
the Talmud by pressing Louis IX to collect from his subjects all the copies he
could obtain and consign them to the flames." Before leaving Innocent IV. I ask the reader to realise the typical Jewish
cunning exhibited by Rothschild in exploiting the answer of Cardinal del Val
regarding the authenticity of the letter as confirming an interpretation of that
letter's contents by Rothschild! How Jewish! Gregory X in a Bull of 7th October, 1272, is a little more explicit than
Innocent IV; the same exhortation is made for legal trial of all cases, but he
says that they should "not be arrested again on such groundless charge unless
(which we think impossible) they are captured in flagrant crime." Gregory thus
does not deny that the crime exists; he says he thinks it is impossible. Pope Martin V, Nicholas V, Paul III and Clement XIII issued statements which
show to my satisfaction, although not apparently to that of some anti-Jew
writers, that they did not wish to support the opinion that the Ritual Murder
charge was a true one against the Jews.
Then we come to Clement XIV. Before he became Pope, he was Cardinal
Ganganelli. He was despatched by the Inquisition in 1759 to investigate Ritual
Murder charges against the Jews in Poland, and he wrote a long report about it.
This report is quoted in full in Roth's Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew
and is, indeed, the only "evidence" brought forward by Roth in that book,
published in 1935. From beginning to end of Ganganelli's report, there is nothing that a
scientific investigator would regard as evidence that Ritual Murder was not
practised by Jews. The Polish cases he admits were juridically decided; and he
brings forward examples of definitely false charges of Ritual Murder such as
everyone knows have arisen, but which do not in the least affect the question as
to whether Ritual Murder happens or not. He merely opposes his opinion to those
of the men in authority on the spot. But there is more. Definitely, and far from being able to refute the charge
of Ritual Murder against Jews, Ganganelli admits the Ritual Murders of St. Simon
of Trent and of St. Andreas of Rinn in these words: "I admit then, as true, the fact of the Blessed Simon, a boy three years old,
killed by the Jews in Trent in the year 1475 in hatred of the faith of Jesus
Christ"; and "I also admit the truth of another fact, which happened in the year
1462 in the village of Rinn, in the Diocese of Brixen, in the person of the
Blessed Andreas, a boy barbarously murdered by the Jews in hatred of the faith
of Jesus Christ."
One thing concerning Ganganelli's report seems to have escaped the notice of
other anti-Jewish workers, and to my mind it damns the report from the
beginning; in undertaking an investigation such as that with which Ganganelli
was confronted, one should surely start with an unbiased outlook? Read
Ganganelli's admission about his own outlook when he went to Poland to
investigate: "With my weak faculties, I endeavoured to demonstrate the non-existence of
the crime which was imputed to the Jewish Nation in Poland." The Cardinal set forth, not to find out whether Ritual Murder existed in
Poland or not, but "to demonstrate the non-existence of the crime"! And yet, he
had to admit the crimes of Trent and of Rinn! Thus, the book Ritual Murder Libel and the Jew, by the Jew Roth, which
relies entirely upon Ganganelli for its material, is valueless except to the
anti-Jewish worker to whom it is a God-send! Yet, what a good "press" this book
had when it was published in 1935! The Morning Post greeted it (16th January,
1935) with headlines "Ritual Murder: Jewish people absolved: striking
denunciation," and called the book "a final and incontrovertible refutation of
the hideous Ritual Murder accusation." It is clear that the critic had either
never taken the trouble to read the book or was deliberately misleading the
public as to its contents; it is no "incontrovertible refutation"; it is an
unscientific conglomeration of irrelevant matter, with a confession of bias and
of the truth of the Ritual Murder accusation itself. The Catholic Times
(15th February, 1935) says: "The learned Cardinal completely refutes the
persecutors of the Jews and conclusively shows the flimsiness of the charges
against them and their inherent absurdity." Ganganelli "completely refutes"
nothing, and all that he "conclusively shows" is that Ritual Murders were a
Jewish practice.
The Birmingham Mail, 22nd September, 1936, is typical of the attitude of the
"British" critics of the book: "It is symptomatic of the unhealthy state of the
Continental mind that credence can be given in certain parts of Europe to the
atrocious libel in which it is alleged that Christian blood is a necessary
concomitant of the Jewish Passover celebrations." Although the book was widely advertised when it came out, the Jews seem to
have realised that it merely gives evidence in favour of Ritual Murder, for I
found it difficult to get a copy in 1936, having ultimately to resort to a
friend in the second-hand book trade to get one for me. Thus Clement XIV, far from being a witness for the defence of the Jews, is an
unwilling witness of the truth of the anti-Jewish accusation. And what of the Popes who have supported the Ritual Murder accusation by
their acts? There are many. Sixtus IV approved in his Bull XII Kal. July, 1478, of the conduct of the
Bishop who dealt with the Jews in the St. Simon case at Trent. The Jews
endeavoured to enlist Sixtus IV on their side by pointing out that he had
suspended the cult of St. Simon of Trent; this was done by Sixtus IV solely as a
disciplinary measure, for Simon had not yet been beatified by papal authority,
but was being made the centre of a local cult.
Gregory XIII recognised Simon as a martyr and himself visited the shrine. Sixtus V ratified the cult of St. Simon in 1588, allowing the celebration of
mass in his name. This is confirmed as a fact by Benedict XIV. Benedict XIV himself in a Bull Beatus Andreas (1778, Venice, IV, p.
101 seq.), beatified both Simon and Andreas, two boys murdered by the Jews "in
hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ"; "the Jews," he said, "used every means to
escape the just punishment that they had merited and to escape the just anger of
the Christians." How significant of the methods of the advocates for the Jew, to note that in
Strack's book, no mention whatever is made of Benedict XIV's Bull, although the
actions of Sixtus IV are wilfully misinterpreted! Pius VII, 24th November, 1805, confirmed a decree of the Congregation of
Rites of 31st August according to the Church at Saragossa the right to honour
Dominiculus, killed by the Jews in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ (see p.
17). He also authorised for the church at Toledo the same privilege in respect
to St. Christopher, the boy crucified by the Jews near that place in 1490 (see
p. 20). In 1867, the Congregation of Rites authorised the cult of Lorenzino, at
Vicenza, Padua, ritually murdered by Jews.
Gregory XVI, also, gave his support to the anti-Jewish accusers when he
honoured Gougenot des Mousseaux by making him a Chevalier of the Order of St.
Gregory the Great, in reward for writing his book, Le Juif, le Judaisme et la
Judaisation des Peuples Chretiens, in which Gougenot des Mousseaux devoted a
chapter charging the Jews with Ritual Murder of Christians for the sake of their
blood. Pius IX refused to see the Jew Montefiore when the latter was returning from
his visits to Egypt and to Constantinople, where he had bribed the Khedive and
the Sultan so that the Jews at Damascus could escape the consequences of their
guilt of the Ritual Murder of Father Thomas and his servant; this, in spite of a
shameless Jewish persistence which has been fully described in Sir Moses
Montefiore's biography. That showed what Pius IX thought about it, and he
himself was of Jewish blood. Pope Leo XIII bestowed distinctions on Edouard Drumont, author of La France
luive, who accused the Jews of Ritual Murder therein. Authority: Jewish
Encyclopedia (1905), Vol. X, p, 127.
To sum up: The Popes who have appeared to disbelieve the existence of the
Ritual Murder crime have, with the exception of Clement XIII, been those who
lived in the least enlightened times; many later Popes have given very clear
evidence that they hold the opposite opinion. The reader has the facts before
him and can judge for himself. Remember that although other martyred boys, victims of Jewish Ritual Murder,
have been regarded in many places as saints without papal authority, there is no
record of papal disapproval of these cults except in the case of Sixtus IV,
already mentioned, whose action was purely disciplinary and who himself
specifically approved of the conduct of the Ritual Murder Case to which the
matter referred. Such locally beatified "saints" or martyrs were St. William of
Norwich (1144), St. Richard of Pontoise (1179), St. Hugh of Lincoln (1255), St.
Werner of Oberwesel (1286) and St. Rudolph of Berne (1287). In every such case
it is quite obvious that the cult had the full approval at least of the
episcopal authorities over the places mentioned. Those who condemn the Blood Accusation as a wicked invention for the purpose
of persecuting Jews and robbing them, must at the same time condemn wholesale
some of the highest dignitaries of the Catholic Church, men against whom nothing
is known beyond that they had excellent characters, like William Turbe, Bishop
of Norwich to give an English example. When the reader peruses the details of the cases that I have cited in this
book, he will realise that Episcopal Courts have dealt with many of them; in
other words, the Jews were condemned by the existing religious authority of the
day. Many of the earliest records we have of these Ritual Murders come from the
pens of Catholic historians, such as the Bollandists, a body of Belgian Jesuits;
a list of the principal works on the subject will be found at the end of the
book. Father Creagh, Redemptorist, publicly accused Jews of the practice of Ritual
Murder, on 11th January, 1904, in a speech in Limerick. Authority: Jewish
Encyclopedia (1904), Vol. VIII. p. 89. Perhaps I may best wind up this chapter by giving the names of the twelve
members of juries who investigated, considered and condemned the Jews in the
Ritual Murder case of La Guardia in Toledo, together with their qualifications: (1) Maestre Fray Juan de Santispiritus, Professor of Hebrew, Salamanca
University;
CHAPTER XVI
THE ATTITUDE OF THE PROTESTANT
CHURCH THIS may be summed up very briefly. The Protestant Church appears to have
allied itself to Jewry, if one may judge from the political views expressed by
our Archbishops and most of our bishops. These views are almost invariably
similar to those expressed by Masons, and are almost always pernicious. Martin Luther seems to have had an inkling of the true nature of the Jew when
he said: "How the Jews love the Book of Esther, which is so suitable to their
bloodthirsty, revengeful, murderous appetite and hopes. The sun has never shone
on such a bloodthirsty and revengeful people, who fancy themselves to be the
chosen people so that they can murder and strangle the heathen." (From the
Erlangen edition of Luther's Table Talks, Vol. XXXII, pp. 120.) This seems plain speaking enough; but we find the Jew, C. Roth, Ritual
Murder Libel and the Jew, citing Martin Luther as having condemned the
"libel" of Ritual Murder "in unqualified terms." However, the Jewish Encyclopedia (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 213, definitely
states that Luther charged the Jews with Ritual Murders. At Magdeburg in 1562, a Protestant History of the Christian Church was
compiled, called the Magdeburg Centuries; it was compiled by a number of
Lutheran theologians headed by M. Flacius, and was first published at Basle as
the Historia Ecclesia Christi. This work records the ritual murders of
Blois, Pontoise (Paris), Braisne, Fulda, Berne and Oberwesel. John Foxe in his Acts and Monuments of the Church (1563) says: "For
every year commonly their [the Jews'] custom was to get some Christian man's
child from his parents and on Good Friday to crucify him in despite of our
religion." He describes the ritual crucifixion of British children by Jews at
Norwich and Lincoln, before the expulsion. The learned and distinguished Puritan, William Prynne, a fearless fighter
against evil, in his Short Demurrer to the Jewes long discontinued Remitter
into England, 1656, gave details and references of the Ritual Murders at
Norwich, Gloucester, and Bury St. Edmunds in England, and those of Blois,
Braisne, Richard "of Paris," Fulda, Prague, Werner of Oberwesel, Rudolph of
Berne, Simon of Trent and others. In Book I p 67, he says: "The Jews . . . have
ofttimes . . . maliciously acted it [crucifixion] over and again in
representation; . . . by crucifying sundry Christian children on Good Friday or
near Easter, on a Crosse, in a most barbarous manner, in derision of our
Saviour's death and passion." On p. 68 he quotes several authorities "that the
Jews in Paris did every year steal some Christian child, or another brought up
in the King's Court, and carrying him to a secret house or vault, did, on Good
Friday or Easter-Day, in contempt and derision of Christ and Christian religion
crucify him on a Crosse . . and that they have been frequently apprehended,
persevering in this wickednesse; for which, upon Direction, they were usually
murdered, stoned, burned, destroyed, hanged, by the furious multitude's
violence, or executed, imprisoned, banished by Christian Kings and Magistrates,
yet such was their malice to Christ, that they would still persevere therein,
and act it over again upon every opportunity." This book of Prynne's, which ran into two editions, is in the British Museum
and Guildhall Libraries, but is unobtainable, though stated by booksellers to be
of no great rarity or value; in the London Library there is no copy, but there
is a Jewish refutation of it!
Our nation has been so carefully schooled by the Jewish Money Power, which has been able to destroy or rarefy all sources of information on Ritual Murder, that the twentieth century Protestant Church has come to believe that the thing is a mere relic of medieval superstition.
CHAPTER XX
IRRELEVANT MEDITATIONS I WRITE this chapter in an endeavour to try and account for the strange
attitude adopted by Gentiles, often influential people, in rushing forward to
shield the Jews, not only from the Ritual Murder charge, but from accusations
concerning other activities hostile to Western Civilization. Consider the Letter of Protest signed by archbishops, bishops, lords,
justices, editors and professors, which was sent to The Times as stated
on p. 8 against the "revival" of the Blood Accusation against a Jew at Kiev,
1911-13. Consider that the trial of the accused had not been made. Consider that
none of the signatories would have thought it proper to intervene in the course
of justice in a foreign country on behalf of anyone not a British subject. Yet
they did it for the sake of a Jew. Why? Here is another instance: Mr. J. Hall Richardson reports it on pp. 216-217 of
his book, From the City to Fleet Street (S. Paul & Co., 1927). He is
writing of the murders of Jack the Ripper, and he says: "It would scarcely be believed that the Metropolitan Police held the clue to
the identification of the murderer in their own hands and deliberately threw it
away under the personal direction of the then Commissioner of Police, Sir Chas.
Warren, who acted in the belief that an anti-Semitic riot might take place if a
certain damning piece of writing were permitted to remain on the walls." Writing of the murderer: "Some freak of fancy had led him to write upon the
wall this sentence: 'The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing.' "I have never learned that any photographic record was made of this
inscription, and when the City Police came to hear of it, they were horrified
that their colleagues in the Metropolitan Force had wiped away what might have
been an important piece of circumstantial evidence as to the class to which the
murderer belonged." That the Jack the Ripper murders were ritual I do not allege; but that they
were Jewish seems to be established by the above-quoted paragraphs. Yet the clue
was passed over and the murderer remained at large. In what other cause would
such an important piece of evidence be ignored, and the whole community's
interests sacrificed for the sake of a Jew? It is significant, that Sir Chas.
Warren was not only District Grand Master in Masonry, 1891-5, but was actually
the founder of the first research Lodge--Quatuor Coronati. Is it a sort of mass hypnotism worked upon people who have already either
consciously or unconsciously accepted some sort of mental or spiritual
subservience to Jewish influence? Is it cabbalistic? I cannot answer the question, but I find no other explanation for the wholesale denunciation which is made by so many authoritative Britons against those who have the courage to come forward and state their conviction that the Jews have been responsible for the Ritual Murder of Christians. I know I shall be subjected to a long-continued typhoon of abuse and libel against which I shall have no defence except the contents of this book. I can only ask those who feel compelled to take part in the campaign against what is inaccurately called "anti-semitism" to pause and ask themselves whether they are really mentally free, or whether they are almost unconsciously directed in their intended action by alien tenets absorbed perhaps in their youth under Old Testament teachings, in adult life by Masonic influence, or by Jewish books.
CHAPTER XVII
OTHER CASES WORTHY OF CREDENCE THIS book is not intended to be an exhaustive history of Jewish Ritual
Murder. In previous chapters I have described the cases which occurred before
the Expulsion of the Jews from England, and also the cases which appear to me to
be historical events admitting of no reasonable doubt as to their correct
interpretation as Jewish Ritual Murders. In this chapter, I am listing a number of reported cases of Ritual Murder
which, whilst being in my opinion worthy of credence, are not supported by the
same detail or authority that constitute authenticity.
There are many discoveries of bodies of children, thought to have been
ritually murdered by Jews, which are not mentioned in this list, and since the
Sultan issued his firman in 1840 denying that Ritual Murder existed among the
Jews, it is not surprising that many of these cases happened in territories
under Turkish rule. The following reports of alleged Ritual Murder appear to me worthy of record: A.D. 419. Socrates (Hist. Eccles., Lib. VII, Chap. XVI) gives an account of a
case at Inmestar, a town between Chalcis and Antioch. The Syrian Posidonius (135-51 B.C.), and the first century Greeks Apollonius
Molon and Apion had previously reported that it was a Jewish custom to sacrifice
annually a Greek boy, specially fattened for the occasion. The probable reason
for the Ritual Murder accusation being made against Christians themselves in the
early years of the Religion was that many of these Christians were of Jewish
origin. 1285. Munich. Illustrated in Bavaria Sancta. 1270. Wissembourg. Monniot quotes on p. 148 of his Le Crime Rituel chez
les Juifs a letter dated 19th November, 1913, from the cure of the town, in
which the details of this case are quoted from the Alsatian historian Hertzog,
who says the victim's tomb was for many years in the church. 1283. Mayence. 1303. Weissensee (Thuringia). 1305. Prague. The mob took the law into its own hands in a case of alleged
crucifixion of a Christian at Passover.
1331. Lieberlingen. Child's body found in well with wounds indicating that it
had been sacrificed by Jews. The judges of the place had a number of Jews
burned. 1345. Munich. Illustrated in Bavaria Sancta. 1347. Cologne. The sacrificial knife in this case is preserved at the Church
of St. Sigbert. 1401. Diessenhofen. 1407. Cracow. A Polish priest, Budek, charged the Jews with murdering a boy
at Easter. 1429. Ravensbourg. 1435. Palma. 1470. Endingen, Baden. Jews burned for killing eight years previously four
Christians ritually. 1529. Posing, Hungary. Child murdered for its blood. Many Jews burned after
confession by torture of some. 1598. Podolia. Jews tried and condemned, after a rabbi had confessed to
killing four-year-old Albert at Passover and bleeding him. 1764. Orcuta, Hungary. Boy found dead, covered with wounds suggestive of
Ritual Murder. 1791. Tasnad, Hungary. Jews condemned for murdering and bleeding a boy, on
the evidence of the small son of one of them aged five years. Accused received
the royal pardon. 1797. Galatz, Rumania. About this time "The Ritual Murder accusation became
epidemic" (Jewish Encyclopedia, 1905, Vol. X, p. 513) 1812. Corfu. Three Jews were condemned for the murder of a Christian child.
Monniot (Le Crime Rituel chez les Juifs) says the archives of the island
report this case. 1847. Mount Lebanon. Mentioned by Sir Richard Burton in The Jew, the Gypsy
and El Islam, 1898, p. 128.
1935. Afghanistan. The White Russian paper Nasch Put of Harbin, 7th October,
reports a case in Afghanistan where a Mahommedan child was robbed and riddled
with stabs by Jews, the Court verdict being that this was done for ritual
purposes. I repeat that there are many other cases of Ritual Murder accusations not mentioned in this book; they are omitted because I have insufficient detail concerning them.
CHAPTER
XVIII
TWO QUEER HAPPENINGS 1839 A Remittance of Blood. During the Damascus Ritual Murder trial, the French
Consul, Comte Ratti-Menton, by whose energy and determination the case was
brought to light, received a letter from Comte de Suzannet, who wrote: "Nearly a
year ago, a box arrived at the custom-house that a Jew came to claim on being
asked to open it, he refused and offered first 100 piastres, then 200, then 300,
then 1,000 and at last 10,000 piastres (2,500 francs). The custom-house official
persisted, and opened the box, discovering therein a bottle of blood. On asking
the Jew for an explanation, the latter said that they had the custom of
preserving the blood of their Grand Rabbis or important men. He was allowed to
go, and left for Jerusalem." The quick death of the chief custom-house officer is not surprising;
witnesses of the crimes of the Jews are subject to a sudden demise. But the
reader will perhaps be more impressed by the fact that this Aaron Stambouli was
one of those subsequently found guilty of the Ritual Murder of Father Thomas at
Damascus and condemned! 1888. Breslau, Germany. On 21st July, Max Bernstein, aged 24, a pupil at the
Talmudic College, met an eight-year-old Christian boy, Severin Hacke, bought him
some sweetmeats and took him to his (Bernstein's) home. There, he stripped the
boy of his clothing and with a knife made incisions in a certain part of the
child's body, collecting the blood that came from the cuts on a piece of
blotting-paper. When the boy was naturally frightened, the Jew told him there
was no need for fear as he only wanted a little blood. The boy went home and said nothing about the matter; but his father, seeing
the scars, questioned him and the truth came out. Bernstein was arrested, and the prosecuting attorney after preventing a
manoeuvre on the part of the defending counsel to have the case settled behind
closed doors, maintained that this was a ritual case for the extraction of blood
for the needs of a Jewish rite.
The Court, however, refused to recognise this, but sentenced Bernstein to
three months' imprisonment for having made incisions in the body of the child. The facts of this case are not disputed by anyone. The Jews, of course,
spread the rumour that Bernstein was a religious maniac. Dr. Edmond Lesser of
Breslau wrote a report to that effect which the Royal Scientific Committee for
the Medical Profession endorsed. This Professor was a Jew, of course. But the
reader should note that the report was issued in 1890, and that the Court itself
never had any such "expert" propaganda before it!
CHAPTER XIX
WHAT OF THESE? DURING my trial I asked the only witness brought against me, Inspector
Kitchener, "Are you a Detective-Inspector?" Kitchener: "Yes." Leese: "Are there any cases of child-murder nowadays which cannot be solved?" Kitchener: "Yes." Leese: "Has it ever occurred to you that some of them may be cases of Ritual
Murder by Jews?" The Judge: "If it had, he would have acted without evidence, and he has no
right to." In the belief that it is the business of the detective first to investigate
and then to collect evidence, and then to act upon that evidence, I give here
some facts on recent happenings which seem to me to open up the necessary field
for investigation. They are, the Chorlton murder, the Lindbergh baby case, and a
queer business in the Argentine.
1928. Chorlton, Manchester. The throat had been cut; the body was drained of blood; it was found on some
waste ground and it was remarkable that there was no blood on the boy's clothes
and hands. There was a pool of blood seven yards from the body. The wound was
pronounced by experts as not being self-inflicted. A police witness said the
body seemed to have been dragged along the grass; the Coroner suggested that
someone had washed the boy's hands.
The police were completely baffled; it was certain that the work was not that
of any maniac, but that the crime was premeditated, and was in fact, "the
perfect crime." The verdict at the inquest was an open one. The affair was reported in The Times, 3rd, 4th and 6th December 1928,
and in the early edition only of that of 23rd February, 1929; also in the
Manchester Evening papers, 6th to 13th December, 1928. My only comment is that the murder could not have been done on the spot where
the body was found, since the boy's clothes and hands were not stained with
blood, indicating that the boy must have been naked when the throat was cut;
therefore, some blood was probably poured onto the ground a few yards away to
mislead the detectives. Ritual murders have several times been discovered by the fact that no blood
has been found at the place where the corpse, bled white, has been recovered. 2. The Lindbergh Case. I cannot see that it has ever been proved that the body found was that of
Colonel Lindbergh's son. It is true that the child's clothes were identified,
but the 'body' was only a skeleton, and the 'identification' by the nursemaid,
Betty Gow, was made by means of the clothes and a matter of 'twisted toes.' (We
must remember that the Tisza Eszlar case, see p. 30, was conjured with by the
finding and false identification of a body dressed in the murdered girl's
clothes.) Chas. Lindbergh, the father, America's air hero, appointed two Jews,
Salvatore Spitale and Irving Bitz, as intermediaries between himself and a gang
who pretended to know where his son was. The Purple Gang all-Jewish and headed
by a Jew called Fleischer, was the object of the police search. Ultimately, a German called Hauptmann was arrested, and the whole Jewish
Press of America condemned him several score of times before his trial; actually
he was ultimately found "guilty" on evidence which would not have hanged a dog,
and met his death in the electric chair. The condemned man said that Reilly, his lawyer, had brought about his fate by
sabotaging his defence; Reilly went insane and committed suicide. Hauptmann said that the receiver of the kidnap ransom was Isador Fisch, a
Jew; but he had died. The mob of people outside the death-house at Hauptmann's execution, shouted
and joked and laughed in the same obscene fashion as did the female furies over
the victims of the guillotine in the French Revolution. It was commonly
considered in America that Hitler, not Hauptmann, had been found guilty! It is possible that Hauptmann was paid to steal the child, without knowing
that it was going to be anything but an ordinary kidnapping; and that the boy
was intended for Ritual Slaughter for Purim. It was Chas. Lindbergh's father who had strongly opposed the establishment of
the Federal Reserve Banking System sponsored by powerful Jewish interests and
had also brought to public notice the wicked circular letter of the American
Banking Association which ordered the member banks to deflate "to make a
monetary stringency among your Patrons." This, it is thought, might determine
the choice of the innocent child of Hon. Chas. Lindbergh's famous son for a
victim. 1937. Argentine.
CHAPTER XX IRRELEVANT MEDITATIONS I WRITE this chapter in an endeavour to try and account for the strange attitude adopted by Gentiles, often influential people, in rushing forward to shield the Jews, not only from the Ritual Murder charge, but from accusations concerning other activities hostile to Western Civilization. Consider the Letter of Protest signed by archbishops, bishops, lords, justices, editors and professors, which was sent to The Times as stated on p. 8 against the "revival" of the Blood Accusation against a Jew at Kiev, 1911-13. Consider that the trial of the accused had not been made. Consider that none of the signatories would have thought it proper to intervene in the course of justice in a foreign country on behalf of anyone not a British subject. Yet they did it for the sake of a Jew. Why? Here is another instance: Mr. J. Hall Richardson reports it on pp. 216-217 of his book, From the City to Fleet Street (S. Paul & Co., 1927). He is writing of the murders of Jack the Ripper, and he says: "It would scarcely be believed that the Metropolitan Police held the clue to the identification of the murderer in their own hands and deliberately threw it away under the personal direction of the then Commissioner of Police, Sir Chas. Warren, who acted in the belief that an anti-Semitic riot might take place if a certain damning piece of writing were permitted to remain on the walls." Writing of the murderer: "Some freak of fancy had led him to write upon the wall this sentence: 'The Jewes are not the men to be blamed for nothing.' "I have never learned that any photographic record was made of this inscription, and when the City Police came to hear of it, they were horrified that their colleagues in the Metropolitan Force had wiped away what might have been an important piece of circumstantial evidence as to the class to which the murderer belonged." That the Jack the Ripper murders were ritual I do not allege; but that they were Jewish seems to be established by the above-quoted paragraphs. Yet the clue was passed over and the murderer remained at large. In what other cause would such an important piece of evidence be ignored, and the whole community's interests sacrificed for the sake of a Jew? It is significant, that Sir Chas. Warren was not only District Grand Master in Masonry, 1891-5, but was actually the founder of the first research Lodge--Quatuor Coronati. Is it a sort of mass hypnotism worked upon people who have already either consciously or unconsciously accepted some sort of mental or spiritual subservience to Jewish influence? Is it cabbalistic? I cannot answer the question, but I find no other explanation for the wholesale denunciation which is made by so many authoritative Britons against those who have the courage to come forward and state their conviction that the Jews have been responsible for the Ritual Murder of Christians. I know I shall be subjected to a long-continued typhoon of abuse and libel against which I shall have no defence except the contents of this book. I can only ask those who feel compelled to take part in the campaign against what is inaccurately called "anti-semitism" to pause and ask themselves whether they are really mentally free, or whether they are almost unconsciously directed in their intended action by alien tenets absorbed perhaps in their youth under Old Testament teachings, in adult life by Masonic influence, or by Jewish books.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS SUPPORTING THE
BLOOD ACCUSATION Acta Sanctorum. This is the work of the Bollandists, who were a band of
Jesuits devoting themselves to historical record between 1643 and 1883. The
volumes in which they recorded various ritual murders by Jews are mainly those
written in the seventeenth century. Lives of the Saints, by Alban Butler. Dizionario Ecclesiastico, Vol. 64-66 (Semenario Peo-scire, Venice,
1853-4).
Annales Ecclesiastici, ab 1198, p. 568, by O. Raynaldus, 1753. These
two deal with the case of St. Simon of Trent. Catholic Bulletin, August, 1916 (published at Dublin, M. H. Gill &
Sons). Cahiers Romains, Catholic publication in Rome, 29th November, 1913.
Acts and Monuments of the Church, by John Foxe, 1563. A Short Demurrer to the Jewes long discontinued Remitter into England,
by William Prynne, 1656. Les Juifs devant l'Eglise et l' Histoire, by Rev. Father Constant. Meine Antworten an die Rabbiner: Funf Briefe uber den Talmudismus und das
Blut-Ritual der Juden, by August Rohling (1883), Canon of Prague Cathedral. La France Juive, by Edouard Drumont. Obtainable from M. Petit, 12 rue
Laugier, Paris 17. 70 francs. Le Juif, le Judaisme et la Judaisation des Peuples Chretiens, by
Gougenot des Mousseaux, Chevalier, 1886. The whole of Chapter VI is devoted to
Ritual Murders. Le Mystere du Sang chez les Juifs de tous les Temps, by Henri
Desportes, 1889 (Savine). Le Crime Rituel chez les Juifs, by A. Monniot, 1914. Obtainable from
M. Petit) 12 rue Laugier, Paris 17. 10 francs. An excellent general guide to the
whole subject, with preface by Edouard Drumont. It was Drumont who exposed the
Jewish Panama scandals. Der Ritual Mord bei den Juden, by Eugen Brandt. Ritual Morde, by Ottokar Stauf von der March (Hammer Verlag).
Judische Moral und Blut Mysterium, by A. Fern, 1927. Der Ritual Mord, by G. Utikal. This book is recommended by the Reich
Office for the Promotion of German Literature as "a truly national
representation of Jewish Ritual Murder." Das Blut in Judischen Schriftum, by Dr. Bischoff, 1929.
Der Sturmer, Special Ritual Murder Issue, dated May, 1934, Nuremburg.
The reader should not be prejudiced by the Jewish campaign of hate against the
editor of Der Sturmer. The Ritual Murder issue is a valuable historical record. The Jew, the Gypsy, and El Islam, by Sir Richard Burton, edited by W.
H. Wilkins (Hutchinson, 1898).
Isabella of Spain, by ECU. T. Walsh, 1931 (Sheed & Ward), pp. 125,
439-468, and 628. References to other authorities in particular cases of Ritual Murder
are made in the text when describing these cases. To the above list should be added a recent work intended to clear the Jews from the Blood Accusation, but which, at least in my own opinion, appears to support it: -- The Ritual Murder Libel and the Jews, by C. Roth (Woburn Press, 1935) . | To Top |
In
His Service: Contact
Editor | Bible
Studies | Newer
Students |
Bible Q
& A's
| Study
Tools
| Search
our Site NOTE: To insure quality and content integrity, these In-depth Bible Studies are © copyrighted and may only be downloaded for study and shared private use. They may not be reproduced or distributed for sale or publication without prior written approval. Other Christian Web sites are welcome to link up to this Website or any page on it. |
