As if to give verisimilitude to the blood-accusation against the Jews, and justify their destruction as bloodthirsty cannibals, a similar incident occurred at about the same time on the island of Rhodes, which belonged to Turkey. A boy of ten years of age, the son of a Greek peasant, had hanged himself, and the Christians hastened to charge the Jews with his murder. The European consuls took the matter in hand, and demanded of the governor, Jussuf Pasha, a strict investigation against the Jews. Upon the evidence of two Greek women that the boy had followed a Jew of Rhodes, the man was arrested, tried, imprisoned, and, because of his denial, inhumanly tortured. His nostrils were pierced by an iron wire, red-hot coals placed upon his head, and a heavy stone upon his breast. This was done or approved by Europeans and Christians, consuls of the European powers, of England, France, and Sweden. Here, too, the Austrian consul took no part in the barbarous persecution. The torture was applied to the accused Jew by his officers without the knowledge of the Pasha. The confession which they desired to obtain was that he had killed the Greek boy to send his blood to the chief rabbi at Constantinople. It was a sort of conspiracy of the Christians in Turkey against the Jews, to bring them to the edge of the precipice, perhaps due to envy, because the young Sultan, Abdul Meg'id, on ascending the throne, in his congratulatory address (Hatti-Sherif of Gulhane) had conceded equal privileges to all subjects of his kingdom, Jews included. The Greeks and Latins in Turkey thought but little of their freedom, because they had to share it with the hated Jews.
Induced by the cruel torture, the half lifeless Jew in Rhodes made a confession. He incriminated several Jews in the murder of the boy, hoping that they had already fled from fear of persecution. But some of them were still in Rhodes. As in Damascus, they were incarcerated, tortured, and brought near to death's door. Nevertheless they remained firm. The consuls then ordered the Ghetto to be closed, so that no one might pass in and out, and the Jews might be unable to lay their complaints before the Pasha, or even before the Sultan. For three days the Jews received no food from outside. Greeks were constantly prowling around the Ghetto to throw in bones, to be able to say afterwards that they were the bones of a murdered Christian. The Austrian consul, who at first had taken the part of the Jews, was ultimately induced to join their enemies.
In consequence of this double accusation, a perfect storm arose against the Jews in Syria and Turkey. In Djabar, near Damascus, the mob broke into the synagogue, pillaged and destroyed it, and tore the scrolls of the Law to shreds. In Beyrout the Jews were protected from ill-treatment by the interposition of Laurilla, the Dutch consul, and Sason, the Prussian consul. The spirit of enmity spread as far as Smyrna, and was attended by many attacks upon the Jews.
Was it a mere accident that at the same time (beginning of March, 1840) a blood accusation was raised against a Jew in Rhenish Prussia, in Jülich? A Christian girl, nine years of age, asserted that a Jew had stabbed her. Her little brother, six years old, confirmed her statement. A Jew and his wife, who happened to be journeying through Jülich, were identified by the children as the criminals, and the girl added that the Jew at the same time had killed an old Christian with a knife. If truth speaks from the mouth of children, this Jew would have had to be sentenced as a murderer of Christians, a vampire. If the torture had been applied, an avowal of the crime would probably have been extorted from the Jew and his wife. But a strict judicial inquiry elicited that the statements of the children were idle falsehoods and deception. The Christian supposed to have been murdered was alive. The pretended wound on the girl's body was only a smudge of blood. The accused Jew was acquitted, and a rumor, referred to by the state attorney himself, charged two Christians from Düsseldorf with having drummed these horrible accusations into the children's heads.
In Rhenish Prussia the truth and the innocence of the Jews were brought to light quickly. In Damascus and Rhodes, on the other hand, the struggle was prolonged, because fiendish European Christians had intentionally woven such a network of lies, that even guileless persons were deceived. In vain the ill-treated Jews wrung their hands, and entreated their European brethren to aid them by means of their more favorable circumstances. They found it exceedingly difficult to bring the truth to light and to unmask villainy. Religious fanaticism, Judæophobia, and political party passions, all combined to assist the triumph of falsehood. The underhand plotters employed the art of Guttenberg—whose four hundredth jubilee was then being celebrated—to circulate accusations throughout the world that Jews were eager drinkers of Christian blood.
Ratti Menton arranged that a report from Damascus presenting the events from his point of view be inserted in the French journals to inform the European world that the Jews had murdered a priest and his servant, and had collected the blood for their unleavened bread for the Passover. One corpse had been thrown into the canal in their quarter, and the other into a Jew's cellar. They had confessed, acknowledging that they had committed the crime in order to celebrate the mysteries of their religion. Without Ratti Menton's zeal the culprits would not have been discovered, and without his interposition the Jewish quarter and all its inhabitants would have been destroyed. Not only the newspapers controlled by the Catholic clergy zealously spread this charge against the Jews, but also the liberal journals, in order to glorify the power of France in the East, published as facts all the distorted statements from Damascus. The eyes of Europe being at this time directed towards the entanglements in Turkey, the false reports rapidly spread through the veins of European journalism. The hatred of the Middle Ages against the Jews might have been easily re-awakened, and might have caused scenes of blood to be re-enacted. The Jews of Europe were filled with horror that in the broad daylight of the nineteenth century they had still to contend against the dark specter of the blood accusation, that it might not drag them down into the grave.
The press, which had been used by their adversaries, was now employed to greater advantage in the cause of the Jews. Calumnies and lying accusations against them could no longer be concealed under the veil of secrecy. There were courageous Jews who tore off the mask of virtue from falsehood and hypocrisy. Such a man was Adolf Crémieux (born 1796, died 1880), who shortly before this time had celebrated triumphs of eloquence. This extraordinary man was destined, as will be shown, to become the bold and powerful advocate of the Jews in their tribulation. The false charges brought against them in Damascus made him their advocate, and induced him to take an active part in the history of his co-religionists. Crémieux, who, among the many talented orators of France, was considered an exceptionally fine speaker, employed his great gifts in the defense of innocent prisoners, without distinction of creed, position, or party. Although Crémieux was at this time a member of the Franco-Jewish consistory, he had not hitherto troubled himself much about Jewish affairs; his soul was filled with patriotism for France. The blood accusation at Damascus, which had been spread far and wide by the opponents of the Jews, first reminded him of his Jewish origin, and inspired him with courage and zeal to take up the cause of his brethren in religion and race, and developed in him a glowing patriotism for Judaism. At the first news of the dark proceedings in Damascus, thoroughly convinced that the Eastern like the European Jews were innocent of blood, Crémieux hastened to the French minister to ask him whether the government had more precise information on the matter. The minister replied that he had not received the slightest information on the subject from the consul or any other source. Thus it was made evident how this game was played. With all the glowing fire of his eloquence and the courage instilled by a righteous cause, Crémieux opposed the wide-spread slanders which echoed through France (April 7), and became the center of a patriotic movement of the French communities. Crémieux was then vice-president of the central consistory; and the Jews of France looked to him, their appointed representative, to rend asunder the network of lies which extended from Damascus to France.
Like the French Jews, those of England also aroused themselves suddenly. By their wealth and honorable conduct they stood very high in public opinion. Some had been elected to fill the honorable post of sheriff; and it was to be expected that they would soon be admitted into Parliament. The most distinguished Jews of England, among them Baron Nathaniel Rothschild, Sir Moses Montefiore (who from a pious sentiment had undertaken a pilgrimage to the Holy Land), Salomons, and the highly-esteemed brothers Goldsmid, held a meeting (April 21), and resolved to appeal to the governments of England, France, and Austria, to use their influence to put a stop to the inhuman proceedings in Damascus. Crémieux came to London, and was present at the meeting, in order to consider a common course of action. The unanimity was noteworthy with which prominent Jews took up the cause of their persecuted brethren, and defended the purity of Judaism, of its Law, and the Talmud. On the same day (May 1), Crémieux presented himself before Louis Philippe, king of France, and a Jewish deputation waited on the English minister, Lord Palmerston, in order to obtain the protection of these two countries for the victims in Damascus.
Louis Philippe replied with much feeling:
"I do not know anything about the occurrence; but if anywhere there are unfortunate Jews who appeal to the protection of my government, and if anything can be effected by its means, I will conform with your wishes."