CHAPTER XIII

Produced by Charles Aldarondo, Bonny Fafard and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team.

HISTORY OF THE JEWS

IN RUSSIA AND POLAND

FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES

UNTIL THE PRESENT DAY

BY

S.M. DUBNOW

TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIAN

BY

I. FRIEDLAENDER

VOLUME II

FROM THE DEATH OF ALEXANDER I. UNTIL THE DEATH OF ALEXANDER III.

(1825-1894)

PHILADELPHIA

THE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA

5706--1946

Copyright 1918 by

THE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE

It was originally proposed to give the history of Russian

Jewry after 1825--the year with which the first volume concludes--in a

single volume. This, however, would have resulted in producing a volume

of unwieldy dimensions, entirely out of proportion to the one preceding

it. It has, therefore, become imperative to divide Dubnow's work into

three, instead of into two, volumes. The second volume, which is

herewith offered to the public, treats of the history of Russian Jewry

from the death of Alexander I. (1825) until the death of Alexander III.

(1894). The third and concluding volume will deal with the reign of

Nicholas II., the last of the Romanovs, and will also contain the

bibliographical apparatus, the maps, the index, and other supplementary

material. This division will undoubtedly recommend itself to the reader.

The next volume is partly in type, and will follow as soon as

circumstances permit.

Of the three reigns described in the present volume, that of Alexander

III., though by far the briefest, is treated at considerably greater

length than the others. The reason for it is not far to seek. The events

which occurred during the fourteen years of his reign laid their

indelible impress upon Russian Jewry, and they have had a determining

influence upon the growth and development of American Israel. The

account of Alexander III.'s reign is introduced in the Russian original

by a general characterization of the anti-Jewish policies of Russian

Tzardom. Owing to the rearrangement of the material, to which reference

was made in the preface to the first volume, this introduction, which

would have interrupted the flow of the narrative, had to be omitted. But

a few passages from it, written in the characteristic style of Mr.

Dubnow, may find a place here:

Russian Tzardom began its consistent role as a persecutor of the

Eternal People when it received, by way of bequest, the vast Jewish

population of disintegrated Poland. At the end of the eighteenth

century, when Western Europe had just begun the emancipation of the

Jews, the latter were subjected in the East of Europe to every

possible medieval experiment.... The reign of Alexander II., who

slightly relieved the civil disfranchisement of the Jews by

permitting certain categories among them to live outside the Pale

and by a few other measures, forms a brief interlude in the Russian

policy of oppression. His tragic death in 1881 marks the beginning

of a new terrible reaction which has superimposed the system of

wholesale street pogroms upon the policy of disfranchisement, and

has again thrown millions of Jews into the dismal abyss of

medievalism.

Russia created a lurid antithesis to Jewish emancipation at a time

when the latter was consummated not only in Western Europe, but also

in the semi-civilized Balkan States.... True, the rise of Russian

Judaeophobia--the Russian technical term for Jew-hatred--was

paralleled by the appearance of German anti-Semitism in which it

found a congenial companion. Yet, the anti-Semitism of the West was

after all only a weak aftermath of the infantile disease of

Europe--the medieval Jew-hatred--whereas culturally retrograde

Russia was still suffering from the same infection in its acute,

"childish" form. The social and cultural anti-Semitism of the West

did not undermine the modern foundations of Jewish civil equality.

But Russian Judaeophobia, more governmental than social, being fully

in accord with the entire régime of absolutism, produced a system

aiming not only at the disfranchisement, but also at the direct

physical annihilation of the Jewish people. The policy of the

extermination of Judaism was stamped upon the forehead of Russian

reaction, receiving various colors at various periods, assuming the

hue now of economic, now of national and religious, now of

bureaucratic oppression. The year 1881 marks the starting-point of

this systematic war against the Jews, which has continued until our

own days, and is bound to reach a crisis upon the termination of the

great world struggle.

Concerning the transcription of Slavonic names, the reader is referred

to the explanations given in the preface to the first volume. The

foot-notes added by the translator have been placed in square brackets.

The poetic quotations by the author have been reproduced in English

verse, the translation following both in content and form the original

languages of the quotations as closely as possible. As in the case of

the first volume, a number of editorial changes have become necessary.

The material has been re-arranged and the headings have been supplied in

accordance with the general plan of the work. A number of pages have

been added, dealing with the attitude of the American people and

Government toward the anti-Jewish persecutions in Russia. These

additions will be found on pp. 292-296, pp. 394-396, and pp. 408-410. I

am indebted to Dr. Cyrus Adler for his kindness in reading the proof of

this part of the work.

The dates given in this volume are those of the Russian calendar, except

for the cases in which the facts relate to happenings outside of Russia.

As in the first volume, the translator has been greatly assisted by the

Hon. Mayer Sulzberger, who has read the proofs with his usual care and

discrimination, and by Professor Alexander Marx, who has offered a

number of valuable suggestions.

I.F.

NEW YORK, February 25, 1918.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

XIII. THE MILITARY DESPOTISM OF NICHOLAS I.

1. Military Service as a Means of De-Judaization 13

2. The Recruiting Ukase of 1827 and Juvenile Conscription 18

3. Military Martyrdom 22

4. The Policy of Expulsions 30

5. The Codification of Jewish Disabilities 34

6. The Russian Censorship and Conversionist Endeavors 41

XIV. COMPULSORY ENLIGHTENMENT AND INCREASED OPPRESSION.

1. Enlightenment as a Means of Assimilation 46

2. Uvarov and Lilienthal 50

3. The Abolition of Jewish Autonomy and Renewed Persecutions 59

4. Intercession of Western European Jewry 66

5. The Economic Plight of Russian Jewry and Agricultural

Experiments 69

6. The Ritual Murder Trial of Velizh 72

7. The Mstislavl Affair 84

XV. THE JEWS IN THE KINGDOM OF POLAND.

1. Plans of Jewish Emancipation 88

2. Political Reaction and Literary Anti-Semitism 94

3. Assimilationist Tendencies Among the Jews of Poland 100

4. The Jews and the Polish Insurrection of 1831 105

XVI. THE INNER LIFE OF RUSSIAN JEWRY DURING THE PERIOD OF MILITARY DESPOTISM.

1. The Uncompromising Attitude of Rabbinism 111

2. The Stagnation of Hasidism 116

3. The Russian Mendelssohn (Isaac Baer Levinsohn) 125

4. The Rise of Neo-Hebraic Culture 132

5. The Jews and the Russian People 138

XVII. THE LAST YEARS OF NICHOLAS I.

1. The "Assortment" of the Jews 140

2. Compulsory Assimilation 143

3. New Conscription Horrors 145

4. The Ritual Murder Trial of Saratov 150

XVIII. THE ERA OF REFORMS UNDER ALEXANDER II.

1. The Abolition of Juvenile Conscription 154

2. "Homeopathic" Emancipation and the Policy of "Fusion" 157

3. The Extension of the Right of Residence 161

4. Further Alleviations and Attempts at Russification 172

5. The Jews and the Polish Insurrection of 1863 177

XIX. THE REACTION UNDER ALEXANDER II.

1. Change of Attitude Toward the Jewish Problem 184

2. The Informer Jacob Brafman 187

3. The Fight Against Jewish "Separatism" 190

4. The Drift Toward Oppression 198

XX. THE INNER LIFE OF RUSSIAN JEWRY DURING THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II.

1. The Russification of the Jewish Intelligenzia 206

2. The Society for the Diffusion of Enlightenment 214

3. The Jewish Press 216

4. The Jews and the Revolutionary Movement 221

5. The Neo-Hebraic Renaissance 224

6. The Harbinger of Jewish Nationalism (Perez Smolenskin) 233

7. Jewish Literature in the Russian Language 238

XXI. THE ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER III. AND THE INAUGURATION OF POGROMS.

1. The Triumph of Autocracy 243

2. The Initiation of the Pogrom Policy 247

3. The Pogrom at Kiev 251

4. Further Outbreaks in South Russia 256

XXII. THE ANTI-JEWISH POLICIES OF IGNATYEV.

1. The Vacillating Attitude of the Authorities 259

2. The Pogrom Panic and the Beginning of the Exodus 265

3. The Gubernatorial Commissions 269

4. The Spread of Anti-Semitism 276

5. The Pogrom at Warsaw 280

XXIII. NEW MEASURES OF OPPRESSION AND PUBLIC PROTESTS.

1. The Despair of Russian Jewry 284

2. The Voice of England and America 287

3. The Problem of Emigration and the Pogrom at Balta 297

4. The Conference of Jewish Notables at St. Petersburg 304

XXIV. LEGISLATIVE POGROMS.

1. The "Temporary Rules" of May 3, 1882 309

2. Abandonment of the Pogrom Policy 312

3. Disabilities and Emigration 318

XXV. INNER UPHEAVALS.

1. Disillusionment of the Intelligenzia and the National

Revival 324

2. Pinsker's "Autoemancipation" 330

3. Miscarried Religious Reforms 333

XXVI. INCREASED JEWISH DISABILITIES.

1. The Pahlen Commission and New Schemes of Oppression 336

2. Jewish Disabilities Outside the Pale 342

3. Restrictions in Education and in the Legal Profession 348

4. Discrimination in Military Service 354

XXVII. RUSSIAN REACTION AND JEWISH EMIGRATION.

1. Aftermath of the Pogrom Policy 358

2. The Conclusions of the Pahlen Commission 362

3. The Triumph of Reaction 369

4. American and Palestinian Emigration 373

XXVIII. JUDAEOPHOBIA TRIUMPHANT.

1. Intensified Reaction 378

2. Continued Harassing 382

3. The Guildhall Meeting in London 388

4. The Protest of America 394

XXIX. THE EXPULSION FROM MOSCOW.

1. Preparing the Blow 399

2. The Horrors of Expulsion 401

3. Effect of Protests 407

4. Pogrom Interludes 411

XXX. BARON HIRSCH'S EMIGRATION SCHEME AND UNRELIEVED SUFFERING.

1. Negotiations with the Russian Government 434

2. The Jewish Colonisation Association and Collapse of the Argentinian

Scheme 419

3. Continued Humiliations and Death of Alexander III. 423

CHAPTER XIII

THE MILITARY DESPOTISM OF NICHOLAS I.

1. MILITARY SERVICE AS A MEANS OF DE-JUDAIZATION

The era of Nicholas I. was typically inaugurated by the bloody

suppression of the Decembrists and their constitutional demands, [1]

proving as it subsequently did one continuous triumph of military

despotism over the liberal movements of the age. As for the emancipation

of the Jews, it was entirely unthinkable in an empire which had become

Europe's bulwark against the inroads of revolutionary or even moderately

liberal tendencies. The new despotic regime, overflowing with aggressive

energy, was bound to create, after its likeness, a novel method of

dealing with the Jewish problem. Such a method was contrived by the iron

will of the Russian autocrat.

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 410, n. 1.]

Nicholas I., who was originally intended for a military career, was

placed on the Russian throne by a whim of fate.[1] Prior to his

accession, Nicholas had shown no interest in the Jewish problem. The

Jewish masses had flitted across his vision but once--in 1816--when,

still a young man, he traveled through Russia for his education. The

impression produced upon him by this strange people is recorded by the

then grand duke in his diary in a manner fully coincident with the

official views of the Government:

[Footnote 1: After the death of Alexander I. the Russian crown fell to

his eldest brother Constantine, military commander of Poland.

Accordingly, Constantine was proclaimed emperor, and was recognized as

such by Nicholas. Constantine, however, who had secretly abdicated some

time previously, insisted on resigning, and Nicholas became Tzar.]

The ruin of the peasants of these provinces [1] are the Zhyds. [2] As

property-holders they are here second in importance to the landed

nobility. By their commercial pursuits they drain the strength of

the hapless White Russian people.... They are everything here:

merchants, contractors, saloon-keepers, mill-owners, ferry-holders,

artisans.... They are regular leeches, and suck these unfortunate

governments [3] to the point of exhaustion. It is a matter of

surprise that in 1812 they displayed exemplary loyalty to us and

assisted us wherever they could at the risk of their lives.

[Footnote 1: Nicholas is speaking of White Russia. Compare Vol. I, pp.

329 and 406.]

[Footnote 2: See on this term Vol. I, p. 320, n. 2.]

[Footnote 3: See on this term Vol. I, p. 308, n. 1.]

The characterization of merchants, artisans, mill-owners, and

ferry-holders as "leeches" could only spring from a conception which

looked upon the Jews as transient foreigners, who, by pursuing any line

of endeavor, could only do so at the expense of the natives and thus

abused the hospitality offered to them. No wonder then that the future

Tzar was puzzled by the display of patriotic sentiments on the part of

the Jewish population at the fatal juncture in the history of Russia.

This inimical view of the Jewish people was retained by Nicholas when he

became the master of Russian-Jewish destinies. He regarded the Jews as

an "injurious element," which had no place in a Slavonic Greek-Orthodox

monarchy, and which therefore ought to be combated. The Jews must be

rendered innocuous, must be "corrected" and curbed by such energetic

military methods as are in keeping with a form of government based upon

the principles of stern tutelage and discipline. As a result of these

considerations, a singular scheme was gradually maturing in the mind of

the Tzar: to detach the Jews from Judaism by impressing them into a

military service of a wholly exceptional character.

The plan of introducing personal military service, instead of the

hitherto customary exemption tax, [1] had engaged the attention of the

Russian Government towards the end of Alexander I's reign, and had

caused a great deal of alarm among the Jewish communities. Nicholas I.

was now resolved to carry this plan into effect. Not satisfied with

imposing a civil obligation upon a people deprived of civil rights, the

Tzar desired to use the Russian military service, a service marked by

most extraordinary features, as an educational and disciplinary agency

for his Jewish subjects: the barrack was to serve as a school, or rather

as a factory, for producing a new generation of de-Judaized Jews, who

were completely Russified, and, if possible, Christianized.

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 318.]

The extension of the term of military service, marked by the ferocious

discipline of that age, to a period of twenty-five years, the enrolment

of immature lads or practically boys, their prolonged separation from a

Jewish environment, and finally the employment of such methods as were

likely to produce an immediate effect upon the recruits in the desired

direction--all this was deemed an infallible means of dissolving Russian

Jewry within the dominant nation, nay, within the dominant Church. It

was a direct and simplified scheme which seemed to lead in a straight

line to the goal. But had the ruling spheres of St. Petersburg known the

history of the Jewish people, they might have realized that the

annihilation of Judaism had in past ages been attempted more than once

by other, no less forcible, means and that the attempt had always proved

a failure.

In the very first year of the new reign, the plan of transforming the

Jews by "military" methods was firmly settled in the emperor's mind. In

1826 Nichola instructed his ministers to draft a special statute of

military service for the Jews, departing in some respects from the

general law. In view of the fact that the new military reform was

intended to include the Western region [1], which was under the military

command of the Tzar's brother. Grand Duke Constantine [2], the draft was

sent to him to Warsaw for further suggestions and approval, and was in

turn transmitted by the grand duke to Senator Nicholas Novosiltzev, his

co-regent [3], for investigation and report. As an experienced statesman,

who had familiarized himself during his administrative activity with the

Jewish conditions obtaining in the Western region, Novosiltzev realized

the grave risks involved in the imperial scheme. In a memorandum

submitted by him to the grand duke, he argued convincingly that the

sudden imposition of military service upon the Jews was bound to cause

an undesirable agitation among them, and that they should, on the

contrary, be slowly "prepared for such a radical transformation."

[Footnote 1: The official designation for the territories of Western

Russia which were formerly a part of the Polish Empire.]

[Footnote 2: Constantine was appointed by his brother Alexander I,

Commander-in-chief of the Polish army after the restoration of Poland in

1815. He remained in this post until his death in 1831. See also above,

p. 13, n. 2.]

[Footnote 3: He was the imperial Russian Commissary in Warsaw, and was

practically in control of the affairs in Poland. See below, p. 92 et

seq.]

Novosiltzev was evidently well informed about the state of mind of the

Jewish masses. No sooner had the rumor of the proposed ukase reached the

Pale of Settlement than the Jews were seized by a tremendous excitement.

It must be borne in mind that the Jewish population of Western Russia

had but recently been incorporated into the Russian Empire. Clinging

with patriarchal devotion to their religion, estranged from the Russian

people, and kept, moreover, in a state of civil rightlessness, the Jews

of that region could not be reasonably expected to gloat over the

prospect of a military service of twenty-five years' duration, which was

bound to alienate their sons from their ancestral faith, detach them

from their native tongue, their habits and customs of life, and throw

them into a strange, and often hostile, environment. The ultimate aim of

the project, which, imbedded in the mind of its originators, seemed

safely hidden from the eye of publicity, was quickly sensed by the

delicate national instinct, and the soul of the people was stirred to

its depths. Public-minded Jews strained every nerve to avert the

calamity. Jewish representatives journeyed to St. Petersburg and Warsaw

to plead the cause of their brethren. Negotiations were entered into

with dignitaries of high rank and with men of influence in the world of

officialdom. Rumor had it that immense bribes had been offered to

Novosiltzev and several high officials in St. Petersburg for the purpose

of receiving their co-operation. But even the intercession of leading

dignitaries was powerless to change the will of the Tzar. He chafed

under the red-tape formalities which obstructed the realization of his

favorite scheme. Without waiting for the transmission of Novosiltzev's

memorandum, the Tzar directed the Minister of the Interior and the Chief

of the General Staff to submit to him for signature an ukase imposing

military service upon the Jews. The fatal enactment was signed on August

26, 1827.

2. The Recruiting Ukase of 1827 and Juvenile Conscription

The ukase announces the desire of the Government "to equalize military

duty for all estates," without, be it noted, equalizing them in their

rights. It further expresses the conviction that "the training and

accomplishments, acquired by the Jews during their military service,

will, on their return home after the completion of the number of years

fixed by law (fully a quarter of a century!), be communicated to their

families and make for greater usefulness and higher efficiency in their

economic life and in the management of their affairs."

However, the "Statute of Conscription and Military Service," subjoined

to the ukase, was a lurid illustration of a tendency utterly at variance

with the desire "to equalize military duty." Had the Russian Government

been genuinely desirous of rendering military duty uniform for all

estates, there would have been no need of issuing separately for the

Jews a huge enactment of ninety-five clauses, with supplementary

"instructions," consisting of sixty-two clauses, for the guidance of the

civil and military authorities. All that was necessary was to declare

that the general military statute applied also to the Jews. Instead, the

reverse stipulation is made: "The general laws and institutions are not

valid in the case of the Jews" when at variance with the special statute

(Clause 3).

The discriminating character of Jewish conscription looms particularly

large in the central portion of the statute. Jewish families were

stricken with terror on reading the eighth clause of the statute

prescribing that "the Jewish conscripts presented by the [Jewish]

communes shall be between the ages of twelve and twenty-five." This

provision was supplemented by Clause 74: "Jewish minors, i.e., below the

age of eighteen, shall be placed in preparatory establishments for

military training."

True, the institution of minor recruits, called _cantonists_, [1] existed

also for Christians. But in their case it was confined to the children

of soldiers in active service, by virtue of the principle laid down by

Arakcheyev [2] that children born of soldiers were the property of the

Military Department, whereas the conscription of Jewish minors was to be

absolute and to apply to all Jewish families without discrimination. To

make things worse, the law demanded that the years of preparatory

training should not be included in the term of active service, the

latter to start only with the age of eighteen (Clause 90); in other

words, the Jewish cantonists were compelled to serve an additional term

of six years over and above the obligatory twenty-five years. Moreover,

at the examination of Jewish conscripts, all that was demanded for their

enlistment was "that they be free from any disease or defect

incompatible with military service, but the other qualifications

required by the general rules shall be left out of consideration"

(Clause 10).

[Footnote 1: From _Canton_, a word applied in Prussia in the eighteenth

century to a recruiting district. In Russia, beginning with 1805, the term

"cantonists" is applied to children born of soldiers and therefore liable

to conscription.]

[Footnote 2: See Vol. I, p. 395, n. 1.]

The duty of enlisting the recruits was imposed upon the Jewish communes,

or Kahals, which were to elect for that purpose between three and six

executive officers, or "trustees," in every city. The community as such

was held responsible for the supply of a given number of recruits from

its own midst. It was authorized to draft into military service any Jew

guilty "of irregularity in the payment of taxes, of vagrancy, and other

misdemeanors." In case the required number of recruits was not

forthcoming within a given term, the authorities were empowered to

obtain them from the derelict community "by way of execution." [1] Any

irregularity on the part of the recruiting "trustees" was to be punished

by the imposition of fines or even by sending them into the army.

[Footnote 1: The term "execution" (_ekzekutzia_) is used in Russian to

designate a writ empowering an officer to carry a judgment into effect,

in other words, to resort to forcible seizure.]

The following categories of Jews were exempted from military duty:

merchants holding membership in guilds, artisans affiliated with

trade-unions, mechanics in factories, agricultural colonists, rabbis,

and the Jews, few and far between at that time, who had graduated from a

Russian educational institution. Those exempted from military service in

kind were required to pay "recruiting money," one thousand rubles for

each recruit. The general law providing that a regular recruit could

offer as his substitute a "volunteer" was extended to the Jews, with the

proviso that the volunteer must also be a Jew.

The "Instructions" to the civil authorities, appended to the statute,

specify the formalities to be followed both at the recruiting stations

and in administering the oath of allegiance to the conscripts in the

synagogues. The latter ceremony was to be marked by gloomy solemnity.

The recruit was to be arrayed in his prayer-shawl (Tallith) and shroud

(Kittel). With his philacteries wound around his arm, he should be

placed before the Ark and, amidst burning candles and to the

accompaniment of shofar blasts, made to recite a lengthy awe-inspiring

oath. The "Instructions" to the military authorities accompanying the

statute prescribe that every batch of Jewish conscripts "shall be

entrusted to a special officer to be watched over, prior to their

departure for their places of destination, and shall be kept apart from

the other recruits." Both in the places of conscription and on the

journey the Jewish recruits were to be quartered exclusively in the

homes of Christian residents.

The promulgated "military constitution" surpassed the very worst

apprehension of the Jews. All were staggered by this sudden blow, which

descended crushingly upon the mode of life, the time-honored traditions,

and the religious ideals of the Jewish people. The Jewish family nests

became astir, trembling for their fledglings. Barely a month after the

publication of the military statute, the central Government in St.

Petersburg was startled by the report that the Volhynian town of

Old-Constantine had been the scene of "mutiny and disorders among the

Jews" on the occasion of the promulgation of the ukase. Benckendorff,

the Chief of the Gendarmerie, [1] conveyed this information to the Tzar,

who thereupon gave orders that "in all similar cases the culprits be

court-martialed". Evidently, the St. Petersburg authorities apprehended a

whole series of Jewish mutinies, as a result of the dreadful ukase, and

they were ready with extraordinary measures for the emergency.

[Footnote 1: Since 1827 the Gendarmerie served as the executive organ of

the political police, or of the so-called Third Section, dreaded

throughout Russia on account of its relentless cruelty in suppressing

the slightest manifestation of liberal thought. The Third Section was

nominally abolished in 1880.]

However, their apprehensions were unfounded. Apart from the incident

referred to, there were no cases of open rebellion against the

authorities. As a matter of fact, even in Old-Constantine, the "mutiny"

was of a nature little calculated to be dealt with by a court-martial.

According to the local tradition, the Jewish residents, Hasidim almost

to a man, were so profoundly stirred by the imperial ukase that they

assembled in the synagogues, fasting and praying, and finally resolved

to adopt "energetic" measures. A petition reciting their grievances

against the Tzar was framed in due form and placed in the hands of a

member of the community who had just died, with the request that the

deceased present it to the Almighty, the God of Israel. This childlike

appeal to the heavenly King from the action of an earthly sovereign and

the emotional scenes accompanying it were interpreted by the Russian

authorities as "mutiny." Under the patriarchal conditions of Jewish life

prevailing at that time a political protest was a matter of

impossibility. The only medium through which the Jews could give vent to

their burning national sorrow was a religious demonstration within the

walls of the synagogue.

3. MILITARY MARTYRDOM

The ways and means by which the provisions of the military statute were

carried into effect during the reign of Nicholas I. we do not learn from

official documents, which seem to have drawn a veil over this dismal

strip of the past. Our information is derived from sources far more

communicative and nearer to truth--the traditions current among the

people. Owing to the fact that every Jewish community, at the mutual

responsibility of all its members, was compelled by law to supply a

definite number of recruits, and that no one was willing to become a

soldier of his own volition, the Kahal administration and the recruiting

"trustees," who had to answer to the authorities for any shortage in

recruits, were practically forced to become a sort of police agents,

whose function it was to "capture" the necessary quota of recruits.

Prior to every military conscription, the victims marked for prey, the

young men and boys of the burgher class, [1] very generally took to

flight, hiding in distant cities, outside the zone of their Kahals, or

in forests and ravines. A popular song in Yiddish refers to these

conditions in the following words;

[Footnote 1: Compare on the status of the burgher in Russian law Vol. I,

p. 308, n. 2. Nearly all the higher estates were exempt.]

_Der Ukas is arobgekumen auf judische Selner,

Seinen mir sich zulofen in die puste Wälder.....

In alle puste Wälder seinen mir zulofen,

In puste Gruber seinen mir verlofen_..... Oi weih, oi weih!_....[1]

[Footnote 1:

When the ukase came down about Jewish soldiers,

We all dispersed over the lonesome forests;

Over the lonesome forests did we disperse,

In lonesome pits did we hide ourselves.... Woe me, Woe!]

The recruiting agents hired by the Kahal or its "trustees," who received

the nickname "hunters" or "captors," [1] hunted down the fugitives,

trailing them everywhere and capturing them for the purpose of making up

the shortage. In default of a sufficient number of adults, little

children, who were easier "catch," were seized, often enough in

violation of the provision of the law. Even boys under the required age

of twelve, sometimes no more than eight years old, were caught and

offered as conscripts at the recruiting stations, their age being

misstated. [2] The agents perpetrated incredible cruelties. Houses were

raided during the night, and children were torn from the arms of their

mothers, or lured away and kidnapped.

[Footnote 1: More literally "catchers"; in Yiddish _Khappers_.]

[Footnote 2: This was the more easy, as regular birth-registers were not

yet in existence.]

After being captured, the Jewish conscripts were sent into the

recruiting jail where they were kept in confinement until their

examination at the recruiting station. The enlisted minors were turned

over to a special officer to be dispatched to their places of

destination, mostly in the Eastern provinces including Siberia. For it

must be noted that the cantonists were stationed almost to a man in the

outlying Russian governments, where they could be brought up at a safe

distance from all Jewish influences. The unfortunate victims who were

drafted into the army and deported to these far-off regions were mourned

by their relatives as dead. During the autumnal season, when the

recruits were drafted and deported, the streets of the Jewish towns

resounded with moans. The juvenile cantonists were packed into wagons

like so many sheep and carried off in batches under a military

convoy. When they took leave of their dear ones it was for a quarter of a

century; in the case of children it was for a longer term, too often it

was good-bye for life.

How these unfortunate youngsters were driven to their places of

destination we learn from the description of Alexander Hertzen, [1] who

chanced to meet a batch of Jewish cantonists on his involuntary journey

through Vyatka, in 1835. At one of the post stations in some

God-forsaken village of the Vyatka government he met the escorting

officer. The following dialogue ensued between the two:

[Footnote 1: Hertzen, a famous Russian writer (d. 1870), was exiled to the

government of Vyatka for propagating liberal doctrines.]

"Whom do you carry and to what place?"

"Well, sir, you see, they got together a bunch of these accursed

Jewish youngsters between the age of eight and nine. I suppose they

are meant for the fleet, but how should I know? At first the command

was to drive them to Perm. Now there is a change. We are told to

drive them to Kazan. I have had them on my hands for a hundred

versts or thereabouts. The officer that turned them over to me told

me they were an awful nuisance. A third of them remained on the road

(at this the officer pointed with his finger to the ground). Half of

them will not get to their destination," he added.

"Epidemics, I suppose?", I inquired, stirred to the very core.

"No, not exactly epidemics; but they just fall like flies. Well, you

know, these Jewish boys are so puny and delicate. They can't stand

mixing dirt for ten hours, with dry biscuits to live on. Again

everywhere strange folks, no father, no mother, no caresses. Well

then, you just hear a cough and the youngster is dead. Hello,

corporal, get out the small fry!"

The little ones were assembled and arrayed in a military line. It

was one of the most terrible spectacles I have ever witnessed. Poor,

poor children! The boys of twelve or thirteen managed somehow to

stand up, but the little ones of eight and ten.... No brush, however

black, could convey the terror of this scene on the canvas.

Pale, worn out, with scared looks, this is the way they stood in

their uncomfortable, rough soldier uniforms, with their starched,

turned-up collars, fixing an inexpressibly helpless and pitiful gaze

upon the garrisoned soldiers, who were handling them rudely. White

lips, blue lines under the eyes betokened either fever or cold. And

these poor children, without care, without a caress, exposed to the

wind which blows unhindered from the Arctic Ocean, were marching to

their death. I seized the officer's hand, and, with the words: "Take

good care of them! ", threw myself into my carriage. I felt like

sobbing, and I knew I could not master myself....

The great Russian writer saw the Jewish cantonists on the road, but he

knew nothing of what happened to them later on, in the recesses of the

barracks into which they were driven. This terrible secret was revealed

to the world at a later period by the few survivors among these martyred

Jewish children.

Having arrived at their destination, the juvenile conscripts were put

into the cantonist battalions. The "preparation for military service"

began with their religious re-education at the hands of sergeants and

corporals. No means was, neglected so long as it bade fair to bring the

children to the baptismal font. The authorities refrained from giving

formal instructions, leaving everything to the zeal of the officers who

knew the wishes of their superiors. The children were first sent for

spiritual admonition to the local Greek-Orthodox priests, whose efforts,

however, proved fruitless in nearly every case. They were then taken in

hand by the sergeants and corporals who adopted military methods of

persuasion.

These brutal soldiers invented all kinds of tortures. A favorite

procedure was to make the cantonists get down on their knees in the

evening after all had gone to bed and to keep the sleepy children in

that position for hours. Those who agreed to be baptized were sent to

bed, those who refused were kept up the whole night till they dropped

from exhaustion. The children who continued to hold their own were

flogged and, under the guise of gymnastic exercises, subjected to all

kinds of tortures. Those that refused to eat pork or the customary

cabbage soup prepared with lard were beaten and left to starve. Others

were fed on salted fish and then forbidden to drink, until the little

ones, tormented by thirst, agreed to embrace Christianity.

The majority of these children, unable to endure the tortures inflicted

on them, saved themselves by baptism. But many cantonists, particularly

those of a maturer age (between fifteen and eighteen), bore their

martyrdom with heroic patience. Beaten almost into senselessness, their

bodies striped by lashes, tormented to the point of exhaustion by

hunger, thirst, and sleeplessness, the lads declared again and again

that they would not betray the faith of their fathers. Most of these

obstinate youths were carried from the barracks into the military

hospitals to be released by a kind death. Only a few remained alive.

Alongside of this passive heroism there were cases of demonstrative

martyrdom. One such incident has survived in the popular memory. The

story goes that during a military parade [1] in the city of Kazan the

battalion chief drew up all the Jewish cantonists on the banks of the

river, where the Greek-Orthodox priests were standing in their

vestments, and all was ready for the baptismal ceremony. At the command

to jump into the water, the boys answered in military fashion "Aye,

aye!" Whereupon they dived under and disappeared. When they were dragged

out, they were dead. In most cases, however, these little martyrs

suffered and died noiselessly, in the gloom of the guard-houses,

barracks, and military hospitals. They strewed with their tiny bodies

the roads that led into the outlying regions of the Empire, and those

that managed to get there were fading away slowly in the barracks which

had been turned into inquisitorial dungeons. This martyrdom of children,

set in a military environment, represents a singular phenomenon even in

the extensive annals of Jewish martyrology.

[Footnote 1: A variant of the legend speaks of a review by the Tzar

himself.]

Such was the lot of the juvenile cantonists. As for the adult recruits,

who were drafted into the army at the normal age of conscription

(18-25), their conversion to Christianity was not pursued by the same

direct methods, but their fate was not a whit less tragic from the

moment of their capture till the end of their grievous twenty-five

years' service. Youths, who had no knowledge of the Russian language,

were torn away from the heder or yeshibah, often from wife and children.

In consequence of the early marriages then in vogue, most youths at the

age of eighteen were married. The impending separation for a quarter of

a century, added to the danger of the soldier's apostasy or death in

far-off regions, often disrupted the family ties. Many recruits, before

entering upon their military career, gave their wives a divorce so as

not to doom them to perpetual widowhood.

At the end of 1834 rumors began to spread among the Jewish masses

concerning a law which was about to be issued forbidding early marriages

but exempting from conscription those married prior to the promulgation

of the law. A panic ensued. Everywhere feverish haste was displayed in

marrying off boys from ten to fifteen years old to girls of an equally

tender age. Within a few months there appeared in every city hundreds

and thousands of such couples, whose marital relations were often

confined to playing with nuts or bones. The misunderstanding which had

caused this senseless matrimonial panic or _beholoh,_[1] as it was

afterwards popularly called, was cleared up by the publication, on April

13, 1835, of the new "Statute on the Jews." To be sure, the new law

contained a clause forbidding marriages before the age of eighteen, but

it offered no privileges for those already married, so that the only

result of the _beholoh_ was to increase the number of families robbed by

conscription of their heads and supporters.

[Footnote 1: A Hebrew word, also used in Yiddish, meaning _fright,

panic_.]

The years of military service were spent by the grown-up Jewish soldiers

amidst extraordinary hardships. They were beaten and ridiculed because

of their inability to express themselves in Russian, their refusal to

eat _trefa_, and their general lack of adaptation to the strange

environment and to the military mode of life. And even when this process

of adaptation was finally accomplished, the Jewish soldier was never

promoted beyond the position of a non-commissioned under-officer,

baptism being the inevitable stepping-stone to a higher rank. True, the

Statute on Military Service promised those Jewish soldiers who had

completed their term in the army with distinction admission to the civil

service, but the promise remained on paper so long as the candidates

were loyal to Judaism. On the contrary, the Jews who had completed their

military service and had in most cases become invalids were not even

allowed to spend the rest of their lives in the localities outside the

Pale, in which they had been stationed as soldiers. Only at a later

period, during the reign of Alexander II., was this right accorded to

the "Nicholas soldiers" [1] and their descendants.

[Footnote 1: In Russian, _Nikolayevskiye soldaty_, i.e., those that had

served in the army during the reign of Nicholas I.]

The full weight of conscription fell upon the poorest classes of the

Jewish population, the so-called burgher estate, [1] consisting of petty

artisans and those impoverished tradesmen who could not afford to enrol

in the mercantile guilds, though there are cases on record where poor

Jews begged from door to door to collect a sufficient sum of money for a

guild certificate in order to save their children from military service.

The more or less well-to-do were exempted from conscription either by

virtue of their mercantile status or because of their connections with

the Kahal leaders who had the power of selecting the victims.

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 23, n. 1.]

4. THE POLICY OF EXPULSIONS

In all lands of Western Europe the introduction of personal military

service for the Jews was either accompanied or preceded by their

emancipation. At all events, it was followed by some mitigation of their

disabilities, serving, so to speak, as an earnest of the grant of equal

rights. Even in clerical Austria, the imposition of military duty upon

the Jews was preceded by the _Toleranz Patent_, this would-be Act of

Emancipation. [1]

[Footnote 1: Military service was imposed upon the Jews of Austria by

the law of 1787. Several years previously, on January 2, 1782, Emperor

Joseph II. had issued his famous Toleration Act, removing a number of

Jewish disabilities and opening the way to their assimilation with the

environment. Nevertheless, most of the former restrictions remained in

force.]

In Russia the very reverse took place. The introduction of military

conscription of a most aggravating kind and the unspeakable cruelties

attending its practical execution were followed, in the case of the

Jews, by an unprecedented recrudescence of legislative discrimination

and a monstrous increase of their disabilities. The Jews were lashed

with a double knout, a military and a civil. In the same ill-fated year

which saw the promulgation of the conscription statute, barely three

months after it had received the imperial sanction, while the moans of

the Jews, fasting and praying to God to deliver them from the calamity,

were still echoing in the synagogues, two new ukases were issued, both

signed on December 2, 1827--the one decreeing the transfer of the Jews

from all villages and village inns in the government of Grodno into the

towns and townlets, the other ordering the banishment of all Jewish

residents from the city of Kiev.

The expulsion from the Grodno villages was the continuation of the

policy of the _rural_ liquidation of Jewry, inaugurated in 1823 in White

Russia. [1] The Grodno province was merely meant to serve as a starting

point. Grand Duke Constantine, [2] who had brought up the question, was

ordered "_at first_ to carry out the expulsion in the government of

Grodno alone," and to postpone for a later occasion the application of

the same measure to the other "governments entrusted to his command."

Simultaneously considerable foresight was displayed in instructing the

grand duke to wait with the expulsion of the Jews "until the conclusion

of the military conscription going on at present." Evidently there was

some fear of disorders and complications. It was thought wiser to seize

the children for the army first and then to expel the parents--to get

hold of the young birds and then to destroy the nest.

[Footnote 1: It may be remarked here that the principal enactments of

that period, down to 1835, were, drafted in their preliminary stage by

the "Jewish Committee" established in 1823. See Vol. I, p. 407 _et

seq._]

[Footnote 2: Commander-in-Chief of the former Polish provinces. See p.

16, n. 2.]

The expulsion from Kiev was of a different order. It marked the

beginning of a new system, the narrowing down of the _urban_ area

allotted to the Jews within the Pale of Settlement. Since 1794 [1] the

Jews had been allowed to settle in Kiev freely. They had formed there,

with official sanction, an important community and had vastly developed

commerce and industry. Suddenly, however, the Government discovered that

"their presence is detrimental to the industry of this city and to the

exchequer in general, and is, moreover, at variance with the rights and

privileges conferred at different periods upon the city of Kiev." The

discovery was followed by a grim rescript from St. Petersburg,

forbidding not only the further settlement of Jews in Kiev but also

prescribing that even those settled there long ago should leave the city

within one year, those owning immovable property within two years.

Henceforward only the temporary sojourn of Jews, for a period not

exceeding six months, was to be permitted and to be limited, moreover,

to merchants of the first two guilds who arrive "in connection with

contracts and fairs" or to attend to public bids and deliveries.

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 317.]

In 1829 the whip of expulsion cracked over the backs of the Jews

dwelling on the shores of the Baltic and the Black Sea. In Courland and

Livonia measures were taken "looking to the reduction of the number of

Jews" which had been considerably swelled by the influx of

"newcomers"--of Jews not born in those provinces and therefore having no

right to settle there. The Tzar endorsed the proposal of the "Jewish

Committee" to transfer from Courland all Jews not born there into the

cities in which their birth was registered. Those not yet registered in

a municipality outside the province were granted a half-year's respite

for that purpose. If within the prescribed term they failed to attend to

their registration, they were to be sent to the army, or, in case of

unfitness for military service, deported to Siberia.

In the same year an imperial ukase declared that "the residence of

civilian Jews in the cities of Sevastopol and Nicholayev was

inconvenient and injurious," in view of the military and naval

importance of these places, and therefore decreed the expulsion of their

Jewish residents: those owning real property within two years, the

others within one year. By a new ukase issued in 1830 the Jews were

expelled from the villages and hamlets of the government of Kiev. Thus

were human beings hurled about from village to town, from city to city,

from province to province, with no more concern than might be displayed

in the transportation of cattle.

This process of "mobilization" had reached its climax when the Polish

insurrection of 1830-1831 broke out, affecting the whole Western

region. [1] Fearing lest the persecuted Jews might be driven into the

arms of the Poles, the Government decided on a strategic retreat. In

February, 1831, in consequence of the representations of the local

military commander, who urged the Government "to take into consideration

the present political circumstances, in which they (the Jews) may

occasionally prove useful," the final expulsion of the Jews from Kiev

was postponed for three years. At the end of the three years, the

governor of Kiev made similar representations to St. Petersburg,

emphasizing the desirability of allowing the Jews to remain in the city,

even though it might become necessary to segregate them in a special

quarter, "this (i.e., their remaining in the city) being found useful

also in this respect that, on account of their temperate and simple

habits of life, they are in a position to sell their goods considerably

cheaper, whereas in the case of their expulsion many articles and

manufactures will rise in price." Nicholas I. rejected this plea, and

only agreed to postpone the expulsion until February, 1835, for the

reason that the new "Statute Concerning the Jews," then in preparation,

which was to define the general legal status of Russian Jewry, was

expected to be ready by that time. Similar short reprieves were granted

to the Jews about to be exiled from Nicholayev, from the villages of the

government of Kiev, and from other places.

[Footnote 1: See above, p. 16, n. 1.]

5. THE CODIFICATION OF JEWISH DISABILITIES

No sooner had the conscription ukase been issued than the bureaucrats of

St. Petersburg began to apply themselves in the hidden recesses of their

chancelleries to a new civil code for the Jews, which was to supersede

the antiquated Statute of 1804. The work passed through a number of

departments. The projected enactment was framed by the "Jewish

Committee," which had been established in 1823 for the purpose of

bringing about "a reduction of the number of Jews in the monarchy," and

consisted of cabinet ministers and the chiefs of departments. [1]

Originally the department chiefs had elaborated a draft covering 1230

clauses, a gigantic code of disabilities; evidently founded on the

principle that in the case of Jews everything is forbidden which, is not

permitted by special legislation. The dimensions of the draft were such

that even the Government was appalled and decided to turn it over to the

ministerial members of the Committee.

[Footnote 1: See Vol. I, p. 407 et seq.]

Modified in shape and reduced in size, the code was submitted in 1834 to

the Department of Laws forming part of the Council of State, and after

careful discussion by the Department of Laws was brought up at the

plenary sessions of the Council. The "ministerial" draft, though smaller

in bulk, was marked by such severity that the Department of Laws found

it necessary to tone it down. The ministers, with the exception of the

Minister of Finance, had proposed to transfer all Jews, within a period

of three years, from the villages to the towns and townlets. The

Department of Laws considered this measure too risky, pointing to the

White Russian expulsion of 1823, which had failed to produce the

expected results, and, "while it has ruined the Jews, it does not in the

least seem to have improved the condition of the villagers." [1] The

plenum of the Council agreed with the Department of Laws that "the

proposed expulsion of the Jews (from the villages), being extremely

difficult of execution and being of problematic benefit, should be

eliminated from the Statute and should be stopped even there where it

had been decreed but not carried into effect."

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 407.]

The report was laid before the Tzar, who attached to it the following

"resolution": [1] "Where this measure (of expulsion) has been started, it

is inconvenient to repeal it; but it shall be postponed for the time

being in the governments in which no steps towards it have as yet been

made." For a number of years this "resolution" hung like the sword of

Damocles over the heads of rural Jewry.

[Footnote 1: See on the meaning of the term "resolution" Vol. I, p. 253,

n. 1.]

Less yielding was the Tzar's attitude on the question of the partial

enlargement of the Pale of Settlement. The Department of Laws had

suggested to grant the merchants of the first guild the right of

residence in the Russian interior in the interest of the exchequer and

big business. At the general meeting of the Council of State only a

minority (thirteen) voted for the proposal. The majority (twenty-two)

argued that they had no right to violate the time-honored tradition,

"dating from the time of Peter the Great," which bars the Jews from the

Russian interior; that to admit them "would produce a very unpleasant

impression upon our people, which, on account of its religious notions

and its general estimate of the moral peculiarities of the Jews, has

become accustomed to keep aloof from them and to despise them;" that the

countries of Western Europe, which had accorded fall citizenship to the

Jews, "cannot serve as an example for Russia, partly because of the

incomparably larger number of Jews living here, partly because our

Government and people, with all their well-known tolerance, are yet far

from that indifference with which certain other nations look upon

religious matters." After marking his approval of the last words by the

marginal exclamation "Thank God!", the Tzar disposed of the whole matter

in the following brief resolution: "This question has been determined by

Peter the Great. I dare not change it; I completely share the opinion of

the twenty-two members."

While on this occasion the Tzar endorsed the opinion of the Council as

represented by its majority, in cases in which it proved favorable to

the Jews he did not hesitate to set it aside. Thus the Department of

Laws, as part of the Council of State, and, following in its wake, the

Council itself had timidly suggested to Nicholas to comply in part with

the plea of the Jews for a mitigation of the rigors of conscription, [1]

but the imperial verdict read: "To be left as heretofore." Nicholas

remained equally firm on the question of the expulsions from Kiev. The

Department of Laws, guided by the previously-mentioned representations

of the local governor, favored the postponement of the expulsion, and

fourteen members of the plenary Council agreed with the suggestion of

the Department, and resolved to recommend it to the "benevolent

consideration of his Majesty," in other words to request the Tzar to

revoke the baneful ukase. But fifteen, members rejected all such

propositions on the ground that, as far as that question was concerned,

the imperial will was unmistakable, the Tzar having decided the matter

in a sense unfavorable to the Jews. In a similar manner, numerous other

decisions of the Council of State were dictated not so much by inner

conviction as by fear of the clearly manifested imperial will, which no

one dared to cross.

[Footnote 1: The Kahal of Vilna, in a memorandum submitted in 1835,

pleaded for the abolition of the dreadful institution of cantonists, and

begged that the age limit of Jewish recruits be raised from 12-15 to

20-35.]

Under these circumstances, the entire draft of the statute passed

through the Council of State. In its session of March 28, 1835, the

Council voted to submit it to the emperor for his signature. On this

occasion a solitary and belated voice was raised in defence of the Jews,

without evoking an echo. A member of the Council, Admiral Greig, who was

brave enough to swim against the current, submitted a "special opinion"

on the proposed statute, in which he advocated a number of alleviations

in the intolerable legal status of the Jews. Greig put the whole issue

in a nut-shell: "Are the Jews to be suffered in the country, or not?"

If they are, then we must abandon the system "of hampering them in their

actions and in their religious customs" and grant them at least "equal

liberty of commerce with the others," for in this case "we may

anticipate more good from their gratitude than from their hatred."

Should, however, the conclusion be reached that the Jews ought not to be

tolerated in Russia, then the only thing to be done is "to banish them

all without exception from the country into foreign lands." This might

be "more useful than to allow this estate to remain in the country and

to keep it in a position which is bound to arouse in them continual

dissatisfaction and resentment." It need scarcely be added that the

voice of the "queer" admiral found no hearing.

Nor did the Jewish people manage to get a hearing. Stunned by the

uninterrupted succession of blows and moved by the spirit of martyrdom,

Russian Jewry kept its peace during those dismal years. Yet, when the

news of an impending general regulation of the Jewish legal status began

to leak out, a section of Russian Jewry became astir. For to anticipate

a blow is more excruciating than to receive one, and it was quite

natural that an attempt should be made to stay the hand which was lifted

to strike. Towards the end of 1833 the Council of State received, as

part of the material bearing on the Jewish question, two memoranda, one

from the Kahal of Vilna, signed by six elders, and another from Litman

Feigin of Chernigov, well known in administrative circles as merchant

and public contractor.

The Kahal of Vilna declared that the repressive policy, pursued during

the last few years by the "Jewish Committee," had thrown a large part of

the Jewish people "into utmost disorder," and had made the Jews "shiver

and shudder at the thought that a general Jewish statute had been

drafted by the same Committee and had now been submitted to the Council

of State for revision." The petitioners go on to say that, weighed down

by a succession of cruel discriminations affecting not only their rights

but also their mode of discharging military service, the Jews would

succumb to utter despair, did they not repose their hopes in the

benevolence of the Tzar, who, on his recent trip through the Western

provinces, had expressed to the deputies of the Jewish communes his

imperial satisfaction with the loyalty to the throne displayed by the

Jews during the Polish insurrection of 1831. The Kahal of Vilna,

therefore, implored the Council of State "to turn its attention to this

unfortunate and maligned people" and to stop all further persecutions.

A more emphatic note of protest is sounded in the memorandum of Feigin.

By a string of references to the latest Government measures he

demonstrates the fact that "the Jewish people is hunted down, not

because of its moral qualities but because of its faith."

The Jews, faced by the new statute, have lost all hope for a better lot,

inasmuch as the Government has embarked upon this measure without having

solicited the explanations or justifications of this people, whereas,

according to common legal procedure, even an individual may not be

condemned without having been called upon to justify himself.

The rebuke had no effect. The Government preferred to render its verdict

_in absentia_, without listening to counsel for the defence and without

any safeguards of fair play. In line with this attitude, it also denied

the petition of the Vilna Kahal to be allowed "to send at least four

deputies to the capital as spokesmen of the entire Jewish people for the

purpose of submitting to the Government their explanations and

propositions concerning the reorganization of the Jews, after having

been presented with a draft of the statute." The final verdict was

pronounced in the spring of 1835, and in April the new "Statute

concerning the Jews" received the signature of the Tzar.

This "Charter of Disabilities," which was destined to operate for many

decades, represents a combination of the Russian "ground laws"

concerning the Jews and the restrictive by-laws issued after 1804. The

Pale of Settlement was now accurately defined: it consisted of Lithuania

[1] and the South-western provinces, [2] without any territorial

restrictions, White Russia [3] minus the Villages, Little Russia [4]

minus the crown hamlets, New Russia [5] minus Nicholayev and Sevastopol,

the government of Kiev minus the city of Kiev, the Baltic provinces for

the old settlers only, while the rural settlements on the entire

fifty-verst zone along the Western frontier were to be closed to

newcomers. As for the interior provinces, only temporary "furloughs"

(limited to six weeks and to be certified by gubernatorial passports)

were to be granted for the execution of judicial and commercial affairs,

with the proviso that the travellers should wear Russian instead of

Jewish dress. The merchants affiliated with the first and second guilds

were allowed, in addition, to visit the two capitals, [6] the sea-ports,

as well as the fairs of Nizhni-Novgorod, Kharkov, and other big fairs

for wholesale buying or selling. [7]

[Footnote 1: The present governments of Kovno, Vilna, Grodno, and Minsk.]

[Footnote 2: The governments of Volhynia and Podolia.]

[Footnote 3: The governments of Vitebsk and Moghilev.]

[Footnote 4: The governments of Chernigov and Poltava.]

[Footnote 5: The governments of Kherson, Yekaterinoslav, Tavrida, and

Bessarabia.]

[Footnote 6: St. Petersburg and Moscow.]

[Footnote 7: The time-limit was six months for the merchants of the

first guild and three months for those of the second.]

The Jews were further forbidden to employ Christian domestics for

permanent employment. They could hire Christians for occasional services

only, on condition that the latter live in separate quarters. Marriages

at an earlier age than eighteen for the bridegroom and sixteen for the

bride were forbidden under the pain of imprisonment--a prohibition which

the defective registration of births and marriages then in vogue made it

easy to evade. The language to be employed by the Jews in their public

documents was to be Russian or any other local dialect, but "under no

circumstances the Hebrew language."

The function of the Kahal, according to the Statute, is to see to it

that the "instructions of the authorities" are carried out precisely and

that the state taxes and communal assessments are "correctly remitted."

The Kahal elders are to be elected by the community every three years

from among persons who can read and write Russian, subject to their

being ratified by the gubernatorial administration. At the same time the

Jews are entitled to participation in the municipal elections; those who

can read and write Russian are eligible as members of the town councils

and magistracies--the supplementary law of 1836 fixed the rate at

one-third, [1] excepting the city of Vilna where the Jews were entirely

excluded from municipal self-government.

[Footnote 1: Compare Vol. I, p. 368.]

Synagogues may not be built in the vicinity of churches. The Russian

schools of all grades are to be open to Jewish children, who "are not

compelled to change their religion" (Clause 106)--a welcome provision in

view of the compulsory methods which had then become habitual. The

coercive baptism of Jewish children was provided for in a separate

enactment, the Statute on Conscription, which is declared "to remain in

force." In this way the Statute of 1835 reduces itself to a codification

of the whole mass of the preceding anti-Jewish legislation. Its only

positive feature was that it put a stop to the expulsion from the

villages which had ruined the Jewish population during the years

1804-1830.

6. THE RUSSIAN CENSORSHIP AND CONVERSIONIST ENDEAVORS

With all its discriminations, the promulgation of this general statute

was far from checking the feverish activity of the Government. With

indefatigable zeal, its hands went on turning the legislative wheel and

squeezing ever tighter the already unbearable vise of Jewish life. The

slightest attempt to escape from its pressure was punished ruthlessly.

In 1838 the police of St. Petersburg discovered a group of Jews in the

capital "with expired passports," these Jews having extended their stay

there a little beyond the term fixed for Jewish travellers, and the Tzar

curtly decreed: "to be sent to serve in the penal companies of

Kronstadt." [1] In 1840 heavy fines were imposed upon the landed

proprietors in the Great Russian governments for "keeping over" Jews on

their estates.

[Footnote 1: A fortress in the vicinity of St Petersburg.]

Considerable attention was bestowed by the Government on placing the

spiritual life of the Jews under police supervision. In 1836 a

censorship campaign was launched against Hebrew literature. Hebrew

books, which were then almost exclusively of a religious nature, such as

prayer-books, Bible and Talmud editions, rabbinic, cabalistic, and

hasidic writings, were then issuing from the printing presses of Vilna,

Slavuta, [1] and other places, and were subject to a rigorous censorship

exercised by Christians or by Jewish converts. Practically every Jewish

home-library consisted of religious works of this type. The suspicions

of the Government were aroused by certain Jewish converts who had

insinuated that the foreign editions of these works and those that had

appeared in Russia itself prior to the establishment of a censorship

were of an "injurious" character. As a result, all Jewish home-libraries

were subjected to a search. Orders were given to deliver into the hands

of the local police, in the course of that year, all foreign Hebrew

prints as well as the uncensored editions, published at any previous

time in Russia, and to entrust their revision to "dependable" rabbis.

These rabbis were instructed to put their stamp on the books approved by

them and return the books not approved by them to the police for

transmission to the Ministry of the Interior. The regulation involved

the entire ancient Hebrew literature printed during the sixteenth,

seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, prior to the establishment of the

Russian censorship. In order to "facilitate the supervision" over new

publications or reprints from older editions, all Jewish printing

presses which existed at that time in various cities and towns were

ordered closed, and only those of Vilna and Kiev, [2] to which special

censors were attached, were allowed to remain.

[Footnote 1: A town in Volhynia.]

[Footnote 2: The printing-press of Kiev was subsequently transferred to

Zhitomir.]

As the Hebrew authors of antiquity or the Middle Ages did not fully

anticipate the requirements of the Russian censors, many classic works

were found to contain passages which were thought to be "at variance

with imperial enactments." By the ukase of 1836 all books of this kind,

circulating in tens of thousands of copies, had to be transported to St.

Petersburg under a police escort to await their final verdict. The

procedure, however, proved too cumbersome, and, in 1837, the emperor,

complying with the petitions of the governors, was graciously pleased to

command that all these books be "delivered to the flames on the spot."

This _auto-da-fé_ was to be witnessed by a member of the gubernatorial

administration and a special "dependable" official dispatched by the

governor for the sole purpose of making a report to the central

Government on every literary conflagration of this kind and forwarding

to the Ministry of the Interior one copy of each "annihilated" book.

But even this was not enough to satisfy the lust of the Russian

censorship. It was now suspected that even the "dependable" rabbis might

pass many a book as "harmless," though its contents were subversive of

the public weal. As a result, a new ukase was issued in 1841, placing

the rabbinical censors themselves under Government control. All

uncensored books, including those already passed as "harmless," were

ordered to be taken away from the private libraries and forwarded to the

censorship committees in Vilna and Kiev. The latter were instructed to

attach their seals to the approved books and "deliver to the flames" the

books condemned by them. Endless wagonloads of these confiscated books

could be seen moving towards Vilna and Kiev, and for many years

afterwards the literature of the "People of the Book," covering a period

of three milleniums, was still languishing in the gaol of censorship,

waiting to be saved from or to be sentenced to a fiery death by a

Russian official.

It is almost unnecessary to add that the primitive method of solving the

Jewish problem by means of conversion, was still the guiding principle

of the Government. The Russian legislation of that period teems with

regulations concerning apostasy. The surrender of the Synagogue to the

Church seemed merely a question of time. In reality, however, the

Government itself believed but half-heartedly in the sincerity of the

converted Jews. In 1827 the Tzar put down in his own handwriting the

following resolution: "It is to be strictly observed that the baptismal

ceremony shall take place unconditionally on a Sunday, and with all

possible publicity, so as to remove all suspicion of a pretended

adoption of Christianity." Subsequently, this watchfulness had to be

relaxed in the case of those "who avoid publicity in adopting

Christianity," more especially in the case of the cantonists, "who have

declared their willingness to embrace the orthodox faith"--under the

effect, we may add, of the tortures in the barracks. Sincerity under

these circumstances was out of the question, and, in 1831, the battalion

chaplains were authorized to baptize these helpless creatures, even

"without applying for permission to the ecclesiastical authorities."

The barrack missionaries were frequently successful among these

unfortunate military prisoners. In the imperial rescripts of that period

the characteristic expression "privates from among the Jews _remaining

in the above faith_" figures as a standing designation for that group of

refractory and incorrigible soldiers who disturbed the officially

pre-established harmony of epidemic conversions by remaining loyal to

Judaism. But among the "civilian" Jews, who had not been detached from

their Jewish environment, apostasy was extraordinarily rare, and law

after law was promulgated in vain, offering privileges to converts or

leniency to criminals who were ready to embrace the orthodox creed. [1]

[Footnote 1: Under Clause 157 of the Russian Penal Code of 1845, the

penalty of the law was softened, not only in degree but also in kind,

for those criminals who had embraced the Greek-Orthodox faith during the

investigation or trial.]

History of the Jews in Russia and Poland, Volume 2 [of 3] From the Death of Alexander I until the Death of Alexander III (1825-1894) · 第 1 / 18 章