The Maccabaean

THE death of Lord Rothschild, the first British Jewish Peer, will unquestionably call forth deep mourning in England. He was, following his mother, a sort of a fairy godfather to the community—generous, interested, very conscious of his Jewishness and in every way desirous of upholding the good name of the Jew, and the good name of the House of Rothschild. In respect to “Kiddush Hashem,” the Rothschilds understand the Jewish “noblesse oblige”— at least all of them in England. But it would be untrue to say that their great wealth wrought a magical spell upon themselves. Disraeli glorified the Rothschild Jewishness in the character of Sidonia, but no such sententious, mystical phrases ever escaped their lips. Lord Rothschild was a “bale-bayis” raised to the ‘nth power; and though we have every reason to know that money could not do everything (for he had to yield some of his pet hobbies owing to the opposition of those much poorer than he) he met all the problems and all the difficulties of existence with princely largesse.

He was not a Zionist, and if it be true that he changed his mind on the matter since the outbreak of the war, that would be significant not of his own opinion but of the political situation pressing upon him. His first point of contact with Zionism was in 1892 when a lengthy petition was presented to him in which he was titled “Prince of Israel,” In that petition, prepared by Lord Swaythling and the Rev. Simeon Singer, the horrors of Russian conditions were recited and His Lordship asked to approach the Government, and through it approach other Governments, with a view to enable all the persecuted to live “each man under his own vine and fruit tree.” (The full story of that petition has been told in The Maccabaean, 1902-3-4.) His Lordship blue-pencilled his title the “Prince of Israel” and it became nothing more than a record.

In 1896, with the advent of Herzl, Lord Rothschild was asked to adopt a more progressive attitude towards Palestine. His answer was characteristic, “That is the business of my cousin Edmund,” and as Baron Edmund had at that time, too, a peculiar view of his own operations in Palestine, no progress was made. In 1899 when the Jewish Colonial Trust was launched, the late Lord Swaythling and the late chief Rabbi Adler prepared a

manifesto to denounce the Trust or rather to warn the public against purchasing its stock. Everything was in readiness to undo Zıonism, provided Lord Rothschild would sign the manifesto. This he declined to do, at the same time making it known that he disapproved of any such action—which killed an attack that might have been fatal. As he, himself, made his conduct known to the Zionists, it was accepted as significant of a friendly attitude, but a well-authenticated story is told that when a little later steps were taken to bring him and Herzl together, he rebuffed the intermediaries by asking “what club does he belong to?” The allusion, of course, wäs to Herzl’s social standing in England. Yet, on the other hand, it was characteristic of him—and this is an untold story of Zionist effort—that when a group of German Jewish bankers offered to make a loan to Turkey for the express purpose of thwarting the Zionists, Rothschild stood aloof from that scheme, and as these bankers would not put into their contract what the Zionists wished to be part of the agreement, means were found for preventing the negotiations coming to a st.c- cessful termination.

When, however, in August, 1902 Herzl was asked to appear before the Royal Commission on Immigration and the British Government through the Lord Chancellor, showed distinctly its appreciation of the man and the recognition of his position, Lord Rothschild immediately took the hint and there was much joy in Jewry at the appearance of the millionaire leader and the popular leader going out armin-arm. What change this might have brought about subsequently is literally buried in the might-have-beens, and how far it led Herzl to attempt East-African policy are not known. However, in the long discussion which the writer had with Herzl at Basle in 1903, the matter was never mentioned. It is only fair however, to say that Herzl was at loggerheads with the Viennese Rothschilds as far back as 1896 and his having approached Baron de Hirsch first, whom, after all, the Rothschilds regarded as a newcomer, undoubtedly annoyed the Parisian family. And as ill-luck would have it the first millionaire whom he approached in Eng and was the bitter opponent of the London head of the house.

There should be no such petty personalities involved in a world movement, yet unfortunately they do exist. A Rothschild should, of course, be superior to such

(Continued from page 65)

to-Riche and Heine, and Heine’s smile is revived in Tristan Bernard’s work. Tristan Bernard, the French playwright, whose comedies are well-known to the American public, is of Jewish ancestry also. The brilliant writer, whose humor is called by French critics the true Gallic humor (L’esprit Gaulois), although not as original as Porto-Riche, is one of the greatest dramatists of to-day. With his prolific power he has gone through drama and

fiction, in all of which one hears the echo of his healthy merriment.

These two giant personalities are not the only playwrights of Jewish parentage in France. Pierre Wolff, Francis de Croisset, Vandêrem, Lévy, Ephraim, Edmont de Rothschild, all these and many others, whose identity is without doubt the same, have paid tribute to the most perfect art of our day with equal modesty in concealing their—birth.