Sir,—In compliance with your request, I beg leave to submit to you some observations relative to the affairs of the Jews at Damascus, which I was enabled to make in my recent visit to that city, and also to lay before you the general impression on my mind at that time, as to the weight and credibility of the evidence addressed in support of the charges which have been advanced against them.
My visit to Damascus took place in the early part of the month of August of the present year, my fellow-travellers being the Rev. Mr Marshall, Chaplain of H.M.S. Castor, and the Rev. Mr Schlientz, of Malta, and his lady.
On the 10th of August, soon after my arrival at Damascus, accompanied by Mr Marshall, I went to the Jewish quarter of that city, and proceeded in the first instance to the house of David Arari, one of the accused persons, who was then in confinement, and at whose house the Father Tommaso is said to have been murdered. We were shown into an apartment where the atrocious deed is said to have been committed. It is a small room to the left of the Divan, with windows in front looking into the interior court, and high windows behind looking into the street. The latter circumstance is important as tending to throw doubts on the credibility of the accusation, as it is scarcely possible to conceive that any person could submit quietly to the pains of death without uttering cries for assistance, and that, if those cries had been uttered, they should not have been heard in the street outside.
In the corresponding apartment on the other side of the Divan, we were shown a stain of dirt upon the wall, which the zeal of the accusers branded with the imputation of being blood. This room was in a dismantled state, all the furniture having been removed, and the marble flooring torn up in order to search for bones or other remains of the supposed crime.
We afterwards visited the house of Mourad Farki, Mayer Farki, and Solomon Farki. The two former, being accused of participating in the murder, were in confinement. We were shown the room where the murder of Tommaso's servant is said to have been perpetrated, and saw the privy and the sewer in the street where the remains of the two are alleged to have been thrown.
We also went to the house of Halil Said Naivi, one of the accusers, and saw that individual. He is the keeper of a low grog-shop of disreputable character. It must be admitted that the nature of the man's calling does not afford any guarantee for the credibility of his testimony.
On the following day, August 11, we went to visit the Latin Convent of the Capuchins, of which Father Tommaso was an inmate. In the chapel is a tomb with an inscription to the following effect:—
"Qui reposano le ossa de Pre. Tommaso da Sardegna Missionano Cappuccino assassinato dagli Ebrei il giorno 5 di Febrajo 1840."
I will not be exactly certain whether the above is a literal copy of the inscription, having written it down from memory after my return home, but I can confidently state that it is substantially correct, especially in so far as concerns the use of the obnoxious word "assassinato."
By this it will be seen that these enlightened Capuchins, following the example of popular credulity, assume the murder of their colleague as a fact before it has been proved judicially.