towards each other by the publick at large, as well as by one who wishes to subscribe himself a Lover of Antiquarian and Architectural Research, but a greater LOVER OF DECENCY.

"A People still, whose common ties are gone, [none; Who, mixt with every race, are lost in A part there are, whom, doubtless, man might trust,

Worthy as wealthy, pure, religious, just; They who with patience, yet with rapture look

Mr. URBAN,

On the strong promise of the Sacred Book." CRABBE'S Borough. Cl, 15th day of Ab. A. M. 5570, 15th of August, 1810. TRUST to your well-known justice and impartiality for the insertion of the following observations, occasioned by perusing Mr. Lemoine's Letter on the Jews, vol.LXXX.p.514.

I

Mr. L. begins by stating, that the only incentive to bring an Israelite to Christianity, is Interest; that is, he is only to be converted by Purchase. I cannot refer Mr. L. to a higher authority (on this particular head) than the "Calvinistic Junta," called "the London Society," &c. for a refutation of the principle of making Jews renounce their faith for mere pecuniary considerations. This Society (not of pious Christians, but of a few zealous Sectarian Enthusiasts) have been most liberal in the dispensation of pecuniary comforts, to the descendants of Abraham; but hitherto without much effect. For I cannot congratulate them on their acquisition of a few boreign itinerant Jews (of very questionable character), or a few children, the most part of whom are the fruits of illicit love, of Jewish fathers and Christian mothers. Mr. L. seems to be the first writer who has made the happy discovery of a

pliancy of disposition in the Jews to become Christians." This but very i agrees with their general conduct and history during the last eighteen centuries, a period of continued and cruel persecutions and proscriptions in every country of Europe, alternately the slaves of Hope and Fear; spared to-day, to be butchered tomorrow. If, under these severe trials, they have remained firm and unshaken, what can induce Mr. L. to

suppose them "pliant" at this time, when their lot has fallen in pleasant places," and when the different nations of Europe seem to vie with each other in acts of kindness to them, as if to compensate for former intolerance, and unjustifiable severity. Mr. L. must at last come to this confession, that, if my brethren are to be converted to Christianity, it must be through an agency far more powerful than that of a few zealous Sectarians.

Has Mr. L. seen this "pliancy" in the few Jews le has known, or knows; such as the late David Levi, and others? I am sorry (as a Citizen of the World) to see Mr. L. has fallen into so many gross errors concerning a People; which every inhabitant of this great City, in the least acquainted with, must know either to be result of misinformation, or the effusions of a strongly prejudiced imagination. However inadequate to the arduous task, I will charitably endeavour to correct some of his mistakes, as a tribute due to truth; in doing of which I will

"Nought extenuate, or set down aught in malice."

Now to Mr. L.'s observations on the Jewish Bye-laws, which he very seriously states they compare to the Laws of Moses! The absurdity of this remark is so glaring as to need but a few words of reply. What if I stated that the Bye-laws of the Whip or Jockey Club were, by its members, thought equal to the Constitution of these Realins! The Bye-laws of the several Jewish Congregations are printed in a language, a mixture of modern Hebrew and Low Dutch; and I could wish Mr. L. to say when and where he saw an English translation, a thing that does not exist. If it did, Mr. L. would not have indulged in many of his remarks. There are five Synagogues in the Metropolis; viz. Great Synagogue, Duke's place; New Synagogue, Leadenhail-street; Hamburgh Synagogue, Church-row, Fenchurch-street; Great Portuguese Jews Synagogue, Bevis-marks; and lastly, the Westminster Synagogue, Denmark-court, Strand (once Dibdin's Sans Souci!) Each of these Synagogues hath its separate Byelaws for their own internal government, &c. These Codes of private regulatory rules no more interfere

with the constitutions and laws of our country, than the rules of an Odd Fellows' Club can be said to interfere with our Penal Code. Had Mr. L. taken the pains to request an honest Jew to explain or read to him these Bye-laws, he would have found them pure domestic regulations, binding only the Congregation who had sauctioned them ; each Synagogue having their separate Code, independent and materially differing from each other. Again: the Jews in the country cities and towns govern themselves, without any orders or commands from the London Vestries. These Bye-laws are considered so purely local, that a General. Commitice is appointed from time to time to revise and amend them, adapted to the exigencies of the times. This will suffice, Mr. Urban, to prove to you, that there cannot exist in the mind of a Jew any analogy between his veneration of the Sacred Laws of Moses, and a few Bye-laws, merely for the local and internal government of the Synagogue. The former every Israelite holds it as blasphemous to alter in any letter or syllable! It is lamentable that public writers should trust so much to hearsay, when, by a few well-directed enquiries, they might have got at truth, and, thus thrown some light on the history of a People so interesting in every point of view. Every writer (with the solitary exception of Mr. W. H. Reid) has fallen into many gross absurdities concerning the Jews; indeed I must give to Mr. Reid (the learned author of "The New Sanhedrin; or, Causes and Consequences of the French Emperor's Conduct to the Jews") my mite of gratitude; for he has indeed been " an advocate for the house of Israel," and has done ample justice to the Continental Jews as well as English ones,

་་

Mr. L. in the first part of his letter having accused the Jews of "pliancy," proceeds (forgetful of that assertion) in the second part of the same leiter, to make them very ignorant" and very "obstinate." How am I to reconcile these glaring contradictions of pliancy and obstinacy? Here Mr. L. seems to be quite misinformed; for at no period since the toleration of the Jews in these Isles were the English Jews in general so well versed in both foreign and domestic Lite

rature,

are

rature, as at this time. Did my friends permit, I could hand you, Mr. Urban, a long list of native talent, not only of Jews, but of Jewesses, whom Mr. L. finds worse than ignorant, many of whom, by their learning and virtues, would honour this or any other country. At no period (in Britain) have the Jews had to boast of more learned or enlightened Rabbies than the Rev. Doctors Hirschel and Meldola, who equally as respected by the Christian community as they are venerated by the congregations they so ably preside over. Dr. Johnson has said, "De mortuis nil nisi verum ;" and I must remind Mr. L. that all the Talmudical and Rabbinical knowledge is not entombed with the late David Levi, who indeed knew but very little of either Talmud or Mishna, compared with the knowledge of it by many private men of our nation, modestly moving in the humbler spheres of artisans and mechanicks, who are not so absorbed in trade, as not to afford themselves a few hours occasionally to study their own history, and that of the country they live in.

Mr. L. accuses the Jews of neglecting their poor. This is very unfounded; for they are very handsomely provided for. The Jews have individually (besides their own poor, who never go to the parish) to contribute to the poor of their respective parishes, in common with their fellow parishioners. They have in London only, upwards of thirty Societies, friendly, for widows, orphans, support of the aged, &c.; all of us, whose circumstances permit, subscribe most liberally to all benevolent and charitable Christian Institutions, whether public, private, or national; and we acknowledge with heartfelt gratitude, in return, the liberal donations of many worthy Christians to our new-erected "Jews Hospital," Mile End Road; for particulars of which I refer you to a recent and very interesting publication, intituled, "London," by John Wallis, p. 375, &c. Indeed, Mr. Urban, that man must be wilfully blind (whether Christian or Jew) who does not perceive the rapid strides the Israelites of every country are making towards a total" moral and political regeneration." Should these crude observations of an unlettered Jew meet your