« AnkstesnisTęsti »
into the courts, but she swore black was white for him, and they believed her. I don't believe she tells lies easily; she does n't look like it. But she need n't have treated me like dirt. I did n't mean a thing down here but to do a piece of work I could n't get him to settle to in town. He's a wonderful head for business, Owen has; only he's lazy.
"She came in one day suddenly when I was alone with him. It was awkward, I'll admit, but he might have got out of it somehow if he 'd tried. Perhaps she got him into a corner, he can't stand being got in a corner,-so he probably turned nasty and gave us both away. Anyhow, the fat was in the fire.
"She 'd had enough, poor thing; I suppose his bringing me down looked a bit too steep. I can't blame her. I've felt like it many a time, but I never had the pluck.
"You see, dear, what happened to Mrs. Ransome was n't an accident: she meant to do herself in. Oh, my God, dear, don't faint! You 're as white as glass!"
Joy covered her face with her hands. She had queer images going on in her mind: the twins eating bread and milk
in the nursery, the smart white foxterriers running at Owen's heels,-he had a masterly way of training dogs,the starched, stiff parlor-maid impassively laying tea, church on Sunday, and the pew full of the occupants of Pollards, all regular and handsome and solid. What was happening to the inside of these hollow beings? Was everything that looked so safe a bog under one's feet? Nina was speaking again.
"I could n't stand it," she repeated, "to see you here, and he starting it all up again, me not out of the house, and you her friend. Well, it was a bit too thick, was n't it? And I have my pride. He'll chuck me for this, but I don't care now; he should n't have said what he did, not after-you do look shocking, Miss Featherstone dear. Do take a glass of water or something."
"No, no," said Joy; "I don't want anything." She rose slowly to her feet, holding on to the back of her chair. She was quite steady now, and she understood. She understood some of it, but she felt that there must be some monstrous mistake somewhere a mistake less monstrous than the truth.
"I must go to Julia," she said. "Let me pass, please; I must see Julia!"
The Jewish Problem
Its Relation to American Ideals and Interests
By HERBERT ADAMS GIBBONS
Zionism is daily assuming a significance that demands full examination and debate. Dr. Gibbons here presents vigorously one aspect of the anti-Zionist point of view. We offer it not as the point of view of THE CENTURY MAGAZINE, but as the opening statement of an interesting debate in which our readers will have both sides of this question fully discussed.—THE EDITOR.
HE aftermath of the war has European countries at the expense of
Tbro after tatt of United States
many things to be deplored and some things to be feared. On June 16, 1858, Abraham Lincoln said at Springfield, Illinois: "I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other." Because Abraham Lincoln realized that we were at the cross-roads, and because his faith in the nation choosing the right road was coupled with the determination to make men see which was the right road, he became President, and saved his country. Once more there is division within the household. We do not expect the house to fall, but are we taking steps to provide that "it will cease to be divided"?
The German, Irish, Polish, Russian, and Jewish elements in our population are too numerous, too virile, too intelligent, to be "Americanized" by steamroller methods. They will not exchange their culture and traditions for Anglo-Saxon culture and traditions. They will oppose, and oppose successfully, the entry of the United States into a coalition or alliance to protect and advance the interests of certain
other European countries and racial elements. A study of the figures of the 1920 census will convince any man of sober judgment of the impossibility of making Americanization synonymous with the acceptance of AngloSaxon culture and a "pan-Angle alliance." The figures are against "the hands across the sea" and "blood is thicker than water" propagandists. In 1920 the United States was an English-speaking, but not an AngloSaxon, nation. What will it be in 1930? In 1940? We must realize that whatever system of regulating immigration we use, a large influx of English and Scotch is not to be hoped for. More important still, one has only to use his eyes to see that the old Anglo-Saxon stock in this country is producing per family fewer children than German Americans, Irish Americans, Polish Americans, Russian Americans, and Jewish Americans. The percentage in favor of elements which refuse to become Anglicized runs from two to four children more per family in this generation than among Americans of English and Scotch blood.
In the face of these facts (study the
census, and the reader can check up on me), it does not do the slightest good for members of the Anglo-Saxon group to call the Sinn Feiners jackasses, cry traitor to the German Americans who took President Wilson at his word, berate the Poles, denounce the Russians and the Bolshevists, or become anti-Semites. On the other hand, it will do a lot of harm. My phrase is not strong enough. The attempt to make assimilation with the customs and traditions and interests of the Anglo-Saxon group and professed friendship for any European nation the tests of Americanization will lead to a permanent and hopeless destruction of our national life. I feel this so keenly that I must state it baldly.
It is not that those of us who belong to the older blood and who have an almost fanatical pride in our institutions and affection for the country and civilization which gave us our background should be content to see the United States changed into an inchoate dumping-ground of Europe; but we should realize that we are not living in a world of theories, that fulfilment of a desire is not accomplished simply by expressing it, and that facts are not to be dismissed with a lordly wave of the hand. I am afraid that the old American stock and its attitude were well illustrated by Assemblyman Falconer, who had never heard of Einstein. His ignorance of the Berlin professor's existence did not make Einstein a myth, nor did it prevent Einstein from receiving the freedom of the city of New York. Because you and I have Haig's etching of Durham Cathedral in our study and love to read Walter Pater, that is no reason why Patrick McDermott should feel untrue to the country of
his adoption when he attends a Sinn Fein meeting. He has as much right to dream of McGillicuddy's Reeks towering over Killarney as Admiral Sims and I have to think of Magdalen Tower and the steeple of St. Mary the Virgin rising over Oxford. You think of love-feasts in Paris, and say that the Treaty of Versailles shall stand. Your fellow-citizen, Hans Schwartz, has a letter from his folks in Westphalia, and declares that it sha'n't. Pat and Hans each have six children; you have one. Quot filii [et filiæ], tot
During the war, one hundred per cent. Americans were after the pacifists and pro-Germans. When the armistice was signed, baiting had become a habit; so they discovered that foreigners who failed to shave were Bolshevists. Now suspicion of undermining our institutions seems to have turned against the Jews. My mail brings me much less about the Bolshevists and the I. W. W. than it did last year, but scarcely a day passes that some one does not write to me that the Jews are plotting to control the world. In letters and pamphlets I get a continuous rehash of the London "Morning Post," the Paris “La Vieille France," and the Dearborn "Independent." Of course Dearborn is not as large a place as London or Paris, but it has put itself upon the map by passing on to the American public what Mr. Henry Ford's young men have read in European anti-Semitic journals.
The articles of the Dearborn "Independent," however, cannot be passed over with a laugh or answered by a denunciation of the motives of the Detroit manufacturer who inspires them. The Ford campaign is symptomatic of a condition that is new in
The attention which the Dearborn "Independent's" campaign is commanding in this country, despite the discreet silence of other newspapers, demonstrates the existence of antiSemitic feeling. This is a distressing result of the World War. And yet it is impossible to believe that the ground was not fertile for it to spring up into a full-grown movement in so short a time. In dealing with internal and international problems of European countries, anti-Semitism has long been an accepted fact and factor, but until 1918 were the Jews widely spoken of by us as a disruptive force to be reckoned with in American life, and as agents of an international organization aiming at world domination?
During the period of settlement in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there were few Jews in America, and during the greater part of the nineteenth century those who came over here to cast in their fortunes with the growing republic found that they did not have to feel either the political or social barriers erected everywhere against Jews in the Old World. Of course there was a certain amount of prejudice due to age-old notions and traditions of Christendom. But the prejudice was social prejudice, and was never felt by Jews of gentle breeding or of intellectual attainments. They
were accepted everywhere without hesitation, and no position in government service or in business was denied them. In proportion to their numbers, Jews always played an important part in American life. Every one of the older cities in America has Jewish families who have retained their ancient faith, who have identified themselves with purely Jewish activities, and who are still regarded as among the "best families" of the cities in which they live. In the laws and customs of the American people there is no discrimination against Jews. The Jewish question, in its social and economic aspects, arose only after the great tide of immigration from Russia set in thirty years ago. In its political aspect it has arisen here since the Balfour declaration of November 2, 1917, which purported to give the Jews "a national home" in Palestine. In its religious aspect it does not exist.
Social prejudice is a curious phenomenon, the causes of which are not readily distinguishable. It shows itself arbitrarily against any group which is too numerous or too suddenly prosperous or too clannish. But in my experience I have never seen an instance of social prejudice acting arbitrarily against a person unless he belonged to an Asiatic or African race. No doors are closed to Jews in America simply because they are Jews. Exclusion from hotels and clubs is a hardship that has to be endured by many a man or woman because of the faults or characteristics of others. When Jews were few, they were never barred. Even now there is no hotel or club that would not be glad to have some Jews.
The trouble is that Jews themselves, wherever they have gathered in numbers, have displayed a strong
group spirit. The exclusiveness is on their side and leads to the exclusion. Social prejudice is not a manifestation of anti-Semitism, then, nor is antiSemitism a development of social prejudice.
Nor is there racial prejudice against Jews ipso facto. The Jews who feel that there is this racial prejudice are victims of their own imagination, and have brought the idea with them from Europe. Racial prejudice is a strong term, and cannot be imputed to those who claim to dislike Jews as a group. The white man instinctively denies social equality to colored races. He possesses a physical antipathy for all Africans, and in varying degrees for Asiatics. Something within him which he cannot control makes it impossible for him to have a close relationship with them. There is none of this feeling about Jews, who, like Arabs and other peoples of the Near East, are a white race in their origins. If an American feels any physical repugnance for a Galician or Polish or Russian Jew who has just arrived, it is a mere question of the lack of a bath, and identically the same feeling is experienced by the newly arrived immigrant's American coreligionists. Racial prejudice, in the narrower European sense of the word, is also lacking. The older Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic elements in the United States possess a certain arrogance in dealing even with other white races taken in the aggregate. Members of the Jewish group may feel that there is a certain reserve in the attitude of the Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic groups, but they can rest assured that this same reserve is shown toward other European races, Latin, Greek, and Slavic.
The super-sensitiveness of Jews of the older immigration, who feel that they have to suffer because of the unprepossessing qualities of their coreligionists of the later immigration, and the ignorance of Jews of the later immigration, lead them into a fundamental misunderstanding of the attitude of their Christian fellow-citizens. We are ready to break bread with Jews, receive them in our homes, marry them, and work with them, and very often under them. Many of my dearest friends are Jews, and I find that they have in common only one characteristic, an impenitent sort of idealism. In everything else they are as different from one another as Gentile friends. The rise of anti-Semitism in the United States does not, and cannot, feed upon religious bigotry, social prejudice, or racial antipathy.
A dislike of the Jewish element on business grounds, and a feeling of uneasiness concerning the Jew's place in our economic life, have long been reasons for incipient anti-Semitism. Virtually every other immigrant strain in the multi-textured America has penetrated all through the country, and when its numbers passed the million mark, has settled on the land. The Northern groups did this from the beginning. Within the last twenty years Slavs and notably Italians have taken to farming. When we had fifty thousand Jews in the United States, their whole-hearted devotion to commerce and banking, while noticeable, was not alarming. Now that we have more than 3,300,000, a good half of whom have not gone fifteen miles from Ellis Island, and only a few thousand of whom are tilling the soil, we can no