The Claims of the Jews to an Equality of Rights

Letter 1. To Willis G. Clark, Esq.

We will admit, that, during the ages of superstition and darkness, silence was often imposed upon us by the terrors of persecution, by the executioner’s axe and the rack of the inquisitor. Works designed to exhibit the wrongs we had to endure, and to perpetuate the history of our sufferings were surrendered to the destroying flames, depriving us thus of the melancholy privilege of the sympathy of posterity for fallen greatness. Nevertheless, enough has been left to the Jews to teach unto others what is their opinion of the Creator and of his laws, and of the glorious hope of salvation which awaits all mankind. Why then, let me ask, are we not more consulted when we are the subject of discussion? Why will men spread false views when the truth is accessible?

This unphilosophical proceeding may claim some extenuation in countries where one class of the inhabitants has a legal superiority over the other, as in England and Germany, and Spain and Italy, in short in nearly all Europe; for then the privileged class may have a personal interest in keeping up a state of ignorance, in order to sustain the prejudice under which the legally oppressed labour, and to prevent a removal of the burden of odium and disqualification already established by law and custom. In countries like those, selfishness may claim such a cause as a reason for pardonable ignorance, when the Jews are represented as enemies to the common welfare, and their doctrines as hostile to the public security; there the bigot may feel himself justified by special pleas, when he seeks to wipe away the name of Israel from the roll of nations. But how ought the case to stand in this country, where there exists no legal disqualifications against us, at least not in those states where we are most numerous? Why should we be looked upon with distrust in this happy land—happy because possessed of freedom and blessed with the knowledge of that heavenly Revelation which was first given to us—where we are permitted under the protection of equal laws to call on our Maker in our ancient language after our own manner, undisturbed by the dread of the tyrant or the fear of the inquisitor? Here, therefore, it is indeed surprising that the crudities of foreign journals, and the false inventions of interested travellers, should find such implicit belief, and that works of men evidently prejudiced should obtain currency: whilst the only sources of real information are not suffered to see the light; as though the anathema pronounced against us in the middle ages, and retained in tyrannical countries to this day, was to be transplanted and cherished also in this land against the Sons of Jacob, as the only exception to the benefits of equal rights.

Were this illiberal spirit residing only in the bosom of the ignorant multitude, who are often swayed by ideas imperfectly understood, and led astray by clamour artfully fomented by wily demagogues: I would be content to submit to it with silence, as being the fate which the minority upon every question of expediency has to suffer, even in the freest country. The majority must rule; and if this majority has had no means of obtaining correct knowledge, it is but too apt to look with suspicion and distrust upon the opinions and doings of the minority, however respectable and virtuous this minority may be. But, unfortunately, it is not the great multitude alone who act so unworthily; it is not the ignorant mass solely who wrongly suspect Israel’s descendants, who speak falsely concerning our character and our religious hopes. Men, who from their position are the makers of public opinion, the preachers and the conductors of the press lend themselves, not rarely, I trust unwittingly, to the propagation of unsound views concerning us, and are thus instrumental in keeping alive a prejudice which ought long since to have been buried in the tomb of oblivion. It were time indeed that each society should do its utmost to improve the condition, both spiritual and temporal, of its own members, without interfering with that of others, mindful that where equality is the law of the land, there is no privileged class (a). Liberty precludes the idea of toleration, and the majority, no matter how large, have no right to claim any merit (b) for leaving the minority undisturbed in the enjoyment of equal rights; and surely there exists no equitable rule to render odious the opinions and to restrain the actions of an individual or of a body of men, unless their opinions and conduct might become injurious to the public weal (c). This being the case, we utterly deny the right of our Christian neighbours to bring up our people and our religion as a constant topic of discussion; and what is more, to raise funds to bring about a defection of our members. If there exists such a right in the majority, the same right is inherent in us; and if we should exercise it, as exercise we might, would it not cause a great degree of just indignation and discontent in the minds of the majority? [ . . . ]

I will rest here for the present, but I may address you again on this subject at a future day if you will permit me to do so.

Yours, respectfully, I. L.

Philad. Dec. 12th, 1839