[The purpose of the Digest is informative: Preference is given to papers not generally accessible to our readers. Quotation does not indicate approval.–Editor]
The Jews constitute only one per cent of the men of wealth with the largest incomes in the world, we learn from Dr. Richard Lewinsohn, whose book “Juedische Weltfinanz” has just been published by Hoffman and Kampe (Berlin and Hamburg).
“An investigation regarding international capitalists and their influence,” writes Dr. Lewinsohn, “shows that this is not at all a Jewish specialty. On the contrary, the greatest and most important international trusts and bank firms are ruled almost exclusively by non-Jews. This shatters the charge that the Jews are controlling international finance.”
Citing the list of the 44 wealthiest men (20 to 120 million) which was compiled in 1905 by the Englishman James Burnley, the writer further observes: “This list shows how absurd is the statement made recently in an anti-Semitic pamphlet, without any reference to authoritative sources, giving the wealth of the Krupp family before the war at 250 million marks and that of the Rothschild family at 40,000 million marks. Even at the very peak of their fortune the wealth of all the Rothschilds, including the near and distant relatives, did not reach one-twentieth of the sum which a financial ignoramus, dazed by the conceptions of the inflation period, has given in the interests of the voelkische propagandists.”
It is also pointed out that among the six men with the largest incomes in the United States there is not one Jew, while in England, before the war, the wealthiest individuals and families were, excepting the Rothschilds, non-Jews. Dr. Lewinsohn then gives the following table of Prussian millionaires, before the war, possessing more than 50 million marks each, according to the compilation made in 1912 by Rudolf Martin, a former member of the German government.
1. Frau Bertha Krupp v. Bohlen 187 17
2. Fuerst Henckel v. Donnersmark 177 12
3. Christian Kraft Fuerst zu Hohenlohe-Oeringen 151 7
4. Freiherr Max v. Goldschmidt-Rothschild 107 3–1
5. Hans Heinrich XV, Fuerst v. Pless 84 1.9
6. Hans Ulrich Graf. v. Schaff-Gotsch 79 4–5
7. Freifrau Mathilde v. Rothschild 76 2–3
8. Eduard Beit v. Speyer 76 2–3
9. Franz-Hubert Graf Tiele-Winckler 74 3–4
10. Engelbert Herzog v. Arenberg 59 2.6
11. Graf Franz v. Ballestrem 56 2–3
12. August Thyssen 55 2.6
Among the twelve wealthiest Prussians, there were but three Jews, two Rothschilds and one member of the Speyer family. Freiherr Max v. Goldschmidt–Rothschild, at that time the wealthiest Jew in Germany, stood fourth on the list.
OBJECTS TO PLANS OF “BUSINESS MEN’S COMMITTEE OF TWENTY”
The Jews who are lending their support to the activities of the Business Men’s Committee of Twenty, which aims to secure the aid of the public school system to teach religion on week-days, are criticized by I. L. Bril in the “Jewish Daily News” (Mar. 17).
“Whilst it is proposed to use the churches close to the public schools, efforts may be made to utilize the school buildings if no churches exist near the schools,” Mr. Bril writes. “Next month the attempt will be made to put the plan into operation all over the city. Already there are twenty-five public schools which cooperate with the Committee of Twenty. The teachers in the public schools are the instructors in these religious centers. Of course this service on the part of the teachers is quite voluntary and, it is said, that no child will be compelled to attend any of the religious centers. For the present only Protestant churches are interested in the plan but the statement is made that the ‘movement has the cordial, if passive, support of the Roman Catholic Diocese and of Jewish religious leaders in the city.” We do not know who the ‘Jewish religious leaders’ are who have given ‘cordial support’ to the movement. But whoever they are they do not speak in the name of the Jewish community.
“The great majority of our Jewish public school teachers know very little about Judaism and we believe that they practice still less. Now Judaism is a religion of practice and not of mere theory. What kind of Judaism will be taught? This is very important, for it is bound to lead to strife.”
PLEASED WITH CHANGE OF POLICY IN KOLO
The belief that the election of Hypolinary Hart-glass, who represents the Jewish opposition to the Polish-Jewish Agreement, as President of the Kolo, Club of Jewish Sejm Deputies, was a step in the right direction, is expressed by the “Israelite Press” of Winnipeg.
Picturing the plight of Polish Jewry, which has not been improved since the Polish-Jewish Agreement was concluded, the paper observes:
“Just what the new Kolo President Hartglass, and his colleagues can do to remedy this situation is hard to imagine. One thing is certain; the situation cannot be worse, a more manly attitude towards the government might, at any rate, restore our national prestige, and eventually, perhaps, bring the ruling Polish class to realize that political trickery, deception and contempt for one group of their population, are not instruments calculated to bring about happiness and prosperity in the country.”
ARAB PAPER OBJECTS TO SURPLUS IN PALESTINE BUDGET
Dissatisfaction with the Palestine government because the Palestine budget has a surplus of two million Egyptian pounds, while the budgets of greater countries, England, America, etc., showed a deficit, is voiced by the “Sowt Ashaab,” Palestine Arab paper.
“Is Palestine richer than England or other European countries, whose expenditure exceeds their income?” the Arab paper asks. “Not at all, Economic conditions in Palestine during the past year have been the worst since the occupation. The country is still suffering from a serious financial setback, and a dreadful economic crisis.
“What then, is the secret of this surplus in the budget? He who examines the budget carefully sees that it is due to the levying of excessive rates and taxes, the oppressive and harsh method of assessing and collecting the tithe.
“It seems as if, not satisfied with this surplus, the Palestine Government wished to increase it by doubling the inland postage on papers.”
The program of the Zionist Revisionists, published in our Mar. 19 issue, contains one mistake. It says that the immigration to the United States has never been more than 1/2 per cent of the total population. The correct reading is “never was more than 1 to 2 per cent.”