IV.

The Requisition to the LORD MAYOR of London.

"January 21, 1882.

"To the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor of the City of London.

My Lord,-We, the undersigned, consider that there should be a public expression of opinion respecting the persecution which the Jews of Russia have recently and for some time past suffered. We, therefore, ask your Lordship to be so good as to call, at your earliest convenience, a public meeting for that purpose at the Mansion House, and that you will be good enough to take the chair on the occasion."

Signed by

His Grace the LORD ARCHBISHOP of CANTERBURY.
The Right Hon. the EARL of SHAFTESBURY, K.G.
The Right Hon. LORD SCARSdale.

The Right Rev. the LORD BISHOP of GLOUCESTER

and BRISTOL.

The Right Rev. the LORD BISHOP of OXFORD.

Lord EDMOND FITZMAURICE. M.P.

The Hon. W. ST. JOHN BRODRICK, M.P.

Sir ARTHUR OTWAY, Bart., M.P.

Alderman Sir JAMES CLARKE LAWRENCE, Bart., M.P.
Sir ERASMUS WILSON, F.R.S.

The Rev. the MASTER of BALLIOL.
The Rev. Canon SPENCE, M.A.
The Rev. H. R. HAWEIS, M.A:
CHARLES DARWIN, Esq., F.R.S.
MATTHEW ARNOLD, Esq., F.R.S.
HENRY RICHARD, Esq., M.P.
CHARLES MAGNIAC, Esq., M.P.

Mr. Alderman LAWRENCE, M.P.

F. A. INDERWICK, Esq., Q.C., M.P.

His Eminence Cardinal MANNING.

The Right Hon. and Right Rev. the LORD BISHOP Of
LONDON.

The Right Hon. Lord MOUNT-TEMPLE.

The Right Rev. the LORD BISHOP of MANCHester.
The Right Hon. Lord ELCHO, M.P.

The Hon. F. Leveson-Gower, M.P.
The Right Hon. J. G. HUBBARD, M.P.
Sir JOHN LUBBOCK, Bart., M.P., F.R.S.
Sir DONALD CURRIE, K.C.M.G., M.P.

The Very Rev. the DEAN of Peterborough, D.D.
The Rev. Canon FARRAR, D.D.

The Rev. W. PAGE ROBERTS, M.A.

The Rev. JAMES MARTINEAU, D.D.
Professor TYNDALL, F.R.S.
SAMUEL MORLEY, Esq., M.P.
MICHAEL BIDDULPH, Esq., M.P.
Mr. Alderman COTTON, M.P.

ALEXANDER MCARTHUR, Esq., M.P.

C. A. MCLAREN, Esq., M.P.

V.

At the great meeting held by the Lord Mayor of London at the Mansion House, on February 1st, 1882, with reference to the Persecution of the Jews in Russia, the following speeches were delivered.

The Right Hon. the EARL OF SHAFTESBURY, K.G., said:

The Lord Mayor has rightly described the purpose and character of this meeting. It is, perhaps, special

and peculiar in its character. There may be or there may not be a precedent for such a meeting, but I hold that in these days of what are called the solidarity of nations and enlarged responsibilities and the greatly increased force of public opinion, if there be no precedent, it ought to be established on this very day. (Hear, hear.) I am very glad that the people of England have come forward to make a solemn declaration that, in their belief, there are moral as well as material weapons; that the moral weapons, in the long run, are the more effectual and the more permanent; and that it is our duty to resort to those moral weapons when for the use of the material we have neither the right nor the power. I dare say we shall be asked, “What is the purpose of all your movement? Your document or memorial, if there be one, will be cast aside and thrown into the waste-paper basket." That may be the fate of any document we present; that will not be the fate of the spirit of that document; that spirit will survive and will work its effect upon the hearts of all who can feel or think. I have a very strong feeling, and we all have an opinion, as to the power of any constantly repeated affirmation of a great principle founded upon justice and humanity; it carries with it a prodigious weight. Have we not seen in times past the marvellous influence produced by a manifestation of public opinion founded on such attributes? Even the Sultan of Turkey succumbs to it, and the Shah of Persia, in the very plenitude of his power, yields to it. The First Napoleon, as we read in the memoirs of Madame de Staël, would not suffer her to come to Paris, lest she should draw the world away from him. Was the powerful Emperor Nicholas indifferent to public opinion, and especially the opinion of England? I know, from conversations held with him by one of my most intimate friends, that the Emperor Nicholas felt deeply and acutely

the opinion of England, and shall we not hope and believe that he who now sits upon the throne of all the Russias will feel the influence of the public voice as much as his predecessor? I believe it is so; I believe it is far beyond his power to resist it; I believe, in the words of Richard Hooker in relation to Divine law, that the very least feel its influence, and the greatest are not exempt from its power. It is not necessary to dwell in detail upon the horrible circumstances of the events that have occurred in Russia, marked as they have been by murder, lust, rapine, and destruction. They have been set before the world in the columns of The Times and in other papers. The narratives have been supported by every testimony that could possibly be adduced, and especially by that wise, touching, and unanswerable memorial presented by the Jews' Committee. We followed the details with horror and disgust, and we come here for the purpose of expressing our opinion, and of praying that a stop may be put to atrocities that have disgraced the generation in which we live. To the statements made denials have been offered, and denials coming from official authorities. Of course it was to be expected that should be so; but I conclude from all I have read and heard that the evidence in support of the charges is so overwhelming as to remove all hesitation in believing that they are substantially true. If it be said there is exaggeration, I will give the full benefit of the doubt; but if one-tenth of all that is stated be true it is sufficient to draw down the indignation of the world. There are not only denials, but there are attempts at refutation in those quasi-official documents, which are as truly official as anything that ever came out of the Russian Chancellery; and the authors proceed to cast imputations, and to say that in this movement the people of England are animated by an affected philanthropy, that their object is to set Eng

lish and Russian Society by the ears, and that the movement has the party object of disturbing the peace and happiness of the Cabinet of Mr. Gladstone. (Laughter.) Of all the wild assertions ever made these are the very wildest, Look at the signatures to the requisition; the majority of those whose names are there are not animated by venom and anger against the Prime Minister. If this case were not so serious and appalling I should say that these insinuations were childish and contemptible. Those who make them know the fact and feel it; they know very well that this is a free meeting of free citizens (cheers), and that we come here to express our deep regard for the rights of the human race. It is not simply because those who are persecuted are Jews that we are met here; Englishmen would feel the same sympathy equally for Buddhists, Mahomedans, or Pagans. I know that many have a deep and special feeling towards the Hebrew race; I have it myself; but we are met here upon one grand, universal principle. If there be one thing on earth an Englishman loves better than another it is freedom; he desires that every one should be as free and as happy as he is himself. (Cheers.) We must clear the ground of another charge, for it is said in one of these quasi-official documents that this movement arises out of hatred of Russia. I do not believe it; I will take upon myself to say that the feeling of the great mass of the people of England is one neither of hate nor of fear towards the Russian people. (Cheers.) As for any hatred of Russia in my own case, let me remind you that when a meeting was held to protest against the outrages committed on the wretched Bulgarians I occupied the chair, and I made a statement which I have not retracted, and which I am not going to retract. I did not fear at that time to say that I almost wished to see the Russians on the shores of the Bosphorus. So far from there being