table extinction of the Jews. A few years since, some of the
most thoughtful minds in this country had become gravely
impressed with the idea that we were at the beginning of the
end, and he who was daring enough to raise his voice against the
tendency of the hour, was derided as striving to accomplish the
impossible.

This conviction was not confined to those who desired the
result which it portended, for many accepted it gloomily enough
as a truth which they claimed was irresistible. The writer never
shared this view, but has constantly been one of those who under-
took to breast the torrent and to stay the hand of the destroyer.
The work which he now projects is in that direction. When it
was begun, the whole sky was dark with clouds and scarcely a
ray of hope was to be discovered, but in the short space of time
which has intervened between the inception and the completion
of this effort, large rifts have been made and the sunshine of a
future of promise for the Jews breaks over the landscape.



THE JEWS IN AMERICA. 187

The radicalism which culminated at Pittsburg in 1885,
aroused a storm of indignation throughout the land which caused
its collapse at Cincinnati in the summer of 1886. The Pittsburg
conference which adjourned to meet at Cincinnati failed to con-
vene. The new generation of American Jews free from the intoxi-
cation resulting from sudden emancipation, and whose minds
have developed in an atmosphere of liberty, look at the questions
involved from a different locus standi from that adopted by the
Jews of a former generation. The American born Jew has had
the benefit of an American education. As has been said, he was
born and has grown up in an atmosphere of liberty ; he knows no
other condition. He is not impelled to license as the anti-climax
of enslavement; he becomes not riotous, in need or thought by
reason of any enfranchisement, for he has never been disfran-
chised. Like most native born Americans, while ready to die for
republican institutions, he recognizes that republicanism does
not mean Anarchy and that the surrender of certain elements of
individual liberty is a pre-requisite to the preservation and main-
tenance of liberty. And so in religious matters, when he has
come to contemplate the vast changes that have been made by
irresponsible persons in so short a time and in deference to so
sordid a spirit, his mind recoils and he refuses tu recognize the
right of any man to rudely lay his hands upon the traditions of
his fathers. By his achievements in every sphere of life he has
conquered the prejudice against his people and has claimed as his
right, the respect of his fellow men. The triumphs of the Jews
in the arts, literature, science and in finances has cast around the
name of ''Jtw" a halo of which he is intensely proud. He is im-
pelled to study the history of his people, to learn of their mar-
tyrdom, their endurance and their triumphs, and since the his-
tory of the Jews is inextricably interwoven with the religion of
the Jews he has been compelled in studying their history to learn
their religion. And he has learned that what is divinely ordained
or derived from traditions that extends to a period whereof the
memory of man runneth not to the contrary, may not be rudely
cast aside, or brushed away by men, the fountain of whose au-
thority extends not higher than themselves. For these so-called



l88 LEO N. LEVI MEMORIAL VOLUME.

reformers who halt not for sentiment nor reason he has no re-
spect, but rather says with Cassius,

'1 had as lief not be, as live to be
In awe of such a thing as I myself."

The effort to decry^ the race character of the Jew, which of all
others is the most absurd, finds no sympathy in the American
Jew. I make these assertions now with no fear of a successful
contradiction, for the developments of the past year furnish in-
controvertible evidence of their truth. But while the educated
and reflecting Jew is indisposed to be led by the revolutionists,
few have any definite notions of what is the duty of the hour and
the great mass of the people by reason of the indifference which
has been planted, as has already been shown, in their natures have
failed to give the subject any consideration whatsoever. There-
fore the author believes that he performs a simple duty to pre-
sent his reflections upon the status, the duties and the destiny of
the Jews in this country, not in the hope that his views wnll prove
acceptable to all those who read, but rather in the fond expecta-
tion that those who read will be induced to reflect and to discuss
the views that shall occur to them by reason of the stimulus I
shall offer, and thus there may be evolved from a multitude of
counsel that wisdom which the emergency requires.

It is my purpose in the course of this essay to show that it is
the duty and the policy of the Jews to preserve their solidarity,
and that in order to secure such a result it is essential that the
highest respect should be paid to the history and traditions of our
people, to the preservation of our customs within certain limita-
tions, and the practice of our religion with due deference to those
ancient forms that were practiced by our ancestors in times of
gravest adversity and peril ; and this leads me first to inquire,
should the Jews perpetuate their race, or suffer themselves to be
merged into and assimilated by the different peoples of the earth ?



CHAPTER I

Wherein is Considered the Right cind Duty of the Jews to Per-
petuate Their Existence as a Distinct People.

In considering the duty and policy of the Jews in respect of
the preservation of their integrity as a people, it becomes neces-
sary at the threshold to inquire into our right to remain an ex-
clusive people.

This involves the wide subject of whether there should be any
distinct peoples, and if so, whether the distinction may be prop-
erly made save upon national and territorial lines. It is con-
tended, that as the Jews are only such because of a community
of creed, that they may not persevere in their exclusiveness with-
out violence to the proper sensibilities of their neighbors. Voltaire
made this one of the chief bases of his strictures on the Jews
and even to this day we hear complaints made of the clannishness
of this remarkable people. If it were true that the Jews are such,
simply because of a community of creed, it would be proper to
inquire into the right of any religious community to segregate it-
self and in a measure abstain from intercourse with the world
at large, but it seems to me to be an idle discussion as to the
propriety of certain facts which do not exist.

It is not true in the first place that the Jews are abnormally
clannish ; it is not true in the second place that the Jews are only
Jews because of their religion. This idea has become prevalent
because the Jews have no territorial and no temporal government
and hence are not accorded the dignity of a race. History con-
tains no record, so far as I am advised, of any distinct people pre-
serving their manners, customs, traditions and laws, and what is
more remarkable, the purity of their blood, without the cohesive
power of a country, and a temporal government, except it be the
Jews. The gypsies can certainly not be accorded so high a dis-
tinction, and aside from them I know of none other that approxi-

i8q



190 LEO N. LEVI MEMORIAL VOLUME.

mates such an instance. At another place I shall discuss this re-
markable characteristic of the Jewish people. For the present i
must assume that the Jews are not simply an indiscriminate lot of
people who hold to a common belief. A native Esquimaux, or
American Indian might conscientiously adopt every tenet of the
Jewish church, might practice every form and ceremony imposed
by the Jewish laws and the Jewish ritual, and so far as the re-
ligion is concerned, be a Jew, but yet, no one who will reflect for
a moment would class them with the Jews as a people. If the
truth were known, a very large percentage of so-called Christians
would be found to be believers in the essentials of the Jewish re-,
ligion, and yet, they are not Jews. It requires not only that men
should believe in Judaism, but that they should be the descendants
in direct line of that people who enjoyed a temporal government
and who owned a country up to the time of the destruction of
the second commonwealth. That great event took away from the
Jews their country and their temporal government; it scattered
them over the face of the earth, but it did not destroy the nation-
al and race idea which was a part of their nature and of their
religion, and though nearly two thousand years have elapsed since
that memorable occasion, we find that there are more Jews today
than there were then, richer in the enjoyment of liberty, greater
in the exercise of power, further advanced in culture and with a
strain of blood preserved by steady, direct and undefiled flow
from the original source.

Who shall say then, that the Jews are no longer a race ? The
world numbers seven million of them among its population.
When Moses led the Jews from Egypt to Palestine, it is estimated
that there were three million of the children of Israel in his train.
The seven million who now exist are the direct descendants of
that chosen people. Certainly it will not be contended that a
strip of territory over which a lot of men exercise dominion, nor
that a form of government which men may exercise, constitute
a race. Blood is the basis and sub-stratum of the race idea and
no people on the face of the globe can lay claim with so much
right to purity of blood, and unity of blood, as the Jews. Be it
remembered, that I do not claim nationality for the Jews as such,



THE JEWS IN AMERICA. I9I

for they have had no such claim since Jerusalem was captured by
the Romans, but nationality and the race quality are two separate
and distinct things. It is well known that when The Netherlands
were hard pressed by their enemies on one occasion, the grand
idea was conceived of utilizing the vast amount of shipping in
the Dutch ports for an exodus of the Hollanders and after their
departure to cut the dikes and flood the country so that it might
not become a prey to the national foe. Had this idea been carried
into effect and the brave Netherlands had forsaken their country
and gone abroad to populate as they designed, some distant land,
would it be contended that they had lost their race character by
reason of their exodus? It seems to me that such a conclusion
would be most lame and impotent. If I have reasoned to any
purpose, the inquiry of right in the premises is not to be limited
to the Jews as the exponents of a particular creed, but to the
Jews as a race. I recognize the anomaly presented by the fact
that this race, as I claim them to be, is scattered over the face of
•the globe, divided up into many sections, and the different sec-
tions owing allegiance to different governments, but what is
there about the Jew that is not anomalous? In everything that
pertains to him he is sui generis. There is nothing incompatible
between the preservation on his part of the race idea, and the ut-
most fealty to the government under which he lives. I need not
discuss this, for there can be no conflict of allegiance to a mere
idea, and a government. In his relation to his government, the
American Jew is an American citizen. He observes the laws of
his country, he contributes to the support of his country, he is
ready to fight her battles abroad and to spend his last drop of
blood and treasure in defence of her shores against any and every
invader, and if the ranks of the enemy be composed of his co-
religionists, yet will he regard them as his enemies, for neither
his religion nor his race idea is ever suffered to interfere with his
patriotism, nor his allegiance to the powers that be. (My son fear
the Lord and the King Prov. 24-21).

The inquiry therefore broadens into the question, should
there be any classes among men — any distinctions because of
race, nationality, complexion, customs, habits, etc.?



192 LEO N. LEVI MEMORIAL VOLUME.

There are theorists who would erase from the map of exist-
ence every Hne that separates men from their fellow-men, classes
from other classes, nations from other nations, and even con-
tinents f rorn continents ; and their efforts are lauded as the high-
est and most enlightened philosophy by the same class of critics
who extol a leaden-colored canvas as the perfect representation
of the skies. There is much plausibility in the proposition that,
as all men are men, endowed with the same physical and mental
attributes, constituting a distinct class of animals, subject to be
swayed by the same affections, manifesting like sentiments and
sensations, they should be brothers in the most exalted meaning
of the word. It is claimed, in the words of the great "apostle
of freedom," that *'all men are created free and equal;" that
all men have equal rights ; and that there is something essentially
and inherently false in any social or governmental system which
makes distinctions among classes of men or among individuals.
The vice of the argument lies in this : The enthusiast confounds
a law of classification with a law of existence. What science
has discovered for convenience of definition, has been accepted
as the key-note in the scale of human duty. To explain further:
A definition may be defined as that process by which any entity
is assigned to its proximate genus and at the same time dis-
tinguished from other members of the same class, by its specific
difference. Thus negro is defined as a "man" (his proximate
genus) "with black skin, flat nose and woolly hair" (his specific
differences from other members of the human family).

A moment's reflection will convince my readers that the
process of definition is necessary to intercourse between man
and man, and that the process was contemporaneous with the
inception of the means of intercourse. In primitive times when
travel was difficult and infrequent, the different classes of men
were strangers to each other. The sons of Ham knew only
their dusky companions, and to their minds the idea of man
had no wider range than their own particular type. So, too,
with the sons of Shem and Japhet. In the course of ages a
great number of different types were developed in each of the
great branches, and each type considered itself the family of



THE JEWS IN AMERICA. I93

man. But time and travel acquainted men with other men.
Herodotus discovered many species of men, and while he dis-
tinguished them from the Greeks by many specific differences,
yet there were enough characteristics in common between them
all and the Greeks to assign them all to their proximate genus
"man." This synthetic process by which the Caucasian, the
Malay, the African, etc., are classed under a common designation
has given rise to the fallacy that all men are men — and hence
equal. It is perhaps true that all "men were created free and
equal," but in all respects save their political rights their equality
relates entirely to the particular moment of their creation. So-
cially, morally and physically every man is different in degree
of merit from every other man. Only before the law are all men
equal. But equality before the law does not comprehend equality
upon any other plane. The two propositions are entirely distinct.
If it be true that because we are all members of the human family
we are equal and should fraternize, it is equally true that
all men and all cats are animals, and hence are equal
and should fraternize. We have the quality of exist-
ence in common with all entities — are we for this reason
to be considered as violating a law of nature or a canon of duty,
when we use an inanimate object for our own purposes without
regard to its preservation or perpetuity? I appreciate the fact
that by reversing this argument we may be led to the logical
conclusion that any two objects, things or persons having specific
differences are foreign to each other and should not fraternize.
The answer to this is the solution of the whole problem. Nature
has implanted in every animate creature a selfish spirit whose
existence is necessary for the preservation of their natures.
Selfishness is not only necessary for the existence of animate
creatures, but it is the power under Heaven that works out the
fate of the world. It is the keynote of all harmony, and is the
basis of the highest virtues. The love of self brings order out
of chaos, civilization out of barbarism, government out of
anarchy, and compels the practice of the social virtues which
otherwise would give way to social corruption. I do not employ
the term selfishness to define that sordid and disgusting quality



194 . LEO N. LEVI MEMORIAL VOLUME.

which the word vulgarly implies, but I use it in that compre-
hensive sense which embraces the love and advancement of self.
It is the love of self which precludes all men from being brothers
in the sense which enthusiasts would have us regard all men;
it is the love of self which precludes each man from remaining
to and for himself separate from his kind. Man is a social and
a progenitive animal. As a social animal he seeks society; as a
progenitive animal he procreates. His self-love extends naturally
to what is nearest and dearest to him. Self-love makes him
jealous of the society and exclusive possession of his wife; self-
love makes him protect and care for his offspring and enforce
obedience from them. Thus the family relation, the highest
of earthly ties, grows out of self-love. Shall we deny the right
of any man to love his wife, the mother of his children, better
than he does a strange woman utterly unknown to him ? Selfish-
ness makes every man care for the members of his own com-
munity or society, for every community or society is formed for
the benefit of its members, and each member must care for and
protect all of the others in order that he may derive the benefits
of the community or society. The process of thought is lost sight
of in the daily occurrences of life, but an analysis of the ordinary
affairs of the world will convince the most superficial thinker
that not only is the world operated according to the law of self-
ishness, but that without that law we would drift into chaos.
It follows very clearly that by a natural law, the further is re-
moved any person, object or thing from the existence of any
man, the less will be his love for that person, object or thing.
I do not mean physical propinquity of course, but I refer to the
influence of relationship whether of blood, community of tastes,
occupation, creeds, joys or dangers. The ratio, of course, is co-
equal with that of relationship.

It has been remarked that all entities have the quality of
existence in common, but the relation is so slight that the love
it elicits is very faint. If I may use a figure of speech I should
compare love to the circle made on the surface of the sea by
dropping a pebble in the water. At first it is distinct and well
defined, but as it widens it grows fainter and fainter, until al-



THE JEWS IN AMERICA. I95

though certainly still existent it is imperceptible. Every man
bears some relation to all existence, and by reason and in the
ratio of that relationship bears love thereto. But existence is
composed of species beyond number. Comprehended in the im-
measurable and infinite circle of existence are an infinite number
of smaller circles, none of equal size, none concentric with
another, none covering the same space, yet all related by the
common circle which embraces all, which is contiguous im-
mediately to the great circles representing the first classification
of existences, and which great circles are contiguous to each
other, and contain again within themselves the species which
make up their hierarchy of existence. The tiniest snowdrop
on Himalayas' loftiest height bears some relationship to the
fieriest spark in the sim. The law of human nature which com-
pels man's love to extend outward in all directions as the circle
widens from the spot where the pebble gave it existence, does
not impose upon him the duty of loving all things or all persons
alike. Without difference in degrees of love according to re-
lationship, we should be deprived of the holiest and most exalting
ties and obligations and the sanctity of the home circle, the
institution of marriage, the parental, filial and fraternal love
would be swallowed up into that universal and uniform love,
which would, after all, be but indifference.

If I have argued to any purpose it must be clear that if all
men are brothers it is because they are men, not because they
are governed by a common fraternal feeling — Sum homo nihil
humani a me alienum puio is a sentiment which with great
propriety might be extended. In a different degree but of like
nature is the truth, 'T am an animal and I esteem nothing ani-
mate as foreign to me." If I am asked at what point fraternity
should cease, I can only say that the limits are regulated by
circumstances. Wherever may be found a community of senti-
ment, blood, circumstances, occupations, tastes, creeds, joys, sor-
rows or dangers there will be found fraternal ties limited by
the particular community which engendered them. This is^the
brotherhood of classes, and it is this fraternity which is derided
and discouraged by the visionaries who exclaim that all men are



196 LEO N. LEVI MEMORIAL VOLUME.

brothers, and there should be no castes, cliques, clans, nations
or peoples. An universal brotherhood would no doubt follow
the attainment of universal virtue and the perfection of the
human family. When the standard of human perfection is
discovered and all men attain that standard, then, and not till
then will all men be brothers ; but as long as men entertain differ-
ences of opinions so long will there be classes. If the formation
of new classes could be discontinued, the classes now existing
might be merged into one (although I doubt even this) ; but
new classes must necessarily spring up. They may not come into
existence by any name, they rarely do, but circumstances form
them with unceasing regularity.

It is in entire conformity with the laws of nature for men to
unite in the pursuit of any legitimate object. Artists form so-
cieties among themselves in which the "tie that binds" is the
love and practice of art. In such a society creed or nationality
go for naught, the open sesame and the ritual being art. To
the soldier every soldier is a brother. Every profession has its
freemasonry. Every devotee is a brother to the followers of
his own faith. The subjects of every government are united by
their common nationality.

Such circumscriptions operate nothing against the usefulness
of those thus circumscribed. We have all our parts to play, and
in playing them we can neither enter every circle nor confine
ourselves to one. There are certain duties which we owe to our
fellow-men in return for the benefits we derive from the social
state, and they must be performed.

To do less is to violate the law of our obligations to society,
which is the companion of the law of self-love in the govern-
ment of the world.

Society is composed of elements owing to one another cor-
relative obligations, the prompt discharge of which is a pre-
requisite to the orderly regulation and progress of the whole.
Herbert Spencer compares society to an organic structure having
parts and functions analogous to those of animate creatures
in his comparison, "Government is represented by the regulative



THE JEWS IN AMERICA. 1^7

functions of a living organism, and forms of government so
many varieties of the structure."

Professor Edmund Robertson, commenting in the Brittanica
upon the views of Herbert Spencer, announces the familiar truth,
that where men are united in groups there arises from their
union the necessity of action in behalf of the group. "It is, of
course, always a matter of difficulty to determine the exact
nature and degree of obligation which individuals owe to society,
for the reason principally, that the origin of society is lost ui
the obscurity of unexplored antiquity. If there ever was a time
when society did not exist among the members of the human
family in some form or other, history is silent as to that era."

Various theories have been advanced in explanation of the
genesis of society, all of them being plausible, and none entirely
satisfactory.

Professor Robertson in his article on government in the
Brittanica, briefly, but clearly, considers the various theories