|
T i s z a - E s z l á r 1 8 8 2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
(p.178)
The coachman of the examining judge, sleeping in the wagon-shed and awakened by the ceaseless
yapping of the watchdog, checked the premises. Near the main house, in the inner yard, he
noticed three persons, who had apparently been positioned as watchmen; they were making
signals in the direction of the street. In the corridor to Bary's room, the coachman
came upon two Jews in kaftans, who -- armed with revolvers -- were conspicuously trying to
get in the entrance door. When challenged, the whole strange crew rushed to the yard gate.
Two kaftan-garbed Jews, pursued by the dog which was at their heels, swung themselves over the
garden fence and thereby a bunch of skeleton keys were dropped. At daybreak, in the vicinity
of the doghouse, a piece of meat was found which the dog, however, had not accepted. A
chemical analysis yielded the fact that it was poisoned with arsenic.
After this incident the examining judge was accompanied on his walks and travels by secret
police and his house guarded day and night. -- So much for the essentials of the report
of Marcziányi.
This assassination attempt on Bary failed -- further such attempts seemed hopeless.
There still remained the main witness for the prosecution, the sixteen-year-old Moritz
Scharf!
On a motion of the examining judge, Scharf junior had been taken into protective
custody, since he himself no longer felt safe with his racial comrades! Later, before
the court, this witness declared when questioned about this: "I was told that they would
kill me, because I have spoken the truth. . ." -- In the decision of the examining
judge of 27 May 1882, the text reads: ". . .with consideration furthermore of the fact
that according to the record of the newspapers it has become public that he (Scharf, junior)
has made incriminating statements concerning his racial comrades, according to which one
can fear that, with the irritable mood of his racial comrades. . .that they will
harm him or try to corrupt him(33), and keep him
from making further depositions -- in consideration of this, especially in his own
interests and for the complete safety of his person (179)
Moritz Scharf will be allowed until further notice to remain in official localities
and stay voluntarily in court custody."
Scharf had therefore been brought into the Comitat House at Nyiregyháza; he
even remained there into August of the next year, not as a prisoner, but as a witness
standing under police protection, who was allowed to move freely besides, who mixed with
the families of the court officials there, was decently clothed and cared for and who even
received private tutoring! What didn't the Jewish newspapers, the Pester Lloyd in
the lead, fabricate: that Scharf had been lodged in a pig sty and sadistically
abused and at the end had been nearly driven mad -- one recognizes here already the intention
of designating the later statements of Scharf as those of one mentally disturbed --
which they [i.e., the Jews] certainly tried to do.
How necessary the police protection in Nyiregyháza was, emerges from the fact that
attacks upon this witness were planned several times. The castellan [one in charge of a
fortress or the security of public building] Henter, to whom Moritz had been handed
over, had been able to make detailed reports also about this to the court. To go into
detail about this here, however, would take us too far from the main narrative.
These living witnesses they had not been able to silence -- but the Protocol of the
four physicians, of 20 June 1882, still remained, which helped to uncover the
shameless subversions of the Jewish manipulators; it existed and could thereby still bring
unfavorable and incalculable factors to bear against Jewry. This danger had been thoroughly
recognized, for already, five days after the first autopsy of the female body which had
washed ashore, the Jewish attorney Heumann applied to the court for an exhumation
and new dissection of the body, which this time was supposed to be performed by "authorities"
since "apparently irregularities and violations of law" had occurred. This impertinent
petition was nevertheless rejected, and in the following period a struggle raged over the
handing over of the body, in which the court was defeated. On 7 December -- thus nearly
a half-year after the burial -- the exhumation actually took place, this time in the presence
of the three Budapest professorial "authorities" Schauthauer, Mihálkovics and
(180) Belki. They declared that the scientific
tools necessary for them were not available at the location and proposed the transportation of
the body to Budapest. The Court of Justice finally consented that a portion of the
body would be transported there. Although the body, as is clear from the 7 December
1882 protocol itself, was found to be in a terrible state of decomposition, which
excluded any pronouncement, and the "corpse, powerfully contracted at the knee joints and
hips, fell into pieces at an attempt to straighten it out,"(34)
these wonder-doctors managed, "in a round-about procedure"(35),
to produce a masterpiece of work "proving" the identification of Esther Solymosi with
the body washed ashore after "long yet necessary digressions with a consulting of the
earlier procedures"(36). The expert opinion of the confidential
agents of the court, therefore the word of four physicians, was supposed to be
"refuted," in that these doctors were reproached with "lack of expert knowledge and
carelessness in the investigation of the necessary facts of the case," as was further also
written in the new expert opinion of the Herr University-professors, with, of course, the
modesty characteristic of their race: ". . .and it is no immodesty if we credit
ourselves in our special fields of expertise with a more comprehensive vision,
a more finely developed feeling for the connection between subjects apparently remote
from each other, than the medical confidential agents of the praiseworthy Nyiregyháza
court, who might be honest men of healing, but are not specialists in the fields
which are at issue here."
The comprehensive vision and finely-developed feeling of this committee were, to be
sure, amazing attributes, which made it possible to reconstruct from a part of a
split-open body, long gone over into decomposition, a fourteen-year-old and, even in
addition to that, a definitely identified girl; these unusual talents of the chosen
authorities of a likewise Chosen People, made the hair of even the Court of Justice of the
Hungarian provincial seat stand on end! It ordered the striking of a portion of the judicial
documents simply in (181) those passages of this professorial
expert opinion which were conspicuously deceitful and at the same time made the decision to
deliver the report of the three professors and the remains of the exhumation which had been
retained, to the Hungarian National Medical Council for verification, with no
possibility of appeal.
This superarbitrium [literally, "above judgement/appeal" -- i.e., the findings of
the Hungarian National Medical Council] repeated in essential points the results of the
first expert opinion of the medical agents of the court and evoked, as Georg von
Marcziányi was able to determine, "the greatest consternation in the circles
of Jewry". Over the members of the Hungarian National Medical Council, the Jewish press
poured a veritable deluge of insinuations and maledictions!
Nevertheless, after the conclusion of these investigations, these documents were delivered
to the Head Prosecutor's Office; the head Prosecutor, Szeyffert, to whom certainly
no anti-Semitic leanings could be imputed, took over setting down the charges in writing and
transmitted them to the Court of Justice at Nyiregyháza.
The Concluding Hearing in Nyiregyháza
The Tisza-Eszlár trial
On 19 June 1883 began the great concluding hearing, after it had been postponed many
times. The investigation had lasted over fourteen months. Accused were fifteen Jews, to
wit:
a) on a charge of premeditated murder: the ritual-slaughterers Salomon
Schwarz and Leopold Braun, the teacher (cantor) Abraham Buxbaum and the vagabond Hermann
Wollner, "beggar without definite place of residence, who already has a police record";
b) on a charge of participation in murder: the temple servant Joseph Scharf,
the estate owner in Tisza-Eszlár, Adolph Junger, the worker Abraham Braun, the merchant
Samuel Lustig, the tenant Lazar Weißstein and the mohel [circumciser] Emanuel Taub;
c) on a charge of accessories after the fact: "because they have made an effort to
frustrate the investigation against the accused by assisting them," the five Jews who
took part in smuggling the body: the raftsmen Amsel (182)
Vogel and David Hersko, and also Yankel Smilovics, Martin Groß and Ignaz Klein.
At their disposal stood not less than five, for the most part Jewish/free masonic, "prominent"
defenders; two defending attorneys were members of the Hungarian Reichstag, who had been
designated for the "defense" on the basis that they had a mandate due to their connection
to "high politics"!
"It is a matter of an affair which could be fraught with grave consequences for a
few million human beings; under these circumstances, one can claim that the number of five
defending counsel was too small rather than too large."(37) --
Next, 80,000 Fl. were made available for taking care of the "smaller expenses" of the
defense(38). At the Jew Guttmann's, the head man of the
Israelite Alliance (A.I.U.) in Vienna, his own telegraphic equipment was set up.
Between Nyiregyháza and the Viennese Jew, his own telegraph connection was thereby
set up, so that the Jews were informed directly and as quickly as possible of every word
that was spoken, without the world outside -- not even the authorities -- being able to
learn anything. -- "A Christian ought to demand it at once! I ask you, Herr Minister,
whether you would allow him this! I don't believe that you would. . ." (The Deputy
Schneider in the Austrian Reichsrat on the 10th of November, 1899.)
The hearing had 138 prospective witnesses. The President of the Court of Justice was
Franz von Kornis, and the state's attorney was the many-times mentioned Eduard von
Szeyffert. He had picked up very definite instructions at Nyiregyháza. The
Jewish press was full of the praise of this man; Paul Nathan as well gives him a
good report card -- which already says it all! He writes: "Eduard von Szeyffert
dealt with this difficult task with perfect tact and reaped for himself the boundless
recognition of the educated (read: Jewish!) world and -- what this means -- the deadly
hatred of the (183) anti-Semites. . ."
(39) The mother of the victim was represented all the more cynically by these Jews, and
without a trace of sympathy: "The old woman Solymosi was a tall, gaunt, bony woman
of angular body type. During the hearings she appeared in dark clothes, and a black
scarf also framed her yellow, parchment-like and expressionless face. There was something
strangely sad in observing these mummy-like features. There was no emotion
to be noted in her face and the single thing which seemed alive was a pair of small blue
eyes, which simultaneously gazed out at the world stupidly and with a superstitious
religiosity. No doubt: the fundamental trait of character of this pitiable woman was
a mixture of stubborn, unshakable devoutness to God and to superstitions. It must
have been easy to awaken the imagination in her that she was an instrument of God.
At least she believed herself to be in a quite special relationship to the Highest One.
From God come the ideas about the end of her daughter. . ."
(40) -- That is what a Jew was able to write in the year 1892 in the Germany of
Wilhelm, by the Grace of God.!
The charge was supported in its essential points on the basis of the protocol statements of
the sixteen-year-old son of the temple servant Joseph Scharf, Moritz, of the
21st/22nd of May 1882. In the public hearing as well, Moritz Scharf repeated
firmly and with certainty his account already given before the examining judge. On the
first day of the hearing there was already a violent scene: "When Moritz Scharf had related
the story of the murder, the accused father began almost to rage against the boy; there
were frightful scenes, when the men, some of them quite old, stood facing the young man,
whom they regarded as the sole author of their misfortune."
(41) -- The old man Scharf suddenly tried to fall upon his son, but was pushed
back again to the bench of the accused by the prison guards. Each of the accused was invited
to comment on the statements of the witness. The Jewish teacher Buxbaum raged: "It
(184) is not true, what this one says, this dog, this
louse!" -- Moritz replied quietly: "You were present too, when Esther was murdered!" --
Buxbaum: "What time was it?" -- Moritz: "Between eleven and twelve o'clock." -- Buxbaum,
beside himself: "I was there? Pfui!" (He spit in the face of Moritz.)
These scenes repeated themselves in the following days of the hearing and took on an ever
sharper tone. On the eighth day of the hearing, Moritz was questioned by the Jewish defense
counsel Heumann about why he always walked about under guard; Moritz replied:
"Because the Jews would kill me, because I have said the truth. . ." -- "If you
had not "barked" (42) such lies, then we would not be here"
confirmed father Scharf resignedly on another day. -- "For an entirely different
reason this (the investigation) could not be ended," the son said in defense of himself.
To this the Jewish defense counsel: "I ask the witness, Moritz Scharf, why the
investigation could not be ended and for what reason it lasted thirteen months." --
The Jewish youngster rebuffed him with: "For the reason that the Jews who remained
behind in Tisza-Eszlár dressed a corpse in the clothes of Esther Solymosi!"
After he had become a witness to the horrifying events in the synagogue, Moritz ran
to his parents, to report to them the things he had seen from his own terrible
vantage-point. President Kornis: "What did you say to your parents sitting at the table?"
-- Moritz: "I told them the situation which I'd seen." President: "What was the answer?"
-- Moritz: "My mother said that I should be quiet!" But the small boy Samu had
overheard something and blabbed it out, which is how the case was set in motion!
Paul Nathan comments about his tribal associate who had been struck from the race:
"Good Heavens, a murder cannot, after all, ruin the midday meal for a man, when one has a
good appetite. . .Therefore the family consumes its meal in peace and as pleasant dinner
conversation Mortiz reports (185) a little joke which he
has just seen. . .Now the midday meal is over ; Father, Mother and son have until this
point no cause to get excited because of this little murder; they won't have any
further disturbance of their Sabbath mood. . .It is a truly idyllic murder,
which has played itself out without anxious preparations, without cautious weighing things
out, everything is entrusted entirely to the kindness of Providence. Were a braggart to
describe at the proper point in an operetta a murder of the type which Moritz
Scharf has, people would break out in clear laughter" -- This is the "writer"
Paul Nathan!
At the remonstrance of his father ("he said to me that 'to you, pork sausage tastes better
than kosher food'"(43) Moritz at last stated that he no
longer wanted to be a Jew, that he had gotten a horror of the Jewish religion. . .
He could only explain the murder of Esther to himself in this way, that the Jews had to
do this according to the doctrines of their religion(44).
The brother of the murdered girl, Johann Solymosi, remarked on the evening after the
disappearance of Esther, how a large number of Jews, among them numerous
foreign ones, came out of the temple and walked over to the Jew Lichtmann. Just
after midnight they left his property again in a body and cautiously moved to the
temple.
Frau Bátori and her daughter Sophie remarked that on the evening of 1 April
light was burning in the synagogue (45) in the vicinity of which
they lived, until late at night, which was otherwise unusual. Around midnight the
rear part of the temple was still brightly lighted.
On the 16th day of the hearing, the peasant woman Cseres from Tisza-Eszlár gave her
account to the Protocol: "In the night in which Esther disappeared, there was a great noise
near us. . .I looked out of the window and saw many Jews come and go. Later the Jew
Großberg came wringing his hands and called out: "God, what have we done, what have
we caused to happen!" A strange (186) Jew, according to his
appearance a Galician, answered Großberg: "Don't worry, nothing will come out of
it!"
The witness Sipoß, who was in service with Großberg at the time of the disappearance
of Esther, stated that on that evening numerous Jews were on the Großberg property
who had conversed excitedly in Jewish dialect; she hadn't understood a word. When she stepped
into the room, old Großman immediately showed her out again with the remark that they had
"something" to discuss.
Furthermore, it was established without objection that the Jews Schwarz, Braun and
Buxbaum had entered the locality already on 31 March, a day before the murder of
Esther and had taken accommodation with the former ritual-slaughterers Taub and
Jakob Süßmann respectively.
Moritz Scharf had repeated his statement before the court, that he had observed the
murder through the keyhole of the inner synagogue door; to the question of the President
about how long he had watched, the witness answered: "Three-quarters or even a whole hour."
Examining judge Bary had put this to the test at the scene directly after the
interrogation of Moritz, to see whether he had actually been able to see what he had
testified: that was the case. The result was recorded at the scene. Now the Court of
Justice undertook the verification of this with the assistance of the state attorney and the
defense counsel; Moritz and his father were brought along. And see -- there was
almost nothing visible through the keyhole; only a narrow strip of perhaps a half of a meter
in the middle of the room was visible! The witness had stated in the Protocols that he had
looked through the keyhole by bending only a little bit and had been able to see well. But now
it was established that the keyhole was located only 85 cm. above the floor, which implied
that Moritz could look through it only by crouching over entirely and only for a few
minutes; he claimed, however, as we see in the Protocol from this local inspection, that
when Bary had taken him there, he did not need to bend over that way then. The basic
result of this local inspection was: ". . .It was further determined that Moritz Scharf
(187) did not see the scene at the [time of] the
inspection." One of the Jewish defense counsel remarked: "With this inspection of the scene
we should have opened the whole case, then we need not have had to hear [the case] for five
weeks long!"
The defense had prudently been careful not to arrange a local inspection at an earlier date,
for in the intervening time this ominous synagogue keyhole was repositioned in such a
clever fashion that at the later examination even the Chief State's Attorney of Hungary,
when he peered through it, according to his own expression, actually "saw nothing"!
(46) [This trick was echoed by the O.J. Simpson case, and the
transparent nonsense of -- to anyone with common sense -- the well-remembered Jewish
shysterism of: if-the-glove-doesn't-fit-you-must-acquit!]
There yet remained to refute the expert opinion of the National Medical Council about the
body washed ashore, in order to be able to also set free the Jews imprisoned on the charge
of smuggling the body.
In the search for a "European authority", whose name alone could cancel out all former
expert opinions, they selected Rudolph Virchow, the Professor and Director of the
Institute of Pathology at the University of Berlin, who had the additional advantage of
functioning as a semi-official liberal-"progressive" Reichstag member. In his "statement
of expert opinion about the autopsy procedures in the Tisza-Eszlár criminal case" of
15 June 1883, Virchow, "the great friend of the Jews"(47)
, actually had the last word, in that he pushed the "unreliability of the
autopsy protocol of the Drs. Trajtler and Kiß of the 19th and 20th of June
1882 into a bright light," although he had not even obtained one part of the body, but
could base his opinion merely on the statements of the Budapest experts.
(188) Thus fell the Superarbitrium of the National Medical Council from
16 March 1883.
In the arguments of the judgement of the first stage we read: "There is circumstantial
evidence, which with respect to the fact that the Medical Council did not communicate the
motivating factors which are the basis of its expert opinion, so that one cannot know on
the basis of which anatomical data the Council deviated from the expert opinion of the
professors in the determination of the probable age of the body, and furthermore, with
respect to the fact that the body was found in the undoubted clothes of Esther (!),
allows the acceptance [of the fact] that the body in question could be the corpse of Esther
Solymosi."
All was in tidy order: The missing girl had gotten lost on her way -- although she of
course, as a child of the village and on a clear day besides, was familiar with every
hill and dale -- fell into the Theiß and after months was washed ashore as a well-preserved,
well cared-for corpse in faultlessly arranged clothes. . .
But just as in the first days, the mother of the victim remained unswerving in [the midst
of] these intrigues; she had answered in response to all questioning: "Gentlemen of the
court, my mother's heart tells me that the Jews, who are sitting on the bench of the
accused, murdered my daughter. The Jews came to me and have offered me a large sum of
money if I would make this voice of my heart be silent -- I cannot do it. . ." (H.
Desportes, p. 239)
The pronouncement of judgment was suddenly hurried into: All accused were acquitted
and insofar as they had suffered economic injury by their long custody pending trial,
the state had to pay everything! "After great mistakes and errors the Nyiregyháza Court
of Justice lets justice rule, indeed, it scorns to throw even the shadow of a
suspicion upon the innocent prisoners"(48)
The court President Kornis directed the following "conciliatory words" toward the
mockingly smiling gang of murderers: "I must admonish you, that you, returning to your
home hearth and (189) Christian fellow-citizens, bring along
peace and modesty and refrain from any such provocation which could lead to the arousal of
excited emotions and to the disturbance of [your] peacefully living together. You
would not wish to ascribe the suffering and vexation you endured (!) to the judge or
to the court of Justice or, finally, to individual citizens, but to the coincidence of
circumstances. You might make friends with the destiny which often interposes itself without
mercy and heavily in the course of life and which is often impossible to avoid even with the
greatest lawfulness and decency."(49) For the mother of the
victim, however, no one had a word of comfort; on the contrary, she was helplessly
abandoned to Jewish scorn and imprecations still during the court hearing; according to her
own statements, the Jews had even finally claimed that she had abused Esther, and because
of that she had gone into the water. . .even ten years later Paul Nathan could spit
out at her in the filthiest manner!
"An uncanny shudder quietly creeps over a person when he views the behavior of Jewry in
this cause célčbre : the Jews, who continuously throw out phrases about
humanitarianism, enlightenment, human rights, tolerance, and so on, and who refer to
the law with daring cynicism in all cases where they have been righteously attacked -- the
same law which they for the most part hold in contempt and trample with their feet --
these Jews first commit an atrocious ritual-murder, cowardly deny it with snide brow,
break out filthy obscenities about the pain of the grief-bowed mother, abuse her
under hypocritical pretexts, mislead the court, cunningly cut the threads of the
investigation, like hyenas dig half-decayed bodies from their graves, switch them around,
dress the false dead body in the garments of the slaughtered one, mutually swindle each
other for the sake of ill-gotten gains, send death threats to judges performing their
duties, plan assassinations of the same, in order to get incriminating court documents
into their possession and will finally, (190) if all this
doesn't help them and the iron ring is contracting around them closer and closer, move on
to corpse desecration in the most disgusting and repulsive sense of the word, in order to
dispel the storm clouds drawing threateningly close above the Jews! This is their
humanitarianism, their enlightenment, their morality, which they proclaim
so hypocritically, standing upon whose postulate -- built upon deceit and lies -- they
have the presumption to strive for religious tolerance, for tolerance for religious rites
like one of these rites which has come to the light of day in the ritual-sacrifice murder in
Tisza-Eszlár. . ."(50)
Both of the higher stages confirmed the judgment of acquittal in full. As if on signal,
the entire body of accused Jews disappeared thereupon from Hungary; Moritz Scharf,
the "betrayer," went as a diamond polisher to Amsterdam; the defense counsel,
however, remained in the country and nourished themselves "uprightly." One of the first
"defenders," the freemason Karl Eötvös, already rewarded before the trial with
payment on account of 80,000 Fl., became a great Hungarian landowner. . .
Epilogue
The acquittal of the accused set lose in the Hungarian people an enormous rage. Eötvös
and his good friend, the Chief State's Attorney Szeyffert, had to leave Nyiregyháza
shortly after the pronouncement of judgement in rash haste and in a closed wagon, under the
curses of the populace and pursued by a hail of stones. In all larger cities of the nation,
especially in Preßburg, Kaschau, Ödenburg, in Budapest and in court locations
themselves, serious clashes occurred, Jewish shops were stormed, and in the comitats
individual Jewish properties went up in flames. Nevertheless, all these things only brought
water to the mills of Judah. . .On 11 September 1883, the already mentioned court
preacher Stöcker spoke at a meeting of his Christian-social party in
(191) Berlin about the outcome of this trial; there he said, among other things
(51): "The trial of Tisza-Eszlár is decided, the accused were
acquitted. . .virtuous jurists, among them two state's attorneys, have assured me that
before the trial they had believed in the innocence of the accused, after the
decision however, they believe in their guilt; they personally consider themselves
fully convinced of the guilt of the accused."
"I was in the country some time after the pronouncement of judgement, and I have found no
person who had the slightest doubt about the guilt of the accused. . ." wrote
Edouard Drumont in his preface to the Geheimnis des Blutes [Secret of the
Blood] of Henry Desportes!
The peasant woman Cseres said on the occasion of her interrogation in the public
hearing that it "was being spread about in Tisza-Eszlár that the Christians are losing
and the Jews are winning"; that the inhabitants of the village had banded together and
angrily discussed the Jewish machinations and they were finally brought back to peace only
by the military. -- Their instincts, not warped by miseducation, had told them that certain
powers were at work to bend this judge's decision!
These rumors already took on firmer shape in an "open letter" which a later defender of the
murder gang, the Jew Bernhard Friedman, directed to the large Hungarian newspapers.
In a letter of 19 September 1882 the text reads, in part: "One sees two outcomes
possible for this investigation. One says that the state attorney's office will
study the case and after there is no acceptable proof, simply apply for cessation of the
trial. But then one says the matter will be taken from the vice-solicitor
Bary and entrusted to cleverer (read: to Jewish! -- the author) and more experienced
hands, so that the errors committed in the investigation can be repaired if
possible." In another passage of this letter it further reads: "One other issue which will
now likewise be decided is this, whether, in case the royal State Prosecutor's Office
should consider a supplementary investigation necessary, (192)
Bary should also be entrusted with it despite the numerous errors which he has
committed -- or another man?
But Bary had understood how to maintain his position with the same energy which he
had employed during the preliminary investigation. Thus actually only the former of the two
possibilities brought up by Jew Friedman remained open. This was the road
taken. Now, who is the great unknown "one" who already could know all this
already, nearly one full year before the judicial decision? Paul Nathan can be
consulted even for an answer to one part of this crucial question, in that he forgets
his talmudic, fox like cunning in one passage in his treatment of the Jewish triumph in
Nyiregyháza and writes(52): "There were in Hungary
a number of people who took up the struggle with courage and genius; by themselves, of
course, they would have been defeated; but in alliance with the public opinion of
educated Europe, they triumphed, and the truth triumphed."
We know this "educated Europe" already from Damascus; the golden Internationale, which
forms the "public opinion" and prepares the Jewish "victory"! But today we have concrete
indications about it: the trial of Tisza-Eszlár became a financial-political
power-struggle between Jewish High-finance and the nation of Hungary which was
dependent upon it and which was already heavily in debt to international High-finance in
the eighties of the 19th century -- and just at the time when the small village by the Theiß
was making news, Hungary was in the process of negotiating with the house of Rothschild
over settlement of its national debt, which was burdened with an excessively high rate
of interest. The completion of this annuity-conversion was supposed to bring an annual
savings of 2.5 million Gulden in interest to the economically beleaguered country. A few
days before the beginning of the main hearings at Nyiregyháza, the Baron Albert
Rothschild sent a sharply worded dispatch to the Hungarian Finance Minister, Count
Szapary; the gist of its contents was that the money-market,
(193)consisting overwhelmingly of Jewish elements, along with the means which
stood at its disposal, would bring it to pass that "the Hungarian state notes would be
depressed to a level which would correspond with that of the Hungarian pronouncement of
law" -- This dispatch was also made known in the press!
The Budapest representative of the House of Rothschild, the Jew Goldschmidt, spoke
in the days before the main proceedings of the criminal trial as the agent of the
"Alliance Israélite" with the Hungarian Minister, Baron Bela Orczy -- after the
"Anglo-Jewish Association" in London had already meddled into this in an unheard of
fashion -- and stated to him categorically that they would like the charges against the
ritual-slaughterers dropped. Furthermore, he threatened him with bringing an
interpellation in the English Parliament, and put to him the impertinent
demand that the acquittal of the accused had to occur not at the first stage of
appeal, but instead immediately at the first judicial hearing!
On 20 July 1883 Justice Minister Pauler received a telegram from Minister
President Tisza, in which the latter asked his Justice minister "to strictly control
and to threaten with dismissal if necessary" the Court President Kornis!
The paper of the Minister President took up this inspiration and wrote: "The Tisza-Eszlár
case compromises Hungary! Other countries point their fingers at Hungary. The world
press pillories us daily. The judgment of the outside world is sovereign, it cannot
by appealed to anyone. Who has brought this shame upon Hungary? Those very people
who have created the Tisza-Eszlár trial! We therefore simply ask: Que usque tandem?
(53) and hereupon demand from them an answer, not in words,
but in deeds."
This battue then sufficed to cause the complete collapse of the Court President, who
up until then had remained unbiased, and to acquit the already convicted Jews with words
which were almost apologetic, and in a manner of what one might call unseemly haste. Jewry
had gotten a "moral satisfaction" but the Hungarian state a Jewish state loan! As
emerges from the journal notes of Justice minister Pauler
(194) of 26 September 1883, after the conclusion of the trial, the
finance-Jew Goldschmidt, on the instruction of the Rothschilds, demanded that the Head
State's Attorneys Kozma and Szeyffert receive honors. Karl Holz wrote
of this infamy: "Both state's attorneys, who were at the service of Jewry, who put the
greatest obstacles in the way of the straight course of the court proceedings, who had bent
the law, were supposed to be honored before the entire Aryan world to the joy of Israel
for this baseness by His Imperial and Royal Apostolic Majesty!"
And the Jewish paper Egyenlöseg still dared to write after the end of the trial:
"Would it be a wonder, if after so much terror, Europe would turn from a nation which
was so weak as not to resist anti-Semitism?!"
Sixteen years later, in 1899, a sensational incident occurred in the Austrian
Reichsrat [state council]. The anti-Semitic Deputy Schneider claimed, in a
long speech, in which he referred back to the blood-murder of Tisza-Eszlár among other
things, that the Hungarian Minister President Count Andrassy, who died in 1890,
had himself admitted to him at that time, upon being asked, that a Jewish blood-murder
had occurred in Tisza-Eszlár. A tumultuous scene ensued; the Jewish deputies wailed: "One
can easily say that, since Andrassy is dead. To whom did he say it?" -- Then the Deputy
Prince Liechtenstein arose and calmly maintained that in a conversation relating to
Tisza-Eszlár between himself and Andrassy, the latter had stated the following: "Indeed,
the Jews murdered Esther Solymosi, but we could not admit that, otherwise 17,000
Jews would have been slain in Hungary the next day -- and from where should we have gotten
the money(54) then?"
Since the Deputy Liebermann von Sonnenberg(55) reported
this incident again in the German Reichstag on 7 February
(195) 1901 as a political fact, concerning whose importance he wanted to be
clear, we have no reason to doubt the historical genuineness of Andrassy's
statement.
The responsible men of one state therefore preferred to look on as the children of their
people bled to death unatoned for under the the ritual-slaughter knives of Galician Jews,
than that they do without money credited from Jewish banks which these had first sucked
out of their hosts!
According to the classification of Paul Nathan, this category of people is to
be accounted part of "educated Europe". We will yet find rich opportunity to subject
this Europe to thorough consideration!
In this connection one ritual-crime ought still to be mentioned as sequel, which
happened in 1895 likewise on Hungarian soil. On the morning of 6
September of that year, in Honter Comitat in Garam-Kis-Sallo, the
farmer Johann Balars sent his five-and-a-half year-old daughter Juliska
with an errand to the gin-shop Jew Ignatz Adler. The girl did not return. On the
10th of September, thus shortly before the "great Day of Atonement," the horribly
mutilated child's body was discovered outside of the place. The Jews had "reconciled"
themselves with Yahweh!
A Catholic clergyman composed a report about this in which the German translation reads:
(56): "The skin of the head and chest of the girl was flayed
off. Cuts from a long, sharp knife were recognizable The body was covered
over and over again with piercing wounds. The autopsy showed that the child had been
starved for several days; then the torture began which must have transpired in such a way
that the little girl was hung up by the feet by iron hooks and had to go though
the torment while alive!
In the body and heart of the victim was not a drop of blood to
(196) be found. Neither on the body nor on the clothes were there any
blood spots.
At the time when the girl disappeared, by the claim of many witnesses three
wagons of Jews arrived at Ignatz Adler's place, among them a
ritual-slaughterer."
The Jews remained, as always in Hungary, unmolested; the Jew Adler was merely questioned
as to whether he had an enemy in the village, at which he named a rich farmer. This man
and his son, a butcher, were arrested, the latter for the reason that at his place, as
was normal for his profession, a bloody apron was found! The entire populace unanimously
accused the Jews of the murder. When the two men arrested had also been set free again,
the incident indeed proved how far Hungary had come. Moreover, Ignatz Adler was
so sure of himself that he was able to bring suit for libel against the clergyman as
"Agitator-Chaplain" and against the Hungarian paper which ran his report! Further,
in Skurz (1884) and in Konitz (1900) non-Jewish butchers had also been accused
of this bestial ritual-slaughter crime; and these accusations became a tried and true
method!
Go to Chapter 4: Skurz
Back to Table of Contents
|