From the following letters subsequently addressed to Sir Moses by the Rev. Joseph Marshall, Chaplain of H.M.S. Castor, Lieutenant Shadwell of the same ship, and the Rev. Schlientz, of Malta, all referring to their visit to Damascus on the 16th August, in the year 1840, the reader will be able to gather important information respecting the accused.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
1840.
AUTHENTIC ACCOUNTS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES ATTENDING THE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE JEWS—TERRIBLE SUFFERINGS OF THE ACCUSED—EVIDENCE OF THEIR INNOCENCE—WITNESSES IN THEIR FAVOUR BASTINADOED TO DEATH.
Copy of a Letter from the Rev. Joseph Marshall, Chaplain of H.M.S. "Castor."
Sir,—In reference to the enquiries you make concerning your brethren in Damascus, I have much pleasure in informing you, that when I visited that city about the middle of last August, I took considerable pains in making myself acquainted with the nature of the charge preferred against them, the evidence on which it rested, the treatment to which they were exposed. The result of my enquiries I will briefly submit to you.
That two men, the Padre Tommaso and his servant, are missing, is beyond dispute. There is not the least reason to believe that the servant is murdered or dead; there is but little evidence that the Padre has been murdered, and not the slightest that he was murdered by Jews; on the contrary, evidence a priori is entirely in their favour, and that extorted by torture, if fairly considered, is equally so. However, as some others who have visited Damascus have expressed a contrary opinion, I think it necessary to state, in a few words, some of the grounds upon which I establish mine.
I need not allude to their ceremonial and moral law; both are equally abhorrent of the act imputed to them; but perhaps they were fanatics influenced by an inward light stronger than their law. Fanaticism is not usually found among such men as Soloman Murad and Meyer Farki, with their compeers, the leading men of a highly respectable and wealthy community, as was evident from the appearance of their families even in distress. Indeed I was answered by both Moslem and Franks, that the higher order of Jews at Damascus were less to be remarked for enthusiasm than coldness in religion. I have the same authority for believing that worldly competitions and commercial jealousy made it very improbable that they would unite so closely as the commission of such a crime would imply.
What testimony is there then to overcome these probabilities? Confession wrung from mortal agony and unsupported by circumstantial evidence. Their enemies do, to be sure, appeal to certain circumstances, such as the identity of the extorted confession itself: true, I believe it to be so perfectly identical as to lose all character of independence. But there were other circumstances. There were animal remains found twenty-five days after the Friar had disappeared, in a running sewer in closer proximity to a butcher's stall than to David Arari's house. There was said also to be the mark of fire on the white marble pavement of the same gentleman's court. I saw it not, though the stone was pointed out. This mark, which did not exist, was supposed to be caused by the burning of the Padre's clothes, but there were certain stains on a wall which might be blood; I thought they might be anything else rather. Again, with the aforesaid animal remains there was found a piece of cloth such as might identify it with part of the Friar's cap. Is this circumstance consistent with the burning of his apparel, or did they spare that part only, which would most easily lead to detection?
But there was another circumstance much dwelt on, viz., the posting of a notice at the barber's door, at too great a height for the Friar's stature; therefore, evidently the work of a Jew. I can positively say, it was at the natural height for such fixtures, within the reach of any middle-sized person, and with the slightest trouble might be placed there by anyone. But what was the object of the gigantic Jew in posting the advertisement at all? He had taken it, it was supposed, from the Synagogue door, where it was supposed the Friar had posted it. And for the purpose of destroying all trace of the Friar having been in the Jews' quarter, he transferred it to the barber's door, which was actually within the Jews' quarter. He might, to be sure, have destroyed it and all trace of the Padre at once; but this would have been an expedient too simple for the sagacity of this Hebrew, which appears to have been in an inverse ratio to his bulk.