JEWISH COLONIZATION
New developments――Two tendencies――Societies in London for
supporting Jewish colonization of Palestine――_Rabbi_ Chayyim
Zebi Sneersohn――Sir Moses Montefiore’s further journey to
Palestine.
THE various projects and suggestions discussed above fell far short
of real Zionism, although some of them were permeated with Zionist
ideals. Between the Restoration of _Israel_ preached by Christians and
that advocated by national Jews, between theological combinations and
rational organized work, lie innumerable intermediate phases. And each
phase may be said to furnish a certain kind of evidence of the changes
undergone by public opinion towards the Zionist idea. Often enough,
indeed, the attitude of the public mind is one that eludes rigid
classification. Yet, while the currents of ideas and imaginations
crossed and recrossed, joined and interlinked one with another,
two alternating tendencies were plainly apparent even to the least
practical observer: the _philanthropic_ and the _national_.
The philanthropic tendency had undoubtedly as its _raison d’être_ the
plan of settling small groups of Jewish agriculturists in Palestine.
A succession of experiments in this kind of work was necessary.
Just as, for instance, vegetable products have been introduced into a
country by a single individual, the recognition of their utility being
sufficient to induce the inhabitants to take advantage of the novelty,
so the establishment of small settlements in Palestine might be
expected to lead to imitation and consequent further development. But
at the same time, even if the results of these experiments remained
for years much less extensive than might be desired, and instead of
thousands of Jews only hundreds settled on the land, it would still be
too much to assert that the first societies had failed to fulfil their
legitimate purpose. It was not unimportant to have made a beginning,
and to have sown even a few scattered seeds, which during a fruitful
season, aided by the dew of God’s blessing, might yield an abundant
harvest. If public activity to promote such plans had been as
energetic as the intrinsic merits of the cause deserved, an objection
on account of the insignificance of the work would have mattered but
little, because a comparatively small measure of success would have
been deemed of sufficient importance to counterbalance many cases
of failure. It was not surprising, however, that where scepticism
prevailed the results of Palestinian colonisation were not such as
to silence the objections of practical people who were insufficiently
inspired by the Zionist idea. The breadth of Zionist premises seemed
to them out of proportion to the results which Zionists succeeded in
obtaining. They ridiculed the apparent poverty of the achievement as
compared with the powerful machinery which had been set in operation,
the strewing of abundant seeds for the sake of reaping a few mature
plants. But to the sincere supporter even a comparatively small
measure of success appeared highly important, for he measured the
value of that success by his eager desire for the boon of a new future.
Three Societies for the support of Jewish Colonization in Palestine
were founded in London at the beginning of the sixties of the last
century. One, managed by Jews and Christians together, was mainly “for
promoting Jewish settlements in Palestine” through the encouragement
of agricultural pursuits.¹ Another, also under the management of
Christians and Jews, comprised several separate undertakings in the
neighbourhood of _Jerusalem_. A third was founded by the American
Consul in _Jerusalem_, with the idea that the direction should be
placed in the hands of the Jews only. Its first efforts were to be
centred on _Jerusalem_ and its neighbourhood.
¹ Dr. Abraham Benisch――William Henry Black (1808‒1872),
founder of the Palestine Archæological Association (1853)
and pastor of the seventh day Baptists――Alfred Hall
――Montague Leverson――Rev. John Mills (1812‒1873)――Hugh
Owen――Solomon Sequerra were among its members.
Whether it was possible to frame a workable scheme of colonization
on an extensive scale, and whether any such scheme could be carried
into practice with any chance of success, were questions difficult
to answer. It was a fact that beyond the walls of the old (Jewish)
_Jerusalem_ there was no safety for life or limb, and still less
for property. But, on the other hand, it was known that this evil
was not ineradicable, for during the few years when Syria was under
the control of Mehemet Ali the energetic government of that Prince
effectually curbed the lawlessness of the wandering tribes, and so
thoroughly established security that a person might have travelled
from one frontier town of Syria to the other with a bag of money in
his hands, without fearing any attempt at robbery. Moreover, before
the evacuation of Syria by the Egyptian troops, Sir Moses Montefiore
had been seriously engaged in the plan of establishing a Jewish centre
of settlement in the Holy Land, and had entered into negotiations with
Mehemet Ali, the Viceroy of Egypt, when the surrender of Syria to the
Porte frustrated his great design. Those who have had the opportunity
of referring to the second private journal of Lady Montefiore will
find in the Addenda (Appendix lxiv) full particulars of this project.
This experienced philanthropist had not therefore considered such a
scheme impracticable twenty-three years earlier. The question was:
Had circumstances so altered since the accession of the _Sultan_ Abdul
Aziz to the throne that any plan of this kind would have as good a
chance of success as it had offered under Mehemet Ali? “Difficulties,”
said a great statesman, “are made to be overcome”: and after all,
why should those presented by such a scheme prove insuperable? The
proposition of itself was, unquestionably, worthy of the attention
of a generation so enterprising and so eminently practical in its
philanthropic exertions as that of the sixties of the last century.
It was at this time that _Rabbi_ Chayyim Zebi Sneersohn, of
_Jerusalem_, addressed to the Jews of England an open letter
(Appendix lxv) advocating the promotion of Jewish colonization. One
of the replies was the announcement of Sir Moses Montefiore’s new
journey to Palestine. Possibly this visit had no further object than
the gratification of a natural desire to see again the places so holy
and so closely connected with _Israel’s_ most sacred associations,
which had been especially endeared to him as the centre of his
repeated pilgrimages in past years.
Nevertheless, public opinion inclined to the view that there was a
connection between this journey and the Jewish Commonwealth projected
many years before, which would indeed have been established had not
Syria unfortunately passed from the power of Mehemet Ali, under whom
life and property were well protected, into the weak hands of the
_Sultan_, under whom the land had soon relapsed into its former state
of lawlessness. A whole generation had passed away since then, and
during this interval much had changed for the better in Syria.
Foreigners were now enabled to hold landed property in the dominions
of the Porte. The Government of the country had become much more
settled. Roads had been made: the fierce Bedouins were held in
check. Travelling in the country was much safer than in former years.
An incessant stream of pilgrims from all directions had begun to
pour into the land. The bounds of _Jerusalem_ had been considerably
extended, and the approaching completion of the Suez Canal had given
a new impetus to the cultivation of the soil and trade in general.
Was it not now possible to take up the project contemplated in 1839,
but abandoned after a time, under more favourable auspices? Such an
undertaking was not to be carried out by one section of the Jewish
people: it required the united forces of the Jews of the civilized
world. And the magic spell which should weld all these scattered
forces into one united whole had not yet been spoken. A publicist
wrote at that time in the _Jewish Chronicle_:――
“Can it be doubted that the name of Montefiore would prove the magic
spell, were only authority given to utter it? It is likely that in the
first instance not all standard-bearers of _Jerusalem_ would join the
movement. The Continent might for a time hang back. It might at first
be found impracticable to enlist for such a project the phlegmatic
Germans. But practical England and her dependencies, as well as the
acute Americans, would hail such a project: and after a while all
other sections of _Israel_ would join.”
We may appropriately pause at this point to consider the attitude of
English Jews to the conflicting ideas of Zionism and assimilation.