J e w i s h  R i t u a l -
M u r d e r :   a   H i s t o r i c a l   I n v e s t i g a
t i o n
Der jüdische Ritualmord: Eine historische Untersuchung
von Hellmut Schramm, Ph. D.

T i s z a - E s z l á r   1 8 8
2
------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 2
(p.156)

As mentioned, old Frau Solymosi had reported to the
community judge on 3 April; when he did nothing, the mother repeated her
report a full month later on 4 May. On the 19thy of May -- therefore now a
month and a half after the loss of her child -- the examining judge
Bary appeared, who embarked upon the case all the more
energetically from now on. This tactic of dragging things on, which became
endemic in all the nations where Jewry had already spun its threads, was
the topic of an interpellation of the Representative
Istóczy, which the latter directed toward the Justice Minister Dr.
Pauler on 24 May 1882 in the Hungarian Reichstag: "In
connection with that, which my Representative colleague Géza von
Ónody said in yesterday's sitting, in relation to the girl Esther
Solymosi, murdered in Tisza-Eszlár in the synagogue, directly before
the Jewish Easter festival by the Jewish schächter
[ritual-slaughterer] Salomon Schwarz, I ask the Herr
Minister:
1. Have you knowledge of the fact that the sitting
judge of the upper Dada region, in the Szabolcser Comitat, to whom the
mother of the murdered girl reported, (157)
instead of making the case the subject of a preliminary investigation,
as was his duty, referred the mother to the court of justice in
Nyiregyháza, and that this man in turn referred the mother back to the
sitting judge again, and that, with the sitting judge and the court of
justice making a completely unreasonable issue of jurisdiction out of
the case, the investigation was first begun after weeks had
passed?
2. Do the Lord ministers intend to hold the sitting
judge [I have] mentioned, and the members of the court of justice who were
involved, responsible for this conspicuous neglect of duty?
3.
Do you intend, considering the scope of the case -- incalculable as
a consequence of the prevailing circumstances -- to pursue the case with
attention and to exercise watchfulness that, despite the great
financial resources of the Jews which have now been set into motion,
the guilty Jew or guilty Jews receive their rightful
punishment?"

Since Istóczy in the argument of his
interpellation speaks of a Jewish race, he receives a sharp rebuff
from the Minister President and Leader of the ruling Jewish-Liberal party,
the freemason Koloman from Tisza, whose machinations substantially
influenced the course of the trial. Tisza replies: "My first
comment is this, that it is totally inadmissable to speak of any
race or [religious] denomination in our fatherland, that it
is base and deserving of full contempt. . ." So far had the Judafication
of Hungary already progressed in the eighty years of the 19th century,
that a corrupt Jewish race was not permitted to be spoken of!

We
now understand the following events better.

In the beginning, the
state's attorney Melchior Both was in charge of the Office of
Public Prosecutor. On 18 May 1882, the proceedings were put under
the charge of the responsible court, on 3 June of the same year Both shot
himself. Georg Ritter von Marcziányi interprets this incident,
which caused the greatest sensation in its time, as follows in his book
(page 19): "One of the most important moments in the judicial preliminary
examination was the suicide of the state's attorney of Nyiregyháza
in the first days of June, (158)Melchior
Both, who put a bullet in his head after the arrival of the Chief
state's attorney von Kozma who had traveled for the examination of
the case. It turned out that Both had already been in a position of
closest intercourse with the top-level Jews there for a long
time. After the the ritual-murder had become known, a secret collection
of money took place among the Jews there, and the rumor was about
among the people that the goal of this collection was for the bribing
of the Court of Justice. The fact of the matter is, that Both
did everything to nip the whole murder case in the bud. .
."

That was Both.

Ladislaus Egressi-Nagy
functioned as the second state's attorney; he was soon relieved of his
duties in this trial as a result of a difficult falling-out with the
examining judge Bary, who was as incorruptible as he was
energetic.

The Chief state's attorney von Kozma also seemed
to be no longer sure of the case; things must have been going on here
which have never been fully explained. Characteristically, the Chief
state's attorney in his critical situation turned, not to the Justice
Minister Pauler, known for his incorruptible and unbiased attitude
and on that account slandered and avoided by the Jewish gang and their
helpers, but to a Jewish-inspired and therefore influential clique of
journalists in Budapest, the so-called "Jókai-Club," which delightedly
rendered its expert opinion concerning the Chief state's attorney;
in this opinion we read(20):
"Considering that the Herr Chief state's attorney Alexander Kozma
never has given grounds in his past life, spent in view of the public,
during a public career of many years, which could cast even the remotest
suspicion of corruption (!) upon him, the Court of opinion rules
that: Herr Szabó has impugned the Herr Chief state's attorney with
such an unworthy suspicion, which the Court(21) condemns
decisively and declares to be perfectly groundless."

The situation:
A chief state's attorney has to allow the public (159)
reproach fall upon him, that he, too, has been bagged by Jewish
gold. Now [his] attacker is not put in his place, but rather [Kozma] seeks
assistance from this assuredly influential society of Jews which
designates itself a "Court," and he allows himself to be exposed to an
endorsement of his incorruptibility by this Jewish Areopagus! This could
have served as material for the funny papers, had not these matters not
become so disheartening; for this rehabilitation was trumpeted forth in
the Jewish press -- and the struggle against the "anti-Semitic leprosy"
received a new impetus, and this in turn had a decisive effect upon the
course of the trial!

In the full consciousness of the power of
universal Jewry, Paul Nathan commented in [his] extremely
informative way: "In a nation with a parliamentary government (!), the
Press is an outstanding power, and in a country such as Hungary,
the word of certain men has a significance which is not to be
compared with the findings of a royal Court of Justice, even be that
[a verdict of] of conviction. . .such (!) men are, in fact, able to
ultimately stigmatize a slanderer for the entire nation and to
restore honor where it has been impugned without cause. After this
happens, the entire Hungarian Press hesitates not one instant in
expressing its disgust for those attacking that honor. The matter is
settled (!) and, with the exception of a small group of outcasts of
the nation, nobody dares [to do] anything further. There are attacks whose
purpose is clear, but whose goal, however, remains
unreachable."

Under these auspices the trial could now begin. But,
contrary to expectation, there was again a halt in the proceedings -- the
scenario, as the saying goes, did not go over well.

Kozma
remained, but he committed a tactical error. The vice state's attorney
Koloman von Soós, a creature of the Chief state's attorney, became
the successor of Nagy; but the reputation of being all too friendly to the
Jews preceded him, so that he was not able to stay long in
Nyiregyháza. He likewise went.

On 11 October and on the 25th
of November, the matter of delegating a new court of Justice was discussed
in the Hungarian parliament. The government refused this.

Now there
appeared the state's attorney Emerich Havas. Meanwhile, it had
become (160) winter. On 29 November, the court
was supposed to open. On this date chief state's attorney Kozma
received an urgent petition from Havas, in which the latter asked
for his "withdrawal from the state's attorney functions in the affair of
Tisza-Eszlár," because the Herr Justice Minister had instituted against
him a "criminal investigation because of suborning false witnesses and
abuses of the power of his office". We shall not go more deeply into
the matter of the proceedings against Havas here. Their course was
likewise very murky. His successor, Eduard von Szeyffert -- thus
the fifth state's attorney -- was dispatched [in his place]!

A
great deal of water had flowed under the bridge by the time the actual
trial began. This time of intermission appears filled with incidents which
throw such a delineating light upon the tactics of the Jewish struggle,
that at least the most important ones, arranged in their chronological
sequence, should be resurrected from the oblivion to which they have been
intentionally consigned.

The Intrigues up to the Time of the Main
Hearings

Already, before the beginning of the trial, there was a
series of complaints about insults and duels which we will pass over
because of their unimportant nature.

In April 1882, the
greatest variety of rumors were surfacing already in every region of
Hungary, such as: Esther Solymosi had been seen here or there --
the [possibility of] a mistake was eliminated; since no one could produce
the girl despite these claims, the Jews let a large number of dead Esthers
pop up. Even this disinformation campaign did not catch on; the most that
it accomplished was that inquiries went in circles. As later, in
1891 in Corfu and 1900 in Konitz, these clumsy maneuvers
brought about unrest and strong anti-Semitic disturbances in the populace,
which could at first be suppressed by military presence; but the local
Jewish manipulation had miscalculated this time. From now on, the
"Alliance Israélite Universelle" considered the situation of the Jews in
Hungary to be so critical, that something most be done for its
exoneration. Jewish Gold was supposed to prepare this offensive, in that a
"premium" [reward] of 5000 Fl. (161) was
subscribed for producing the girl. The Jew Josef Lichtmann in
Tisza- Eszlár received the commission of "offering" the mother
Solymosi a sum of 1000 Fl. if she would accept another girl
instead of her daughter. This transpired with the words: "If the girl
should make an appearance, how nice 1000 Fl. would be for you, and you
could receive this sum from us right away." When this Jew was called to
account for his attempt at bribery, he naturally denied everything and
admitted only this much, that he had spoken not of 1000, but of 300 Fl.,
which the woman would receive in case she succeeded in bringing the
missing Esther back home.

A Jewess undertook a similar attempt at
bribery, when she approached the mother of Esther with the words: "Dear
Frau Solymosi, how much money would you not receive, if your
daughter should again appear." -- Eight years later, a father whose
eighteen-year-old son had been bled to death under the ritual-slaughtering
knife of Polish Jews, received a written offer that he should be
"compensated" with 50,000 Marks: ". . . Be reasonable at last, it is to
your advantage."(22)

But
old Frau Solymosi was likewise "unreasonable," angrily kicked the
Jews out of her modest little house and made a report. Both bribery
attempts allow us to recognize the plan, hatched early-on, to plant a
false Esther. Sometime around the middle of June, the schächter
left Tisza-Eszlár, after he had asserted with certainty several times that
in three days the body of Esther would appear. Thereby was staged the most
foolish fraud which International Jewry has ever undertaken in these kind
of trials.

On the 18th of June 1882 -- therefore 79 days
after the disappearance of the girl, perhaps 20 km below Tisza-Eszlár, a
female body was thrown on land by the current of the Theiß. Raftsmen who
were moored in the vicinity pulled the corpse, which had become entangled
in willow bushes, onto land and buried it without making a report of it to
the authorities. But the news (162) spread from
here by a ranger more quickly than was expected, from village to village
and even reached the ears of Bary. The latter had developed sharp
ears. With the same resolve with which he examined witnesses, he arranged
for the district physician Dr. Kiß to go to the place where the
body was discovered on the evening of 18 June; Kiß presided over
the immediate opening of the grave; at a depth of 2.5 fathoms the body,
which had been pulled from the water, was in fact discovered; it was
superficially inspected without being taken from the grave. The thorough
examination and autopsy was delayed until the arrival of the Court of
Justice. Guards were posted at the grave site. Already in the midday hours
of the new day, before any of the authorities had arrived, "crowds of Jews
converged on the banks of the Theiß from all directions of the compass,
from far regions at distances of 15-20 miles, and triumphed over the most
recent success of Israel, under loud curses at Christians and
especially at evil anti-Semites, like a swarm of ravens assembling
above the corpse of a mole. This scene was very interesting and would have
been worthy of being immortalized by the brush of a painter."(23) -- The
Budapest and Vienna Jewish papers teemed with telegrams, which bore the
signature of Dr. Heymann-Levy, one of the Jewish defenders.(24)

Still
before anyone was able to view the body, which was guarded by armed police
officers, and before the judicial pronouncement had been made -- the first
protocol, composed on the morning of 19 June at 1 A.M. by the district
physician, was still on its way to the Court -- "Jewish sentries, posted
in every direction like telegraph poles, triumphantly trumpeted the news
that: Esther Solymosi's body had been discovered in unwounded condition.
Great was the joy, the jubilation, the malicious enjoyment, the mockery
and contempt, which was poured over the shamed friends of anti-Semitism,
over whose presumed disgrace Israel now thought itself able to celebrate
its shameless orgies."(25)

(163)It is important and must be
kept firmly in mind: The Jewish news service "knew" that the body found at
least 20 km distant from Tisza-Eszlár was that of the fourteen year-old
Solymosi!

On the 19th and 20th of June a new inspection was
held at the place of discovery under consultation of the court; the body,
covered over with a crust of mud, was flushed with water and a female
person appeared, which had been carefully dressed with the garments
of the missing girl. Piece by piece, each was identified by Mother
Solymosi as belonging to her daughter; what appeared beneath the
clothes, however, was not the fourteen year-old girl. It is shocking to
read how Frau Solymosi attentively regarded this planted body, as if she
were hoping to have her daughter before her again, but then tersely and
definitely declared: "That is not Esther!"

Separated from
one another and under supervision, the siblings, the close relatives, the
neighbors, the pastor, the local teacher, and finally the mother was once
again, in turn, led past the body: Their statements all agreed: what was
lying there was a complete stranger!

The medical surveys paralleled
these perceptions of the witnesses; at the scene of the finding of the
body appeared simultaneously the physicians appointed by the court: Dr.
Trajtler, Dr. Kiß, Dr. Horváth and Géza v. Kéri. These four expert
witnesses took on the job of making a protocol -- still on the 19th and
the 20th of June -- concerning the internal and external findings
[from examination] of the body.

We learn the following important
details from the exterior findings (Autopsy protocol of the afternoon of
19 June 1882):

1. The hair appears to have been
shaved off.

2. The face is hollowed, there is no sort of
abrasions present, nor are there any kind of signs of exterior wounds to
be found.

3. The neck is not
wounded.

4. The chest is emaciated.

5. The
hands are strikingly small and beautiful. The nails are especially
conspicuous for their fine development and the fact that they have been
carefully tended.

(164) 6. The
feet are small and delicate. Their shape allows us to conclude that they
have always been shod. [i.e., that, unlike most peasant women, the subject
never went barefoot.]

The interior examination (Autopsy
protocol in continuation of the morning of the 20th of June, 1882)
yielded, among other things, the important determination that the lungs
were covered on their surfaces with strongly projecting, bumpy air
vesicles and were anemic. In the upper apex of the right lung were
tubercles and a cavity (cavern) the size of a musket ball, filled with
pus.

The expert witness physicians composed an expert opinion in
response to the questions of the examining judge Bary, which were
important for further investigation. The result of their examinations,
which would indicate the direction of Bary's inquiries, can be finally
summarized with the setting forth of these comprehensive arguments:

1. The body is not the victim of death by suffocation in
the water; it was thrown into the water already dead.
2.
The body is, at most, ten days old. (If one accepts the statements of
Moritz Scharf as a basis, Esther Solymosi had been murdered
over eleven weeks before!)
3. The body has not been in the water
for more than three or four days.
4. The body is that of an
eighteen or probably even a twenty year-old.
5. The body is not
that of a girl, but of a person who has led a dissolute life.
6.
The direct cause of death was consumption. [i.e.,
tuberculosis]
7. The body shows no traces whatsoever of
external wounds which could have caused bleeding. The loss of flesh on
the right arm indicates that the body was dragged by means of a
rope.
8. The shape of the feet and hands, and the meticulous
care of the same, shows that this person followed no kind of rough
labor in her lifetime, but belonged to a class "which did not occupy
itself with coarse manual labor."
On the basis of these findings, on
whose composition four physicians had taken part, (165) Bary determined his further investigation. He
began with the assumption that a corpse-smuggling as clever as it was
shameless took place -- and he had full success with this assumption!
Already, on the following day, he had all the raftsmen taken into custody;
a great number of them were immediately released again because they could
not, from the beginning, be considered possible accomplices due to the
position of their vessels. One of the rafting business owners who had been
held in custody was Yankel Smilovics, a Jew. Having been cornered
and not up to the methodology of the judge, he resigned himself on 26
June 1882 to making statements with the following contents: On 6
June Yankel Smilovics met another sponger, Amsel Vogel. The
latter opened up to him the possibility of "earning a lot of money" if he
would take on the job of taking a corpse down below Tisza-Eslár
with his raft. As a further accomplice the Jew David Hersko was
involved -- the cloverleaf was complete!

On the 10th of June
(on the 20th of June, the doctors declared that the body was, at
most, ten days old!) Smilovics took the ferryboat to Tisza-Eszlár,
according to arrangements made; there two Jews, Martin Groß and Ignatz
Klein, were waiting for him with a wagon, and handed over to him a female
body dressed in a slip. Smilovics shifted his strange freight over to
David Hersko, together with the instruction that below Tisza-Eszlár a
peasant woman was waiting and would give him clothes for the corpse.
-- Everything went according to plan. The body was dressed with the help
of the "peasant woman," who later turned out to be the Jewess Großmann
from Tisza-Eszlár, and was then cast into the water. The non-Jewish
raftsman Csepkanics was on the last of the rafts. Below
Tisza-Eszlár, he suddenly noticed how a body, which he did not recognize
and which the Theiß was driving down against his raft, disappeared under
his boat and then surfaced again and now was being taken by the wind
toward the far shore. There the object remained hanging in the willow
bushes and now could be recognized as human.

The possessions of the
slaughtered Esther had therefore been carefully preserved at the scene of
the crime. The mother of the child was actually able to identify every
single piece of clothing of her daughter on the 19th of June.(166) If we visualize the witness statements of the
young Scharf, the victim was undressed down to her slip (". . .I saw that
Esther lay in her slip on the ground, while her clothes were on the
table"). The slip was naturally deeply soaked through with blood and was
therefore no longer of use, if they did not want to betray themselves. In
some way or other, a new slip must have been procured; a
Talmud-brain managed to dig up the information from one of the
statements made to the court by old Frau Solymosi: a certain Roth
(a Jewess) came to her and importuned her for a slip of Esther or
even a strip from one of them; for these things would be necessary (she
told her) in order to get information concerning the whereabouts of the
girl from a fortune-teller! This is how this Jewish-Galician gang behaved
to this old woman!

Unfortunately it was not possible to determine
the origin of the strange body; various hypotheses have been proposed. If
one examines all the clues which the statements of the Jewish smugglers as
well as the condition of the dead body have yielded, this body came either
from a dissection room or from a Jewish cemetary. It is known that the
orthodox Jews have the ritual custom of meticulously shaving off the hair
of Jewesses not only at the time of marriage but also after their death,
and this had been done thoroughly with the body.

The body,
externally and conspicuously well-groomed (cosmetic treatments) but
otherwise all the more strikingly uncared for in every respect, would
support the final surmise -- that, in any case, this was not the body of a
blooming, virginal fourteen year-old peasant girl!

Actually, by the
end of June 1882, the investigatory court was able to establish
that at the least the tracks of this recent crime were leading to
the national capital city of Budapest. Action was supposed to be
taken, with the arrest of perhaps 30 of even "highly respected Jews" --
among them a Jewish medical "authority" -- so that the final proof of this
monstrous, entangled Jewish criminal organization would thereby be
supplied -- at the end, even connections to Viennese Jews could be
established -- but the Minister President Tisza, who specially
interrupted his vacation at his country home at the last minute, (167) prevented the Justice Minister Dr.
Pauler from giving the necessary instructions to the court of Justice
at Nyiregyháza. . .

Thus, these final connections remain
just as unclear as the question of what happened to the body of the girl
after the butchery of 1 April. Yet even here we have at least a clue:
Still prior to the staging of the smuggled corpse, below Tisza-Eszlár
fishermen drew a headless, well advanced in decay and thus unrecognizable
female body from the river. The Hungarian magnate Ónody, resident
in Tisza-Eszlár, was later able to determine that these fishermen, as soon
as the rumor of their discovery spread, were bribed by provably
Jewish parties not to hand over the body to the rangers, but to
bury it at an exactly agreed-upon location. But something of this must
have leaked out, for the Nyiregyháza Court of Justice decided to
dispatch an exhumation commission to the relevant location on a certain
day. The Jewish intelligence service had smelled a rat, for even before
the commission reached the site, the Jews Heymann-Levy, Flegmann and
Lichtmann had already appeared. What they were up to at this extremely
critical moment remains unknown; all that was known was that the deputies
of the high Court of Justice were standing before a freshly excavated
empty hole. . .

But the Jewish stage-managers were not
content with this success, from now on they wanted to "officially" --
i.e., journalistically -- refute the blood-accusation. In the year
1891 on Corfu, the correspondent of the Berliner Tageblatt
[Berlin Daily], Dr. Barth, took over this handsomely paid
"mission," which, thanks to the fire-break of the Kreuzzeitung, did
not succeed. The same thing was tried in Hungary. The editor of the Jewish
Prague Politik [Politics], with the revealing surname of
Puffke-Lipnitzki, was given the task of writing a series of
articles about Tisza-Eszlár in the Cracow (likewise Jewish) Csas.
In his book (page 179), Representative Ónody formed this judgement of
these effusions: "The series of articles is a masterpiece of an exquisite
sort, a masterpiece as only a brain refined by the shrewdest malice of
Talmudic morality is able to produce."

As the starting point of
his arguments, Lipnitzki (168) makes use of
"information" as if he received it: "It is impossible to suppose of the
Jews, that they, in the midst of the 19th century, cleansed by the
winds of the Enlightenment and of cultural progress, could have committed
such a murder as they are accused of: Esther Solymosi probably has been
murdered by the anti-Semites!"

There we have it -- constantly
repeated as weapons in Jewish hands are: "Enlightenment," "culture" and --
as often as possible -- "humanitarianism," all for the purpose of imputing
to non-Jewish peasants the most hideous crimes!

Like his colleague
Barth, this Prague "editor" appeared at the scene; with this
difference only, that the Berlin colleague was received by an archbishop
with every formality, but Puffke achieved access at the door of an
"uneducated" peasant woman! Puffke-Lipnitzki attempted to draw
Mother Solymosi into conversation. He gave her to understand that, if she
were ready to make some statements desired by him, she could "make some
money." His shamelessness went so far that he "bid" 5 Fl.. for some stalks
of straw from the bed of her murdered daughter! The devilish intent was
obvious: his "press" would then have delightedly trumpeted to the entire
world that the mother was selling as "souvenirs" even the straw from the
bed of her child for sinful money in order to enrich herself even more by
the death of her child -- we recall that Paul Nathan had already
determined "that in truth, the living conditions of Frau Solymosi
have markedly improved. . ."

Notice of large reward to be offered to
"truth-tellers" by Jews

But the old Solymosi woman, who, "directly at the entrance
of the same man (Puffke-Lipnitzki), recognizing with the instinct
of a mother's heart who and what kind of individual was confronting
her,"(26) threw
the Jewish bearer-of-19th-century-culture out; for this, in his article
she was then given a very high recognition of her stainless character, by
being described as "without honor and an evil woman"! In order to be
protected from further Jewish importuning, the property of the Solymosis
had to be kept under police surveillance. These scandalous events were
echoed even in Germany.

(169)On 4 July
1882, Dr. Henrici, who had already aroused enormous
interest(27) in a
great number of gatherings as one of the first anti-Semitic speakers (in
1881 he had called the first racial anti-Semitic people's
assemblies in Berlin), also spoke in Berlin in the "Sozialer
Reichesverein" [roughly, "Social National Union"]: "That little spot
in Hungary has become a turning point for the whole anti-Semitic movement,
perhaps it will form a boundary stone for Israel. . .In case these people
of the ritual-murder are referred [to court], all peoples have the most
scared duty, to protect us from the gang which slaughters us not only
economically, but perhaps also in actuality. This little place
(Tisza-Eszlár) will perhaps become Israel's end. Cowardice and
bloodthirstiness have been characteristic traits of the Jews in all times.
It would be a national suicide, if we would not protest against the fact
that members of the nation which in Hungary are standing before the blood
court [i.e., as accused ritual-murderers], are sitting in the robes of
office upon a German judicial bench and are allowed to pass judgement
upon the Germans. . ."

In another assembly, Henrici
demanded, to thunderous applause, the immediate removal from office of
Jewish judges -- "even in Berlin what has come to light in Hungary can
happen! One need only examine once the statistics of those who have
disappeared and see at which time of the year most of the children were
lost! (Shout: Passover!) Come hell or high water, we will not
yield or waver until we have pushed the foot from the back of our necks,
until we have cast the Jews, together with their bloody ritual-slaughter
knives down into the dust where they belong. . ."

In a petition
directed to the government, police supervision over the Jewish populace,
but particularly over the synagogues, was supposed to be requested.
In order to enlighten the population and shake it from its apathy, a large
number of handbills about this blood-murder were circulated, since the
"German" newspapers had refused to accept the explanation relating
to this!

(170)So strongly did these
"extra editions" affect the nerves of the "Chairman of the Jewish
community of Berlin," the banking Jew and "Royal Advisor for Commerce,"
Meyer-Magnus, that he complained to the Prussian Minister of the
Interior von Puttkamer. The text of the letter of reply from the
latter should be reproduced as simply a symbolic document of its
time:

"Berlin, 13 July 1882
Ministry of the
Interior

Sir

I most obligingly thank you for the delivery,
by means of your kind letter, of the extra edition of the morning of the
23rd which referred to the well-known case of the disappearance of the
Christian resident in Tisza-Eszlár.

I find myself in perfect
agreement with you, Sir, in respect to the condemnation of this sorry
piece of work, abject alike in both form and content and I in no way
underestimate the danger which the circulation of such productions of the
press can bring in their train under prevailing
conditions.

Incidentally, according to the investigation ordered by
me in the case at hand, everything has also been thoroughly correctly
dealt with by the local police authority, in so far as the latter has
immediately made the application on its behalf with the Royal State
Prosecutor's Office. Already charges against the editor due to offenses
against § 166 of the penal code have been lodged by that office and at the
same time the confiscation of the extra edition has been applied
for. . .I should like to take the opportunity to assure you, Sir, of my
best and deepest respect.

(signed) v. Puttkamer.

To
the
Royal Confidential Advisor and Chairman
of the Board of
Directors of the Jewish community
Herr
Meyer-Magnus,

Esquire,
Hier-W.  Bellevuestr.
8."

(171) But Meyer, Esq., "the
Great" and his dinner-jacketed band of swindlers could smile amusedly to
themselves as they rubbed their hands.

Yet soon they should again
have opportunity to get angry -- this time more lastingly! Leading men of
the anti-Semitic movement, among them the dynamic Dr. Henrici named
above, and also Otto Glagau, its "culture warrior", had the merit
not only of having relentlessly uncovered the practices of the Jewish
stock exchange hyenas and foundation swindlers, but also of having clearly
recognized the most monstrous crime, blood-murder, and having pointed it
out as fact to a peaceable citizenry, came together for the formation of
an anti-Jewish alliance, to which anti-Semites from Austria and
Hungary also belonged. This anti-Jewish alliance summoned the first
anti-Semitic congress in Dresden. Otto Glagau held the
leadership. Max Liebermann von Sonnenberg, who later became Reich
deputy, at whose suggestion the facts of the case of the blood-murder
which occurred in the year 1900 at Konitz were published,
Dr. Amman, the founder of the "Sozialer Reichsverein", Dr.
Hentschel, court preacher and member of the Reichstag
Stöcker, the founder of the Christlichsoziale Partei
[Christian Social Party] (1878), "a dazzling speaker in the pulpit as well
as in the people's assembly"(28), the
future member of the Reichstag Prof. Paul Förster, with his brother
Bernhard the author of the so-called "anti-Semitic Petition" of
1881, Ruppel, Pickenbach, Ernst Schmeitzner,
well-known through his antisemitische Monatshefte [Anti-Semitic
Monthly issues], the member of the Hungarian Reichstag, Istóczy,
whose Manifest an die Regierungen und Völker der durch das Judentum
gefährdeten christlichen Staaten [Manifesto to the Governments and
Peoples of the Christian States Endangered by Jewry] was adopted, and
Ivan von Simónyi -- all these were to be named as the leading men
of this congress.

At their invitation the Hungarian Reichstag
deputy Géza v. Ónody also spoke on the 10th of September
1882 in Dresden about the ritual-crime committed in his
hometown and about the doings of the Alliance Israélite Universelle
in Hungary. The portrait of the murdered girl, created by his countryman
Anrányi according to the statements of the mother and relatives,
was (172) displayed in the assembly hall. It is
the same one which Ónody published in his book. Even ten years later, this
circumstance so enraged the Jew Nathan, that he described the girl
as a prostitute; he writes on page 39 of his book: ". . .it is claimed
that it is the portrait of a public beauty of Nyiregyháza, and
really, whoever strolled through the broad streets of that particular
little Hungarian city, a native of the place probably pointed out to him a
tall girl with a short apron, with a loosely wound blue cloth about her
bare neck which, although she was not ritually slaughtered, and although
she continually went about her somewhat profitable trade,
nonetheless was supposed to be the original of the Esther of the portrait.
Her name was Ludovika Marossek. . .This painted Esther
Solymosi [i.e., the one in the portrait], who was a prostitute,
has the busts of crowned heads around her(29), and
upon this portrait gazed apparently devoutly the heads of the party,
worthy pastors and great men of mature age, some of them in significant
positions, who have the eyes of the public on them, and who make a
pretense of working for the 'moral' rebirth of society, and wish to solve
problems of high politics, these people worshipfully gathered before the
portrait of a -- whore. . ."

A few days later Ónody spoke
in Berlin in the first mass gathering of the anti-Semites over
Tisza-Eszlár. On 16 September 1882, the Deutsche Tageblatt
gave the following atmospheric report: "The powerful arousal into which
the population of our capital city has been transported by the
ritual-murder of the unfortunate Esther Solymosi, committed by the
Jews, the stubborn silence of the Jewish-Progressive press concerning the
event, and finally, the news that the Hungarian Reischstag Deputy for
Tisza-Eszlár, Herr von Ónody, will appear on Thursday evening in order to
make a thorough report about the terrible crime by means of (173) official materials at a large assembly,
had enticed an enormous crowd of people to the local assembly hall. For
that talk turned out to be a great demonstration against Jewry. We wished
that our esteemed Jewish fellow-citizens had been able to hear the
authentic truth about the crime from the mouth of this unimpeachable
man of honor. . ."

The appearance of Ónody in Germany -- as even
Nathan had to concede -- had achieved two things:
1. "The
previously varying tale of the murder took on solid shape -- anti-Semitism
again surfaced" and
2. "Ónody had committed himself personally
in Hungary as in Germany, and with him the anti-Semitism of both nations,
to [justice for] the ritual-murder."
With these successes, which even a
Jewish "intellectual" stressed, the Hungarian could feel satisfaction for
the first time.

How had things been developing in his home country?
In Hungary as well, the anti-Semitic currents had been swelling. Whatever
decision the court might make, the people were convinced that they were
being bled to death by the Jewish foreign body -- not only economically
but in the literal sense of the word. One knew what to expect from
newspaper reporting -- indeed, Jews and editors had already become
identical concepts in Hungary! But the Alliance Israélite, that
parent company of World Jewry, must have given a signal; for at the same
time as anti-Semitic speakers were appearing in Germany and fliers were
being circulated, there suddenly assembled in Budapest on 5 July
1882, contrary to all other practice in secrecy and silence, a general
meeting of the Rabbis under the chairmanship of the Head Rabbis
Menachem Hatz and Leopold Lipschitz. No resounding
"resolutions" were composed (an exception for such a meeting!) but
something totally cunning was cooked up! The Rabbis wrote letters -- this
"quiet propaganda" was already practiced at that time -- but not
spontaneously to this or that (174) person
abroad -- but to very well-known international "authorities," who almost
without exception belonged to the theological faculty of their
universities, and they asked these men to render their expert opinions
about the possibility of ritual-murder and/or to "historically elucidate"
this subject. With great adroitness, they knew how to discover, next to
the freemasons, their baptized racial comrades among the "Christian"
theologians! These scholars, to whom this request suddenly came, had in
all probability never been able to examine a ritually-slaughtered human
body which had been drained of all its blood, as their former colleague,
D. Johann Eck had done in the 16th century -- perhaps [this was the
occasion when] they were first told about what is meant by a ritual- or
blood-murder -- with the exception of their baptized [Jewish]
colleagues!

Their letters of reply are consequently composed in an
occasionally very evasive manner and one soon gets the impression: the
"colleagues of the Mosaic persuasion" should get the kind of exposition
which would not further upset them and besides: it is flattering and at
the same time an honor to be approached by a learned assembly of foreign
Rabbis for a letter of expert opinion, and therefore the bearer of an
apparently quite well-known name is not permitted to disappoint them in
any way. These letters of reply, written for both the above-named rabbinic
Head Swindlers and also, really, for their agents, are to be evaluated
with this perspective in mind!

The theological faculty of the
University at Amsterdam writes: "The theological faculty owes it to
the decision of the assembly of Rabbis, held on the 5th of July of this
year in Budapest, that your friendly invitation was also issued to
it, as well, to give its statement in relation to an old accusation
made once again against the Jews. . .agreeing with the judgement of
all experts in the field, it also is thoroughly of the conviction that a
lawful instruction to use human blood acquired by murder for ritual
purposes is not contained anywhere in the religious books of the
Jews. . "

The theological faculty of the University of
Copenhagen refuted "this foolish invention, proceeding from
blind fanaticism" by recalling (175) "with
what great severity the Mosaic Law forbids men the consumption of blood;
according to this law, anyone who would commit the above atrocity which
is charged to the Jews [in Tisza-Eszlár], would be excluded from the
community of the Jews and incur heavy punishment(!) Fully justified is the
complaint and the indignation of the whole of Jewry over the fact that
this accusation has been raised against them - an accusation which, as
often as it has been raised, yet never has had the slightest basis in
fact. . ."

The theologians of the faculties at Leiden and
Utrecht are also "according to their knowledge of the Mosaic and Talmudic
laws," completely convinced that both [i.e, the mosaic and Talmudic laws]
do not in the least assent to a use of human blood, and still less
do they prescribe it." -- In such a manner were the expert opinions of the
faculties procured!(174) Unfortunately, a
Paul de Lagarde in all innocence became involved in this Jewish
swindle maneuver and as a consequence had to let his name be abused even
decades later by Jewish rats! In his letter of reply from Göttingen
of 7 October 1882, he even thanks "the esteemed assembly of Rabbis for the
confidence which it has shown me (P.D. Lagarde) by this request." Further
on, however, Lagarde makes it clear that he was unable to supply the
"desired historical elucidation" of the (ritual-murder) accusation, due to
lack of time. . ."Should it seem expeditious to the esteemed assembly of
Rabbis, however, that I appear as a witness (!) for it in any sort of
judicial hearing. . .I am prepared to do so."

The Ordinarius at the
University of Straßburg, Nöldeke, obviously irritated, rants from
his summer holiday in the Black Forest (10 August 1882): "It is sad that
there is repeated cause for [having to] seriously refute the charges
raised by malice and ignorance against the Jews, that they use
human or Christian blood for some sort of religious celebration. The
accusation is entirely groundless; of course such atrocities are totally
contrary to all the principles of Judaism (!) Jews, who would have
committed such a crime would have been excluded unconditionally from the
religious community of Judaism(176). . ." --
The same Nöldeke also then rendered his "expert opinion" in the
Xanten ritual-murder trial -- thus we are prepared for that! Quite
obviously, however, the "Licensed Theologian and titular Professor"
August Wünsche, as a baptized Jew and (of all things)
headmaster at a girls' school in Dresden(30), knew
what was in the interests of the Jews. At the end of his rather cordial
letter (31 October 1882) to the Head Rabbi Lipschitz in
Budapest we read: "May a high court succeed in throwing light
upon the Tisza-Eszlár affair and soon prove the innocence of the
accused Jews, so that the evil spirit of the anti-Semitic
movement may not draw new nourishment, to the misfortune of the
common life of Christians and Jews!"

With these "Christian"
credentials [i.e., from the theological faculties of the various
universities], the Jewish taskmasters could be
well-satisfied.!

These expressions of expert opinion, 22 in all, --
among them one also finds the opinions of the Professors Delitzsch (a
Jew!), and Strack of Berlin -- were carefully collected and
published(31) in
Berlin in December 1882, thus before the start of the
ritual-murder trial in Hungary, under the collective designation:
Christliche Zeugnisse gegen die Blutbeschuldigung der Juden
[Christian testimony against the blood-accusation of the
Jews].

It is clear that Judah knew how to make necessary
capital from the contributions of its honorary Christian colleagues. The
Gießener University Professor Stade in his letter of response
actually anticipates these Jewish goals -- without, perhaps, having been
conscious of them -- when his letter reads: "The outcome of the affair in
Tisza-Eszlár may be what it will: this much is determined in advance, that
it will be allowed to be used neither against the Jewish religion nor
against the character of the Jewish people. Deeds such as those of which
the ritual-slaughterer there is said to be guilty, are foreign to the
latter and loathsome to the former."

(177)In the time to follow, Jewish journalistic
garbage was poured in bucketsful over Ónody. The Hungarian magnate made
short shrift of one of these Jewish rats; to challenge a Jew [to a duel]
would be to accord him too much honor. So Ónody got the correspondent of
the Jewish Wiener Extrablatt out of his hotel room with the
Karbatsche [a heavy-duty whip]. The press-Jew immediately preferred
to depart with the fore-noon train. . .

"But the other pens
kept writing. . .These modest men were the correspondents of the
great (Jewish) Hungraian and Austrian papers, they were the organ by
means of which civilization gazed down. . .People there took the
Karbatsche to be the most powerful of weapons and they learned that
the pen was still more powerful. . .The Press passed a sentence of
death and the anti-Semites felt that a new, larger power than their own
had moved in. These proud magnates had lost. . ."

So
wrote Paul Nathan barely ten years later, and he had to know, of
course, being, finally, an "expert in his field"!

The same tactic
of wearing-down was used on the examining judge Josef Bary and the
representative of the national press of Hungary, Verhovay in
the intermission [before the trial]. Even the Justice Minister
Pauler did not remain unscathed. The Minister President
Tisza had adopted the habit of circumventing the Ministry of
Justice by sending his instructions directly to the state
attorneys. . .Ónody, Bary, Verhovay and Pauler held out. A
cruder weapon had to be used on them.

Ónody was impervious to
economic measures, but Verhovay, the editor of the national paper
Függetlenség, was on the verge of ruin. His friends gave him
further help. Bary, who had charge of the important documentary
material and energetically kept on with his investigations despite all
interventions and intrigues, and did not weaken or waver, could be finally
be put out of the way, of course, with more radical methods. That too was
attempted. From the account of Ónody's comrade in the struggle, the
knight Georg von Marcziányi(32), we
learn (178) that already on the 14th of July
1882 an attack upon Bary was planned.

Go to Tisza-Eszlár/Page
3

Back to Table of
Contents

Copyright 2001 by R. Belser.
Reproduction in whole or in part without express written permission of the
translator is not permitted. All rights reserved.