Page:Report on the Conference upon the Rosenthal Case 1866.pdf/39

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

34

1. Dr. M'Caul went to Lord Shaftesbury on the Rosenthal[1] affair. His reception, however, was so cool that he mentioned it on his return, and said he would never go again, except on special business. To this resolution we believe he adhered until his death. It is in vain, therefore, to say that Dr. M'Caul was silent on these matters.

2. Dr. M'Caul was more painfully distressed by the course taken by the Jerusalem section and its consequences, than by any other circumstance towards the close of his career.

3. To this last fact I can testify myself from the most explicit statements which he made to me again and again. While matters stood as I have described them above, I was of course passive. I had no ground for advancing any charge. I had no special call on me to interfere. But, recently, the statements respecting Dr. Macgowan have accumulated, and have been widely and openly canvassed among the friends of the Jewish cause, and have got into the newspapers. The gentlemen, with whom I am acting, have reported them to me with clearness and detail, knowing the interest that I have always taken in the Jews, and my intimacy with Dr. M'Caul. I was thoroughly satisfied with the truth of the statements. As a member of the Jews' Society I was not disposed to be silent in such a matter, and to abide under a consciousness that I knew much which, for the welfare of the Society, it was proper their General Committee should know, though I have much doubt whether the General Committee of the Jews' Society knows it now. I believe that the knowledge of our statement has been restricted to a section of that Committee only. However, in my mind the question was this, shall I stifle evidence of so great importance which I clearly see can be substantiated, and disregard all the old testimony of Dr. M'Caul in favour of the Rosenthals, leaving their character under unjust reproach, and desert them in their unmerited distress, when I know they are deserving of support? and shall I leave the Jews' Society in what I feel to be its most unsatisfactory condition ? Or shall the interests of truth, charity, and the Jewish cause prevail, and I incur the reproach, if need be, of having a want of tenderness to the memory of a public man who is deceased, and of inflicting words of pain upon his widow I had no hesitation, nor have I any now, as to the course which it was my duty to pursue.

I have nothing further to submit to yourself, except my respectful but earnest protest against your unseemly and inexcusable reflections upon the gentlemen who have acted with me in this painful matter; believing, as I do, that they are actuated by the very same motives, and unselfish, honest principles, and love of the cause of Israel, as I am myself.

I remain, yours, &c.,

J. C. Rochester.

P.S. —I venture to add one sentence, in the hope of bringing the truth before your Lordship in its proper light. * * * * It has not been referred to, nor will she be called forward by my friends. I have myself had conversation with that person. Allow me to suggest that your Lordship should do so also. She appeared to me thoroughly informed, and remarkably free from any party bias in Jerusalem affairs.

  1. The expression “Rosenthal Affair” is here employed in reference to the imprisonment of Mr. Rosenthal in 1858 by Consul Rosen at the instigation of Bishop Gobat, in order to compel him to withdraw the action for libel which Lord Clarendon had authorized him to institute against the Bishop, Dr. Macgowan, &c.