The Jew and American Ideals | Page 6

a crank as infests practically every
conference and convention. We do not know who translated the alleged
protocols, nor in what language they were written. Moreover, not one
word of assurance does Professor Nilus give on his own account that he
knows any of these things. He does not appear to have made any
investigation of any kind. In view of the rest of his work we may be

quite sure that had he done so he would have told us. He does not even
tell us, in this edition of 1905, that the person from whom he acquired
the "translation" was known to him as a reliable and trustworthy person.
He does not profess to know anything more than I have already quoted
from him. No one knows Nilus himself. So much for the explanation of
1905.
Before I pass on to consider a later and different explanation made by
the mysterious Nilus, a few brief observations upon the story now
before us may not be out of place, especially since the Dearborn
Independent has accepted it and made it the basis of its propaganda.
How is it possible for any person possessing anything approaching a
trained mind, and especially for one accustomed to historical study, to
accept as authentic, and without adequate corroboration, documents
whose origin and history are so clouded with secrecy, mystery, and
ignorance? And how can men and women who are to all appearances
rational and high-minded bring themselves to indict and condemn a
whole race, invoking thereby the perils of world-wide racial conflict,
upon the basis of such flimsy, clouded, and tainted testimony? No
decent and self-respecting judge or jury anywhere in the United States
would, I dare believe, convict the humblest individual of even petty
crime upon the basis of such testimony. Serious charges made by a
complainant who does not appear in court and is not known to the court,
an alleged translation of an alleged original, not produced in court,
alleged to have been stolen by an anonymous thief not produced in
court, from an alleged conspirator not named nor produced in court,
and not a scintilla of corroborative evidence, direct or
circumstantial--was ever a chain of evidence so flimsy? By comparison,
the discovery of the Book of Mormon is a well-attested event.
Now let us consider another very different story told by Nilus. In
January, 1917--the date is important--another edition of the book, so
greatly enlarged and rewritten as to be almost a new book, appeared in
Russia bearing the name of the mysterious and unknown Nilus. The
title of this book is It Is Near, at the Door. It was published at Sergeiev,
near Moscow, at the Monastery of Sergeiev. I have said that the date of
the appearance of this volume is important, and here is the reason: The

overthrow of tsarism occurred in March, 1917. Toward the end of 1916
the revolutionary ferment was already apparent. What else could be
expected than that the provocative agents of the Tsar's Secret Police
and the Black Hundreds should strive to divert the attention of the
people to some other issue? And what more natural than that they
should conclude that a widespread movement against the Jews, great
pogroms over a wide area, would best suit their purpose? The first
publication of the alleged protocols took place in 1905, also at the
beginning of a popular revolution, and it did have the effect of creating
a considerable anti-Jewish agitation which weakened the revolutionary
movement. The trail of the Secret Police and the Black Hundreds is
plain. And now for the new version of the history of the protocols. On
page 96 of this new book, which is a violent diatribe against the Jews,
Nilus says:
In 1901 I came into possession of a manuscript, and this comparatively
small book was destined to cause such a deep change in my entire
viewpoint as can only be caused in the heart of man by Divine Power.
It was comparable with the miracle of making the blind see. "May
Divine acts show on him."
This manuscript was called, "The Protocols of the Zionist Men of
Wisdom," and it was given to me by the now deceased leader of the
Tshernigov nobility, who later became Vice-Governor of Stavropol,
Alexis Nicholaievich Sukhotin. I had already begun to work with my
pen for the glory of the Lord, and I was friendly with Sukhotin because
he was a man of my opinion--i.e., extremely conservative, as they are
now termed.
Sukhotin told me that he in turn had obtained the manuscript from a
lady who always lived abroad. This lady was a noblewoman from
Tshernigov. He mentioned her by name, but I have forgotten it. He said
that she obtained it in some mysterious way, by theft, I believe.