a warning to the Jewish people against _the Daily Vacation Bible
Schools_ which are being established in various parts of the city, also
against certain missions and settlement houses, all of which are _traps
into which Jewish children are decoyed for the purpose of seducing them
from the religion of their parents_. These institutions belong to that
class of conversionist agencies which wage a campaign for the seeking of
converts through _workers ... (who) are a class of criminals that keep
just within the law and deserve no better treatment than is usually
accorded to people of that kind_.”
When a bishop of the Episcopal Church said, “We must make the United
States indisputably a Christian nation,” the Jewish press retorted that
such a thing could not be done until the Constitution of the United
States had been “abolished.” “Christian America” is a persecuting term
according to the professional Jewish spokesmen, and the most laborious
efforts have been put forth by them to prove on paper that the United
States is not and cannot be Christian.
Not only do the Jews _disagree_ with Christian teaching—which is their
perfect right, and no one dare question it—but they seek to _interfere_
with it. It is not religious tolerance in the midst of religious
difference, but religious attack that they preach and practice. The
whole record of the Jewish opposition to Christmas, Easter and certain
patriotic songs shows that.
When Cleveland and Lakewood arranged for a community Christmas, the
Cleveland Jewish press said: “The writer of this has no idea how many
Jews there are in Lakewood, but if there is only one, there should be no
community Christmas, no community religion of any kind.” That is not a
counsel of tolerance, it is a counsel of attack. The Christmas
literature of American Judaism is fiercer than the flames of the
Inquisition. In the month of January, the Jewish press has urged its
readers to begin an early campaign against Christmas celebrations the
next Christmas—“Only three hundred and sixty days before Christmas. So
let us do our Christmas arguing early and take plenty of time to do it.”
If anything, Easter is attacked yet more bitterly. But we refrain, for
good reasons, from repeating what Jews commonly say on such occasions.
The strange inconsistency of it all is to see the great department
stores of the Levys and the Isaacs and the Goldsteins and the Silvermans
filled with brilliant Christmas cheer and at Easter with the goods
appropriate to the time. The festivals of the “heathen” are very
profitable. Jewish merchants have been chided for this—not
over-severely—by certain rabbis. But on the whole the rabbis had better
remain content, for there are no forces more rapidly secularizing the
two festival days than are the merchandising and profiteering forces.
Even religious intolerance has its gleesome moments, and the Jews’ come
whenever the signs appear of the greater secularization of the church.
One parallel between the Protocols and the real hopes of the Jews is
written in _the common Jewish prophecy that Christianity is doomed to
perish_. It will perish by becoming, to all intents and purposes,
Judaism. And it will become Judaism, first, by ousting all the doctrines
pertaining to the person of Christ, excising from the Gospels the great
“I Ams” which are His distinctive teachings concerning Himself; and,
second, by devitalizing Christianity of all the spiritual content which
flows from a union by faith with a Person believed to be divine. That is
the only way it can be done. There may be a union of all the churches of
the Christian faith because the fundamentals are the same; no union of
Christianity and Judaism can occur unless Judaism takes in Jesus as the
Messiah, or unless Christianity ejects Him as the Messiah. Judaism sees
the union coming by the ejection of the Lord as the Messiah, and
rejoices at every sign of it.
Dr. Charles F. Aked, who has since blossomed out as a Jewish spokesman,
delivered a sermon in which he cast aside all the “supernatural”
elements in the life of Christ, from His birth, to the significance of
His death, and was hailed by the Jewish press as “_the fulfillment of
the prophecy that within fifty years the religion of all the American
people, outside the Catholic Church, would be Judaism in principle even
though not in name_.”
“No Jew,” says the _American Israelite_, “will conceal his gratification
when he finds Christians virtually admitting that liberal Christianity
is practically an acceptance of the doctrine of liberal Judaism.”
Unfortunately, this is true. Liberal Christianity and Liberal Judaism
meet, but only by the surrender of all that is distinctively Christian
in doctrine. A liberal Christian is more Jewish than Christian. The
statement may sound harsh and arouse resentment, but it is a very simple
matter for any liberal Christian to convince himself of this by reading
the volume of liberal Jewish doctrine put out by Kaufman Kohler,
president of the Hebrew Union College. Liberalism is the funnel by which
Christianity is expected to run into Judaism, just as liberalism
so-called in other departments of life is expected to bring about
certain other Jewish aims.
“Liberalism” in Jewish thought means a wideopen country in every way.
Judaism has opposed every significant reform that has come to the
country; prohibition, Sunday decency, movie and stage regeneration, and
community reverence for sacred things. Judaism has been the prop of the
liquor traffic, Sunday desecration, movie and stage excesses, and public
contempt for the sacred things of the prevailing religion; and it is all
too evident that the Jewish propaganda has made serious inroads
everywhere.
A Congregational Church in New Jersey decided to abandon the Bible in
some of its classes and substitute sociology, politics, municipal
government and kindred subjects for study, and the Jewish press hailed
it as another sign that the church was “in a fair way to adopt what is
in substance American Judaism.” In St. Louis a clergyman, instead of
preaching sermons, began to act out moralistic dramas which he himself
had written, and the Jewish press again hailed it as a sign of the
dissatisfaction of the Christian with his church. Everything done in
every branch of the Christian church has been closely watched, and
wherever a departure occurred from the distinctly Christian position it
was extravagantly applauded; and wherever loyalty to the landmarks
appeared, it was just as extravagantly condemned. Judaism does not wish
the Christian church to remain Christian. This accounts for destructive
Higher Criticism being almost exclusively the work of Jews, although the
world has long known them under the guise of “German critics.”
Jewish intolerance today, yesterday and in every age of history where
Jews were able to exert influence or power, is indisputable except among
people who do not know the record. Jewish intolerance in the past is a
matter of history; for the future it is a matter of Jewish prophecy. One
of the strongest causes militating against the full Americanization of
several millions of Jews in this country is their belief—instilled in
them by their religious authorities—that they are “chosen,” that this
land is theirs, that the inhabitants are idolators, that the day is
coming when the Jews will be supreme. How can they otherwise act than in
agreement with such declarations? You can see what is meant if you read
Jewish articles describing the shoving aside of the New England people
by the Jews; the supercilious attitude adopted toward the stock that
made America is merely a foreshadowing of what would be the complete
attitude if power and influence made it possible. Bolshevism, which
began with the destruction of the class that contained all the promise
of a better Russia, is an exact parallel for the attitude that is
adopted in this country regarding the original stock.
We are not permitted by the Jews to sing the “Battle Hymn of the
Republic” in our schools because one of the stanzas has a Christian
flavor. The Jews claim that the presence of one Jewish child in an
assembly of children ought in “fairness” to prevent the singing of that
historic song.
Norman Hapgood, writing in a Jewish publication, said: “I need hardly
explain that I do not think Jews ought to insist overmuch on their
rights or nationality in a negative sense. They ought to be as much Jews
as they can, but ought to be as little as possible of what is merely
anti-Christian. For the Jews to try to get a song out of the public
schools because it praises Jesus is perhaps natural but hardly wise.”
Mr. Hapgood received a lot of abuse for his well-conceived counsel.
Again we come to the end of our space with the record hardly scratched.
Sufficient has been presented to show the strong, unceasing
anti-Christian activity of the Jews in the United States. Had the Jewish
press been read extensively by non-Jews during the past 15 years, this
present series of articles would have been unnecessary—the people would
have known the facts. It is to present some of the facts that are
illustrated in the Jewish press along the line of religious intolerance
that these two articles have been written.
Jewish spokesmen plead for suppression of facts in the name of
“religious tolerance,” and they denounce exposure of the facts as being
“religious persecution.” Read the whole non-Jewish religious and secular
publications and you will not find one one-hundred-thousandth part of
the animosity against the Jewish religion which is found in the Jewish
press—continuously found week after week for long years—against the
Christian religion. The present writer has never seen nor heard of an
article attacking the Jews’ religion.
So, once for all, in spiking the cry of “religious persecution,” we show
that it exists in quantity and strength among the Jews—nowhere else. No
one imbued with the American spirit would or could condemn, hinder, or
even remonstrate with any person on account of the faith he holds.
As to “religious prejudice” or “persecution” entering into the present
series of articles—there they are, reprinted in booklet form for
permanent examination: where is the prejudice or persecution? _Cite the
page!_
Jewish spokesmen would use their energy to better advantage, and more to
the honor of the Jewish people, if they would address themselves to
_what is in the articles_, rather than to what is not in them. The
statements made by THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT have been voluminously
_discussed_; but they are still awaiting an _answer_.
——
Issue of June 11, 1921. _“This clannishness would eventually break down
were it not for the deliberate efforts of Jewish leaders who are
determined that Israel shall remain an imperium in imperio. If the Jews
persist in maintaining a distinct ethnic consciousness and an exclusive
community life, anti-Semitism will thrive in America as it has thrived
in Europe. The American nation, itself the result of fusion, will not
tolerate without protest a foreign element in it.”_
_—Herbert Adams Gibbons in the Century, September. Page 789_.
XLV.
Jewish Gamblers Corrupt American Baseball
There are men in the United States who say that baseball has received
its death wound and is slowly dying out of the list of respectable
sports. There are other men who say that American baseball can be saved
if a clean sweep is made of the Jewish influence which has just dragged
it through a period of bitter shame and demoralization.
Whether baseball as a first class sport is killed and will survive only
as a cheap-jack entertainment; or whether baseball possesses sufficient
intrinsic character to rise in righteous wrath and cast out the danger
that menaces it, will remain a matter of various opinion. But there is
one certainty, namely, that the last and most dangerous blow dealt
baseball was curiously notable for its Jewish character.
Yet only lesser Jews were indicted. Inevitably the names of other Jews
appeared in the press accounts, and people wondered who they were. A
Jewish judge presided. Jewish lawyers were prominent on both sides of
the cases. Numerous strange things occurred.
But strangest of all is the fact that although American fans felt that
something epochal had happened in baseball, few really know what it is.
There has been time enough for others to tell the truth if they were so
disposed. Many sport editors have come as near telling it as their
newspapers would permit them. But it becomes daily more evident that if
the whole matter is to be laid bare, so that Americans may know where to
look for danger, THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT will have to do it.
And this is not of our own choosing. Baseball is a trivial matter
compared with some of the facts that are awaiting publication. Yet it is
possible to see the operation of the Jewish Idea in baseball as clearly
as in any other field. The process is the same, whether in war or
politics, in finance or in sports.
To begin with, Jews are not sportsmen. This is not set down in complaint
against them, but merely as analysis. It may be a defect in their
character, or it may not; it is nevertheless a fact which discriminating
Jews unhesitatingly acknowledge. Whether this is due to their physical
lethargy, their dislike of unnecessary physical action, or their serious
cast of mind, others may decide; the Jew is not naturally an out-of-door
sportsman; if he takes up golf it is because his station in society
calls for it, not that he really likes it; and if he goes in for
collegiate athletics, as some of the younger Jews are doing, it is
because so much attention has been called to their neglect of the sports
that the younger generation thinks it necessary to remove that occasion
of remark.
And yet, the bane of American sports today is the presence of a certain
type of Jew, not as a participant but as an exploiter and corrupter. If
he had been a sportsman for the love of sport he might have been saved
from becoming an exploiter and corrupter, for there is no mind to which
the corrupting of a sport is more illogical and even unexplainable than
the mind of the man who participates in it.
There will be a very full case made out in justification of the use of
the above terms “exploiter” and “corrupter” with regard to baseball. But
it would be just as easy to make out the same sort of case with regard
to wrestling and horse-racing. Wrestling is so completely ruled by Jews
as to have become an outlawed sport. The story of wrestling is not only
the story of the demoralization of a sport, but also the story of the
wholesale bunkoing of the public.
The same is true of horse-racing. The whole atmosphere of this sport has
been tinged with dishonesty. The horses remain almost the only wellbred
creatures connected with it. Yet why should the art of breeding and
training and testing fine horses be debasing? Only because a certain
class saw in it a chance to play upon the weaknesses of men for the sake
of gain.
That, indeed, explains the presence of the Jew in modern sports and it
also explains why the Jewish Idea in sport, instead of being
preservative, is corruptive. The Jew saw money where the sportsman saw
fun and skill. The Jew set out to capitalize rivalry and to
commercialize contestant zeal.
This is not necessarily the only course the Jew could have taken with
regard to sports, but it is the course that he most notably has taken,
and as scandal follows scandal it would seem to be high time that
organized Jewry should undertake to control or repudiate those Jews who
have been most instrumental in corrupting and nearly destroying our
cleanest, most manly public sports.
It is worth noting that in Chicago, where the Jewish Anti-Defamation
League has its headquarters, there was not a word of reproof sent out
from Jews to the Jewish culprits, chiding them for their activities. Not
a word. But at the same time the pressure of the Anti-Defamation League
was heavy on the whole American newspaper press to prevent the public
statement that the whole baseball scandal was a Jewish performance from
end to end.
Baseball had a close call for its life back in 1875. Rowdyism, gambling,
drinking and general disorderliness on the baseball fields brought the
sport very low in public estimation, so low that attendance at the games
fell heavily.
In this year 1921 there is another public rebuke being administered
baseball by the same means—a very heavy reduction of public support in
attendance at the games.
The storm began to be heard as far back as 1919. The Cincinnati
Nationals had defeated the Chicago Americans in the World Series of that
year, and immediately thereafter the country became a whispering gallery
wherein were heard mysterious rumors of crooked dealing. The names of
Jews were heard then, but it meant nothing to the average man. The
rumors dealt with shady financial gains for a number of Jew gamblers of
decidedly shady reputation.
But “they got away with it,” in the parlance of the field. There was not
enough public indignation to force a show-down, and too many interests
were involved to prevent baseball being given a black eye in full view
of an adoring public.
However, not everyone forgot the incident. Some who had the interest of
honest sport at heart, and a regard for facts as well, kept on the
trail—long after the trail grew cold, long after the principal
wrongdoers forgot their early caution. Where money had once been taken
successfully, the gang would be sure to return.
Time went on until the 1920 season began to wane. One day when the
Chicago and Philadelphia National League teams were engaged in a series
at Chicago, strange messages began to reach the office of the Chicago
club. The messages were dated from Detroit and informed the Chicago club
and management that several “well-known” Jews were betting heavily on
Philadelphia. The bets involved large sums of money, and as the contest
was only the ordinary run of daily game, not an important contest at
all, the unusual interest of Jewish plungers attracted attention. At the
same time it was observed that money began rolling into the pool rooms
of Philadelphia.
Chicago club officials called a hasty conference on receipt of the
messages. They called in Grover Cleveland Alexander, explained the
situation to him, and told him it was up to him to save the game. It was
not Alexander’s turn to pitch, Claude R. Hendryx having been chosen for
that day; neither was Alexander in training to pitch that day. However,
he did go to the box, and although he hurled his heart out to beat
Philadelphia and thwart the Jew gamblers, he failed.
Then came the big scandal. A Cook County grand jury was called into
session at Chicago and asked to investigate. When this grand jury had
completed its labors, eight members of the Chicago American League team
were under indictment for throwing the World Series of 1919, the
previous year, to the Cincinnati Reds. And all along the line of the
investigation the names of Jews were plentifully sprinkled.
It was discovered that the indictments brought by the first grand jury
were faulty; a second one was called and it was under the second group
of indictments that the famous trial at Chicago was held.
One difference in the work of the two grand juries was that the second
indicted five Jews who had escaped the first one. Two of these men were
Carl Zork and Benny Franklin, who were just as much implicated at the
time of the first grand jury as the second, but the prosecutor’s office
did not try to secure their indictment. Why? Because Replogle, the
attorney representing the prosecution, said there were enough men
indicted without Zork and Franklin. These two St. Louis Jews were
represented by Alfred S. Austrian, a Jewish lawyer, of Chicago.
This second grand jury also indicted Ben and Louis Levi and their
brother-in-law, D. A. Zelser, gamblers from Des Moines. Their indictment
was not secured at the first grand jury investigation directed by
Replogle, assistant to Hoyne, who was then acting for the state of
Illinois. Between the first and second grand juries a political change
had occurred, and the public interests in the second grand jury were in
the care of a new prosecuting attorney, Robert Crowe, a former judge.
It becomes necessary at this point in the narrative to give a brief
“Who’s Who” of the baseball scandal, omitting from the list the names of
the baseball players, who are sufficiently known to the public. This
list will comprise only those who have been in the background of
baseball and whom it is necessary to know in order to understand what
has been happening behind the scenes in recent years.
For the first name let us take Albert D. Lasker. He is a member of the
American Jewish Committee, was recently appointed by President Harding
to be chairman of the United States Shipping Board, and is known as the
author of the “Lasker Plan,” a widely heralded plan for the
reorganization of baseball, which practically took the sport out of
non-Jewish control. He is reputed to be the second richest Jew in
Chicago and was head of the advertising agency which became famous under
the Gentile names of Lord & Thomas. Moreover he is a heavy stockholder
in the Chicago Cubs—the Chicago Nationals.
The so-called “Lasker Plan” has been attributed to Mr. Lasker, although
it is not here intimated that he has specifically claimed to be its
originator. The intimation is not made for the reason that to do so
might be putting Mr. Lasker in the position of claiming what is not
true. Until he makes the claim, the term “Lasker Plan” must remain
merely a designation, and not a description of its origin.
This matter brings us to the name of Alfred S. Austrian, a Jewish lawyer
of Chicago, who is a warm friend both of Mr. Lasker and of the Replogle
aforementioned. It is said that Mr. Austrian was really the originator
of the “Lasker Plan” which for certain reasons was handed to Mr. Lasker,
who was not averse to publicity and who knew the art of
self-advertising. Now, it appears that Austrian was also the legal
representative of Charles A. Comiskey, owner of the Chicago Americans,
and that he was also, if he is not now, the legal adviser of William
Veeck, president of the Chicago National League Club, in which it has
just been said that Lasker is a heavy stockholder. It was this club
which was touched by the questionable game of August, 1920, and which
afterward released Hendryx, the pitcher chosen for and withdrawn from
that game. The Chicago National League Club has never explained why it
released Hendryx and he has never demanded redress.
Mr. Austrian’s further activities will appear when the narrative of the
investigation and trial is resumed.
Then there is Arnold Rothstein, a Jew, who describes himself as being in
the real estate business but who is known to be a wealthy gambler, owner
of a notorious gambling house at Saratoga, a race track owner, and is
reputed to be financially interested in the New York National League
Club.
Rothstein was usually referred to during the baseball scandal as “the
man higher up.” It is stated that in some manner unknown he received the
secret testimony given before the grand jury and offered it to a New
York newspaper. However, the fact is this: the grand jury testimony
disappeared from the prosecuting attorney’s safe-keeping. It is stated
that, when Rothstein found out it did not incriminate him, he then
offered it for publicity purposes. The price which it is said to have
cost is also stated. It is further stated that the New York paper to
whom the secret stolen testimony was offered, in turn offered its use
for a larger sum to a Chicago newspaper, and that the Chicago newspaper,
to protect itself, called up Robert Crowe, the new prosecutor, who
advised that, in printing it, the newspaper would incur an unpleasant
risk. Other Chicago editors were warned, and the testimony was not
printed. Even the New York newspaper thought better of it, and did not
print it.
In this connection, Rothstein threatened suit against Ban Johnson, of
the National Commission, the big-bodied, big-minded, honest director and
protector of straight baseball—but the suit, like others of the kind,
has not been brought.