Page images
PDF
EPUB

time unnecessarily occasioned by the frequent consultations of numerous books, during the early days of learning a language. I presume that the students of this work will give me credit for not having set down ought which was not according to rule; and I have sincere confidence in them to believe ought but that they are endea vouring to make themselves thorough masters of the small but comprehensive grammar, which I have edited for them as companion to this.

3. I have struck out all quaint and fantastic illustrations. For instance, under No. 76, where is explained to mean also a nostril, nose: it is added, "It is sometimes put for the entire countenance or face, as the nose being the most prominent feature gives a turn of beauty or ugliness to the face accordingly. It is sometimes taken for rage, anger, because the nose and the entire countenance is an index of anger." I have omitted the words printed in italics. If any student should regret their absence, he will find them, and hosts after their kind, in Dee's and Benmohel's Bythners.

4. The roots which David never planted in his Psalms, but which Bythner has sown in that field - and his translators propagated whilst Hebrew scholars were asleep, I have eradicated, and have restored the genuine roots.

5. I have supplied the singular to plural nouns which neither Bythner nor his translators could find.

6. In giving the pronunciation of the Hebrew words in English characters, I have made the following changes. (a) I have represented the vocal by wy in certain positions,

2

by AA", the n to be pronounced as it is in the French-language; slighter than that if possible. I have also represented the long vowel (..) by the diphthong ai, or ay. (:) initial I have represented by an apostrophe. My reasons the student will find in the gram

mar.

7. I have headed each Psalm with a brief summary of its purport, knowing well that a previous correct notion of the theme conduces to help forward the student in his work.

8. To make the study of the sacred tongue, from the Book of Psalms, most pleasant to the learner, I have also prepared for him an English interlineary translation of that sacred volume, on the plan-but on a sounder principleof Montanus, and the Psalter published by the enterprising firm of Messrs. Bagster & Sons. This three-fold cord -viz. the Grammar, Clavis Psalmorum, and the interlineary Hebrew Psalterif properly laid hold of, will unfold to the learner-whether with a master or without-more of the intrinsic beauty of the sacred tongue in one year than unsystematic study of many years.

The triple work will begin to be issued in monthly numbers, as soon as the complement of subscribers' names shall have been received to warrant the author going to press.

Price to subscribers, paying in advance, THREE SHILLINGS per No.; to non-subscribers, FOUR SHILLINGS.

MOSES MARGOLIOUTH, LL.D.

PH. D., &c. &c.

22, Pelham Crescent, South Kensington, S.W.

This triple work will be published under the auspices of the eminent firm of Messrs. BAGSTER & SONS.

The Hebrew Christian Witness:

AN ANGLO-JUDEO CHRISTIAN MAGAZINE.

Ty DлX. "Ye are My Witnesses."—Is. xliii. 10.

No. 3.]

MARCH, 1873.

[NEW SERIES.

WHO IS TO BE THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS?

EVER

VER since the beginning of this year-when it was announced that Lord Romilly intimated his intention to resign the Mastership of the "Rolls' Court "the problem, which heads this paper, exercised the minds of students of jurisprudence and justice, as well as of Providence and politics. The question whether Sir George Jessel, an unbelieving Jewish barrister, is to be or not to be Lord Romilly's successor continues to be warmly debated in divers quarters. What solution the Prime Minister and the Lord Chancellor may be led, or permitted, to give to the important proposition, we have not the means of knowing. We hold, however, that the above question must be taken into consideration in connection with another, namely, "Who are the legitimate and rightful Masters and Pastors of the estates, now under usurpation, by an arbitrary Act of Parliament, by the crown ?" We affirm and maintain that no one possessed of an ordinary share of legal knowledge and a sense of equity and justice could or would withhold his assent and consent to the following solution to the latter problem :-THE HEBREW CHRISTIANS OF ENGLAND ARE THE LEGITIMATE AND RIGHTFUL MASTERS AND PASTORS OF THOSE ESTATES.

We contend that now-when the number of Hebrew Christians has become a great and stubborn fact, and when there are being daily added to that number, so that, at no great distance, we may fairly anticipate the believing Israelites to be more in number, in this country at least, than the antichristian Jews; now that the Mastership of the Rolls' Court is likely to become vacant-is the time for the restoration of the property and estates, so unjustly confiscated, to the Anglo-Hebrew Christians. They have the most ancient and best attested titles to them. The present Anglo-Hebrew Christians have amongst them statesmen and divines, lawyers and financiers, who are well qualified to take upon themselves the offices of Masters and Pastors. They have amongst them Adlers, Bernals,

H

Cohens, Disraelis, Ewalds, Fürsts, Gompertys, Hirschfelds, Isaacs, Jacobs, Kronigs, Levis, Montefiores, Nürnbergs, Osbornes, Paulis, Ricardos, Samudas, Theodores, Vivians, Wolfs, Yateses, Zimmermans. We have drawn up this single alphabetical list at random. We might easily have filled, if we had space at command, several pages with manifold alphabetical lists of the kind.

If Lord Romilly should resign the Mastership of the Rolls, why should not the Hebrew Christian Farrer Herschell, or Henry Liebstein, be qualified as successors to the post of Master? At all events, the monstrous sacrilege ought not to be perpetrated, in the face of Christendom, of appointing an antichristian Hebrew Master of the Domus Conversorum, the oldest Hebrew Christian establishment in this country.

Some of our readers may not be conversant with the history of the origin and vicissitudes of the Rolls' Court; we therefore reproduce here a few passages, on the subject, from Vestiges of the Anglo-Hebrews in East Anglia. The author, when treating his theme in connection with the reign of Henry III., observes :

"In the year 1232, the king having taxed the anti-Christian Jews to the amount of 18,000 marks, and having robbed the Christian Jews of their all, his majesty was moved, it is said, by the wailing and gnashing of teeth, which the purgatorial fire wrung from his tormented sire-the most cruel oppressor of his Jewish subjects-determined on establishing a home for those Jews who sacrificed everything to their convictions of the divine character of the New Testament, where they had board, lodgings, and the means of instruction. Be it known, however, that the king was no loser by the establishment-the house itself was, on some pretext, taken from a Jew, John Herberton by name—and he took care to indemnify himself more than enough by the exorbitant imposts which he put upon the Jewish community from time to time. In the days, when the spoils of the old times are being restored to the representatives of the spoiled, and when Hebrew Christians are being daily added to the Church, it would be but an honest act to restore the property, under trustees, to the representatives of the Anglo-Hebrew Christians of former days. "

The appendices & and н, referred to in the foot-notes, are the following:

G.-"This was the first royal interest taken in the conversion of the Jews. Individual cases of interest in the spiritual welfare of the house of Jacob were to be met with in earlier times than those of Henry III., even in John's time. In 1213, Richard, the then Prior of Bermondsey, built a house for the reception of Hebrew Christians, which he called 'The Hospital for Converts.' A much earlier institution for the same purpose was founded at Oxford, and flourished for a considerable time.

Being a Paper read before the "Royal Archæological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland," at their annual meeting at Bury St. Edmund's, July 22, 1869. London: Longmans, Green, & Co.

† See Appendix G.

See Appendix H.

“Whilst scarcely a vestige of those institutions which were organised by private individuals can now be traced, the vestiges of the royal one stand out to the present day, in bold relief, and seem to demand examination as to the legitimacy of the transfer which has been inflicted upon the Domus Conversorum. A brief sketch of the vicissitudes of the institution up to the present time may not be altogether uninteresting.

"The royal idea seemed to have found favour with some of the prelates of that period. Ten years after the idea was carried out, the then Bishop of Winchester endowed it with one hundred pounds, a considerable benefaction, as money was then valued. In the year 1248, a very rich Jew of London, Constantine Ahef by name, had the misfortune to be convicted of felony, whereby he forfeited all his houses, lands, tenements, &c., to the crown. king bestowed the forfeitures upon his best establishment.

The

“When Edward I. succeeded to the throne, he ordered that every Jew who made an avowal of THE FAITH, and possessed more property than he absolutely required for the maintenance of himself and family, should hand over the surplus to the fund of the House of Converts. The same king also made over to that institution all the fines to which the Jews might be subjected for the seven years following his accession. He also granted to the said "House" the poll-tax which was levied on the Israelites, and all deodands that might come to the crown from similar sources. The establishment was put on a more business-like footing. He remodelled the management thereof, and insisted upon proper accounts being kept of all the revenues belonging to the House, as well as of the outlays in its behalf. Those accounts were periodically to be rendered to the royal exchequer. Should a balance be realised, the same was to be applied towards the improvement of the fabric, and towards the promotion of further means for the service of God.

"After the expulsion of the Jews, in 1290, the usefulness of the Institution gradually declined, and the fabric fell into comparative decay. A report to the same effect was made in 1310, which brought about a thorough repair of the house, the chapel, cloisters, and tenements, but it unfortunately also paved the way for the future misappropriation of the property, and the diverting it from the object of the charity, which the royal founder had in view. The Wardenship of the 'Domus Conversorum' was annexed to the Mastership of the Rolls. It is true that, when the conjunction of the func tions took place, it was stated that no transfer of the revenues of the institution was contemplated, but rather to secure the care and preservation of the House of Converts, with its edifices, chapel, enclosure, and recent buildings ;' but the spoliation eventually followed for all that.

"It is a fact well worthy of notice, that there were some Hebrew Christians in this country between the periods of the banishment and return of the Jewish people. There is no consecutive chronicle of them during that period, but detached accounts are now and then met with which warrant the affirmation. For instance, in the thirtieth year of Edward III., we read of one John de Castell, who was admitted into the Domus Conversorum' by the following writ:-The king to his beloved chaplain, Henry de Ingleby, the guardian of our House of Converts, in our city, London, sends greeting. Because we wish that John of Castell-a convert from the Jewish religion, who lately came into our kingdom of England-may have such support in our said house,

[ocr errors]

from our alms, as others of the same sort have had in the same house before his time. We command you to admit the same John into our house, and that you cause him to have from that house the prescribed allowance for one convert. The king being witness at Westminster, on the first of July.' We also read of a Jew, William Pierce by name, who was converted to Christianity in the fifth year of Richard II., and had a daily allowance of twopence from the funds of the 'Domus Conversorum.' In the following reign of Henry IV., we read of a Jewess, Elizabeth, the daughter of a famous Rabbi Moses, who, having embraced Christianity, had a pension allowed her from that fund, of 'one penny a day above the usual allowance.' The endowment was recognised and made available as late as the year 1686, when two Hebrew Christians received pensions out of the property. It is somewhat suggestive, that notwithstanding that a goodly number of the house of Israel were added to the Church in this country during the eighteenth century, no instance is on record that claims were made on the endowment on the part of the Jewish believers. It shows that the members of the synagogue who had joined the Church were men of considerable wealth. It is also curious to find that in 1738 the royal exchequer granted out of the endowment an annual allowance of five hundred pounds, for maintenance of converts from Popery.' The crowning achievement of misappropriation was effected in the first year of the reign of Her Most Gracious Majesty, when an Act of Parliament (1 Vict. c. 46) was passed, which converted the whole of the Hebrew Christian estates into Crown property. It is a very puzzling act, and might afford ingenious Chancery lawyers a grand theatre for the exhibition of legal skill. The preamble of the bill states that the Rolls' estate was formerly the site of the House or Hospital of Converted Jews,' and that the hereditaments thereto belonging had been granted by Edward III. to the Rolls' Office. The fact, however, is that Edward III. only assigned those estates to that office IN TRUST for carrying out the object of the endowments.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"I never can pass through Fleet-street without casting a wistful glance towards the archway which leads to the chapel which originally belonged to the Domus Conversorum.' Very often indeed have I loitered about the sanctuary itself, with a yearning heart that it might be restored to its original object. It has still its ancient and strong walls of flint and cement, in the same style of building as the white tower of the Tower of London; an upper portion of it having fallen in ancient times, has been replaced by modern brickwork. This stands in the Roll's Court, and the chapel is still in use for divine service, for the benefit of lawyers and others in the neighbourhood.”

H.-"Some thirty years ago, a statement of the particulars contained in the preceding Appendix was drawn up, and submitted to a London solicitor, but he gave his opinion that it was then too late to agitate the subject, as the Act of Parliament had settled it for ever. Recent repeals of Acts of Parliament by other Acts of Parliament would seem to lead one to believe that, if it were too late then to agitate, it is not too late now. All honour is due to the Rev. W. Gray, * for having had the courage to initiate a new agitation. He has kindly permitted me to make use of the following reply, which he received from Mr. J. S. Brewer, of the Public

* Ex-Superintendent of the Operative Jewish Converts' Institution in Palestine Place, Bethnal Green.

« PreviousContinue »