Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

ART. XV.-STATE OF THE JEWS.

The Twelfth Report of the London Society for promoting Christianity among the Jews; with an Appendix containing extracts of Correspondence, and a List of Subscribers and Benefactors to March 31, 1820; to which is prefixed a Sermon preached before the Society on May 5, 1820, at the Parish Church of St. Paul, Covent Garden, by the Hon. and Rev. Gerard T. Noel, M. A. Vicar of Rainham, Kent, and Minister of Percy Chapel. Seeley. London, 1820.

THE societies which have been formed in this country for promoting the knowledge of Christianity, are now conducted on so extended a scale, that a report is no longer a mere statement of receipts and disbursements, prefaced with the pleasure or pain which the committee feel in reporting the increase or diminution of funds, and concluded with overflowing gratitude to the benefactors of the society, and urgent entreaties "for the continuance of their liberal patronage and support." Their correspondence now extends to every quarter of the globe; and every report which they make brings us better acquainted with people and places of which we hear but seldom through other channels. This is peculiarly the case with the Society to which our attention is now drawn. Buxtorf pathetically exclaimed "Quis me pulvere aromatario aut succo malogranatorum satis confirmasset, ut fumosas et maleolentes Judæorum caveas permeare potuissem?" Few travellers indeed have been anxious to seek intimate converse with the Jews, except those whose Christian zeal has furnished a better antidote than that which Buxtorf sought. Such however have been connected with the London Society; and as its publications contain a fuller account of the present state of the Jews than can be found any where else, we shall not scruple to consider their report as entitled to that notice which is claimed by many works greatly inferior in point of information and interest.

The connexion between England and the Jews has never been very creditable to either party; but the treatment which they met with from their first settlement in this country, to the time of their explusion by Edward the First, has been justly considered as one of the most disgraceful parts of our history. We suspect, however, that it is a part which has not been placed in quite a fair light by most of our historians; and that much of the cruelty which has been laid to the charge of our kings, should rather be placed to the account of their subjects. We have no wish except to do justice between the parties; and we

A

must premise, that if we should seem at first to apologize for our early monarchs, it will nevertheless be found that we believe them guilty of worse cruelty to the Jews, than that with which they are generally, and as we think unjustly, charged.

"The Jews, and all that they have, are the property of the King," says an old law of Edward; and this simple statement throws great light on all their transactions with their royal proprietors. They were in fact born to slavery. "Quam cito aliquis Judæus natus fuerit, sive sit masculus sive fœmina, serviat nobis in aliquo," is the language of Henry the Third, and the slavery of the Jews was fully recognized by the Synod of Exeter in the reign of his successor. "A Judæis Regnum Dei ablatum et datum Genti Justitiam facienti, scriptum in canonibus reperitur. Per quod liquet Christicolas Libertate donatos, Judæosque subactos eorum perpetuæ servituti." They were considered as the private property of the king. Two instances are on record in which the king mortgaged the whole body of the Jews, and two others in which he was graciously pleased to make a present of a Jew with all his chattels. It might be expected that the crown would not allow so large a property to remain unproductive, and accordingly our kings threw upon them the invidious task of raising money for the public service. The king's Jews ("Judai nostri," as they are generally styled by their sovereigns) were the only persons who were allowed to practise usury; and the interest which they obtained was excessive. About the year 1247, the scholars of Oxford complained to the King of the extortion of his Jews, and his Majesty was pleased to issue the following order. "Judæi Oxon. non recipient a scholaribus, pro libra, in septimana, nisi duos denarios et similiter fiat in minori summa." This has all the appearance of being a peculiar exception in favour of the scholars of Oxford; and it was probably in consideration of their youth, and slender finances, that the rate of interest was limited to little more than 40 per cent. Indeed one instance is on record, in which a Jew of London raised a tumult, by demanding 2s. per week for the use of 20s., or 520 per cent. per ann. interest. This was, no doubt, an extraordinary case; but some idea may be formed of the usual rate of interest, from the usurer's venturing to demand so enormous a profit. The Jews, then, under the guise of usurers, were, in fact, the tax-gatherers of the kingdom. But however useful their occupation might be to the state, it made them the objects of popular hatred.

"Endless it were," says Fuller, "to reckon up the indignities ofsfered unto these Jews, on occasion sometimes given, but oftner taken. Apprentices now a-dayes do not throw sticks at cocks on Shrove-tuesiday so commonly, as then on that day they used clubs on the Jews, if

[ocr errors]

appearing out of their houses. A people equally unhappy at feasts and at frays. For whensoever the Christians at any revels made great entertainments, the Jews were made to pay the reckoning. And wheresoever any braule began, in London, it ended always in the Old-Jury, with pillaging of the people therein."

On such occasions they always applied for protection to their royal masters; and we believe that our ancient records will authorise us to state, that whenever there was a persecution of the Jews, it was set on foot by the people, and restrained by the crown. As one instance of this, we shall quote part of a letter written by King John in the fifth year of his reign, to the Mayor of London, on occasion of a tumult in which the Jews had been ill-treated. After assuring the good people of London of his affection, and reminding them of the care which he had taken for the preservation of their rights and liberties, his Majesty proceeds:

"Verum cum sciatis, quod Judæi in speciali nostra protectione sint, miramur quod Judæis in civitate London. morantibus, malum fieri sustinetis; cum id manifeste sit contra pacem regni et terræ nostræ tranquillitatem. Ita quidem magis miramur et movemur, quia alii Judæi per Angliam ubicunque moram fecerunt, exceptis illis qui sunt in villa vestra, in bona pace consistunt. Nunc id tamen diximus pro Judæis nostris, pro pace nostra: quia si cuidam tantum pacem nostram dedissemus, debet inviolabiliter observari. De cætero autem, Judæos in civitate London. morantes vestræ committimus custodiæ, ut si quis eis malum facere attentaverit, vos manu forti eis subsidium facientes, eos defendatis. Vestris enim manibus eorum sanguinem requiremus, si forte per defectum vestri aliquid mali eis acciderit, quod absit. Scimus enim bene quod per fatuos villæ et non per discretos, hujusmodi eveniunt; et debent discreti fatuorum stultitiam compescere.'

Whether there have ever been occasions, since this letter was written, when his Majesty's concluding sentiment might have been seasonably urged on the inhabitants of the metropolis, we shall not inquire: we produce the letter to show, that whatever liberties our kings might take with their Jews, they did not suffer others to injure them with impunity. Similar protections were granted on various occasions; and whatever the sufferings of the Jews may have been, they appear to have found such solace in the royal favour as inclined them to remain in the country. The charter of King John granted that they should freely and honourably reside in his kingdom; and that wherever they might be, it should be lawful for them to go where they pleased with all their property. It seems probable, that this did not extend to their leaving his dominions, because (although we afterwards find Henry the Third speaking of their being allowed to remain here as an indulgence) yet it seems that a special

licence was required to enable them to quit the country. We believe, however, that they had no fixed or general wish to depart, though they might express such a desire in a moment of irritation, and while they were under the pressure of a tollage which they could not answer. Surely, if they had felt such a wish, whatever pains might be taken to restrain them, we should hear of their attempts to escape; and those who fled from such oppression as they are said to have suffered, might well have run the risk of detection. In fact, the charter which we have mentioned, gave them several privileges; such as trial by their peers in all cases where the plaintiff was a Christian, and the same exemption from all tolls and customs as was claimed for the king's own property. It is probable, indeed, that a Jew who had obtained a licence to quit the country, might be obliged to leave his property behind him; but this could be no great consideration if he had been pillaged in such a manner as some of our historians describe. In fact, the accounts which we read of the sums paid by them, would be absolutely incredible on any other supposition than that of their being allowed, and even protected and encouraged in illegal and oppressive exactions from the people. About the year 1210, they were required by King John to pay 66,000 marks—an enormous sum if we reflect that at a later period five marks was considered as a fair annual stipend for a vicar.* We believe that there was something very little short of a partnership, between the king and his Jews, and with this belief we are not surprised to find heavy tollages laid and immense sums levied. The Jews, beside the special privileges which they enjoyed, were protected in their unjust traffic, and perfectly well understood that their protector would claim such a part of their profits as his necessities might require. Sometimes they disagreed as to the division of the spoil; and these disputes have been represented by our historians in the most invidious light in which they could be placed. We are told, on several occasions, that the king wanted money, and therefore caused certain Jews to be imprisoned until they paid a high ransom for their liberty, or else that he racked them with unsufferable torments till they had given up their last farthing. Once for all, let it be understood, that we do not apologize for the slavery to which the Jews were reduced; that we do not approve of the iniquitous partnership

"In 1287 Peter Quinil, B. of Exon, in Synodo Exoniensi, decrees, that in every parochial church, the Perpetual Vicarage should be endowed with at least V marks per ann., that he may in some measure keep hospitality; and in case he grow old, sickly, or impotent, may be thereby sustained. This must be done if the living were really worth XL marks per ann. But if it be of better value the Vicar's portion must be increased." Fleetwood's Chronicon Preciosum, p. 107.

which seems to have existed, and that we do not defend the cruel punishments which in those barbarous ages were inflicted as well on Christians as on Jews: and if this be allowed us, we will venture to say, that the case might be more fairly stated thus-when the king wanted money, for obvious reasons, he preferred obtaining it from other sources; but when these failed, he had recourse to the Jews-their affairs were perfectly well known to him, and every contract of every Jew in his kingdom was in his possession-he knew accurately what they could raise, and demanded it without scruple-such as refused to pay the sums at which they were assessed, he imprisoned and punished with great cruelty for withholding what they never disputed his right to claim.

THE JUDAISM" was a branch of the public revenue, and the Scaccarium Judæorum, or exchequer of the Jews, formed a part of the great exchequer. In this court all the rolls, records, and proceedings relating to the Jews were entered, and the management of the whole was committed to certain persons styled custodes, or justiciarii Judæorum. These were considered as officers of the great exchequer, and were entitled to the same privileges and salary as the barons. Beside these, there were other officers, such as chirographers and cofferers, who had the custody of all chirographs, charters, and contracts (or, as they were commonly called, stars *) made by the Jews, either among themselves or with Christians. These documents were kept in chests, which were provided for that purpose in all places where many Jews resided, and which were only allowed to be opened by these officers, in the presence of the sheriff of the county, if it was in the country; or if it was in London, in the presence of the Barons of the Exchequer, or other principal officers of the Judaism. No contract in which a Jew was a party could be maintained, unless the counterpart was found in this depository. When our kings wanted money, these coffers were searched; and it was seen what sum might be raised, and what shares ought to be contributed by particular individuals. If this sum was not raised, the defaulters were treated with' great barbarity. We repeat again, that we do not mean to justify the conduct of our kings with respect to this unhappy people. It was indeed grossly wicked. The Jews were in every respect treated like cattle; and the favour shown to them arose, not from benevolence, but from self-interest. A deep stain lies upon this country; and the blood of the Jews has "cried from our ground." But their blood is upon us more immediately

* They were at this time frequently written in Hebrew, and retained the Hebrew

• שטר name

« НазадПродовжити »