Body found
Andrei Yustschinsky
 

On 20 March (!) 1911 the body of a boy was found on the border of the urban area of Kiev in a clay pit. It was found in a half-sitting position, the hands were tied together upon the back with a cord. The body was dressed merely with a shirt, underpants, and a single stocking. Behind the head, in a depression in the earthen wall, which according to the record of the then Kiev attorney and high school teacher Gregor Schwartz-Bostunitsch was inscribed with mystical signs, were found five rolled-together school exercise books which bore the name "property of the student of the fore-class, Andrei Yustschinsky, Sophia School"; because of this, the identification was made very shortly. It turned out to be the thirteen-year-old son of the middle-class woman Alexandra Prichodko of Kiev.

The Kievskaya Mysl (Kiev Thought) gave the following report at the time about the discovery of the body: "When the body of the unfortunate boy was carried out of the pit, the crowd shuddered, and sobbing could be heard. The aspect of the slain victim was terrible. His face was dark blue and covered with blood, and a several windings of a strong cord, which cut into the skin, were wrapped around the arms. There were three wounds on the head, which all came from some kind of piercing tool. The same wounds were also on the face and on both sides of the neck. When the boy's shirt was lifted up, the chest, back, and abdomen showed the same piercing wounds. There were two stab wounds in the region of the heart, three on the body and several on the sides. The entire body showed approximately twenty wounds. All of the wounds were apparently inflicted upon the naked body, since the shirt showed no tears. The exposure of these wounds excited the greatest outrage among the crowd."

The forensic medical autopsy found 47 piercing and cutting (336) wounds; the wounds on the head, left temple (1) and neck had produced the fatal exsanguination; the loss of blood had been so considerable that the body was close to being empty of blood.

The physicians rendering their expert opinions, the University professor, lecturer for forensic Medicine, Obolonski and the prosector at the same professorship, Tufanov, reached the following conclusions:
1. All of the wounds found on the body of Yustschinsky were produced while he was alive. Of these wounds, those on the head and neck were inflicted during full cardiac activity, while all other wounds were inflicted while cardiac activity was considerably reduced.
2. Likewise, the hands of the boy were bound and the mouth kept closed while he was living.
3. While these wounds were being inflicted upon him, he was in a vertical (that is, standing) position, with somewhat of an inclination toward the left.
4. A stabbing or piercing object served as the instrument which made the wounds. A portion of the wounds were executed by means of an instrument in the form of an awl or of a stiletto of flat, rectangular shape with an edge of two sides sharpened like a chisel. All other wounds could also have been produced by the same instrument. The first piercing wounds were inflicted upon the boy in the head and neck, and the final ones were inflicted in the heart. With one of the heart-stabs, the blade penetrated the body up to the grip, which left behind an impression on the skin.
5. There had to have been several persons who participated in this crime.
6. The type of the instrument and the multiplicity of the wounds suggest that one of the goals of the murderers was to cause as much agonizing pain to Yustschinsky as possible.(337)
7. There was not more than 1/3 of the entire amount of blood which remained in the body itself; the greatest portion of the blood escaped through the veins of the brain, the arteries at the left temple, and the neck veins.
8. The absence of traces of blood in the ditch where the body was discovered, its situation at the place of discovery, and other circumstances suggest that Yustschinsky was slain at another location and only afterwards dragged into the pit in a condition of rigor mortis and leaned up against its wall, and that therefore the place of discovery is not the scene of the crime. -- (We are reminded of Xanten, Skurz, Konitz, etc.)

Based upon these determinations, another expert, the psychiatrist Professor Sikorski, distinguished three peculiarities which preceded the murder: the gradual withdrawal of blood, the causing of special torments, and last of all the murder by a stab to the heart. The latter followed after the victim had served [his purpose] for the first two goals (withdrawal of blood, as an object for torturing) and when the nearness of death was recognized by the murderers. -- By the circumstance that all wounds were cold-bloodedly produced by a sure and calm hand, by a hand which was accustomed to the slaughtering of animals, Professor Sikorski saw in the technique of this murder an indication that

the possibility of such an exact, emotionless and unhurried work was secured
for the murderers in corresponding manner, and he came to the conclusion that
the slaying of Yustschinsky represented an act which was carefully prepared
and which was carried out according to plan under cautious supervision!

The murder excited the public attention of all of Russia -- all the more, when similar events were known from the past, which showed a striking conformity with the existing case.

On 13 May 1911, the Russian Duma was forced to occupy itself with an interpellation which concerned this murder of a boy and which contained the question as to whether the existence of a 'sect' which employed human blood was known to the government, and what it (338) was considering doing to suppress this 'sect.' The interpellations had enclosed a detailed autopsy report in the matter of the murder of the boy Emelyanov which occurred in 1893, from which it clearly emerged that this victim had been murdered according to every rule of ritual-slaughter. -- The reply of the Duma has not become known. At the last Russian trial concerning the attempted murder of the boy Vinzens Grudsinskoi, which had been committed on the night of 2 March (!) 1900, the Ministry of Justice had ordained that questions of ritual-murder were not to be raised! The people, in any case, were convinced that this most recent murder was also a link in the chain of crimes which were all carried out according to a definite system and for a particular purpose.
The Murderers

Immediately after announcement of the crime, the Jewish press displayed an extremely suspicious activity; the Kiev Jewish paper Kievskaya Mysl never grew tired of continually labeling for the court new, naturally non-Jewish persons as the indubitable murderers. In fact, they managed, merely on the basis of information from a press-Jew, to accuse the mother of the murdered boy of the gruesome crime and to put her under lock and key -- she was not allowed to take part even in the burial of her child! We are reminded by this of the entirely similar kind of events in Polna! -- After some time the tormented mother was again set free, since not the slightest suspicion for her guilt had resulted. Then again, suspicion was directed upon the step-father, who was supposed to have committed the murder in order to free himself from his obligation to support [the child], and then, finally, upon other relatives of the murdered boy. This all happened at the instigation of the press-Jew Borchevsky, who had a compliant instrument in the corrupted police chief Mischtschuk. As then later emerged from the speech of the prosecutor, "Mischtschuk had been ordered to believe, and he did believe; he believed that the mother (339) inflicted 47 stab wounds on her child and got rid of him in a sack(2). . .

The inquiries were not made there, -- which would have been necessary -- at the place where the corpse had been discovered, but on the contrary, at a distance of a mile away from it! Mischtschuk was publicly accused of corruption -- he stepped down! As official of the investigation "a new power" appeared "from outside" -- the method is sufficiently familiar [to us]! -- the Commissar Kunzevitch; he preferred to stay in the Grand hotel of Kiev and to place his name merely among press reports. He too was bought! Then the "secret policeman" Krazovski entered the picture, "an able person, who not only was capable of exposing the crime, but also certainly did actually expose it, yet found advantage for himself in keeping to himself his knowledge of the decisive pieces [of evidence]"(3). . .With that, judgement is expressed concerning these kind of 'investigations,' which merely pursued the goal, in alliance with the Jewish press, of drawing away from the tracks of the actual murderers, of gaining time and hopelessly confusing the entire affair, so that even non-Jewish newspapers finally produced completely distorted reports.

But they had not reckoned with the youth of Kiev, "who, stirred within by the crime, held it to be his duty to help with the solution of the case. I am proud to name Golubov. He distinguished himself from the other parties by the fact that he really honorably, unselfishly dedicated himself to the mission, and had to put up with the mockery and the laughter, indeed, the danger to his life from the Jews. (4)"

The student Golubov, named in the speech of the prosecutor, acquired great merit in throwing light upon the crime by taking on the investigation of the case on his own initiative, and had discovered important facts. As a result, however, he exposed himself to the concentrated attacks of Jewish rats as an unintended recognition of his activity, an (340) activity which, to be sure, did not move along in the paths of the professional officials of the investigation prescribed by Jewry.

On the edge of the city of Kiev was located the brickyard of the Jew Zaitsev, with the clay quarry belonging to it. A Jewish hospital, whose dining hall had been converted into a 'prayer room' by getting around legal restrictions, was later erected on the property in 1910. Frequently rabbis were observed there, the whole place -- as the "religious center" of the Jews of Kiev -- was enveloped with a mystery, according to the words of the prosecutor. The Jew Mendel Beilis had been appointed as "guard and attendant." The inhabitants of the territory around the brickyard could be counted on the fingers; only two non-Jews lived at some distance from the kiln; in its vicinity lived a circle of seven Jewish families.

Although the property could have been cordoned off and searched very easily without a large police team immediately after the discovery of the body in the clay pit, nothing of the sort happened. It was striking that on the day of the murder, the 12th of March, no work was performed in the brickyard. The property there was deserted. Work was taken up again just afterwards. The inner walls of a shed of the brickyard were suddenly given a new coat of whitewash. . .

The people knew for a long time where the murderers were to be found -- in spite of the tactics of confusion of the Jewish press. Quite striking, if not to say incriminating, was the behavior of the baptized Jew Breitmann, the publisher of the Jewish paper Poslyednich novostyey, which sought to divert the ever thickening suspicion from the brickyard, to gypsies who were travelling nearby. In his nervous activity, one mistake slipped by him: he accused the gypsies of the blood-superstition! The populace had a sharp ear and asked ironically -- according to the words of the prosecutor -- "How can you believe in the use of blood by the Jews, while a former Jew points at the gypsies, among whom a blood-superstition is supposed to exist? Let one note: no Russian is pointing at them, but a baptized Jew!"

In July 1911 four months after the crime, the investigation official Krasovski now also casually got into the brickyard (341) of Zaitsev, spoke with the manager and held some sort of superficial search, only to appease public opinion or to warn the Jews. He also visited Mendel Beilis, at whose place he found nothing at all suspicious, however.

Now the local gendarmerie -- just as in the Polna case -- acted on their own initiative. On 22 July, (older calendar) [Note: The use of the Julian calendar persisted in some European countries for some time after the Gregorian calendar had been generally accepted and in use by most of the rest of the continent.] Beilis was arrested. Russian sources wrote the following: "The excitement of the populace of Kiev due to the mysterious slaying of the boy Yustschinsky is growing ever greater in extent, all the more, when it turned out that the judicial authorities had to release the relatives of the murdered boy from investigative custody again, who had been accused of being the actual murderers by several Jews, because not the slightest suspicion of guilt could be brought against them. On the contrary, they proceeded to the arrest of the Jew Beilis. . .The Jew Beilis received, shortly before the discovery of the murder, the visit of numerous Austrian(5) Jews. The points of suspicion against the Jews are so extraordinarily weighty, and the entire Christian press of Kiev and Petersburg, as of other large cities, urges that in this case complete clarity be procured, so that finally it can be absolutely determined whether there are really sects among the Jews which commit acts of murder from religious reasons. . ." Krasovski, who had for a long time complete and exact information about everything, now feared losing his criminalist laurels -- possibly he only wanted to extort larger sums from his Jewish wire-pullers -- and unexpectedly gave the explanation that the murder of the boy had occurred neither at the place where the body was found, nor in the presence of his accused mother, but that the boy probably had been dragged away onto the broken clay by the attendant Mendel Beilis! Actually, the Jews concluded a financial arrangement with Krasovski, the typically corrupt Tsar's official, after the arrest of Beilis. . ."They had not believed it possible that matters would be taken so far against them! I do not deny, the legal position of the Jews is a difficult one, their destiny (342) is to a certain extent a tragic one, yet we are all under the influence of Jewish ideas, of Jewish money, of the Jewish press. The press, ostensibly Russian, became the booty of the Jews. Any sort of steps [taken] against the Jews evokes the invectives: 'reactionary,' 'enemy of progress' ! The Jews are judicially without rights, but in reality they have all of Russia in their hands. The promise has come into its fulfillment. We all feel that we are under the yoke of all-powerful Jewry. We may be called enemies of progress and obstructionists, but we cannot close our eyes to the corpse of Yustschinsky! The Jews accuse us of inciting the people against them; but that they themselves want to keep the peace! They know that Beilis is guilty, and because of that they seek to confuse the case, to put it on a false track."(6) -- At Beilis's, notes were found which, among others, listed a Faivel Schneerson. Therewith surfaces behind the accused the fearful shape of the 'Zaddik': ("Saint") of the Hassidim, who is to be seen as spiritus rector [guiding spirit] also of this blood-murder! Schneerson out of Lubovitschy, "at whose name Beilis a family of kosher butchers

the accused Beilis constantly becomes uneasy and wipes the sweat from his brow, while his defense counsel also immediately display an increased activity" (7), comes from an old Hassidic family in Russia, from which come several schächter [ritual-slaughterers] and murderers; the 'Zaddik' is the "Übermensch [super-man] of Hassidism, who occupies almost the same position as Jesus Christ in Christianity," is "sanctified from his mother's womb," i.e., the secret of the ritual-slaughter is passed down from father to son(8). "He crawls out of his mother's womb as completed 'Zaddik'" (Bogrow).

(343) According to the information of Theodor Fritsch, a Salomon Schneerson was condemned to death in 1797 due to a blood-murder proven in all details, brought in chains to Petersburg, but here freed thanks to his influential tribal comrade Petretz. A grandson of Salomon Schneerson, Mendel Schneerson, was involved in a blood-murder trial in 1852 in Saratov. In December 1852, the boy Chestobitov, and in January 1853 likewise a youth, Masslov, both from the poorest classes of Russia, had been kidnapped in the government capital city of Saratov. Their bodies, with countless wounds, were later washed up on the banks of the Volga; both showed signs of circumcision. After proceedings had been tried, the trial had to be postponed for years, just in 1860 -- therefore after eight years (respectively, seven years), of four strongly incriminated Jews, among them Mendel Schneerson, three were supposed to be sent into exile to Siberia, from which their allegedly poor condition of health was spared, however. According to information in the Jewish Lexicon, the Alliance Israélite Universelle intervened with the Russian envoy in Paris in favor of the "unjustly condemned Jews"(9). The chief accused left prison already in 1867 at the instigation of the all too well known Crémieux, the specialist for that kind of trial, since merely "superstitious motives" were accepted! A son of this Mendel, Shalom-Bähr, was held to be a Hassidic 'prophet' to whom the Jews made pilgrimages, his brother Bunya filled the office of ritual-slaughterer. His nephew, finally, was that Faivel who, as was proven, stayed with Mendel Beilis, then mysteriously disappeared, but immediately surfaced again when the danger seemed eliminated for himself personally -- in order to present himself as a witness! "One (344) is allowed to assume that he knew more of the murder than all of those who escaped with their lives know in totality. But it is pure irony to question the man as a witness in this trial, instead of placing charges against him. His statements will most certainly not betray anything," wrote Theodor Fritsch in 1913 in the Hammer(10).

". . .Like all those witnesses who escaped with their lives" -- what does this mean?

We prod our memory, so poor in such matters, and find that in the Trent trial in the year 1475, poison played a large role, and then, for example, in the great Hilsner trial in Kuttenberg in Bohemia (1899) a witness (Marie Pernicek), who had given very essential evidence under oath to the protocol, perished a short time later under the most tortured symptoms of having been poisoned and thus had been rendered 'harmless' forever!

In Kiev these things were repeated, only with the difference that international Jewish criminality went to work still more thoroughly.

Next, a tribal comrade was gathered to his patriarchs -- a not entirely rare phenomenon (Moses Abu-el-Afieh, Damascus; Samuel Rosenthal from Kamin), how interesting and rewarding a task it would be for a criminalist to collect all those cases for once, in which Jews who were held to be not completely 'reliable,' were 'liquidated' by other Jews for reasons of caution! -- The old Jew Tartakovski, living as a sub-tenant with other Jews in the vicinity of the brickyard, is supposed to have loved Andrusha very much -- possibly (certain later statements indicate this) he warned the child, when the schächter Schneerson was staying with Mendel Beilis, which Tartakovski believed must be a sign of impending disaster; in any case, directly after the death of Andrusha, this Jew began to make confused speeches and very soon was found strangled!

The Cheberyakov family belonged to the few non-Jews who lived in the vicinity of this miserable property: the (345) husband, by trade a telegraph official, industrious, of unblemished reputation, as husband a pitiful figure -- his wife all the more resolute and dubious -- who also maintained close relations with the Jews. She invited her Jewish friends to small household entertainments, at which her husband was made drunk for the enjoyment of those present -- so much for this family Idyll! In any case, in their press, the Jews called this remarkable woman a "Lady MacBeth" but treated her otherwise very considerately, in conspicuous contrast to the other non-Jewish witnesses. One got the impression as if they were not entirely certain whether it might not finally occur to Mrs. Cheberyakov to say what she knew.

Witnesses

This woman was the mother of three children, a young boy (Zhenya) and two girls (Valya and Ludmilla); early on the day of the murder, these three were awakened in the absence of their mother by Andrusha; they should go play with him in the clay pit. Having arrived there, they were approached from behind by the attendant Mendel Beilis. He seized the small Zhenya, who was able to tear himself loose, however, and Andrusha. Meanwhile, two more Jews, among them the young Beilis, were added to the group -- they had been stalking the children according to a plan! The little Valya still saw how Andrusha was dragged to the brickyard. This happened on the day of the murder, the 20th of March. These statements of the children leaked out, although press and commissars had made an effort to take no notice of this! The student Golubov had then questioned the children once again and recorded their statements. On 22 July (old calendar) Beilis was finally arrested together with Mrs. Cheberkov; her children were from that time on for the most part entrusted to the care of strange people.

After one week the little ones fell critically ill with symptoms of poisoning, after the "secret commissar" Krasovski had "visited" them and brought them "pies"! Two children, Zhenya and Valya, died in quick succession, while Ludmilla slowly recovered only after many weeks -- according to reports by the press, the children died of "dysentery"!

Now the mother could be set free again -- the most important witnesses had been eliminated, the surviving child, (346) not able to be questioned for a long time, was besides under the influence of the dubious subject Krasovski.
Mother bribed

The mother, for the sake of caution, was next "ordered" at once to Kharkov, in fact this Jewish-owned creature went there -- to where the Jewish 'General Staff" had cautiously retreated(11) -- she was royally received by a "distinguished" society -- naturally exclusively Jewish -- in the chief hotel of the city; one can thoroughly imagine that they expressed their "profound sympathy" to the mother, only to become more clear then: The Jew Margolin, the later defense counsel of Mendel Beilis -- he had omitted for reasons of caution to properly register himself in Kharkov -- introduced himself (according to the prosecutor) to Cheberyakova as "Member of the Reichsrat" [Council of the Reich] and offered her the round sum of 40,000 Rubles, so that she might voluntarily accept the guilt herself for the murder of Andrusha. In front of the court, Margolin later in no way denied this monstrous proposal, but cynically explained that "every job must be paid for"!

From the speech of the prosecutor, we wish to excerpt the following passage for a closer illumination: ". . .There in Kharkov, in the salon of the great hotel, the clinking of gold sounded, and under the sound of silver coins, the entire investigation was running. This company [of people] which the journalists of a Jewish paper have trained, who write so clairvoyantly about this trial, this society wanted that Cheberyakova, after [drinking] champagne, should sign a blank piece of paper which would then have contained her confession as murderess. Cheberyakova turned down the proposal, despite having been assured of a defense by the best advocates and a safe-conduct into foreign lands. And thus this version, too -- how many is it now? -- has collapsed. . . "(12)

Cheberyakova therefore returned to Kiev and immediately had to watch her step, although, as mentioned, she was treated with a certain respect. Characteristically, (347) she broke off from her earlier Jewish dealings, she seemed at last cured by the terrible events! Shortly after the death of both of Cheberyakova's children, a stop was put to the plans of investigation official Mischtschuk, who had conducted the trial five months long in entirely the wrong direction. After his dismissal, he joined -- this may be taken as the conclusive assessment of his person -- that circle of press-Jews who had made a well-planned and expert investigation impossible from the beginning onwards. Mischtschuk now declared publicly that there could no longer be ritual-murder in the 20th century(!). He appeared before the court with new 'research,' from which the perfect innocence of the Jews was supposed to follow; nonetheless, it soon emerged that the former Commissar wished to lead the court astray with the most crude distortions. It succeeded in making short work of him and his accomplices in Kharkov. But only Mischtschuk himself was put in prison; with him, one exponent of Jewry had left the stage!
The Beilis 'Trial' and the 'Intelligentsia of Europe'

Jew charged
At the beginning of 1912, charges were finally filed against Beilis. According to the Nordlivländischen Zeitung [North Livonian Times], in the documents charging Belis it reads: "Beilis is accused, according to arrangement with other still not discovered persons, with forethought, on the basis of religious superstition for ritual purposes, of having seized the boy Yustschinsky, who was playing with other children, and of having dragged him into a factory building. Here his accomplices bound Yustschinsky's hands and stuffed his mouth and killed him by 47 stab wounds in the head, neck, and body. These woundings caused long and severe suffering and brought about a complete exsanguination."

In this critical situation, the Kiev press-Jews indicated three non-Jews who were supposed to have committed the murder, of which all details were given with exactitude. Witnesses were also found who were prepared, after a substantial fee, to swear to anything. But this diversionary maneuver was (348) so stupidly contrived that these new Jewish machinations were soon seen through.

The proceedings against Beilis were not set for 29 May 1912. But once again Jewry stepped in with a new, the seventh announcement, by which suspicion was supposed to be directed toward a crime brotherhood. But with this, such considerable "irregularities" were found on the side of even the new investigation official, that he likewise had to be dismissed from the service and the trial placed in other hands. These intrigues had at least the result that the proceedings against Mendel Beilis were again postponed for about a full year!

These maneuvers literally cost Jewry massive sums. Naturally, the German intelligentsia was also mobilized -- when had it not been misused! -- On 23 March 1912 there appeared a "Declaration" in the notorious Berliner Tageblatt [Berlin Daily] -- in the parlance of the people called "Jerusalemer Straßenblatt" [Jerusalem Street Sheet], signed by perhaps 200 personalities completely unfit to render an expert opinion on the question of ritual-murder, in which a sharply-worded position was taken "against an insane belief, which attributes to the Jews the use of human blood for ritual purposes." At the beginning, it sounds at first almost completely rational: "Whether this Jew (Mendel Beilis) is the murderer, concerning that we cannot judge. It would be illegitimate to anticipate a legal proceeding still pending, and besides that, one pending in a foreign state." In taking up the murder of Andrei Yustschinsky, however, it continues on then with the well-known tirade: "The agitation of the streets (13) has greedily snatched at this event and brazenly claimed that the boy Yustschinsky was slaughtered by Jews, in order to tap off his blood and to use this blood for ritual purposes, in accordance with an allegedly Jewish religious law. This madness, carried unscrupulously to the people, has again and again called forth terrible consequences from the Middle Ages right down to the most recent times. It has seduced the uneducated mass of the people [into committing] gruesome massacres of the Jews, and crowds, led astray by this madness, have (349) befouled themselves with the innocent blood of their fellow-man. And yet never has the mere shadow of a proof for the justification of this insane belief been produced. The most respected Christians knowledgeable about Jewish scripture have shown absolutely, that at no time were the Jews ever incited to the murder of their fellow-man by their religion.

We hold it to be the duty of everyone who has the moral progress of Man close to his heart, to raise his voice against such pathetic craziness. We conclude with a cry of warning to the most respected Russian (?) scholars, writers, and artists, in the awareness that such a warning knows no boundary posts. It must be a matter for the heart of the entire world of culture."

This article could just as well have had a Paul Nathan or a "famous writer" of the same race, as clerical authors -- but it was signed by, besides a half-hundred Christian theologians of all ranks, privy councillors, etc., among others by Prince Heinrich of Schönaich-Carolath, Count Posadovsky, the Reichstag President Kaempf, the Chief Reichstag Vice-President Paasche, who stated at a military council in the Reichstag: "Things would go to the devil if Jews could not be officers" -- moreover, he had a Jewish daughter-in-law -- , the second Vice-President Dove, numerous members of the Reichstag, among them we note the leader of the National Liberals, Bassermann, married to a Jewess, and the "Royal Teacher and City School Councillor of Munich," Georg Kerschensteiner. Many University professors came to help; thus we also find Werner Sombart, "Professor at the Commercial College of Berlin," who besides saw to it that his letter appeared in the same year (1912): The Future of the Jews, in which he first takes on the causes of the hostile-to-Jews mood of this year in Russia and reaches the remarkable determination that the mental and economic life of Germany is already Jewish-permeated to a considerable degree. Although Sombart now even admits, in further developing his theme, that the differences of blood between Jews and Aryans are too great, he (350) nevertheless saw "in the Jewish people, if we regard it as a whole, one of the most valuable types which humankind has ever produced". . ."Which would have to give rise to powerful gaps in the human world, if the Jewish type should disappear. . .We never want to lose the deep, sad Jewish eyes (p. 57)." -- Without Jews, collapse of the economy of the people! "We owe gratitude to Providence, for the not so sparse proportion of Jewish elements. . .Especially since there, where we are most purely German, is the Oriental part which with the Jews intrudes into our gray Northland world, a true restorative. For we might perish, in the end, from pure blondness. Regarded from the purely bodily aspect: what colorfulness the dark Oriental type brings into our Northern environment! How should we want do without the race of Judith and of Miriam" (p. 72 - oy veh, Herr Professor!). "Also in the spiritual realm we might run the danger of suffocating from our blondness, if we did not feel between us the hot Oriental souls of our fellow-citizens." -- When Sombart now determines, that without a doubt there exists a racial distinction between Aryans and Jews, and that on the other hand the "Jewish people represents one of the most valuable types," then the only logical conclusion which remains is that the Aryan part is the less valuable. Actually, Sombart designates (p. 82) the non-Jewish of two competitors (for professorships) as the stupider: "Since the Jews, on the average, are so much more clever and industrious than we are." -- At the time of Sombart the "cleverer" third of the teaching body of Breslau University already consisted of -- Jews! This result, then, also means that "living together with the Jews is rich in blessings for all"!

These are merely some informative samples from one letter of one of the leading German national economists, which he -- probably by no means by accident, let appear still, during the events in Kiev, and by no means as a parody but rather, as Sombart himself emphasized, wished to have understood as an apologia, with which he intended to step out of the reserve which he had imposed upon himself in his book: Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben (1911) [The Jews and Economic Life].

(351)The "living together rife with blessings for all segments [of the populace]" was experienced in the following decades not by the representatives of this intellectual direction, but by the non-Jewish corpus of the people in probably the most horrible way, in their own bodies(14).

The Christian Theology Professor and Privy Church Councillor Dr. D. Rudolf Kittel in Leipzig, Rosenthalgasse 13, likewise one of the subscribers, in his letter originating in these years, Judenfeindschaft oder Gotteslästerung [Hostility to the Jews or Blasphemy] (Leipzig, 1914), in which he took a position as exponent of Judaism with extreme severity against Theodor Fritsch, expressed, like Sombart, his "gratitude for that which we owe Israel." -- "This gratitude will be powerful enough in any friend of the truth, to protect him from this danger (i.e., of 'throwing a stone upon Israel')." In his concluding remarks, Kittel blubbers on that "for their part, the German Jews are also happily prepared to offer that upon the altar of the Fatherland, which Germany demands from each of its citizens, and that the German Jews have rallied to the flag in great numbers. . ." -- So it seemed in the head of that German intelligentsia, who believed that they had to jump into the breach even for the "Russian Jews"!

It was signed by -- to mention only a few more names -- furthermore, the actor Albert Bassermann, Richard Dehmel, Rudolf Eucken, Jena, writer Herbert Eulenberg, Berlin, Gerhart Hauptmann, Agnetendorf, Thomas Mann, Munich, Hermann Sudermann, Berlin -- he had formerly been tutor in Jewish families and journalistic colleague of the "estimable General of the Jewish Colonial Troops," Rickert, (see Sudermann's Bilderbuch meiner Jugend [Picture Book of My Youth], 1922), Ludwig Thoma, Munich, authoress Clara Viebig, and last but not least -- the "Christian" Talmud translator and senior master at a girls' school, Professor Dr. August Wünsche of Dresden, who on the occasion of the Tisza-Eszlár ritual-murder trial of 1882 (352) had once already given testimony(15) against the "blood-accusation of the Jews," just as the Privy Councillor Friedrich Delitzsche, University professor, Berlin, whose father Franz Delitzsche (1890) had likewise rendered an 'expert opinion' against the blood-accusation!(16)

The stereotypical phrases contained in this "Declaration" of a Jewish loaf-about, like "Medieval madness," "leading astray," "craziness," "insane belief," "moral progress," "persecution of the Jews," "innocent Jewish blood," "most respected scholars," "Christian scholars," "cultural world," and so forth, have become wearisome for us -- nevertheless, their longevity seems to be boundless, for the same old chestnuts, only a little up-dated, still adorn today, in well-paid reanimation, the part of the world controlled by Jews -- and that is not inconsiderable!

"Christians knowledgeable about the Jewish scriptures. . ." -- this is naturally first and foremost meant to suggest August Wünsche and both Delitzsches; but we already have gotten to know, among the 'experts' in Tisza-Eszlár, still one other 'authority,' the Berlin University Professor Dr. Hermann Strack! This man now added a "scientific expert opinion" concerning the ritual-murder question to that declaration published in the Berlin Tageblatt, and then also sent to the Russian authorities. -- In 1893, already Strack, who conducted a "Jewish mission" as a specialty and from upon this sloping platform had already sunk to the level of masterly advocate of Judaism, although allegedly Gentile himself, had published a brochure: Die Juden, dürfen sie Verbrecher von Religions wegen genannt werden? [The Jews, are they to be called criminals because of religion?]; this letter is an exposition -- collected with highly suspicious zeal -- of those kinds of petitions with which Strack had showered the courts with the goal of making the blood-accusations raised against the Jews impossible in the future by means of judicial decision, on account of insult to the Jewish religious community -- which did not succeed, however! In 1900, the treatise Das Blut im Glauben und Aberglauben der Menschheit(17) [Blood in the Faith and Superstition of Humanity] followed, in a reworking of a letter in defense of his beloved Judaism which had appeared in 1891.(17)

(353)The composition of the title already betrays the direction in which the case is to be steered. "When the horrible human butcherings of Skurz, Xanten, Polna and Konitz cried ever louder to Heaven, and no one whose eyes were open was able any longer to doubt where the guilty were to be sought, there Strack wrote a book to order, which was supposed to prove to the world the innocence of the Jews in respect to all blood-murders."(18)

"Toward the completion of this work," (among others) the Jews Hirschfeld, Preuß, Moritz Stern -- the 'revisor' of the Trent trial documents! -- and the Rabbi Hoffmann, gave their suggestions so that the book, to which we shall have to return once more in a special chapter, could then finally be found suitable by the "Herr Professor Th. G. Masaryk in Prag" to be translated into Czechoslovakian for getting the ritual-murderer Hilsner released! But the craziest thing Strack himself did, when, for the convincing conclusion of his work, he paraded a list several pages long of "pious" Jews as chief witnesses of Jewish innocence, in addition to numerous Jewish "scholars," -- among whose fine society Paul Nathan and the "missionary" Pieritz were to be found. (19)

Small wonder, that such a commissioned Christian Theology professor was then able to act in times to follow as "expert witness" of the "Central Union of German Citizens of the Jewish Faith" in numerous criminal trials against brave German men, who had attempted to expose the teachings of the Talmud and thereby suggest to the German people the inference to be drawn from these monstrosities, as to the true character of the people belonging to it [i.e., the religion of the Talmud]. Small wonder, also, that Strack then received his alloted place in the "Hall of Honor" of the Jewish Philo-Lexikon (Handbuch des jüdischen Wissens [Handbook of Jewish Knowledge], still in the year 1935 (!), as the "scientific defender of Judaism"!

The court in Kiev was also supposed to be forced by Jewry to accept Professor Strack as "expert witness," without an application for this having been made at all by the Russian authorities! (354) The Hammer wrote this prophetic sentence in response to these machinations(20): "Yet should the Russian court allow itself to be coerced into accepting these expert witnesses, it will be very ill-advised!"

Jew Newspapers try to agitated Jews into killing potential witnesses

In the summer of 1912, the Jewish intrigues in Russia had reached an unbearable pitch, so that the Minister of Justice saw himself forced to take sharp measures in order to put an end to the cunning subversions which were staged for the benefit of the accused. Thus, for example, a vast quantity of Jewish pamphlets of inflammatory content, composed in Ghetto argot, were circulated in the country, in order to inform the uneducated people, the rabble, the agitation of the streets, that Jewish "fellow-citizens" were innocent and holy, while the enemies of progress, who dared to "slander" those saviors so basely, were to be exterminated as quickly as possible from the earth, after which the "Kingdom of God" would appear! -- Six years later, in 1918, and in repetition in our day, the German people were also promised the "Golden Age," if it should resolve to destroy its "enemies of progress". . .

The Gouverneur of Kiev summoned to him some editors of "progressive" papers and urgently suggested to them that they refrain from their attempts at provocation. The authorities [he said] would not allow themselves to be diverted by anything. The Prosecutor Chaplinsky was ordered to Petersburg to make a detailed report to the Minister of Justice.   Since these interviews had remained unsuccessful, the Russian government saw itself forced, on account of incendiary articles in the following days, to arrest several "editors" and to confiscate 24 newspapers and four brochures. Two papers had to stop publication. Finally, 34 (!) Jewish papers were sentenced to pay a total of 10,250 Rubles in fines for falsifications, slanders and lies!(21)

Go to Kiev/Page 2
Back to Table of Contents

 

Source 2

In Fall of 1913, thus after a two-year span of investigation, the proceedings against Beilis were supposed to be opened. On 1 October 1913, (22) Theodor (355) Fritsch addressed himself to this point: "In Kiev there sits a man, in investigative custody for two years due to suspicion of having murdered a twelve-year-old boy. There would be nothing special about this, since murders happen in all times and in all countries. But this time there has to be something special going on, because the entire cultural world has been stirred into an uproar over the fate of this man. . .what could have awakened so much sympathy for this ordinary human being? And how were the wise men in Germany, England, and America -- without a closer knowledge of the situation -- able to judge whether the man was guilty or not?. . .So there has to be a special circumstance having to do with Beilis and his crime of murder, and in fact: Beilis is no ordinary mortal, for he belongs to the 'Chosen People'. And his crime of murder is also of a special type; there's no question of either a robbery- or of a lust- murder. Therefore, because a Jew was accused of a serious crime, for that reason the Jewry of the entire world exerts itself in order to bring criminal justice to a standstill. " -- What had happened in the Kiev of the 20th century was merely what the Jew Maier Balaban(23) described quite frankly as already existing as the rule for relations in Lublin of the 16th century: ". . .When that sort (i.e., ritual-murder) of trial was held in the tribunal, the families of the accused, the seniors of the Jewish community, all came to Lublin to assist their nearest and dearest. The seniors of the Lublin community were first of all bombarded, . . in order to procure for (the accused) at least the smaller comforts. (356) Patronages for the Schöffen [type of lay judges, somewhat like American justices of the peace], for the executioners, for the wardens, had to be gotten. They ran from judge to judge, they sought Jews at the market who were acquainted with the judges, had business relationships with them, were their lease-holders or creditors (!), and an effort was made, through their mediation, to convince the judges of the innocence of the accused." -- But the bribery money was raised by ruthless "contributions"!

The final attempt of Jewry to have Beilis declared ill and to get him out of investigative custody, misfired because the physicians had determined that Beilis was enjoying the best of health!
The Main Trial
The trial was now finally set, for 8 October 1913.

Jewry thereupon undertook a new "offensive," to hinder jurisdiction. In the Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums, [General Times of Jewry](24) the Rabbi Ziegler in Karlsbad issued the following "flaming appeal": "On the day of the opening of the Beilis trial in Kiev, protest meetings should be held by the most respected Jews and Christians in all cities and all communities of the world, to lodge a protest against the affront which was done to Jewry, to the truth, and to justice with this trial. Jews of all states, of all nations, get ready to protest! Let no city, let no town be absent! Gather your best [people] around me, ask noble, truth-loving Christians, theologians (!) as well as laity, to stand beside you; this concerns the honor of that religion which Jesus, too, loved with every fiber of his heart (!). The entire cultural world is united to wash the shame of the Beilis trial from itself!" -- Who does not recall the "appeal" of the chief Rabbi Güdemann in Vienna on the occasion of the Hilsner trial in Kuttenberg in 1899, which likewise beseeched the non-Jews "in the names of Christ and the Virgin Mary," to help an "honest, innocent" little Jew; an appeal which was framed in total similarity in its content, and equally scornful. (357)

Judah always knew how to begin -- some representatives of the "mobilized cultural world" we have already introduced by their signatures [i.e., those mentioned on p. 353]!
Blood Libel

In response, the President of the Kiev Court of Justice, Senator Meißner, stated to a correspondent that the Prosecutor, Fischer, would emphatically seek to prove the facts of the case, that ritual motives were the basis for the murder which was perpetrated upon the boy Yustschinsky. Rabbi Ziegler knew where things were going, he became noticeably nervous: "Given that the State's Attorney makes the claim that Jews require the blood of Christians only against a dark, hidden sect of Jews -- must not the State do all that it can to discover this sect, in order to root it out, branch and trunk? Not a third [of the Jewish population] remains in Russia. It [the State] either declares, with the condemnation of the accused, that the Jewish religion requires Christian blood, -- then it must proceed with every power against the adherents of this religion -- or the Russian government desires to take measures against only some secret sect or other of the Jews -- then it must seek to find the latter, to seize [its members]. In both cases the Jews of Russia are standing on the verge of a catastrophe without peer. . .We declare ourselves to be in unreserved solidarity in this matter with our Russian brothers in the faith."(25)

But the President of the Reich Union of German Jews had become stupid from the loud protests, and had the carelessness to state at a meeting: "As a consequence of this accusation, not only Beilis, but all of the world's Jewry sits in the dock. If Beilis is guilty, then we are all guilty."(26) Out of fear of ensuing difficulties, perhaps, numerous Russian Jews let themselves be baptized. The Lutheran pastor Pir in Helsingfors conducted a land office business, by making out a baptismal certificate for anyone for a fee. The Russian government saw itself forced to warn the police officials (358) against admission of these "Geschwindigkeitschristen" ["speeded-up Christians"] -- as the Hammer (27) named them -- into forbidden areas!

Not fewer than 219 witnesses were available during the 20 days of the trial. Baldgrov had the presidency of the court, while Prosecutor Fischer acted for the State. Unfortunately, detailed reports like those that exist for other ritual-murder trials, are missing; Jewry, for obvious reasons, had hindered an informative, objective coverage.

Court loaded Jewish newspapers

Among the 44 representatives of the press who were admitted, only a few non-Jews were to be found, according to statements of one of the few Jew-free papers, the Petersburg Zemschina! Not only the entire press outside of Russia, but with few exceptions, even the majority of Russian papers had been 'served' by Jewish correspondents. -- In Kiev there was only a single paper whose publishers weren't Jews!

The Hammer, as the single German paper, was able to publish fragments from reliable Russian sources at the end of the year 1913; the outbreak of the World War prevented a detailed account of the trial from the protocols and stenographic records, and after the war Judah 'liquidated' documents and witnesses which had become dangerous for it. The Jewish terror during the trial in Kiev is supposed to have overshadowed everything prior to it -- even the events in Nyiregyháza in Hungary! Thus, witness testimony which was unfavorable to the Jews was simply made unintelligible by means of continuous noise from the galleries; it appeared that the court President did not work up the courage to have these young Jews thrown out.

Golub

When one of the chief witnesses, the student Golubov, wanted to communicate to the court the statements made to him by the little Zhenya Cheberyakov, who later succumbed to the murderous attack by poison, at first a hushed silence prevailed in the hall; but when the expositions of Golubov took an incriminating shape, they were soon drowned out by the galleries of the correspondents by means of riotous noise, moving around, the overturning of seats, the dumping out of coins, knocking with canes, and so forth, so that (359) the the presiding judge finally decided to send up bailiffs, to make continuation of the trial possible!

As we recall, Golubov had been been made to look like a true scoundrel in the Jewish press, while a non-Jewish voice (Novoya Vremya) described his appearance before the court in the following manner: "A hushed silence descended upon the courtroom when the witness Golubov appeared on the witness stand in his white student smock, a tall, gaunt figure with a youthfully fresh and peaceful, almost child-like facial expression, a youngster whom the leftist (read: Jewish!) press had described as an agitator, almost as a footpad [archaic term for a mugger], whereas he presented a thoroughly sympathetic appearance. Golubov delivered his testimony with great unbiased calmness and clarity. . ."

Testimony

"Tell me, my child" -- so inquired the presiding judge Baldgrov -- "what you know of the case!" And the girl related in the hushed courtroom: "Mama went out up to the market. We were sleeping, Zhenya was sleeping, I was sleeping, and Valya was sleeping. Then we heard someone call from the street: 'Zhenya, Zhenya!' It was Andrusha, he was calling Zhenya, [telling him that] he should go with him. Zhenya wanted to go and said I was supposed to look after the room, but I said [that] Valya would cry. Then we all got dressed, locked the room, and went playing on the broken clay. There were still other children there. Then Mendel Beilis came running up behind us; we ran away from [him]. Mendel caught Zhenya and Andrusha; Zhenya tore and tore, and tore himself loose, but Andrusha didn't; Mendel and one other Jew held him by the hands. Also, the young Mendel was there. Valya was scared and didn't run with us, but toward the other side; she saw how they were dragging Andrusha to the kiln. I didn't see that, I saw how they were dragging him off; that they were dragging him to the kiln, Valya told me that."

(360)The Prosecutor: "Do you remember how Andrusha was found?" -- "I remember." Prosecutor: "Why didn't you tell right away, what you are saying now?" -- "I was at my grandma's, and later on they didn't ask me." Prosecutor: "How did you get into the quarry?" -- "There was a hole in the fence." -- Prosecutor: "Were you chased away from there sometimes?" -- "They chased us away because we did damage; sometimes we ran through the bricks." Prosecutor: "Was Andrusha always along?" -- "May God keep him, but this time he did come along." Prosecutor: "And where was your father?" -- "He had to work." Prosecutor: "Were you [children] in the habit of sometimes going to Beilis? " -- "We went with Zhenya after milk. There were Jews there who were praying, or were doing some such thing -- I don't know." The defense counsel for Beilis, Grusenberg, asked: "When Mama returned, did you tell her what had happened?" -- "Yes, I told her." -- Karabatschevski asked: "Did somebody give you a pie?" -- "Yes!" -- "And did you become sick from it?" -- "We all became sick." -- "When did Valya die?" -- "One week after my brother."

Ludmilla screwed her face up, tears were in her eyes. The presiding judge: "Why are you crying?" -- "I'm scared," replied the girl!

Afraid

According to the testimony of this child, Andrusha had not been involved in the tours of the children through the property of the brick works up till then. Now, how did the -- according to the inquiries of the court -- painfully conscientious, almost shy boy, who was at one time supposed to become a clergyman, come to play hookey from his classes at the Sophie School and tramp about on that fatal 20th of March, 1911?

According to the exposition of the State's Attorney, Fischer, a few days before his death, the youngster had received a shotgun as a gift from the Jew Arendar, who lived in the vicinity of the Cheberyakov family, and who had taken in the Jew Tartakovski, who died suddenly under mysterious circumstances; beaming with happiness, he had shown it to his siblings -- all that was missing was the gunpowder, and that was the cleverly laid snare! A day before his death, Andrusha told his mother that "good people" would buy him the gunpowder, on the next day, he forgot about going to school because of it, in order to go to these "good people". . .

A Jew with fox-red hair, who has remained unidentified, had observed every step of the boy in his final hours; after the murder, he vanished without a trace; the page in the list of houses where he would have had to be entered, was torn out! Just as numerous foreign Jews, who -- according to the inquiries of the State's Attorney -- had stopped on the day before the crime at the estate of Zaitsev, were "as if blown away" again. The shed which had conspicuously been suddenly whitewashed, was burned down three days before its appointed judicial inspection! Fischer remarked at this: "This fire is one of the many Jewish advantages we are up against in this trial; it is of help to them. . ."
 

Blood Libel Expert

The expert Dr. Sikorski once again threw light upon the murder from all sides and came to the conclusion that religious insanity was as work here. He stated that the murder of Yustschinsky was distinguished by numerous characteristic signs, that it appears as a striking crime of definite type and evokes by its (362) accompanying circumstances a terrifying impression. [That] its interpretation is not based upon prejudice or fantasy, it is a matter of a genuine event of the 20th century. [He stated that] murders, tied in with the drawing off of blood, have been committed by fanatics, but persons who are healthy and act with deliberation. [That] such murders occur everywhere where Jews and Christians live together, yet Jewish children are never victims of such murders; sometimes, the victims are circumcised beforehand, as the Zaratov trial has shown.

The suspicion is confirmed by the Jews themselves, who immediately take in hand defensive measures at the discovery [of such a crime]. -- Repeatedly, stormy scenes resulted during the questioning of this expert, who participated in the judicial proceedings in spite of a serious heart condition; he was persistently interrupted by the attorneys of the Jewish party in a shameless manner, and his giving of evidence made more difficult in every way. Thus, the defender of the Jews Zarudny thought it necessary to take away his notes and pages from the expert witness, so that Sikorski was obliged to give oral testimony! "How much filth this man was pelted with. . .Other scholars whom we have heard, have been more cautious; one of them, an attorney (!) of surgery, compromised himself for the Jews. For this man, the puncture [wounds] were inflicted upon Yustschinsky -- according to his opinion -- 'only as a jest,' and [the rest of the testimony] of this expert could be filled in according to his views: they [the wounds] have provided endless amusement for him. This expert. . .differed from all other expert witnesses on a total of 25 points. Not only I, but all of Russian society, knows what to think of this man." (29)

Against the psychiatrist Professor Sikorski were also arrayed the Professors of the religious academy in Kiev and Petersburg, Hlogelev and Troizki (baptized Jews?), who, on the basis of Bible and Talmud denied categorically the possibility of the use of human, and in particular Christian blood, by the Jews! -- We thereby brush up against, once again, the 'Intelligentsia' of Europe: "Almost no day goes by, without some sort or other of 'highly significant (363) statement' not only of diplomats, men of science, etc., but also from bishops (even from the 'reformed,' for example Dr. Desidor Baltazzar), cardinals, nuncios, the generals of [monastic] orders, and the like. . . (30) In the overcrowded Russian churches, however, "entire populations [i.e., of towns and villages, etc.] prayed in common for the repayment of the murderers; a profound stirring went through the Russian folk-soul."(31)

But Jewish megalomania had taken on unbearable proportions! The Russian paper Druglavny orel copied the following excerpts from Jewish papers: "The fate of the Russian people -- its future -- not merely in Russia, but in the entire world -- now finds itself in the hands of twelve unenlightened Russian peasants. These have challenged the great Jewish people. With a feeling of disgust, gnashing our teeth with pain and humiliation, we take off the glove which has been stained with our sacred blood (32)."

Gradually, the line was crossed into blunt threats: "The Russian government has resolved to deliver up the Jewish people in Kiev to a general slaughter. Upon the outcome of this titanic struggle depends the fate -- you believe, of the Jewish people -- oh, no! -- the Jewish people is unconquerable -- the fate of the Russian State is at stake: To be or not to be? That is the question for it. The victory of the Russian government is the beginning of its end. There is no way out for it. Take note of it!. . ."

Or: "In Kiev, we will show before the eyes of the entire world, that the Jews cannot be trifled with." -- "If Jewry, up until now, has for tactical reasons concealed the fact that it has held the leadership of the Russian Revolution, so now, after the staging of the Kiev trial, an end must come to that. Let the outcome of this trial be what it will, for the Russian government there is no (364) salvation. So Jewry has decided, and thus will it happen. . ."

And thus will it happen: Five years later, the Romanovs met their end in the Ipatyev House at Ekaterinburg by the hands of their Jewish executioners -- their ashes were scattered to the winds! [Not literally true of all the remains; forensic anthropologists identified the skulls of several members of the Romanov family, some seventy years after their slaughter by the Jews. But these remains were obscurely buried under rubble and might well have been lost to posterity, had it not been for a combination of pure chance and the persistence of those who cherished the memories of the Romanov family as symbolic of the Old Russia which Jewish Bolshevism had murdered along with the Tsar and his family.] The Elders of Zion had already decided upon this -- according to the excerpted press citations -- in 1913, in the year of the Beilis trial!

Another Jewish paper called upon the Jews of all nations to boycott the Russian state bonds on all the stock exchanges, to depress the currency, in order to intimidate in this way the Russian government!(33) In Berlin, the Jew Oppenheim, by profession a college teacher in the capital city of the Reich, raged that Mendelssohn must stop all credit for Russia. . .It's unnecessary to go into the role of the Rothschilds again! It would still be, at best, a curious circumstance, to relate that the London Rothschild (Lionel Walter, a 'Lord') turned to the then State Secretary of the Pope, Merry del Val, with the "very humble request for merciful protection for my persecuted comrade in the faith, for the defense of the truth and justice." In his humble petition, he enclosed a certified copy of the papal brief of Innocent IV which dealt with protection of the Jews!(34) It is known by far too few that the "Miracle Monk," Rasputin, this demonic instrument in Jewish hands, also took a direct influence upon the course and outcome of this trial. According to the words of his Jewish "secretary," Aron Simanovitch, Rasputin declared categorically to the Justice Minister Cheglovitov: "You will surely lose the trial. Nothing will come of it!" -- Even before the trial, Rasputin had prophesied the acquittal of the Jew, but Cheglovitov was "dismissed"!(35)
17 million

(365) The Beilis trial is supposed to have cost the Jews 17 million Rubles. "Some kind of invisible power directs these machinations, an invisible hand disperses money to cover up the murder. . ."(36) -- But to the dubious Vyera Cheberyakova in Kharkov, 40,000 Rubles were "offered" for her signing a blank sheet of paper. The Rubles rolled -- "the golden bullets had shot the truth":

Beilis was acquitted!

Theodor Fritsch commented upon this news in the December issue (1913) of the Hammer as follows: "After all the peculiarities which distinguished this amazing trial, nothing other than this was to be expected. This time, also, much has occurred which was able to contribute to the finding of not guilty, just as in the trials of Skurz, Xanten, Konitz! Throughout five months the investigation was led in a false direction in accordance with a plan; two examining judges, one after the other, proved to have been bribed, had to be relieved of their office and charged. When the third finally took up the sure trail and proceeded to the arrest of Beilis, remarkable things happened: two chief witnesses against Beilis (both the children of Cheberyakova) died a sudden (366) death, and when the examining judge was on the verge of inspecting a shed in the brick yard of Zaitsev, in which according to all probability the murder of the boy took place, this shed suddenly burned down. . .In the trial it has been shown that several witnesses, intimidated by threats, did not dare to directly testify; with others, the ringing of gold demonstrably played its role.

Thus a mysterious power has so strangely led by the nose the Russian court of justice, whose honest intentions are otherwise by no means to be doubted, that one hole remained for the caught fox through which he could slip away. Should the consequences of a sentence of condemnation really have been feared?"

They were feared! The State's Attorney, who, in contrast to his foreign colleagues, had not appeared for Jewry, had quite clearly recognized its machinations in this giant trial -- how else is this passage from his address to the jury to be explained: "You should not allow yourselves to fear [anything that could happen] with the condemnation of Beilis, may the image of the martyr Andrusha Yustschinsky step before your inner eyes; Beilis may be a saint for others, for us he is not. The Russian people will extinguish his name from its memory, his name will not be allowed to beshadow that of Andrei Yustschinsky; for the latter is the name of a martyr. . .We do not fear the consequences of the matter in which we have ventured ourselves, however difficult and serious they might be. . ."

In his analysis of the motives of the crime, State's Attorney Fischer arrived at the conviction, similar to that of the Czech attorney Dr. Baxa (37) in the Hilsner trial at Kuttenberg, that Jewry had imposed once again a blood toll upon non-Jewish humanity -- the Jews have not forgotten it! Fischer explained: ". . . People call the Beilis case an outrageous case; we have experienced days of revolution, in which officials (367) were killed, bombs were thrown at the representatives of power, the people were shot at. . .but even out of this bloody past the murder of Andrusha Yustschinsky stands out by its terrifying character! On a bright day they slay an innocent boy, who never did anyone harm, whom everyone loved; they murder him under unbelievable tortures, they loot his blood. . .But this atrocity becomes a world event, because judgement is supposed to be passed on a [certain] Beilis, because we possessed the impertinence to put a Jew on the dock! If only we had been trying a case concerning Russians, . . .then we would have seen at the defense table neither the cream of the legal profession, nor famous scholars as expert witnesses. . .Who had need of his blood? You have heard the definitive remarks of the expert witnesses, that the crime could not have been committed by madmen or psychopaths. . .what interest had they in the murder? Who are the murderers? One of them sits in the dock. . .With what [crime] is the accused charged? It is determined that two thirds of the boy's blood was removed, that he was tortured. . .Are there sects which use blood? There is an entire series of trials which indicate this: One of these trials has taken place in Austria in the case of Polna. . .These trials extend back through all times. . .In all cases, the Jews have made the greatest efforts to shelter their fanatics. . .They are unusual human beings, these Jews. . .The Bible speaks of bloody sacrifices. . .From the Talmud, one could infer what one wishes. We have the Zohar. The Hassidim appear on the scene, at their head the famous (read: notorious!) Schneerson. . .It is a single current of religious superstition. The use of the blood of Christians by the Jews is beyond any question. Jewry feels the burden of the blood secret, but does not dare lay it aside. . ." -- "We will remain pariahs, as long as it remains," a Jewess had written in 1900, who was complicit in the blood-murder of Konitz. . .

Beilis had been acquitted on [the strength of] Jewish-international pressure -- not, however, by the Russian people! "Believe us, (368) o child, the Russian Mother Earth will open itself and spit from out its depths the miserable wretch who has shed your innocent blood. 'Twelve unenlightened peasants' -- may this conscience of the Russian people stand as surety for you."(38) The files concerning the "Beilis case" had thereby concluded. The outbreak of the World War prevented their systematic revision, and after the collapse of Russia they were likewise disposed of like those in Paris which concerned the "Damascus case" after the take-over of the Ministry of Justice by the "attorney" Crémieux-Smeerkopp in 1870!
Epilogue

400,000
Beilis was "compensated" in princely fashion. The "Israelite Committee" in New York had arranged a collection of about 400,000 Gold Marks, in order to be able to offer their "innocent, persecuted" racial comrade a large farm as a present upon his arrival in the Land of Freedom, after a large number of Jews had already emigrated to America already, during the trial -- in a similar manner, of course, the ritual-slaughterer and "martyr" Buschhoff in Xanten had also been "compensated."

Nevertheless, Beilis seemed to have developed no inclination toward agriculture. According to a report in the Hammer of May 1914 (39), Beilis surfaced suddenly in the land of his patriarchs. In Alexandria he was received like a king at his disembarkation, especially for this purpose a "reception committee" had been formed, at whose head stood a certain Isaac Piccioto. -- This name also seems known to us: Two Jews of the same name had, if we rightly recall, played a role in the ritual-murder trial of Damascus in 1840 -- just as it is a striking phenomenon in general, that at Jewish blood-murder trials names surface over and over again which have been previously mentioned for the same reason (Schneerson!). Orient and Occident reached out their hands to each other once again: the circle was closed! In Palestine Beilis was able to await in peace the coming ruin (369) of the State over which the death sentence had already been pronounced by Jewry, in order to return there, if needed, as an expert in the slaughtering of human beings. . .

The men who had exerted themselves for Right and Justice fared otherwise, however. The shocking scenes and abuses to which, for example, the student Golubov and the psychiatrist Sikorski had been exposed through Jewish sub humanity, still continued on after the conclusion of the trial.

So [it was for] Professor Kossorotov; he had belonged to the scientific experts in Kiev, after the sudden demise -- which remained unsolved -- murder by poison was spoken of here, too -- of the University Professor Obolonski. He had presented his opinion before the court to the best of his knowledge, in full scientific agreement with the other experts, which did not at all please the Jews! A terrible campaign ensued against him in the following period, which continued to his lecture hall in Petersburg University, without his having been protected from these Jewish impertinences by his authority. There were tumultuous scenes in his college. He even wrote about it in the Novoye vremya: "If I had been told earlier about student nonsense, I would not have believed it; but on 23 October (1913), I had to change my opinion. I saw human beings who behaved like beasts, made ear-splitting noise, and were not receptive to a single rational word. I had to believe in that which had formerly seemed incompatible with the concept of [what] a student [is]. . ."(40)

Unfortunately, it isn't clear from the report, whether Kossorotov had clearly recognized the racial membership of his audience who were "behaving like beasts"!

The Beilis trial also lapsed into oblivion; but in the same measure as the memory of non-Jewish humanity failed, Jewish memory retained its liveliness!

In 1917, armed with enormous financial resources, Trotsky was ordered to Russia, in order to create a terra deserta, a desert, out of this land. In a (370) bloodshed which was unprecedented in history up until then, next to which even the bloody slaughters of the Old Testament pale, he fulfilled his instructions to the fullest satisfaction of his secret Jewish task-masters. "The Jewish people is unconquerable -- at stake is the fate of the Russian State," thus was World Jewry able to cry out already, in 1913, in the certainty of its imminent victory!

After the collapse of Russia, there began a genuine round-up against, first and foremost, those persons who somehow or other stood suspected of harboring anti-Jewish tendencies; it is now very instructive to discover that nearly all accusers, witnesses and expert witnesses, who during the Beilis trial in Kiev had spoken out against Jewry, fell as victims to the Jewish-Bolshevist Terror. Thus, in 1919, the Professor of Psychiatry, J. Sikorski, was shot under martial law in Kiev, together with a series of nationally-minded professors, while one of his chief opponents in the Kiev trial, Bechterev, who appeared at the request of the defense in the trial with a denial of the possibility of ritual-murder, received a leading scientific administrative post, thanks to Jewish protection.(41) Naturally, the Kiev judges also bled to death under their Jewish executioners; but even the Russian Justice Minister Cheglovitov, who remained completely indifferent during the trial, whose single "crime" had consisted of having finally, after a period of a year (in the middle of 1912), taken the trial -- which was threatening to become disastrously entangled in Jewish snares, away from the authority of corrupt local officials and getting it underway. . .even he went the same way [as the judges, etc.]. . .

"The murder of the boy Yustschinsky provided the occasion for the Minister Cheglovitov and other enemies of the Jews, to initiate the famous ritual-murder trial against Beilis. But this trial did not have the expected result, its ramifications were, rather, very unpleasant for its originators," confirmed a knowing Jew. . .(42)

(371)"Thus has Jewry decided, and thus had it happened!" But in one of the Hammer issues of 1913 (Nr. 275) there are also these prophetic words: ". . .Once again the Jewish party has triumphed; but -- some more such victories, and it will lose without hope of recovery!"

The final monstrous victory of Jewry was the Jewish-Bolshevist massacre and the sacrifice of racially flawless, and for that reason consciously or unconsciously anti-Jewish classes of the people in numerous nations of the Old World. It was the last victory. Aryan humanity attained consciousness. It won its way to the conviction that it has a common enemy: the Jews

Recognizing the enemy, however, means: taking up the struggle. A new world order is in the process of arising, after unspeakably difficult birth pangs, an order in which the Jew has nothing more to seek and -- to murder!

Back to Table of Contents


Copyright 2001 by R. Belser. Reproduction in whole or in part without express written permission of the translator is not permitted. All rights reserved.

 

Source3

r(p. 354)K i e v 1 9 1 1
------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1
(p. 335)

Andrei Yustschinsky
 

On 20 March (!) 1911 the body of a boy was found on the border of the urban area of Kiev in a clay pit. It was found in a half-sitting position, the hands were tied together upon the back with a cord. The body was dressed merely with a shirt, underpants, and a single stocking. Behind the head, in a depression in the earthen wall, which according to the record of the then Kiev attorney and high school teacher Gregor Schwartz-Bostunitsch was inscribed with mystical signs, were found five rolled-together school exercise books which bore the name "property of the student of the fore-class, Andrei Yustschinsky, Sophia School"; because of this, the identification was made very shortly. It turned out to be the thirteen-year-old son of the middle-class woman Alexandra Prichodko of Kiev.The Kievskaya Mysl (Kiev Thought) gave the following report at the time about the discovery of the body: "When the body of the unfortunate boy was carried out of the pit, the crowd shuddered, and sobbing could be heard.

The aspect of the slain victim was terrible. His face was dark blue and covered with blood, and a several windings of a strong cord, which cut into the skin, were wrapped around the arms. There were three wounds on the head, which all came from some kind of piercing tool. The same wounds were also on the face and on both sides of the neck. When the boy's shirt was lifted up, the chest, back, and abdomen showed the same piercing wounds. There were two stab wounds in the region of the heart, three on the body and several on the sides. The entire body showed approximately twenty wounds. All of the wounds were apparently inflicted upon the naked body, since the shirt showed no tears. The exposure of these wounds excited the greatest outrage among the crowd."

The forensic medical autopsy found 47 piercing and cutting (336) wounds; the wounds on the head, left temple (1) and neck had produced the fatal exsanguination; the loss of blood had been so considerable that the body was close to being empty of blood.
Boy was alive
The physicians rendering their expert opinions, the University professor, lecturer for forensic Medicine, Obolonski and the prosector at the same professorship, Tufanov, reached the following conclusions:
1. All of the wounds found on the body of Yustschinsky were produced while he was alive. Of these wounds, those on the head and neck were inflicted during full cardiac activity, while all other wounds were inflicted while cardiac activity was considerably reduced.
2. Likewise, the hands of the boy were bound and the mouth kept closed while he was living.
3. While these wounds were being inflicted upon him, he was in a vertical (that is, standing) position, with somewhat of an inclination toward the left.
4. A stabbing or piercing object served as the instrument which made the wounds. A portion of the wounds were executed by means of an instrument in the form of an awl or of a stiletto of flat, rectangular shape with an edge of two sides sharpened like a chisel. All other wounds could also have been produced by the same instrument. The first piercing wounds were inflicted upon the boy in the head and neck, and the final ones were inflicted in the heart. With one of the heart-stabs, the blade penetrated the body up to the grip, which left behind an impression on the skin.
5. There had to have been several persons who participated in this crime.
6. The type of the instrument and the multiplicity of the wounds suggest that one of the goals of the murderers was to cause as much agonizing pain to Yustschinsky as possible.(337)
7. There was not more than 1/3 of the entire amount of blood which remained in the body itself; the greatest portion of the blood escaped through the veins of the brain, the arteries at the left temple, and the neck veins.
8. The absence of traces of blood in the ditch where the body was discovered, its situation at the place of discovery, and other circumstances suggest that Yustschinsky was slain at another location and only afterwards dragged into the pit in a condition of rigor mortis and leaned up against its wall, and that therefore the place of discovery is not the scene of the crime. -- (We are reminded of Xanten, Skurz, Konitz, etc.)
Sikorski testimony
Based upon these determinations, another expert, the psychiatrist Professor Sikorski, distinguished three peculiarities which preceded the murder: the gradual withdrawal of blood, the causing of special torments, and last of all the murder by a stab to the heart. The latter followed after the victim had served [his purpose] for the first two goals (withdrawal of blood, as an object for torturing) and when the nearness of death was recognized by the murderers. -- By the circumstance that all wounds were cold-bloodedly produced by a sure and calm hand, by a hand which was accustomed to the slaughtering of animals, Professor Sikorski saw in the technique of this murder an indication that

the possibility of such an exact, emotionless and unhurried work was secured
for the murderers in corresponding manner, and he came to the conclusion that
the slaying of Yustschinsky represented an act which was carefully prepared
and which was carried out according to plan under cautious supervision!

The murder excited the public attention of all of Russia -- all the more, when similar events were known from the past, which showed a striking conformity with the existing case.

On 13 May 1911, the Russian Duma was forced to occupy itself with an interpellation which concerned this murder of a boy and which contained the question as to whether the existence of a 'sect' which employed human blood was known to the government, and what it (338) was considering doing to suppress this 'sect.' The interpellations had enclosed a detailed autopsy report in the matter of the murder of the boy Emelyanov which occurred in 1893, from which it clearly emerged that this victim had been murdered according to every rule of ritual-slaughter. -- The reply of the Duma has not become known. At the last Russian trial concerning the attempted murder of the boy Vinzens Grudsinskoi, which had been committed on the night of 2 March (!) 1900, the Ministry of Justice had ordained that questions of ritual-murder were not to be raised! The people, in any case, were convinced that this most recent murder was also a link in the chain of crimes which were all carried out according to a definite system and for a particular purpose.
The Murderers

Mother arrested

Immediately after announcement of the crime, the Jewish press displayed an extremely suspicious activity; the Kiev Jewish paper Kievskaya Mysl never grew tired of continually labeling for the court new, naturally non-Jewish persons as the indubitable murderers. In fact, they managed, merely on the basis of information from a press-Jew, to accuse the mother of the murdered boy of the gruesome crime and to put her under lock and key -- she was not allowed to take part even in the burial of her child! We are reminded by this of the entirely similar kind of events in Polna! -- After some time the tormented mother was again set free, since not the slightest suspicion for her guilt had resulted. Then again, suspicion was directed upon the step-father, who was supposed to have committed the murder in order to free himself from his obligation to support [the child], and then, finally, upon other relatives of the murdered boy. This all happened at the instigation of the press-Jew Borchevsky, who had a compliant instrument in the corrupted police chief Mischtschuk. As then later emerged from the speech of the prosecutor, "Mischtschuk had been ordered to believe, and he did believe; he believed that the mother (339) inflicted 47 stab wounds on her child and got rid of him in a sack(2). . .

The inquiries were not made there, -- which would have been necessary -- at the place where the corpse had been discovered, but on the contrary, at a distance of a mile away from it! Mischtschuk was publicly accused of corruption -- he stepped down! As official of the investigation "a new power" appeared "from outside" -- the method is sufficiently familiar [to us]! -- the Commissar Kunzevitch; he preferred to stay in the Grand hotel of Kiev and to place his name merely among press reports. He too was bought! Then the "secret policeman" Krazovski entered the picture, "an able person, who not only was capable of exposing the crime, but also certainly did actually expose it, yet found advantage for himself in keeping to himself his knowledge of the decisive pieces [of evidence]"(3). . .With that, judgement is expressed concerning these kind of 'investigations,' which merely pursued the goal, in alliance with the Jewish press, of drawing away from the tracks of the actual murderers, of gaining time and hopelessly confusing the entire affair, so that even non-Jewish newspapers finally produced completely distorted reports.

But they had not reckoned with the youth of Kiev, "who, stirred within by the crime, held it to be his duty to help with the solution of the case. I am proud to name Golubov. He distinguished himself from the other parties by the fact that he really honorably, unselfishly dedicated himself to the mission, and had to put up with the mockery and the laughter, indeed, the danger to his life from the Jews. (4)"

The student Golubov, named in the speech of the prosecutor, acquired great merit in throwing light upon the crime by taking on the investigation of the case on his own initiative, and had discovered important facts. As a result, however, he exposed himself to the concentrated attacks of Jewish rats as an unintended recognition of his activity, an (340) activity which, to be sure, did not move along in the paths of the professional officials of the investigation prescribed by Jewry.

On the edge of the city of Kiev was located the brickyard of the Jew Zaitsev, with the clay quarry belonging to it. A Jewish hospital, whose dining hall had been converted into a 'prayer room' by getting around legal restrictions, was later erected on the property in 1910. Frequently rabbis were observed there, the whole place -- as the "religious center" of the Jews of Kiev -- was enveloped with a mystery, according to the words of the prosecutor. The Jew Mendel Beilis had been appointed as "guard and attendant." The inhabitants of the territory around the brickyard could be counted on the fingers; only two non-Jews lived at some distance from the kiln; in its vicinity lived a circle of seven Jewish families.

Although the property could have been cordoned off and searched very easily without a large police team immediately after the discovery of the body in the clay pit, nothing of the sort happened. It was striking that on the day of the murder, the 12th of March, no work was performed in the brickyard. The property there was deserted. Work was taken up again just afterwards. The inner walls of a shed of the brickyard were suddenly given a new coat of whitewash. . .

The people knew for a long time where the murderers were to be found -- in spite of the tactics of confusion of the Jewish press. Quite striking, if not to say incriminating, was the behavior of the baptized

Gypsies

Jew Breitmann, the publisher of the Jewish paper Poslyednich novostyey, which sought to divert the ever thickening suspicion from the brickyard, to gypsies who were travelling nearby. In his nervous activity, one mistake slipped by him: he accused the gypsies of the blood-superstition! The populace had a sharp ear and asked ironically -- according to the words of the prosecutor -- "How can you believe in the use of blood by the Jews, while a former Jew points at the gypsies, among whom a blood-superstition is supposed to exist? Let one note: no Russian is pointing at them, but a baptized Jew!"

In July 1911 four months after the crime, the investigation official Krasovski now also casually got into the brickyard (341) of Zaitsev, spoke with the manager and held some sort of superficial search, only to appease public opinion or to warn the Jews. He also visited Mendel Beilis, at whose place he found nothing at all suspicious, however.

Now the local gendarmerie -- just as in the Polna case -- acted on their own initiative. On 22 July, (older calendar) [Note: The use of the Julian calendar persisted in some European countries for some time after the Gregorian calendar had been generally accepted and in use by most of the rest of the continent.] Beilis was arrested. Russian sources wrote the following: "The excitement of the populace of Kiev due to the mysterious slaying of the boy Yustschinsky is growing ever greater in extent, all the more, when it turned out that the judicial authorities had to release the relatives of the murdered boy from investigative custody again, who had been accused of being the actual murderers by several Jews, because not the slightest suspicion of guilt could be brought against them.

Austrian Jews

On the contrary, they proceeded to the arrest of the Jew Beilis. . .The Jew Beilis received, shortly before the discovery of the murder, the visit of numerous Austrian(5) Jews. The points of suspicion against the Jews are so extraordinarily weighty, and the entire Christian press of Kiev and Petersburg, as of other large cities, urges that in this case complete clarity be procured, so that finally it can be absolutely determined whether there are really sects among the Jews which commit acts of murder from religious reasons. . ." Krasovski, who had for a long time complete and exact information about everything, now feared losing his criminalist laurels -- possibly he only wanted to extort larger sums from his Jewish wire-pullers -- and unexpectedly gave the explanation that the murder of the boy had occurred neither at the place where the body was found, nor in the presence of his accused mother, but that the boy probably had been dragged away onto the broken clay by the attendant Mendel Beilis! Actually, the Jews concluded a financial arrangement with Krasovski, the typically corrupt Tsar's official, after the arrest of Beilis. . ."They had not believed it possible that matters would be taken so far against them! I do not deny, the legal position of the Jews is a difficult one, their destiny (342) is to a certain extent a tragic one, yet we are all under the influence of Jewish ideas, of Jewish money, of the Jewish press. The press, ostensibly Russian, became the booty of the Jews. Any sort of steps [taken] against the Jews evokes the invectives: 'reactionary,' 'enemy of progress' ! The Jews are judicially without rights, but in reality they have all of Russia in their hands. The promise has come into its fulfillment. We all feel that we are under the yoke of all-powerful Jewry. We may be called enemies of progress and obstructionists, but we cannot close our eyes to the corpse of Yustschinsky! The Jews accuse us of inciting the people against them; but that they themselves want to keep the peace! They know that Beilis is guilty, and because of that they seek to confuse the case, to put it on a false track."(6) --

At Beilis's, notes were found which, among others, listed a Faivel Schneerson. Therewith surfaces behind the accused the fearful shape of the 'Zaddik': ("Saint") of the Hassidim, who is to be seen as spiritus rector [guiding spirit] also of this blood-murder! Schneerson out of Lubovitschy, "at whose name the accused Beilis constantly becomes uneasy and wipes the sweat from his brow, while his defense counsel also immediately display an increased activity" (7), comes from an old Hassidic family in Russia, from which come several schächter [ritual-slaughterers] and murderers; the 'Zaddik' is the "Übermensch [super-man] of Hassidism, who occupies almost the same position as Jesus Christ in Christianity," is "sanctified from his mother's womb," i.e., the secret of the ritual-slaughter is passed down from father to son(8). "He crawls out of his mother's womb as completed 'Zaddik'" (Bogrow).

Ritual murderers stayed with beilis

(343) According to the information of Theodor Fritsch, a Salomon Schneerson was condemned to death in 1797 due to a blood-murder proven in all details, brought in chains to Petersburg, but here freed thanks to his influential tribal comrade Petretz. A grandson of Salomon Schneerson, Mendel Schneerson, was involved in a blood-murder trial in 1852 in Saratov.

 A son of this Mendel, Shalom-Bähr, was held to be a Hassidic 'prophet' to whom the Jews made pilgrimages, his brother Bunya filled the office of ritual-slaughterer. His nephew, finally, was that Faivel Schneerson who, as was proven, stayed with Mendel Beilis, then mysteriously disappeared, but immediately surfaced again when the danger seemed eliminated for himself personally -- in order to present himself as a witness! "One (344) is allowed to assume that he knew more of the murder than all of those who escaped with their lives know in totality. But it is pure irony to question the man as a witness in this trial, instead of placing charges against him. His statements will most certainly not betray anything," wrote Theodor Fritsch in 1913 in the Hammer(10).

The old Tartakovski, living as a sub-tenant with other Jews in the vicinity of the brickyard, is supposed to have loved Andrusha very much -- possibly (certain later statements indicate this) he warned the child, when the schächter Schneerson was staying with Mendel Beilis, which Tartakovski believed must be a sign of impending disaster

". . .Like all those witnesses who escaped with their lives" -- what does this mean?

We prod our memory, so poor in such matters, and find that in the Trent trial in the year 1475, poison played a large role, and then, for example, in the great Hilsner trial in Kuttenberg in Bohemia (1899) a witness (Marie Pernicek), who had given very essential evidence under oath to the protocol, perished a short time later under the most tortured symptoms of having been poisoned and thus had been rendered 'harmless' forever!

In Kiev these things were repeated, only with the difference that international Jewish criminality went to work still more thoroughly.
Tartakovski, strangled

Next, a tribal comrade was gathered to his patriarchs -- a not entirely rare phenomenon (Moses Abu-el-Afieh, Damascus; Samuel Rosenthal from Kamin), how interesting and rewarding a task it would be for a criminalist to collect all those cases for once, in which Jews who were held to be not completely 'reliable,' were 'liquidated' by other Jews for reasons of caution! -- The old Tartakovski, living as a sub-tenant with other Jews in the vicinity of the brickyard, is supposed to have loved Andrusha very much -- possibly (certain later statements indicate this) he warned the child, when the schächter Schneerson was staying with Mendel Beilis, which Tartakovski believed must be a sign of impending disaster; in any case, directly after the death of Andrusha, this  began to make confused speeches and very soon was found strangled!

The Cheberyakov family belonged to the few non-Jews who lived in the vicinity of this miserable property: the (345) husband, by trade a telegraph official, industrious, of unblemished reputation, as husband a pitiful figure -- his wife all the more resolute and dubious -- who also maintained close relations with the Jews. She invited her Jewish friends to small household entertainments, at which her husband was made drunk for the enjoyment of those present -- so much for this family Idyll! In any case, in their press, the Jews called this remarkable woman a "Lady MacBeth" but treated her otherwise very considerately, in conspicuous contrast to the other non-Jewish witnesses. One got the impression as if they were not entirely certain whether it might not finally occur to Mrs. Cheberyakov to say what she knew.

This woman was the mother of three children, a young boy (Zhenya) and two girls (Valya and Ludmilla); early on the day of the murder, these three were awakened in the absence of their mother by Andrusha; they should go play with him in the clay pit. Having arrived there, they were approached from behind by the attendant Mendel Beilis. He seized the small Zhenya, who was able to tear himself loose, however, and Andrusha. Meanwhile, two more Jews, among them the young Beilis, were added to the group -- they had been stalking the children according to a plan! The little Valya still saw how Andrusha was dragged to the brickyard. This happened on the day of the murder, the 20th of March. These statements of the children leaked out, although press and commissars had made an effort to take no notice of this! The student Golubov had then questioned the children once again and recorded their statements. On 22 July (old calendar) Beilis was finally arrested together with Mrs. Cheberkov; her children were from that time on for the most part entrusted to the care of strange people. After one week the little ones fell critically ill with symptoms of poisoning, after the "secret commissar" Krasovski had "visited" them and brought them "pies"! Two children, Zhenya and Valya, died in quick succession, while Ludmilla slowly recovered only after many weeks -- according to reports by the press, the children died of "dysentery"!

Now the mother could be set free again -- the most important witnesses had been eliminated, the surviving child, (346) not able to be questioned for a long time, was besides under the influence of the dubious subject Krasovski.

The mother, for the sake of caution, was next "ordered" at once to Kharkov, in fact this Jewish-owned creature went there -- to where the Jewish 'General Staff" had cautiously retreated(11) -- she was royally received by a "distinguished" society -- naturally exclusively Jewish -- in the chief hotel of the city; one can thoroughly imagine that they expressed their "profound sympathy" to the mother, only to become more clear then: The Jew Margolin, the later defense counsel of Mendel Beilis -- he had omitted for reasons of caution to properly register himself in Kharkov -- introduced himself (according to the prosecutor) to Cheberyakova as "Member of the Reichsrat" [Council of the Reich] and offered her the round sum of 40,000 Rubles, so that she might voluntarily accept the guilt herself for the murder of Andrusha. In front of the court, Margolin later in no way denied this monstrous proposal, but cynically explained that "every job must be paid for"!

From the speech of the prosecutor, we wish to excerpt the following passage for a closer illumination: ". . .There in Kharkov, in the salon of the great hotel, the clinking of gold sounded, and under the sound of silver coins, the entire investigation was running. This company [of people] which the journalists of a Jewish paper have trained, who write so clairvoyantly about this trial, this society wanted that Cheberyakova, after [drinking] champagne, should sign a blank piece of paper which would then have contained her confession as murderess. Cheberyakova turned down the proposal, despite having been assured of a defense by the best advocates and a safe-conduct into foreign lands. And thus this version, too -- how many is it now? -- has collapsed. . . "(12)

Cheberyakova therefore returned to Kiev and immediately had to watch her step, although, as mentioned, she was treated with a certain respect. Characteristically, (347) she broke off from her earlier Jewish dealings, she seemed at last cured by the terrible events! Shortly after the death of both of Cheberyakova's children, a stop was put to the plans of investigation official Mischtschuk, who had conducted the trial five months long in entirely the wrong direction. After his dismissal, he joined -- this may be taken as the conclusive assessment of his person -- that circle of press-Jews who had made a well-planned and expert investigation impossible from the beginning onwards. Mischtschuk now declared publicly that there could no longer be ritual-murder in the 20th century(!). He appeared before the court with new 'research,' from which the perfect innocence of the Jews was supposed to follow; nonetheless, it soon emerged that the former Commissar wished to lead the court astray with the most crude distortions. It succeeded in making short work of him and his accomplices in Kharkov. But only Mischtschuk himself was put in prison; with him, one exponent of Jewry had left the stage!
The Beilis 'Trial' and the 'Intelligentsia of Europe'
At the beginning of 1912, charges were finally filed against Beilis. According to the Nordlivländischen Zeitung [North Livonian Times], in the documents charging Belis it reads: "Beilis is accused, according to arrangement with other still not discovered persons, with forethought, on the basis of religious superstition for ritual purposes, of having seized the boy Yustschinsky, who was playing with other children, and of having dragged him into a factory building. Here his accomplices bound Yustschinsky's hands and stuffed his mouth and killed him by 47 stab wounds in the head, neck, and body. These woundings caused long and severe suffering and brought about a complete exsanguination."

In this critical situation, the Kiev press-Jews indicated three non-Jews who were supposed to have committed the murder, of which all details were given with exactitude. Witnesses were also found who were prepared, after a substantial fee, to swear to anything. But this diversionary maneuver was (348) so stupidly contrived that these new Jewish machinations were soon seen through.

The proceedings against Beilis were not set for 29 May 1912. But once again Jewry stepped in with a new, the seventh announcement, by which suspicion was supposed to be directed toward a crime brotherhood. But with this, such considerable "irregularities" were found on the side of even the new investigation official, that he likewise had to be dismissed from the service and the trial placed in other hands. These intrigues had at least the result that the proceedings against Mendel Beilis were again postponed for about a full year!

These maneuvers literally cost Jewry massive sums. Naturally, the German intelligentsia was also mobilized -- when had it not been misused! -- On 23 March 1912 there appeared a "Declaration" in the notorious Berliner Tageblatt [Berlin Daily] -- in the parlance of the people called "Jerusalemer Straßenblatt" [Jerusalem Street Sheet], signed by perhaps 200 personalities completely unfit to render an expert opinion on the question of ritual-murder, in which a sharply-worded position was taken "against an insane belief, which attributes to the Jews the use of human blood for ritual purposes." At the beginning, it sounds at first almost completely rational: "Whether this Jew (Mendel Beilis) is the murderer, concerning that we cannot judge. It would be illegitimate to anticipate a legal proceeding still pending, and besides that, one pending in a foreign state." In taking up the murder of Andrei Yustschinsky, however, it continues on then with the well-known tirade: "The agitation of the streets (13) has greedily snatched at this event and brazenly claimed that the boy Yustschinsky was slaughtered by Jews, in order to tap off his blood and to use this blood for ritual purposes, in accordance with an allegedly Jewish religious law. This madness, carried unscrupulously to the people, has again and again called forth terrible consequences from the Middle Ages right down to the most recent times. It has seduced the uneducated mass of the people [into committing] gruesome massacres of the Jews, and crowds, led astray by this madness, have (349) befouled themselves with the innocent blood of their fellow-man. And yet never has the mere shadow of a proof for the justification of this insane belief been produced. The most respected Christians knowledgeable about Jewish scripture have shown absolutely, that at no time were the Jews ever incited to the murder of their fellow-man by their religion.

We hold it to be the duty of everyone who has the moral progress of Man close to his heart, to raise his voice against such pathetic craziness. We conclude with a cry of warning to the most respected Russian (?) scholars, writers, and artists, in the awareness that such a warning knows no boundary posts. It must be a matter for the heart of the entire world of culture."

This article could just as well have had a Paul Nathan or a "famous writer" of the same race, as clerical authors -- but it was signed by, besides a half-hundred Christian theologians of all ranks, privy councillors, etc., among others by Prince Heinrich of Schönaich-Carolath, Count Posadovsky, the Reichstag President Kaempf, the Chief Reichstag Vice-President Paasche, who stated at a military council in the Reichstag: "Things would go to the devil if Jews could not be officers" -- moreover, he had a Jewish daughter-in-law -- , the second Vice-President Dove, numerous members of the Reichstag, among them we note the leader of the National Liberals, Bassermann, married to a Jewess, and the "Royal Teacher and City School Councillor of Munich," Georg Kerschensteiner. Many University professors came to help; thus we also find Werner Sombart, "Professor at the Commercial College of Berlin," who besides saw to it that his letter appeared in the same year (1912): The Future of the Jews, in which he first takes on the causes of the hostile-to-Jews mood of this year in Russia and reaches the remarkable determination that the mental and economic life of Germany is already Jewish-permeated to a considerable degree. Although Sombart now even admits, in further developing his theme, that the differences of blood between Jews and Aryans are too great, he (350) nevertheless saw "in the Jewish people, if we regard it as a whole, one of the most valuable types which humankind has ever produced". . ."Which would have to give rise to powerful gaps in the human world, if the Jewish type should disappear. . .We never want to lose the deep, sad Jewish eyes (p. 57)." -- Without Jews, collapse of the economy of the people! "We owe gratitude to Providence, for the not so sparse proportion of Jewish elements. . .Especially since there, where we are most purely German, is the Oriental part which with the Jews intrudes into our gray Northland world, a true restorative. For we might perish, in the end, from pure blondness. Regarded from the purely bodily aspect: what colorfulness the dark Oriental type brings into our Northern environment! How should we want do without the race of Judith and of Miriam" (p. 72 - oy veh, Herr Professor!). "