Te Aroha AND Ohinemuri News SATURDAY, AUGUST 7, 1909. THE TZAR AND JEWISH PERSECUTIONS.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVII, Issue 4446, 7 August 1909, Page 2

Te Aroha AND Ohinemuri News SATURDAY, AUGUST 7,1909. THE TZAR AND JEWISH PERSECUTIONS.

In 1905 there were several organised massacres of Jews in different parts of the Russian Empire. So intense was the feeling of indignation in England at the time, that public meetings were held there protesting against such cold-blooded atrocities, and strong representations were made to the British Government. Those authorities felt that they could not interfere with the internal affairs of Russia, and that it would be as unseemly to interfere, and as likely to jeopardise peace between the two great powers, as would be the case if Russia interfered with the internal affairs of Ireland or of South of Africa. The Rothschild’s and others of the principal money-lenders of Britain and Europe made representations to Russia, and several of the great religious bodies in Britain held indignation meetings and made strong protests against the persecutions then rife in the Russian Empire.

It was replied on behalf of the Muscovite authorities that they were not responsible, and thot they tried to protect the Jews and to stop the persecutions; but that sections of the Jews had made themselves hated and despised by their hardness as money-lenders and by their identyfying themselves with Russian revolutionaries. It was perfectly true that Jews had been prominent like Manx and Bakimur of early days in promulgating revolutionary Socialism, and that their teaching had, in some instances sown the seeds of Anarchism which later on showed itself in Russia, but that did not justify Jewish persecutions. But Nemis was on the track of the persecutors, and they have just been tried at St. Petersburg for the massacres at Maricipol, on the Sea of Azov. Sixteen prisoners have been sentenced to imprisonment for short periods, and the Tzar and His Government cannot escape censure for the light sentences inflicted. Indeed, at the time, many local personages at great risk to themselves condemned the Russian authorities as being culpable, if not accessories before and after the fact, and the Zemstvo Congress in November, 1905, passed the following resolution i— I The long and obstinate struggle of the nation with autocracy and arbitrariness has compelled the Government to make concessions. But the Government is seeking to resume an open conflict with the nation by organising the dark elements, and, having armed them out of the nation’s money, to incite them against the progressive ele ments of Society, against the students, workmen, and Jews. It is no secret from anyone that the organisers of these acts of violence and artbitrariness are the police, with General Trepoff at their head. We demand the handing over to a popular tribunal of General Trepoff and all the administrators guilty of violence and of the massacres of Jews.”

These things have led the Labour Party to offer strong opposition to the public reception of the Tzar in England, but it will be almost insane to insult the Emperor of all the Russia’s at this critical juncture. Germany would welcome him at the present time with open arm 3 as a set-off against the indignity imposed on Russia in compelling it by force of threats to acquiesce in the policy of Austria respecting Henzegovina. The British Government, realising the impolicy of offending not only the Tsar, but the Russian people also, will hold on to its original purpose in welcoming the Emperor to England. The latter no doubt is technically responsible for a great deal, but the power behind the in St. Petersburg—are more responsible apd blameworthy, because they forced him into his present false position. We have no sympathy whatever with the anti-Semite movement which swept through Europe with destructive fojrce lately. Russia, Germany, Prance, an d Ropmania have afforded pyjdpnpp of the horrors resulting from that craze, Britain’s true policy is to recognise the difficulty of the Tzar’s official position and to treat futh with that respect which the ruler of a mighty nation is entitled to when he pays England a friendly official visit. By so doing we do not condemn his faults of omission and commission, nor do we fail to sympathise with sufferers from Russian oppression.

acre. Yield, 1£ tons per acre. This is a fair average yield, worth at present pric 8 £3 per ton on- the trucks, is equal to £4 10s per acre. Co it of putting back into grass :—ploughing, 6s per acre ; harrowing, 3s per acre; sowing, 2s per acre; rolling, 2s ; grass seed, £1 ; manure, 14s ; cost of crop, £3 4s; total cost, £5 11s; receive for crop, £4 10s; loss £t Is. While this shows an apparent loss it must be borne in mind that the new pasture is worth much more per acre than the old one, probably £3 Is per acre, so that there is really a gain to the farmer of £2 per acre. This after all is not an immense sum when rates and taxes are taken off. It is to be hoped the price will improve * so that the farmer can get a fair return for his labour.