A Child of Christian Blood: Murder and Conspiracy in Tsarist Russia: The Beilis Blood Libel (58 page)

1.
     feed had become too expensive: STEN I, pp. 359, 273, 393.

2.
     “annoying formality”:
Kievlianin,
October 11, 1913.

3.
     “What do you think happened”:
Rech’,
October 6, 1913.

4.
     Vyshemirsky: Beilis,
My Sufferings,
pp. 140–45; STEN I, pp. 403–9. The core of Beilis’s account is accurate, but Beilis presents Vyshemirsky as far more well-spoken than he actually was.

5.
     “In any normal trial”: “Iz zaly suda,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 6, 1913.

6.
     “on Paris boulevards”: “Vpechatleniia,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 7, 1913.

7.
     one general: Petrovsky-Shtern,
Jews in the Russian Army,
pp. 134–35.

8.
     more at home in Berlin: GAKO f. 864, op. 10, d. 5, l. 35.

9.
     “not a comedy”:
Rech’,
October 6, 1913.

10.
   “in the Jewish cemetery”:
Rech’,
October 7, 1913.

11.
   workers from the Zaitsev factory testified: STEN I, pp. 433–60.

12.
   in the Chicago Loop: All details about the rally are from “Overflow Crowd and a Speaker at Beilis Trial Protest Mass Meeting,”
Chicago Tribune,
October 20, 1913, p. 1; on its organization, “ ‘Ritual Murder Protest Today,’ ”
Chicago Tribune,
October 19, 1913, and “Set Beilis Protest Meeting,”
Chicago Tribune,
October 16, 1913.

13.
   Mass meetings were held in Cincinnati:
American Jewish Yearbook,
p. 136; Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” note 39. Oddly, in New York, the America city with the biggest Jewish population, a protest of five hundred City College students appears to have been the largest one. Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” note 39.

14.
   Hirsch wrote: “Editorial Notes,”
The Advocate: America’s Jewish Journal
46 (1913): 338.

15.
   Champ Clark: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” note 41.

16.
   Sabath resolution: “Congress Takes Up Defense of Beiliss; Representative Sabath Offers a Joint Resolution of Protest,”
New York Times,
October 18, 1913, p. 4.

17.
   “Czar on Trial”:
New York Times,
October 9, 1913.

18.
   “And Yet”: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” note 35.

19.
   “much surprised”: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” note 52.

20.
   “no knowledge”: Tager,
Tsarskaia,
p. 218.

21.
   “more than ready”: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” p. 218.

22.
   “unfortunate effect”: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” p. 218. Wilson argued, with some foundation, that Beilis would, in any event, be acquitted.
The Russian foreign minister himself, who was sharing the consensus of elite opinion—the
trial was, after all, clearly going badly for the prosecution—had told Wilson he was “certain” of such an outcome. See Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” note 50.

23.
   “talented lawyer”: Gruzenberg,
Yesterday,
p. 111.

24.
   glass of water:
Rech’,
October 8, 1913.

25.
   “unthoughtful”: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 8, 1913.

26.
   “honest, thick-skinned”:
Jewish Chronicle,
October 24, 1913, p. 23.

27.
   “mental faculties”: STEN I, p. 528.

28.
   eye-to-eye: STEN I, p. 535.

29.
   swarmed the court:
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 9, 1913.

30.
   Prince A. D. Obolensky:
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 9, 1913.
American Jewish Yearbook,
p. 17.

31.
   King Constantine:
Rech’,
October 7, 1913;
Jewish Chronicle,
October 11, 1913.

32.
   “story of the switches”: see note to p. 111.

33.
   “Christian letters”: GAKO-DpdB (reel 3) f. 183, op. 5, d. 4, l. 413-18.

34.
   early newspaper account: STEN I, p. 606.

35.
   “methods were reprehensible”: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 9, 1913.

36.
   needed to kill: STEN I, p. 601.

37.
   “airplanes, or ride on motorcycles”: STEN I, p. 623.

38.
   felt to her like a body: STEN I, p. 618.

39.
   “When I was sleeping”: STEN I, p. 607.

40.
   “ ‘I had a dream’ ”: STEN I, p. 623.

41.
   “sincerity”:
Rech’,
October 10, 1913;
Kievlianin,
October 10, 1913.

42.
   “psychosis”:
Kievianin,
October 10, 1913.

43.
   wholly expressionless: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 11, 1913.

44.
   acceded to a plan:
Materialy Chrezvychainoi,
pp. 172–73.

45.
   “deadly simplicity”: Nabokov, “Na Protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 11, 1913.

46.
   “Beilis had reminded us”: Nabokov, “Na Protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 11, 1913.

47.
   “defendant”: Nabokov, “Na protesse,”
Rech’,
October 11, 1913; Kondurushkin, “Vpechatleniia,”
Rech’,
October 11, 1913.

48.
   Zamyslovsky attempted: STEN II, pp. 66–68.

49.
   On cross-examination: STEN II, pp. 71–73.

50.
   eye-to-eye: STEN II, pp. 73–74.

51.
   visceral reaction: Tager,
Tsarskaia,
p. 250.

1.
     rumor: Tager, “Protsess,” p. 101.

2.
     “some kind of sensation”: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 14, 1913.

3.
     once been imprisoned:
Vladimir Nabokov, the son, writes in his autobiography,
Speak Memory
(p. 29): “My father spent a restful, if somewhat lonesome three months in solitary confinement, with his books, his collapsible bathtub and his copy of J. P. Muller’s manual of home gymnastics.” V. D. Nabokov served the sentence in 1908 as punishment for taking part in the “Vyborg Manifesto,” a protest against the disbanding of the First
Duma by Tsar Nicholas.

4.
     “fantastic”: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 12, 1913.

5.
     Maslash: STEN II, p. 96.

6.
     “folded his hands”: STEN II, p. 101.

7.
     Three days earlier: Tager,
Tsarskaia,
p. 251;
Materialy Chrezvychainoi,
p. 173; Testimony of Beletsky,
Padenie,
vol. 3, pp. 370–71, 375.

8.
     Ivanov confided:
Materialy Chrezvychainoi,
p. 131; Tager,
Tsarskaia,
pp. 141–44.

9.
     Jewish money: STEN II, pp. 107–8.

10.
   “only honest”: STEN II, p. 115.

11.
   “I believe”: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 14, 1913.

12.
   “tribal enmity”: Tager, “Protsess,” p. 106.

13.
   reading of the psalter: Kondurushkin, “Vpechatlaniia,”
Rech’,
October 15, 1913.

14.
   “The eyelids”: STEN II, pp. 151, 165.

15.
   box with jars: STEN II, p. 160.

16.
   Kosorotov: Tager,
Tsarskaia,
pp. 80–83;
Materialy Chrezvychainoi,
pp. 64, 112, 187–88; Testimony of Beletsky,
Padenie,
vol. 3, pp. 381–82; Beletsky explains how the Ten Million Ruble Fund worked in
Padenie,
vol. 3, pp. 379–80.

17.
   “If they had wanted”: STEN II, p. 178.

18.
   dissected heart: STEN II, p. 173.

19.
   “That’s all the blood”: STEN II, p. 176.

20.
   collected the blood: STEN II, p. 177.

21.
   nothing like the state: STEN II, p. 187.

22.
   filled with blood: STEN II, p. 192.

23.
   “nonsense”: STEN II, p. 209.

24.
   “with whatever weapon”: STEN II, p. 212.

25.
   “mental deterioration”: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 23, 1913.

26.
   “The murder”: STEN II, p. 253.

27.
   “of unseen hand”: STEN II, p. 254.

28.
   “Their capital”: STEN II, p. 256.

29.
   “Bankers, doctors, sexual psychopaths”: S. El’patevskii, “Vpechatleniia,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 19, 1913.

30.
   defense objections: STEN II, p. 258.

31.
   “Could you tell us”: STEN II, p. 263.

32.
   “How can we judge Beilis”: Tager, “Protsess,” p. 111.

33.
   
Book of Neophyte
: STEN II, pp. 303–307.

34.
   “boils”:
This passage derives from Deuteronomy 28:27 where Moses tells his people that if they do not obey God’s commandments and laws, “The Lord will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed.”

35.
   Maklakov: STEN II, pp. 307–308.

36.
   “The extermination”: STEN II, p. 318.

37.
   Jack of Diamonds:
Rech’,
October 21, 1913.

38.
   “Frankists”: STEN II, p. 362. Frankism was an eighteenth-century heretical religious movement centered around the charismatic leader Jacob Frank. According to the
YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe,
“The Frankists initially thought of themselves as a branch of Judaism opposed to the authority of the rabbis and rejecting some elements of rabbinic tradition. Subsequently, Frankists redefined themselves as a separate religious group, practically independent from hitherto existing forms of both Judaism and
Christianity.” In 1759, Frank converted to Catholicism;
http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Frankism
.

39.
   Even Kosorotov: STEN II, p. 223.

40.
   “Sweating, wiping”: Nabokov, “Na protesse,”
Rech’,
October 21, 1913.

41.
   Shmakov grew openly angry: “Iz zaly suda,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 21, 1913.

42.
   burst into laughter: El’patevskii, “Vpechatleniia,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 22, 1913.

43.
   “why it was white”: STEN II, p. 339.

44.
   plagiarized: Shnayer Leiman, “Benzion Katz: Mrs. Baba Bathra,” p. 52n3.

45.
   “ploy will backfire”: Leiman, “Benzion Katz: Mrs. Baba Bathra,” p. 55.

46.
   “would sooner believe”: Nabokov, “Na Protesse,”
Rech’,
October 23, 1913.

47.
   Pranaitis was recalled: Based on STEN II, pp. 434–35, and Leiman, “Benzion Katz: Mrs. Baba Bathra,” pp. 55–56. The Baba Bathra episode, vividly recounted by Katz, does not appear in the transcript, which was widely recognized to be imperfect.

48.
   “Many congratulated”: Leiman, “Benzion Katz: Mrs. Baba Bathra,” p. 56.

49.
   “ignorance”: Tager, “Protsess,” pp. 111–13.

50.
   “papal bulls”: STEN II, p. 336.

51.
   made sure it would not arrive: Tager, “Tsarskoe pravitel’stvo,” p. 345; on the effort to obtain the Vatican’s authentication, see Szajkowski, “The Impact of the Beilis Case,” pp. 356–59. The historian
David I. Kertzer mischaracterizes this episode in
The Popes Against the Jews,
pp. 227–28, 230–36, entirely omitting the role of Ambassador Nelidov in ensuring the letter would not arrive in time for the
trial, and blaming the Vatican for the failure of the letter to be introduced at the trial. Lawlor, in
Were the Popes Against Jews?,
pp. 125–46, corrects some of Kertzer’s
errors but unfortunately confuses the chronology by failing to take into account the thirteen-day difference between the Julian calendar used in
Russia and the Gregorian one used in the West. Kertzer is on firmer ground in his harsh assessment of the Vatican’s failure to condemn the blood libel at the time of the Beilis trial, or afterward. Kertzer points out that Catholic publications regarded as close to the Vatican published articles advocating for the ritual murder charge. The semiofficial Vatican periodical
Civilta Cattolica
published two articles on the Beilis trial in the spring of 1914 by a Jesuit, Father
Paolo Silva, entirely supporting the prosecution’s point of view. In the articles, titled “Jewish Trickery and Papal Documents—Apropos of a Recent Trial,” Father Silva wrote that “the murder [in Kiev] was committed by people who wanted to extract the blood” and that the Jews regard blood as “a drink like milk” (Kertzer, p. 236). The Catholic newspapers
L’Unita Cattolica
in Florence and
L’Univers
in France also supported the ritual-murder charge. See also Charlotte Klein, “From Damascus to Kiev:
Civilta Cattolica
on Ritual Murder,” in
The Blood Libel Legend,
pp. 194–96, and passim on
Civilta
’s advocacy of the blood libel from 1881 to 1914, pp. 180–96. Lawlor (see above) defends the Vatican’s conduct.

52.
   vertical slash: The document’s significance was first noted by Alexander Tager. Tager,
Tsarskaia,
photostat following p. 160; Tager,
Decay of Czarism,
photostat no. 9. Reproduced in the photo section of this book.

53.
   “anemia of the brain”: STEN III, p. 192.

54.
   medical attention: Samuel,
Blood Accusation,
p. 219.

55.
   “If a non-Jew”: STEN III, p. 4.

56.
   “unseen hand”: STEN III, p. 5.

57.
   “under their yoke”: STEN III, p. 18.

58.
   “question of the cow”: STEN III, p. 38.

59.
   “prisoner’s dock”: STEN III, p. 41.

60.
   “pronounce the verdict”: STEN III, p. 57.

61.
   “ultraviolet clues”: “Iz zaly suda,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 25, 1913.

62.
   feared the speech: Nabokov, “Na protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 25, 1913.

63.
   dismissing as a “legend”: STEN III, p. 95.

64.
   “Why not Beilis and Vera?”: STEN III, p. 96.

65.
   Hamentaschen: STEN III, p. 108; “Iz zaly suda,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 25, 1913.

66.
   “unseen hand”: STEN III, p. 98.

67.
   “overwhelming weapon”: STEN III, p. 98.

68.
   “perhaps”: STEN III, p. 124. In his memoirs, written two decades later, Maklakov wrote that he himself was, in principle, willing to acknowledge the possibility that somewhere Jewish fanatics had committed ritual murders. “In such an admission,” he insisted, “there is nothing insulting,” arguing that a religion is not responsible for fanatical sects that commit awful acts in its name. In 1956, he carried on
correspondence on this topic with his contemporary, the Jewish attorney Mark Vishniak, who reproached him for taking such a position. Indeed, the argument that unspecified Jewish ritual murders may have occurred at some time or some place is clearly fallacious. Of the scores of known cases
in the record,
not a single one proved to be well-founded. Therefore, it has been pointed out, the notion that there are unknown cases with unknown evidence in which unknown Jews were actually guilty is illogical. See Maklakov,
Iz vospominanii,
pp. 256–57; O. Budnitskii, “V.A. Maklakov i evreiskii vopros,” pp. 53–54.

69.
   “The prosecution”: STEN III, p. 124.

70.
   “I will rely only”: STEN III, p. 136.

71.
   “She alone”: STEN III, p. 136.

72.
   “most frightening”: STEN III, p. 137.

73.
   “But together”: STEN III, p. 138.

74.
   At those words: El’patevskii, “Vpechatleniia,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 26, 1913.

75.
   “invention of Cheberyak”:
Ubiistvo Iushchinskogo,
“Rech’ V.A. Maklakova,” p. 64; STEN III, p. 145. The text in Maklakov’s published version differs slightly from that in the transcript. Maklakov’s text has been generally preferred here, given the attorneys’ own complaints about inaccuracies in the transcript. See Margolin,
The Jews of Eastern Europe,
p. 156.

76.
   “all of Lukianovka”:
Ubiistvo Iushchinskogo,
“Rech’ V.A. Maklakova,” p. 64; STEN III, p. 145.

77.
   “You have been told”:
Ubiistvo Iushchinskogo,
“Rech’ V.A. Maklakova,” p. 87; STEN III, p. 155.

78.
   “suicide”:
Ubiistvo Iushchinskogo,
“Rech’ V.A. Maklakova,” p. 84; STEN III, p. 154. In the published version of the speech (p. 87), Maklakov warns more declaratively that, in the event of an unjust verdict, “it will be forever remembered that a court of Russian jurors, out of hatred for the Jewish people, turned away from the truth.” It is not clear if he actually said those words in court.

79.
   “frightful accusation”: STEN III, p. 155.

80.
   “I firmly hope”: STEN III, p. 193.

81.
   “I was always on the side”: Budnitskii, “V.A. Maklakov i evreiskii vopros,” pp. 53–54.

82.
   “the more eloquent”: Samuel,
Blood Accusation,
p. 225.

83.
   “took the liberty”: Gruzenberg,
Yesterday,
pp. 107–8.

84.
   candelabrum: STEN III, p. 203.

85.
   “court is a kind of temple”: STEN III, p. 195.

86.
   allusions: STEN III, p. 203.

87.
   “negative system”: STEN III, p. 214.

88.
   “axiom”: STEN III, pp. 214, 217.

89.
   “the coat”: STEN III, p. 213.

90.
   “Defendant Beilis”:
STEN III, p. 272; Bonch-Bruevich,
Znamenie,
p. 184.

91.
   Jewish leaders: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” pp. 213–14.

92.
   Jewish organized labor: Lifschutz, “Repercussions,” pp. 210–11.

93.
   At eight a.m.: Beilis,
My Sufferings,
pp. 182–83.

94.
   St. Sophia Square filled: Viktor Sosedov, “Otryvki,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 29, 1913;
Rech’,
October 29, 1913.

95.
   The jury’s first charge: The text of both questions appears in STEN III, p. 299.

96.
   prejudicial: On the prejudicial formulation of the two questions, see Nabokov, “Delo Beilisa,”
Pravo,
no. 44 (November 3, 1913): 2522–24.

97.
   Nabokov wrote: Nabokov, “Na Protsesse,”
Rech’,
October 29, 1913. Nabokov analyzes Boldyrev’s prejudiced charged to the jury in “Delo Beilisa,”
Pravo,
no. 45 (November 10, 1913): 2577–80.

98.
   “You know that the body”: STEN III, p. 289.

99.
   Most of those: Tager,
Tsarskaia,
p. 229; Bonch-Bruevich,
Znamenie,
p. 186.

100.
 Gruzenberg could only think: “Beseda s pris. pov. O.O. Gruzenbergom,”
Rech’,
October 30, 1913. Gruzenberg’s candid admission of pessimism, made to a reporter soon after the verdict, is at odds with his account of his state of mind in his memoirs. “I had not the slightest doubt about the outcome of the trial,” he wrote. “I believed, indeed I knew, that the conscience of a Russian would never condone the destruction of an innocent person.” Gruzenberg,
Yesterday,
p. 105.

101.
 After an hour passed: Bonch-Bruevich,
Znamenie,
p. 186; Bonch-Bruevich, “Reziume predesedatelia,”
Kievskaia Mysl’,
October 29, 1913.