mission editorial board - sajbd · 2019. 8. 5. · mission editorial board in publishing jewish...

EDITORIAL BOARDMISSION

In publishing JEWISH AFFAIRS, the SAJewish Board of Deputies aims to produce acultural forum which caters for a wide varietyof interests in the community. The journal willbe a vehicle for the publication of articles ofsignificant thought and opinion oncontemporary Jewish issues, and will aim toencourage constructive debate, in the form ofreasoned and researched essays, on all mattersof Jewish and general interest.

JEWISH AFFAIRS aims also to publish essaysof scholarly research on all subjects of Jewishinterest, with special emphasis on aspects ofSouth African Jewish life and thought.Scholarly research papers that make an originalcontribution to their chosen field of enquirywill be submitted to the normal processes ofacademic refereeing before being accepted forpublication.

JEWISH AFFAIRS will promote Jewishcultural and creative achievement in SouthAfrica, and consider Jewish traditions andheritage within the modern context. It aims toprovide future researchers with a window onthe community’s reaction to societalchallenges. In this way the journal hopescritically to explore, and honestly to confront,problems facing the Jewish community bothin South Africa and abroad, by examiningnational and international affairs and theirimpact on South Africa.

The SA Jewish Board of Deputies is committedto dialogue and free enquiry. It aims to protecthuman rights and to strive for better relationsamong peoples of diverse cultural backgroundsin South Africa.

The columns of JEWISH AFFAIRS willtherefore be open to all shades of opinion. Theviews expressed by the contributors will betheir own, and do not necessarily reflect theviews of the Editor, the Editorial Board or thePublishers.

However, in keeping with the provisions ofthe National Constitution, the freedom ofspeech exercised in this journal will excludethe dissemination of hate propaganda, personalattacks or invective, or any material whichmay be regarded as defamatory or malicious.In all such matters, the Editor’s decision isfinal.

EXECUTIVE EDITOR

David Saks SA Jewish Board of Deputies

ACADEMIC ADVISORY BOARDProfessor Marcus Arkin South African Zionist Federation

Dr Ittamar Avin University of Natal, Durban

Dr Louise Bethlehem Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Marlene Bethlehem SA Jewish Board of Deputies

Cedric Ginsberg University of South Africa

Dr Elaine Katz University of the Witwatersrand

Professor Marcia Leveson University of the Witwatersrand

Naomi Musiker Archivist and Bibliographer

Professor Reuben Musiker University of the Witwatersrand

Gwynne Schrire SA Jewish Board of Deputies

Dr Gabriel A Sivan World Jewish Bible Centre

Professor Gideon Shimoni Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Professor Milton Shain University of Cape Town

John Simon University of Cape Town

The Hon. Mr Justice Ralph Zulman Appeal Court of South Africa

SECRETARY – Golde Goldsmith

TYPESETTING/PRINTING – Bookpress, Johannesburg

© South African Jewish Board of Deputies 2007Permission to reprint material from JEWISH AFFAIRS should be

applied for fromThe South African Jewish Board of Deputies

JEWISH AFFAIRS is published 3 times annually

Annual subscription R180 including VAT and postageOverseas: Surface Mail US$30 or BPS25

Air Mail US$70 or BPS50Postal Address: PO Box 87557, Houghton 2041

Original, unpublished essays of between 1 000 and 6 000 words onall subjects are invited, and should be sent to:

The Editor, JEWISH AFFAIRS, PO Box 87557, Houghton 2041,

[email protected]

The Editorial Board reserves the right to cut the length of articles

accepted for publication, and to make any stylistic changes which itmay deem necessary.

VOL. 64 NO. 3 CHANUKAH 2009

Editor: David Saks

JEWS IN THE ANGLO-BOER WAR

Jewish Bittereindes in the Anglo-Boer WarDavid Saks .................................................................................................................................................................. 3

Wartime Letters by British Jewish Servicemen, 1899-1900 ............................................................................. 10

Harry Spanier: An Untoward Jewish SoldierAnn Rabinowitz ........................................................................................................................................................ 14

IN MEMORIAM

“A Bright Star in a Chamber of Darkness”: Helen Suzman and Her LegacyRhoda Kadalie ......................................................................................................................................................... 17

Recollections of Helen SuzmanColin Eglin ............................................................................................................................................................... 19

The Ultimate Dreamer: A Lament for Monty SackBernard Levinson ..................................................................................................................................................... 21

FIGHTERS FOR ZION

Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky – Fighter, Visionary, ZionistJohn Simon ............................................................................................................................................................... 23

Some Gentile ZionistsCecil Bloom .............................................................................................................................................................. 29

ESSAYS AND REFLECTIONS

A Brief Journey through Spanish-Jewish HistoryBernard Katz ............................................................................................................................................................ 34

The Jews of HarbinTony Leon ................................................................................................................................................................. 41

Not ForgottenIrina Shub ................................................................................................................................................................. 43

Chanukah – The Answer to EskomWolfy Matz ............................................................................................................................................................... 46

BOOK REVIEWS

The Quest for Community: A Short History of Jewish Communal Institutions in South Africa, 1841-1939David Saks ................................................................................................................................................................ 47

How the Jewish People Can Win a War That May Never EndGary Selikow ............................................................................................................................................................ 48

NEW POETRYBen Krengel, Lewis Levitz, Tamar .......................................................................................................................... 50

3

JEWISH AFFAIRS CHANUKAH 2009

For a heady few months after the commencementof the Anglo-Boer War in October 1899, the forcesof the two Boer Republics were able, against allexpectations, to keep the British Imperial Lion on theback foot. In the beginning, at least, it was the Britishwho were compelled to defend their territory againstforeign invaders - in Natal, in the Central and North-West Cape and even in Bechuanaland and SouthernRhodesia. In the process, several major towns werebesieged and in trying to relieve them, British armssuffered numerous stinging defeats.

All this now became a distant memory once thetide turned, as it had to do eventually, in mid-February 1900. From now on, the pursued turnedpursuer with a vengeance and by the middle of theyear total victory for one side, and defeat for theother, seemed imminent. The Boer capitals had fallenand the Boer armies were being driven steadilyeastwards towards the Mozambique border.

Few anticipated that the war still had nearly twoyears to run. Too outnumbered to wage a conventionalwar any longer, the Boers decided to decentralise,splitting up into smaller units that roamed thecountryside and harried the occupying power atevery opportunity.

After the fall of Bloemfontein and Pretoria, mostof the Jews in the Boer forces took the Oath ofAllegiance and played no further part in the war. Anot insignificant number fought on, however, andtheir names regularly appear in the POW lists amongstthose netted in the regular sweeps the Britishconducted. Several dozen were still in the field whenpeace was made on 31 May 1902.

Three Jews are recorded as having been killed inthe two-year guerrilla phase of the war. They wereIsaac Herman, Herman Lindenberg and F Goldman.Herman, who held the rank of Commandant accordingto Rabinowitz’ source, was killed near Colesberg in1901. He may be the same Commandant Hermanwho had been in charge of the British POW camp atWaterval, near Pretoria.

Lindenberg was a German Jew from Klerksdorp.He served with the Scandinavians under the famedFrench General Comte de Villebois-Mareuil (who

David Saks is Associate Director of the SA JewishBoard of Deputies and Editor of Jewish Affairs. Thisarticle has been adapted from the relevant chaptersin his recently completed book The Boerejode: Jewsin the Boer Armed Forces, 1899-1902, scheduled toappear in early 2010.

JEWISH BITTEREINDES IN THEANGLO-BOER WAR

*

David Saks

was in overall command of all foreign troops) andfell in an attack on a blockhouse outside Kimberley.

Goldman nearly survived the war. It was his badluck to be on the wrong end of an enemy attack – notBritish, but Zulu – at Holkrans in Northern Natal, notfar from the famous Anglo-Zulu War battlefields ofHlobane and Kambula. He was one of 56 burgherskilled that day - 6 May 1902, a mere three weeksbefore the Treaty of Vereeniging brought the war toa close.

One Goldfain of Johannesburg was an unusual,indeed it would seem a unique, case amongst theBoer Jewish veterans. Arriving in Johannesburgshortly before the war, at the age of seventeen, hewas eventually captured, and on his release joinedthose ultimate verraiers [traitors], the NationalScouts.

Jewish bittereindes were largely spared the ordealof having wives and children interned in the Britishconcentration camps, mainly because comparativelyfew of them had been living on farms at the time ofthe war and because only a handful of them weremarried (most Jews in the Boers ranks tended to beboth young and unattached). Nevertheless, a numberof Jewish families were indeed interned and severalyoung Jewish children are recorded as having died incaptivity. One of them was the infant daughter ofJoseph Horwitz of Klerksdorp.

THE GUERILLA WAR IN THE TRANSVAALAND NATAL

Jacob Arnhold and Jacob Leviton could laterclaim the distinction of being the only Jews to servecontinually in the Republican forces from the JamesonRaid right through to the conclusion of the Anglo-Boer War. In between, they had taken part in theMalaboch campaign (1896) and the Swazilandexpedition and the Mpefu campaign, in the NorthernTransvaal, as well (1898). Both participated in all themajor battles in Natal before the onset of the guerrillacampaign.

Now with the rank of corporal with some fortymen under him, Leviton participated in variousguerrilla operations in the Transvaal, first in the hillsaround Pretoria and subsequently further east. Duringthe bitter winter of 1901, his section moved to theLowveld to spare their horses as well as find muchneeded forage. Leviton would seem to have been atBakenlaagte, a hard-fought Boer victory in whichColonel Benson was killed and his column virtually

4


wiped out. He finally surrendered on 18 June 1902,three weeks after peace was made.

Leviton’s reminiscences of this final period weredarkened by his witnessing at first hand thedevastation wrought by the British as they wentabout effectively starving their opponents intosubmission. On one occasion, he saw Boer childrenlying on the ground looking for grain at a siding.Reports of the multiple tragedies in the concentrationcamps were constantly filtering through to themenfolk still in the field, generating lasting bitterness.

Arnhold was one of the very few Jewish careersoldiers in the Boer forces. Born in Leipzig in 1871,he was orphaned at an early age and settled as ateenager in the ZAR. In 1894, he joined the Staats-Artillerie, serving under Kommandant HenningPretorius. His pre-war activities including takingpart in the defeat and capture of Dr Jameson and hisraiders in 1896, and to the end of his days he relishedthe memory of the three pom-poms captured that dayfrom those luckless bravos.

Arnhold fought throughout the war, finallysurrendering at Wakkerstroom. He took part in mostof the important engagements in the Natal theatre,including Dundee, Waschbank, Ladysmith andSpioenkop, and acted as one of President Kruger’sbodyguards during the latter’s journey to the coastand into final exile in Europe.1

The Mysterious N D Kaplan

Roland W Schikkerling’s journal CommandoCourageous constitutes one of the most vivid recordsof the guerrilla campaign in the Eastern Transvaal, atime when long periods of inactivity were punctuatedby sudden bursts of intensive action, danger andbloodshed. For much of this time, he served underthe renowned General Ben Viljoen, until the latter’scapture near Lydenburg. Four Jews are mentionedby name in Schikkerling’s journal, [Joel] Duveen,[Nicholas] Kaplan, [Joseph] “Zwarenstein” and one“Lazarus”2.

Niklaas David Kaplan, a Russian army veteranaccording to the Jewish oudstryder SaschaSchmahmann, was unquestionably one of the mostredoubtable Jewish fighters in the Boer forces, onewho was remembered years afterwards by both Jewsand Afrikaners who fought alongside him.

The Jewish oudstryder Sascha Schmahmannrecorded meeting Kaplan, whom he rememberedwell “because he had one brown and one very blueeye”, when he arrived at Slypsteendrift at the end of1900 or the beginning of 1901 with a report thatGeneral Trevor (to whom he had been Adjutant) hadbeen killed. “The Boers said of Kaplan that he was avery brave man. They admired his efficiency in theuse of the Pom-Pom, a gun he had learnt to use inRussia,” Schmahmann told his interviewer. He addedthat Kaplan fought in the war to the bitter end, and byits conclusion had been promoted to Commandant.

Kaplan’s ungainly appearance belied hisconsiderable abilities. “Nou ja, hy het wel soos abondel wasgoed op n perd gesit” commented F

Zeiler, who fought alongside him, more than half acentury later, “maar waar verstand nodig was om dieEngelse te uitoorle, was Kaplan se plan altyd van diebestes. Hy het baie maal vir ons die treinspoorgelaai, en waar hy die skoot geplant het, was dieontploffing ook n seker ding.

Zeiler recollection of how one of Kaplan’sspecialities was blowing up blockhouses, was laterconfirmed by Schikkerling, who wrote in CommandoCourageous: “Kaplan was a Jew and he was nocoward [sic! Unlike the rest of his kind, one assumes?].Among other daring enterprises, he once crept up toa blockhouse with two bombs slung around his neckin a saddle wallet”3.

Kaplan was a favourite of General Ben Viljoenand, as a singer and comedian, was a popular memberof his commando. Schikkerling noted that Kaplan,“with the true instinct of his race”, acted as abookmaker when the commando entertainedthemselves by staging horse – and, for those who hadlost their mounts, mule - races on Christmas Day,1901. This took place in Pilgrim’s Rest (whichremained largely in Boer hands to the end and whichenjoyed a surprisingly tranquil existence comparedwith the depredations taking place elsewhere in thecountry). “The spectacle of nine burly, bearded Boersurging their asinine steeds to top speed by shout andspur provoked quite as much honest laughter as anytheatrical farce ever excited” was how Viljoenremembered the occasion.

Kaplan obviously stands out as one of the mostredoubtable of the 300-odd Jews who fought for theBoers, and one of the very few who was still there atthe end. Regrettably, nothing is known about whathappened to him thereafter apart from a vaguereference to his setting up a business in Springfontein.

The Zwarenstein mentioned by Schikkerling wasJoseph, who was later captured at Bloedrivier in theEastern Transvaal on 29 September 1901 when hiscommando was ambushed by Walter Kitchener4. Hisbrother Jacob had been captured on 12 May and 8September 1900 respectively and sent to St Helena.

The initials of the Lazarus Schikkerling mentionsare unknown, but according to the non-JewishOudstryder J J Wolf, a Lazarus who was alwaysknown as ‘Bennie’ (after a wealthy Johannesburgbusinessman) fought in General Ben Viljoen’scommando, as did Schikkerling himself5. Lazarus ismentioned as one of those dispatched to dynamitesome railway tracks, one of the ways the Boersharried their opponents during this hit-and-run phaseof the conflict.

Duveen, the Dutch Die-hard

Joel Duveen’s gallant conduct during theconventional phase of the war, particularly at thebattle of Spioenkop, was long remembered by thosewho fought alongside him. During the guerrillastages, he continued to display the reckless gallantryfor which he was by now well known.6 His featsduring this time were communicated to RabbiRabinowitz many years later by his old comrade-in-

5


arms Major Mauritz Domisse (whose mother wasJewish).

“He was a real dare-devil and never satisfiedunless he was in some scrap with the enemy” Domissewrote of Duveen. It was these qualities that broughthim to the notice of General Beyers, who selectedhim for dangerous intelligence work behind theenemy lines. This he usually carried out himself, butsometimes did so in the company of a small patrol,Dommisse included.

Duveen’s luck ran out in October 1901, during anattack on a fortified camp at Prusen, nearPotgietersrus. He charged right up to the first fort andwas severely wounded in the stomach. After a heavyfight, the camp was captured, but Duveen’s part inthe war was over. Sensibly, Dommisse ignored hispleas to give him a plate of porridge, which almostcertainly would have proved fatal. He was removedto the Potgietersrus Hospital, after which he was sentas a POW to India, spending what was left of the warin the Shajahanpur camp.

Since there were at least 3000 Jews serving in theBritish forces, there were naturally many occasionswhen Jewish soldiers on opposing sides would havebeen firing at one another. One especially noteworthyJew on Jew encounter took place after the battle ofTweebosch, a famous Boer victory in which Generalde la Rey captured his old rival Methuen, in March1902. Captain P H Lazarus, an Intelligence Officer inMethuen’s force, was amongst those taken prisoner.The Boers suspected that he was a burgher andwould have shot him had it not been for theintervention of Solly Schultz, who informed themthat he had been born in England7. Schultz servedthroughout the war on the Boer side, rising to therank of Veld-Kornet. He was one of those whorefused to take the Oath of Allegiance afterwards,instead crossing into German South West Africawhere he acted as Intelligence Officer in the HereroWar.

THE GUERILLA WAR IN THE FREE STATEAND CAPE COLONY

General Christiaan Rudolf de Wet was notnecessarily the most successful of the Boercommanders during the guerrilla phase of the war –that distinction probably would go to General Koosde la Rey, the Lion of the Western Transvaal – but hewas undoubtedly the most renowned. More thananyone, he came to symbolise the stubborn refusal ofthe Boers to admit defeat, the quintessentialbittereinde determination not to surrender theirindependence so long as effective resistance remainedpossible.

Relentlessly pursued, De Wet could turn lethalpursuer at the slightest opportunity, bloodying hisenemies’ noses before disappearing once more intothe veld. He was as respected by his opponents as hewas revered by the men who served under him. “Ihave never met such a leader and such a soldier asthat General” said Joseph ‘Jakkals’ Segall manyyears later. Certainly, no Boer leader did more to

spoil the premature British victory celebrations.De Wet’s first great individual feat of the war was

his stirring, if ultimately futile, attempt to rescueCronje at Paardeberg. Had Cronje taken properadvantage of the escape route he managed to open, inthe face of gigantic odds, the magnitude of thedisaster to Boer arms could at least have been reduced.Taking part in this venture was the young AaronPincus who, together with his brother Myer, hadbeen serving in the Winburg Commando since thebeginning of the war.

Pincus continued to serve under de Wet after thefall of Bloemfontein. He became renowned for hisskilful reconnaissance work, slipping in and out ofthe British lines on a number of occasions. Once, aBritish convoy had bivouacked nearby for the nightand it was decided that young Aaron should try torelieve the enemy of some of their coffee. He washappy to risk the venture, and subsequently returnedin triumph with his mission accomplished. Evadingthe British had been relatively easy, but he was hard-put to evade the wrath of his General. De Wet hadspecifically ordered that the British camp not beattacked, and descended on the errant Pincus with asjambok. Pincus, despite being unable to detachhimself from the purloined coffee box in which hisfinger was inserted, managed to outrun his pursuer.

Unlike de Wet, Pincus eventually did fall intoenemy hands, being captured in April 1901. He spentthe remainder of the war as a POW in Bermuda,where he was reunited with his fellow Winburger,Solomon Sorsky, who had been captured around thesame time.

In addition to Sorsky and the Pincus brothers,there were at least two other Jewish members of theWinburg Commando – F. Goldman (who ultimatelyfell at Holkrans) and Abraham Myers. The latter hadbeen a miller before the war. After spending severalmonths on the Natal front, inter alia taking part in thebattle of Colenso, he was recalled to the WinburgDistrict to fix up some threshing machinery, andwent on to establish a mill that provided for the Boerwives who were left behind on the farms. When theBritish took over, they seized the mill and brieflytook him prisoner. Later, however, he was given apass to Basutholand, where he remained until thewar was over.

The Vlakfontein Segalls

According to Rabbi Louis Rabinowitz, three ofthe Segall family from the southern Free State townof Vlakfontein fought on the Boer side – Joseph (thefamous ‘Jakkals’), his father Abraham and uncleMoses. This was later challenged by RichardMendelsohn, who believed that only Joseph had infact been on active service. He based his conclusionson his close study of the claims for compensation forwartime losses submitted by Moses and Abrahamafter the war, and on the records of the ProvostMarshal’s office, SA Army Headquarters. Accordingto this, Abraham remained “resolutely neutral” andrefused commandeering into the Boer army on four

6


separate occasions. Moses had likewise claimed tohave been “strictly neutral”, was arrested and sent toSt. Helena as a POW on suspicious of having aidedthe Boers by providing them with supplies, notactually fighting for them.

One can only assume that the Segall brothers –certainly in Abraham’s case - suppressed theiractivities in the earlier part of the war to better theirchances of receiving compensation for their extensivewartime losses at the hands of the British. At leasttwo fairly reliable sources, namely the testimony ofJoseph Segall’s cousin H.B. Kaplan and a letter froma Free State veteran in the Sunday Express (12December 1937) indicate that Abraham took part inthe invasion of the Northern Cape and was present atthe battle of Coleskop. He was certainly renownedfor his marksmanship, “perhaps the best in theRepublic” according to his more famous son, whowas not one for over-statements.

Jakkals Segall was only seventeen when he joinedthe Phillippolis Commando. By this time,Bloemfontein had already fallen and the guerrillawar was underway. General Hertzog was at firstreluctant to enlist him, believing him to be too young,but yielded when Segall let him know that he wasdetermined to remain in the field and “defend thefreedom of his Afrikaner friends”. Within a shorttime, Hertzog’s misgivings evaporated as the youngrecruit’s dedication and abilities became apparent.

Some like to believe that Segall’s famousnickname derived from his skill as a scout and spy,which was undisputed by those who served withhim. However, the real reason was the presence inthe commando of another Jew, Wolf Jacobson. Wolfen Jakkals are, of course, a legendary pairing inAfrikaner folklore.8 A correspondent to DieVolksblad, Bloemfontein, identified as “Oom Holsterof Ladybrand”, wrote (9 September 1948): “Omdatdaar toe ’n ‘wolf’ in die kommando was, het dieburgers gedink dat daar ook ’n ‘jakkals’ moet weesen so is Segall toe ‘Jakkals’ genoem”.9 Oom Holsterdid not say so, but the reason for this particularpairing was that the two men were together a greatdeal. This made sense as not only were both of themJews, but they had also come from the same shtetl inLatvia, Pilten.

Segall tended to be reticent in later life when itcame to talking of his wartime experiences, but oneincident he did like to recount. It took place at theconclusion of General Hertzog’s famous raid intothe Cape, which in turn became bound up with thedramatic climax of what came to be called theSecond Great De Wet Hunt.

De Wet was also in the Cape, having invaded inthe vain hope of provoking a Cape Dutch uprising.Hertzog joined up with him at Sanddrift nearPhillipstown, on the southern bank of the rain-swollenOrange River. They were trapped there, unable tofind a place to risk a crossing, and the pursuingBritish columns were closing in from all directions.There was no boat or pontoon in sight. Segallpersuaded Hertzog to allow him to try to swimacross. Tying his three horses together, took off his

clothes and left them together with his rifle in theveld. “I am going back to the old Free State” he saidand dived into the water, “with the help of AlmightyG-d” making it – barely – to the other side. He waspulled out the water, more dead than alive, by AdrianSchoeman (Volksraad Member for Phillipolis andan old friend of his) and his black servant. When herevived about an hour later, he saw that they werealready starting to fight on the Cape side of the river.The British troops would be seen approaching andshells were bursting all around the commandos.There was nothing further Segall could do - his rifle,horses and even clothes might as well have been onanother continent for all the access he had to them.The three set out on foot over the high hills towardsthe farm of a Mr Boshoff, Segall clothed in nothingbut the servant’s blanket. There, Segall was providedwith (ill-fitting) clothes and horse, on which he setout the following day to arrive safely at his uncleMoses’ shop in Springfontein.

De Wet and Hertzog made a fighting retreat,eventually finding a usable drift and crossing backinto the Free State. Rosenthal remarks in his interviewnotes that it was “thanks to Segall’s warning that theVrystaatse Hoofkwartier could come to their aid andtake them over the Colesberg bridge”. De Wet himself,one should note, makes no such observation in hisautobiography, but Rosenthal’s belief, coming as itdoes from a respected intellectual and the author ofan acclaimed biography of De Wet, should not belightly dismissed.

There were two particular engagements with theenemy that Segall used to recall, Vegtkop nearPhillipolis and a second subsequent clash on theKroonstad-Bethlehem line. His good friend NicolaasHavenga was wounded beside him on both theseoccasions. In November 1937, Segall, Havenga (bythen Minister of Finance in the Hertzog government)and another veteran, Jac du Toit, attended acommemorative ceremony at the Vegtkop battlefieldand spoke of their experiences there.

It was Segall’s turn to be wounded, and in hiscase captured, towards the end of May 1902, lessthan two weeks before the war ended. On a pitch-black night, they were cutting their way throughbarbed wire used to protect the railway line againstsabotage when a fusillade broke out and Segall washit in the leg. It is surely not correct, as wassubsequently claimed on his behalf, that he was thelast casualty of the Anglo-Boer War, but he wascertainly one of them.

After the war, when he was making a livingselling photo enlargements, Segall met De Wet againat Edenberg. De Wet bought some of his photographs,then said to him, “Ou Segal, if the Boers were all asbrave and trustworthy as you, Ou Jakkals, the Englishwould never have won”. One of Segall’s mosttreasured possessions until the end of his life was ahandwritten certificate he received from De Wet,dated 21 December 1907. This read (in this writer’srendering from the Dutch): “This is to certify that theyoung gentleman Joseph Segall is well known to me,that from my knowledge of him he is honourable and

7


upstanding, and that during the recent war he carriedout his duty as a burgher faithfully and bravely”.

But what of the second half of the Wolf-Jakkalspairing? In contrast to Segall, who lived long enoughto be interviewed when people were belatedly startingto take an interest in Jews who fought for the Boers,Woolf Jacobson was never approached to tell hisown story of his years on commando. The bare factsof his career at least are known. At the start of thewar, he enlisted in the Fauresmith-PhillipolisCommando (which was under one Generalship),serving first under General Hertzog and thereafter,when the latter was chosen as Staff’s General for allthe Boer forces in South Africa in 1901, under hissuccessor, Chas. Niewoudt. He was on Niewoudt’sStaff-Corps and remained in the field until peace wasmade.

In 1999, the author had the opportunity of meetingJacobson’s daughter and only child, Jenny Leviton.At the time, the SA Jewish Board of Deputies, wasseeking information on Jewish participants in theAnglo-Boer War for purposes of a publication andexhibition to mark the centenary. Mrs Leviton donatedher father’s Dekorasie vir Troue Diens medal, aphotograph of him and several war-related documentsto the Board. Amongst the documents was ahandwritten testimonial from General Hertzog, dated5 July 1905. This confirmed that Jacobson, as aburgher of the old Orange Free State Republic, hadserved under his leadership until the end of the war,and that he had discharged his duty “faithfully anddutifully” (“getrouw en gehoorzaam”). There wasalso a similarly worded testimonial from GeneralNiewoudt.

Unfortunately, there was little that Mrs Levitancould relate at first hand about her father, since hehad died, in May 1921, when she was still veryyoung. One thing she did remember telling her:“Should you find yourself some day in difficultiesand can find no other way out, appeal direct toGeneral Hertzog, and no stone will be left unturnedfor your rights or justice”. In 1939, she had occasionto take up this advice when she required documentaryevidence of Jacobson’s identity as a South Africancitizen. She approached Hertzog for assistance inthis regard, citing verbatum what her father had toldhim, and at the same time requesting that she be senthis DTD medal. There is no record of his havingreplied, but one assumes that the matter wasappropriately dealt with since the medal wassubsequently issued.

Another Jew who fought with Hertzog throughoutthe war was Joubert Marks. Previously a youngjewellery salesman who was more or less adopted bya rural Free State family, he initially served on theWestern front until Cronje’s surrender at Paardeberg.Thereafter he fought on mainly in the Northern FreeState, reaching the rank of lieutenant adjutant toCommandant George Brand under Hertzog’scommando. After the war, Marks settled inLadybrand, where he made an irregular living as aspeculator, and had little to do with the Jewishcommunity. He always asserted that there was ‘never

a better and kindlier man than Regter’ (the name bywhich General Hertzog, a judge in the Orange FreeState before the war, was reverently referred toduring the war).

Max Goldman of Wepener

Max Goldman’s journey to South Africacommenced with his fleeing his native Russia afterfalling asleep on guard duty and losing his rifle. Stillin his teens, he arrived in Port Elizabeth and, typicalof East European Jewish immigrants, took up‘smousing’ (peddling). In the course of his travels,he met and married a Boer farmer’s daughter andtook to farming himself.

Despite having a non-Jewish wife, Goldmanremained committed to his religion. Indeed, he wenton to become one of the founders of the WepenerHebrew Congregation and was elected as its gabbai.All his children were brought up in the Jewish faithand ultimately married Jews.

Goldman’s religious loyalties nearly cost him hislife during the guerrilla campaign in the Free State.He was doing patrol work when he heard that theBritish were about to attack Bushman’s Kop, wherehe knew a Jew named Michailsky kept a shop inwhich there was a Sefer Torah. Goldman,accompanied by one of his brothers-in-law, made hisway to Bushman’s Kop to rescue the Sefer Torah,which he duly obtained and stowed into a bag on hissaddle. On their return home, the two men wereaccosted by a British Tommy, who accused them ofbeing spies and threatened to shoot them. Even as hehad his rifle against Goldman’s chest, an officerarrived on the scene. Goldman explained that he wascarrying a Scroll of the Law “which the Christianshad rejected but the Jews held sacred”, opening hisbag to allow the officer to see for himself. They wereallowed to continue on their way.

Goldman still had the Sefer Torah after the warended and the nascent Wepener Jewish communityheld services in his home. He was one of twocandidates for the position of gabbai when the timecame to formally establish the congregation. Prior tothe election, which, of course, Goldman won, hiswife let it be known that whichever way the votingwent, she would not allow the Sefer Torah to be takenfrom her house since it had saved the life of herhusband and her brother.

Cohen Confusion in Reitz’s Commando

On 17 September 1901, in the early stages of hisfamous invasion of the Cape, General Jan Smuts ledan attack on a British camp at Modderfontein, nearElands River Poort and some fifteen kilometresnorthwest of Tarkastad in the Eastern Cape. It wasmanned by some 200 of the 17th Lancers, relativelyinexperienced and, as it proved, no match for theirbattle-hardened opponents. Denys Reitz was in thethick of the fight, and in his classic war memoirCommando recorded in detail how it unfolded,including an account of a murderous close-range

8


duel in the opening stages:

The place we were fighting in was an outcrop ofloose rocks, jutting up like a reef, nowhere muchhigher than a man, although the rear slope fellsomewhat more steeply into the English camp.In this narrow space, where we were facing eachother almost at handshake, a grim duel began.As the soldiers raised their heads to fire, webrought them down, for they were no match forus in short-range work of this kind, and we killedtwelve or thirteen and wounded several more ata distance of a few yards. We did not suffer asingle casualty, except for a few men hit as werode in. Of these, one was …. a Jew namedCohen with a smashed ankle. These two hadbeen able to crawl through to the firing line andwere taking part in the attack.

The British camp was quickly overwhelmed andplundered. A day or two later, however, Cohen hadto be left behind as his wound had turned gangrenous.Wrote Reitz, “Besides from being a brave manCohen must have been a bit of a wag, for Isubsequently read in an English newspaper thatwhen he was captured and asked by a British officerwhy he, a Jew and an Uitlander, was fighting for theBoers he replied that he was fighting for theFranchise”.10

Cohen here was alluding, sardonically no doubt,to how denying voting rights to recent British settlersin the ZAR had been used as a pretext by Britain toprovoke the war in the first place. At the same time,he was also speaking the literal truth, since Jews inthe ZAR likewise were unenfranchised but wereaccorded burgher status if they volunteered for armedservice.

The official POW list compiled by the Britishmilitary record that David Lewis Cohen (POW no.50612), serving at the time under General Smuts,was captured on 21 September 1901 near Cradockand sent as a POW to India. It notes further that hewas 26 years old and from Johannesburg. The author’sfurther research has established, however, that thereference to his age was most likely a clerical error.

In 1971, by which time few, if any, of the veteransof the Modderfontein battle were still alive, Human& Rousseau published Kommandojare, the warmemoirs of J H Meyer who had taken part in Smuts’invasion. It described the Modderfontein engagementin detail, and concluded this with an extended andlively portrayal of the mysterious Cohen dealt withso briefly by Reitz:

Ou Heimie was ’n karakter van sy eie. Hy wasnie meer’n jong man nie; naby die sestig, met agroot bleskop, ’n paar tamaai wenkbroue en ’nmankerige linkerbeen. Hy was vir ons ’n gedurigebron van vermaak, altyd opgeruimd en vol grappeen met die hande aan die beduie wanneer hy syeie soort Engels of Afrikaans praat. Ons wasalmal baie lief vir hierdie Jood. Hy was ’n goeievriend en ’n aangename makker. En hy was ’n

vuurwarm Kruger-man.11

It is possible – just – to resolve the apparentdiscrepancy of the POW records according Cohenthe forenames of David Louis while Meyer refers tohim as ‘Heimie’ by suggesting that the latter was anickname. So far as his age goes, the burial recordsof the Johannesburg Chevra Kadisha suggest thatMeyer was correct. According to these, David LewisCohen died on 2 February 1933 at the age of 85 andwas buried in the Brixton Cemetery. Since this is theonly person by that name on the list for that timeperiod, it can be assumed that this denotes ourelusive Oudstryder, who would have been around 53at the time of action Reitz and Meyer describe, andthat the British POW records are incorrect.

Cohen was clearly a memorable personality, anda brave and redoubtable fighter as well. Meyerconfirms that he was amongst those in the forefrontof the attack on the Lancers’ camp, despite beingwounded. He goes on to relate that during the scramblefor booty afterwards, he hurried over to a group ofhorses to obtain a new mount for himself and therefound Heimie Cohen, sitting on the ground withabout twenty horses tethered together with a longleather thong.

Clinging as hard as he could to the rope, Cohencalled out, “Dese are mine! Dese are mine! Dey’re allmine!” When Meyer next looked, he saw a group ofburgers descend upon him, and a moment laterCohen was left, sorely protesting, with just the tetherin his hand.

Cohen’s smart retort to the question why he hadjoined up with the Boers has its parallel in an exchangebetween J H Meyers’ and his captors (Springs, July,1900). When his scornfully asked him, “Is this whatyou call a free country?” he responded, “It is freeenough for me! I come from a country of realoppression – from Shadova in Lithuania”.

Relations between the opposing sides duringlulls in the fighting could be almost friendly at times.Leopold Lewe, a young Russian cavalry officer whodecided to take some unauthorised extended leaveand enlist with the Boers, testified to this “best ofenemies” relationship he experienced:

Frequently we held up English trains andconfiscated the ammunition. I still rememberhow the Tommies climbed out of their trucksand talked with us. The Boers drank coffee withthem before they allowed the train – withoutammunition – to continue. This kind offraternisation took place more than once.

Jacob Arnhold remained a bittereinde to the endand had little truck with the post-war ‘toenadering’approach towards Anglo-Afrikaner relations adoptedby such leaders as Louis Botha and Jan Smuts.Rather, he wished that the Boers had fought evenbetter so that they could have “wiped out more of therooineks”. Interviewed by Rabbi Rabinowitz towardsthe end of his life, he poured scorn on the verraierswho had ‘hensopped’ and spoke with pride about

9


what the Boers had achieved:

It was a great war. 60 000 Burghers who werenot soldiers fought against 400 000 Britishsoldiers and 3000 Indian Lancers [sic]. And stillwe might have beaten them had not Lord Robertsinstituted his pernicious blockhouse system. Atevery mile they set them up, it was too much forus.

Every 10 August – Kruger Day – until his death,Arnhold’s small, dignified figure, resplendent incoat-tails and top hat, would be seen laying a wreathat the foot of Kruger’s stature in Pretoria. He lefteverything – it would not have been very much – tothe city’s Kruger House for children.

NOTES

1 Isaac Goldinger, a close friend of the President, also wasengaged in this melancholy task. During the war, Goldingerhad been entrusted with funds to furnish supplies and transportfor the Boer forces, a task he performed meticulously.

2 Schikkerling W R, Commando Courageous - A Boer’sDiary (Johannesburg, 1964), pp163, 167, 196, 338.

3 Schikkerling R W, Commando Courageous - A Boer’s

Diary (Johannesburg, 1964), p3384 See Schikkerling, pp268-70 for a full description of this

incident5 Letter to Rabbi L I Rabinowitz in SAJBD 208 Anglo-Boer

War - Correspondence6 For more on Duveen, see Rabinowitz, L I, ‘Joel Charles

Duveen: Another Jewish Hero of the Boer War’ in JewishGuild Annual, Sept 1952

7 Letter to Rabbi Rabinowitz, 4/8/49 in SAJBD 208 Boer War8 They were published in a supplement to the Farmer’s

Weekly in 1917.9 “Because there was already a ‘wolf’ in the commando, the

burghers considered that there must also be a ‘jakkals’, andso Segall was named ‘Jakkals’.

10 Reitz, D, Commando, A Boer Journal of the Boer War,London, Faber 1929 p234.

11 Meyer, J H, Kommandojare, Human & Rousseau, 1971,pp256-7 (“Old Heimie was a character of note. He was nolonger a young man, nearly sixty, with a big, bald head, a pairof enormous eyebrows and a lame left leg. He was anenduring source of comment for us, always cheerful andready with a joke, gesticulating with his hands when speakinghis unique brand of English and Afrikaans. He was a goodfriend and a pleasant companion. And he was a red-hotKruger man”)

Mustering the Smithfield Commando at the beginning of the war. Isadore Bernitz is in front, immediately tothe right of the large OFS Flag. (By courtesy of Joanna Strangwayes-Booth)

10


Private B. Davis and the Battle of Elandslaagte

Writing from Estcourt, Natal, to his elderly fatherback in Birmingham on 2 March 1900, PrivateBenjamin Davis (No. 937, A Company, 1 Section,Imperial Light Infantry) provided a dramatic accountof his part in the British victory at Elandslaagte. On21 October 1899, a Boer commando under GeneralKock took up a position on the heights overlookingElandslaagte station, some fifty kilometers north ofLadysmith. A significantly larger British force weredispatched to dislodge them, and succeeded in theiraim after several hours of stiff fighting. (Davis’ realname, it should be noted, was Berkovich; a numberof Jewish volunteers chose to Anglicize their nameswhen they enlisted)

Our first fighting was at the Battle of Elandslaagte,where we acted as reserves. We lay down for aboutseven and a half hours, and the suspense was horrible.About two miles further up the valley, big guns werebooming, musketry rattling, horses screaming andmen yelling; while now and again a battery of gunswould crash past us on their way up. None of us werehurt, though several shells burst around us. Oneburied itself quite close to the Major without bursting,and he was as cool as ice; a fine, big chap.

The majority of our fellows are old soldiers,having served in the previous Boer War and some ofthe Kaffir wars. This is a volunteer corps, all pickedmen, and, by a stroke of luck, I was put in the picketcompany of the lot ‘A’. After we had lain a goodwhile, orders came for the advance of A, B and CCompanies. We advanced almost at the double, soeager were our men to get at the enemy. In abouttwenty minutes we were halted, and then we knewwe were in the line of fire. So far, we had only seenour own men, who were steadily advancing fromcover to cover, crouching and crawling towards thehill where the Boers were entrenched. Suddenly,there was a lull. A small band of Boers having beencut off, hoisted the white flag. The General incommand thought the Boers were surrendering, andordered the bugler to sound the “cease fire.” He soonfound out his mistake, and the fighting was renewed.

In the meantime, as the smoke cleared off, I was

BRITISH JEWISH SOLDIERS’ LETTERS BRITISH JEWISH SOLDIERS’ LETTERS BRITISH JEWISH SOLDIERS’ LETTERS BRITISH JEWISH SOLDIERS’ LETTERS BRITISH JEWISH SOLDIERS’ LETTERSFROM THE FRONT, 1899-1900FROM THE FRONT, 1899-1900FROM THE FRONT, 1899-1900FROM THE FRONT, 1899-1900FROM THE FRONT, 1899-1900

*

able to obtain a grand view around, my first view ofa battlefield. For miles around the veldt was dottedwith dead and wounded. Thousands of our mencould be seen as they advanced from trench to trench.Close to me lay a wounded Fusilier. He asked me forsome water, and I gave him my water-bottle. I wasjust handing him a cigarette when we were orderedto fall in. We struck off to the right to take up aposition on a small kopje, and were within aboutthree hundred yards of it when the bullets startedflying around us. When I saw the stern looks of ourfellows, I nerved myself for the rush to cover. It sooncame, with the shot whistling about us. We hadhardly settled down to return the fire when we heardwild yelling and cheering, and, for a moment, as thesmoke cleared, we saw the bayonets flashing as ourgallant Tommies charged the hills. The cheeringcontinued for a quarter of an hour, when it suddenlyincreased three-fold, and, as our artillery galloped upthe hill, we knew the battle was won and the Boersrouted.

Two Views of the Battle of Colenso

The repulse of General Redvers Buller at Colensoon 15 December 1899 was the third, and mosthumiliating, of the defeats the British suffered duringthe so-called “Black Week”. Strongly entrenchedand virtually invisible on the north bank of theTugela, the Boers under General Louis Botha quicklybrought Buller’s columns to a standstill, inflictingheavy casualties while suffering minimal lossesthemselves. Ten artillery field pieces fell into theirhands when the British retreated later in the day.

The first extract, taken from a letter written by anunnamed Jewish officer from Pietermaritzburg,appeared in the JC on 26 January 1900.

I am sorry to say I am lying in the hospital, havingbeen wounded in last Friday’s engagement at Colenso.The battle was a terrible failure; the Boers held aperfectly unassailable position beyond the RiverTugela. They were practically invisible in shelteredtrenches, while out poor fellows had to advance overperfectly open ground and attempt to cross the river.The enemy knew all the ranges, and the hail of bullets

Editor’s Note: The Jewish Chronicle, organ of UK Jewry, enthusiastically backed the British wareffort in South Africa. Its wartime issues regularly carried war news, specifically relating to the Jewson active service. The example of the latter was played up to the hilt, as evidence that Jews were notshirking their duty but indeed “doing their bit” for Queen and Country. Another understated motivewas to counter accusations that the war had come about through the machinations of Jewishfinanciers.Amongst those items published were letters from Jewish soldiers describing their experiences. Thefollowing extracts from such correspondence record how several of the war’s most significantmilitary engagements were seen by the Jewish Tommies who participated in them.

11


was appalling; the pluck shown by our troops wasmagnificent, but the task was impossible, and afterabout seven hours’ fighting we had to retire.

I was shot through the ankle early in the day, butthe wound did not bother me; and it was not untilfighting had nearly ceased, that I got a worse woundin the thigh, which bowled me over. My regimentlost very heavily, two officers killed and ninewounded, and about 100 non-coms. and men killedor wounded.

You need not be anxious about me; on the contrary,I thank God that I came out of it alive. I am quitecomfortable and well cared for in the hospital; anarmy nursing sister looks after us, besides the usualorderlies. The enthusiasm and patriotism in the townis enormous. I was carried off the field by civilianstretcher bearers for about two miles who did notfunk though under rifle fire, and this Hospital is fullof civilian doctors who are assisting the militarydoctors. Although not badly hurt, I am afraid myconvalescence will be slow, as I shall not be able towalk for some time. Thank heaven more troops arecoming out from home. Of course, we must win inthe long run but it will be a long time; the Boer forceshave been absurdly under-estimated, andunfortunately our artillery has not guns of equalrange to theirs.

Private Edwin Samuel Lyons (2nd Royal ScotsFusiliers) was deployed in the sector where theBritish guns were lost. He gave the following accountof his experiences in a letter published in the JC on19 January 1900:

It was one of the most awful experiences by aBritish soldier. My regiment, with only fourCompanies engaged, lost six officers and 91 non-commissioned officers killed, wounded and missing.There is another man named Lyons who was woundedin the neck, but always remember my regimentalnumber is 4297, so as to distinguish between the two.Notwithstanding the deadly fire on us we could notsee the enemy. We did not retire: we were on an openplain, under a boiling sun, without food and water for10½ hours, and could not return the fire because wecould not see the enemy. I was busy with the wounded,with bullets and shells all round me. Two artillerymenwere recommended for the V.C. right next tome. . . .

I told you when you parted with me that I woulddo my duty like an Englishman and a Jew, and youbet I’ll not disgrace my uniform or my race. I amliving, that is the main thing, and what is more, I hopeto march with the remainder of our troops intoPretoria victorious, and come home again. I am allright; I am too ugly for the Boers to shoot, but I tellyou it is not too pleasant carrying our woundedchums to the rear in face of a hot fire of bullets andwatch their sufferings and bind up their wounds, andthe next day to bury the poor fellows who fell neverto rise up again. You will see by the papers that wewere well to the front, and have earned a goodname. . . .

Buck up, mater. It would have been a bitterdisappointment to me had I been left at home whilemy comrades were fighting out here. I am glad I amhere to share the honors and the sufferings of mychums, and to do my little bit for the credit of dear oldEngland and the grandest Queen who ever reigned(God bless her)….

The Central Front

Considerable activity took place in the North-Eastern Cape theatre of operations, centering onColesberg, during the first five months of the war.Unlike in the Kimberley and Ladysmith theatres,where full-scale engagements involving thousandson either side were common, this largely took theform of numerous smaller actions. The followingextract, from a letter by Private Sidney Levy, F.M.Rifles, published in the JC on 23 February 1900,depicts the harshness of daily life on active service.

You cannot imagine how welcome to usvolunteers, living as we do and have done for threesolid months on the bare veldt, devoid of all comforts,is a letter from home. Letters are so scarce that thefew that reach us from outside are looked upon astreasures, and valued accordingly. No doubt, dearmother, you would like to have a long account ofmyself, but you must remember that time is not myown; that I am liable to be called to duty at anymoment.

We have been on active service since November5th, and we have already had an engagement, and ashell from the enemy dropped but a few yards fromme, but luckily did not burst. Twenty-two of our menwere engaged in a bigger fight at Dordrecht, andsome were killed. I am not mentioning this to makeyou anxious . . . but it is every man’s duty in Africato fight for his country, and why should I remainidle? Will you not be proud of your son, mother,when he returns home after the war with a medal onhis breast! Until then we are all having a rough tuneof it, more than you think, and I pray that this terriblewar may soon be ended.

Every day mounted patrols, picquets, guards,fatigue parties &c. Then to be woken up at midnightand have to saddle and ride 40 miles without any grubis no joke, I can assure you. Last week I was four daysin the saddle, and the heat was almost unbearable.We cook our own food, and think nothing of makingsoup and drinking it out of the wash-basin. Still Ikeep up a stout heart. . . . Of course you know we areattached to General Gatacre’s column, and thatanother attack will shortly be made. I wonder whereI shall be when your answer to this comes. . . . .

The Battle of Spioenkop

Spioenkop, fought on 24 January 1900, was theculmination of Buller’s second unsuccessful attemptto breach the Boer’s Tugela line and come to therelief of Ladysmith. The British seized the thinly-defended hill in a night raid, but failed to occupy it

12


properly, leaving them exposed to a strong Boercounter-attack from three directions. The positionwas abandoned after a ferocious day-long battle.Barring Paardeberg a little under a month later,Spioenkop (called Spion Kop by the British) was thebloodiest single encounter of the war, costing some80 Boer and over 320 British lives. Three Jews wereamong the dead - Private H. Dreher (RoyalLancashire Regiment), Private A. Levitt (MiddlesexRegiment) and Lieutenant Frederick MelchiorRaphael (South Lancashire Regiment). The followingobituary for Raphael appeared in the 2 February1900 issue of the JC.

The announcement of the death of Lieutenant F.M. Raphael South Lancashire Regiment, brings homethe stern realities of war to a large number of outreaders. He was, we believe, the first Jewish officerin the British Regular Army to be killed on activeservice. His death was notified at the War Office onMonday last, the 29th inst, as having occurred inaction in Natal on the 24th, from which it may begathered that he took part in General Warren’s attackon Spion Kop…

Lieutenant Frederick Melchior Raphael, son ofMr. and Mrs. George C. Raphael, of Portland Place,London, and Castle Hill, Englefield Green, was bornin 1870 and educated at Wellington College. Joiningthe Rifle Brigade–Militia Battalion in 1889, he passedinto the Regular Army in 1891, being posted to the 1st

Battalion South Lancashire Regiment. He wasgazetted first Lieutenant in that regiment in 1893,and two years ago passed the necessary qualificationsprior to receiving the rank of Captain.

He had qualified in signaling and militarytopography as well as having acted Instructor ofMusketry and Adjutant to his regiment. He was alsoCaptain of the Regimental Cricket Eleven.

A man of strong physique, ever collected,possessing a perfect equanimity of temper, generous,an all-round sportsman, devoting much of his time tofishing and shooting, he was every inch a soldier.Always popular with those with whom he came intocontact, he had the enviable capacity of makingfriends and keeping them, and it is to be hoped thatthose dear to him whom he has left behind to mournhis loss will find consolation in the fact that he hasdied a hero’s death, and one which he himself wouldmost have desired.

Private Abraham Sarfaty (Seffarty), of ACompany, 2nd Middlesex Regiment, took part in theSpioenkop battle, doing “a great deal for the woundedin his capacity as orderly to the Medical Officer incharge of his Battalion”. The JC described him as“one of the Sephardic soldiers in the British Army”.He served in India as a bandsman in his regiment,and was previously mentioned in the JC in aparagraph headed “A Jewish Bandsman”. Theextract that follows was published in the JC on 9March 1900.

Just a few lines to let you know that I am still alive

and safe. You will by this time have read in the papersthat our regiment has been in action, and of thenumber of men we have lost.

It was a terrible day. The night before, the menwere sitting round the camp fires till one o’clock inthe morning, when we had the order to advance andhelp to keep the hill which the other regiments werefast losing. It was a difficult mountain to climb, andwe could only get up in single file. I am not sure ofthe name. It is either “Spitz Kop” or “Spion Kop.”Were it not for our regiment coming up and openingfire at once, the Boers would have captured the hilland made us all prisoners. I was not on the hill all thetime, as the doctor sent me to the field hospital to geta further supply of brandy. The shells were burstingeverywhere. I was busy all day getting water for thewounded and putting on bandages. I shall not attemptto describe some of the terrible sights I witnessed.Out of five Jews in the regiment, one was killed andone wounded. The first was Private Levitt, and theother Color-Sergeant Morris, who was hit in the noseand mouth. . . .

Minyanim in the shadow of Long Tom: TheSiege of Kimberley

Kimberley was one of three British towns thatwere besieged by the Boers in the early stages of thewar. Unlike the other two – Mafeking and Ladysmith– it had a significant Jewish civilian population. Thefollowing letter was written shortly after the relief ofthe town on 15 February 1900 by the Rev. HarrisIsaacs, Minister of the Griqualand West HebrewCongregation, to Chief Rabbi Marcus Adler(published 30 March 1900). Its description of howJewish communal life was conducted under siegeconditions vividly brings to life a unique episode inSouth African Jewish history.

Rev. Dr. – Knowing full well the interest you takein every Jewish community throughout the BritishEmpire, I am sure you will be pleased to hear fromme under present circumstances.

For one hundred and twenty-four days Kimberleyhas been besieged. At first we looked upon it as hugejoke, Boers threatening British territory. But formany weeks towards the end we suffered such agonyand such trouble and tribulations that few of us arelikely to forget it for the rest of our lives. No foodcould be obtained without a permit, bread 10 oz. perday, no flour if bread were used; tea, coffee, sugar,the smallest quantity imaginable; potatoes none,vegetables very little, fruit very little, eggs 24s perdoz., butter none, fowls 25s, each. Wood to cook thefood which was served three pounds per person perweek. Meat, nothing but horse flesh. We did notfatten on this fare.

Yes, medical comforts could be obtained, butonly by medical certificates. And what medicalcomforts! A tin of jam, a tin of salmon, sardines,kippered herrings, soap, candles – these were medicalcomforts. It was one constant struggle from 5.30 a.m.till late in the evening to obtain provisions for the

13


day. Had it not been for the De Beers Company wecould not have held out so long. It supplied us withwater, which had been cut off by the Boers, itsupplied us with the little vegetables and fruitobtainable, and the relief work, which kept people inemployment and in good order. Employment wasgiven to everybody, white, colored, black; nodifference was made in nationality creed, or color.What was most important, it manufacturedammunition, and a big gun throwing a projectile of28 lbs. and named “Long Cecil,” after Cecil J.Rhodes. Strange coincidence, the gentleman [GeorgeLabram – ed.] who perfected this gun was himselfkilled by a 100 lb. shell thrown into the heart of thetown by the Boers.

The members of our community performed theirfair share in the defense of the town. Thirty-sevenjoined and carried arms in the Town Guard.Considering the Jewish population, this is a fairproportion to other churches. Some joined the RedCross Ambulance Corps, and assisted the wounded.The military authorities treated our community withthe greatest consideration. When the town wasrationed on horseflesh, we were given kosher meat.We obtained a very small quantity, two ounces perperson per day, but it was meat – beef – and what aluxury it was! People who, sad to say, had forgottenthe taste of kosher meat, begged and prayed for apermit to obtain it.

Services continued uninterrupted. Amidst shotand shell, accompanied by a choir of cannon balls,

the Maariv was chanted on Friday evening. With40lb. projectiles bursting all over the town, we readthe Law. Read the service and prayed ferventlyindeed, “May God send peace to us and to all Israel– Amen.” Only on one occasion did we fail to obtaina Minyan, and that was when we were bombardedwith the 100lb. projectiles. This Saturday evening,the 100lb. shells came fast and furiously. Starting ateight p.m, it continued to twelve p.m. to the minute,at intervals of two and three minutes, when theenemy piously stopped, for was it not “The HolySunday”? The agonies of this one evening, who candescribe?

Besides everything and every trouble and anguish,we lovers of peace, who had looked upon a littlesickness as a terrible trouble and upon death undernatural circumstances as a grievous blow, now sawwagons flying the red cross with wounded and dead,slowly wending their way to the hospital andmortuary, each day claiming its quota. Our heartsbled for the sorrow that and come upon us. All thistime our women and children bore everything withcourage and fortitude.

And now we are relieved. The town is graduallyresuming its normal appearance. We have alreadyhad butter for breakfast and potatoes for dinner, and– tell it not in Gath, it is a secret – I heard that we aregoing to have fried fish for breakfast to-morrow –Shobbos. What a “Good Shobbos” greeting we willgive each other to-morrow when we leave thesynagogue...

Best Wishes

for

Chanukah

Festival of Lights

14


This story ends on 11 December, 1899, with anAmerican killed needlessly on the field of battle ofSurprise Hill, South Africa. However, it beginsfortuitously enough, with a German Jewish boy,Harry Spanier, coming to America with his siblings,Joseph and Pauline, as part of the mid-19th CenturyGerman-Jewish migration to America.

The Spanier siblings were barely teenagers whenthey arrived and set about striving to integrate intothe American melting pot. Joseph and Pauline settledin post-Gold Rush San Francisco, while Harry tookto the East Coast, New York, and then Columbus inmid-western Ohio.

According to Harry’s passport application, hewas the son of Abraham Spanier of Wandsbek,Germany. He had two passports with varying birthdates, one giving 1840 and the other 1853.

Spanier was variously a grocer, fish market ownerand speculator. He was someone who looked for themain chance, a good idea, a way to make his mark.He was eager to make his first million, as he hadheard it was possible to do in America, the land ofopportunity.

To others, he appeared to be a fine figure of aman, attractive with blue eyes and light hair. He

HARRY SPANIER:AN UNTOWARD BOER SOLDIER

*

Ann Rabinowitz

fitted in everywhere. He must have been a persuasivetalker as he gained the attention of many a prominentbusinessman, belonged to civic organizations andlodges, and had many devoted friends.

At some point, he met the ebullient and sociallyactive Frances Emma Vagnier. She was the daughterof Bartholomew and Frances Vagnier, FrenchCatholics and early settlers of Lancaster, a smallOhio town not far from Columbus. It was not knownhow ‘Emma’ met Harry Spanier. She was muchyounger than he was, and eager to see the world,while he was a worldly man intent on making thingshappen. She was smitten despite the difference intheir ages and their religions. However, she took herreligion seriously, seriously enough to require thattheir forthcoming children be brought up Catholic.

Harry SpanierLancaster, Ohio

Frances Emma SpanierColumbus, OH

They were married in approximately 1884,although no records remain of their joining or whetherit was done civilly or in a church. Intermarriage,whilst frowned upon, occurred frequently in thosedays when Jews were located in areas where therewere few other Jews. The fact, too, was that many ofthese early German Jewish settlers were of the Reformpersuasion and may also have become much lessobservant in the less restrictive confines of America.

The Spaniers had their first child, Joseph,immediately, and two more, Clara Belle and LewisJ., followed. However, Joseph died in 1890, as didHarry’s brother, Joseph.

It was difficult trying to make something of onesself and raise a family too. However, Harry was ahustler and always eager to find his niche. He kept upwith current affairs and what was going on in theworld and eventually concocted the idea that heshould become involved in South African-related

Ann Rabinowitz, a frequent contributor to JewishAffairs and other Jewish publications, is ResearchCoordinator of the Southern Africa Special InterestGroup (SIG), associated with JewishGen on theInternet (http://www.jewishgen.org/safrica). In thatcapacity, she has produced numerous databases andmaterials related to shipping and immigration,naturalization, community profiles and relatedmatters. She is also involved in Holocaust research.

15


commerce. South Africa was alive with possibilities,with its abundant natural resources such as diamondsand gold, even if it had little in the way of standardizedor commercially mass-produced products such ascarriages, railroad cars, mining machinery,explosives, etc.

Harry’s first successful South African venturewas to represent a combine of New Yorkers in theshipping of mules there. Since mules were notnaturally raised in South Africa and were strongerand more long-lasting than horses, there was a greatdesire for them. They were essential ingredients inthe mining industry in particular. In addition, theywere most important in military operations, such ascarting food, guns, and equipment, as demonstratedin the First Anglo-Boer War (1880-1881).

As it so happened, the major companies inColumbus, the Columbus Buggy Co. Inc., andKilbourne and Jacobs Manufacturing Co. were intenton providing items related to mining, transportation,and other similar areas. Harry established connectionsfor selling their products in South Africa. A group ofthe companies then hired him to go there to negotiatecontracts with the government for many diverseitems. This was his chance at striking it rich. Hisambitious plan was to spend a year or two in SouthAfrica, make his fortune and bring his family out tojoin him.

It was now 1896. He obtained his passport andbid good-bye to his devoted wife and two youngchildren. As he left the coast of America for adaunting and unknown foreign shore, he penned aletter to his wife, only the first page of which remains:

On board ship, Saturday, Oct.17, 1896

My own dear wife and children,

This is a great moment for me. It almost breaksmy heart, but we will trust in God to land us safeand may God keep you and the children until myreturn. I have set my teeth together to keep fromalmost breaking down not because I am a coward,but because I miss you so much my darlings. Weare just leaving the shore of our country behindand with a heavy heart I am looking at the…

And so, Harry sailed across the seas and arrivedin South Africa, immediately setting about makingconnections so as to consummate some deals. Hewas widely accepted in the halls of government inPretoria, where many other speculators competedwith him for the lucrative government contracts. Hisfriends were other Americans, who hung out atcertain social clubs, but also the Boers officials withwhom he had to deal. He was a fresh face whorepresented companies that had a worldwidereputation, which boded well for his future success.

He began to make progress, and significantquantities of American products from Columbus,Ohio, began flowing to the Zuid-AfrikaanscheRepubliek. Despite this, he recognized that the bigmoney was going to come from the provision of

railroad cars and lines for new main and branch raillines being constructed, as well as of miningmachinery.

In 1898, he represented a group of companies inthe following undertaking:

Pretoria, 3rd (Central News Agency)

An American syndicate, which has practicallysecured the contract for the Vryheid-Dundeeline, has submitted a proposal to the Governmentoffering to construct all the new branch lines atan average rate of £8,000 per mile, to be paid inState debentures bearing four percent interest.The proposal will have to be submitted to theVolksraad.

This was an important arterial rail line which wasscheduled to connect the Richards Bay coal line withthe Durban-Transvaal main line. The initial sectionof eleven km from Glencoe to Talana was built in1896. Due to the onset of the Second Anglo-BoerWar, the line was not extended to Vryheid until 1903.

The South Africa Harry saw was indeed full ofpossibilities. He continued to write glowing letters tohis wife about what he could accomplish, but at thesame time recorded his homesickness and how muchhe missed his family. The time flew by, and by 1899,three years later, Harry had not managed to go homeyet. Things were still on the cusp of succeeding forhim.

He wrote to his wife that if things did not workout, he would return, but he wanted to stay until hehad tried every means of succeeding on a specialproject he was working on. If he did succeed, hewrote, he would be a millionaire many times over.She wrote back agreeing that he should stay until hereached his goal or until his opportunities ran out.

At some point, Harry became a burgher of theZAR and joined the Boer commandos. Along withothers from Pretoria, he left to join in the siege ofLadysmith. It is quite strange that Harry, a man whoby most accounts was nearly sixty years of age,should have done this. It is true that there were oldermen who joined, but many took non-combatantroles. In addition, he had a wife and two youngchildren who needed his support in America. Whatprompted him to take this life-changing andsubsequently fatal move which risked everything hehad or hoped to accomplish?

Did he suddenly become idealistic and join aforeign army, despite the fact that he had only beenin the ZAR for only three short years? There is nodocumentation that has survived of his feelings alongthese lines. Was he influenced by his friends?American speculators who were in South Africa forthe most part supported the British, not the Boers.However, some close American friends did join theBoers, and this may have accounted for his decision.

There is a possibility that Spanier was caught upin something that has not been documented, such asspying for the American government. ManyAmericans who were in the same position as he was

16


returned home when the war broke out. Severaldescriptions of his activities during the war lead oneto believe that he was observing the proceedingsfrom the sidelines and not actually participating.

It may be that Harry felt that his participation andsupport would guarantee his success after the warwas over and the Boers had won. This may be thefinal answer; he had told his wife he was in it for thelong haul until he achieved the success he hadstruggled for.

This is the missing link in Harry’s story. There isnothing to tell us either in his correspondence or inother documentation that has since come to lightwhat caused him to end up on a battlefield at SurpriseHill in the dark, early hours of 11 December 1899.

One of the unique bits of necrology followingHarry’s death was the letter written to his wife by aCatholic priest, the Rev. Father A. Baudry, who hadshared a tent with him on the battlefield. The followingis an extract:

12.12.1899

Hoofdlager

Madam,

It is my sad duty to ——to you news which willgrieve you very much. As you know your husbandjoined the Boers forces here near Ladysmith.For a couple of weeks he shared the tent whereI was. We soon became very friendly and hetalked much to me of you and your two children,gave me your address and told me that if anythinghappened to him to inform you. Though not a R.Catholic he attended mass which I celebrated inthe camp on Sunday. We parted about a weekhence; he was going to join the PretoriaCommando.

Our eyes were full of tears when we last shookhands to see each other no more.

Yesterday morning at about two o’cl his picketwas attacked by the English; heavy firingcommenced and continued for about an hour.

The English were repulsed, but not until theyhad blown up one gun with a charge of dynamite.On the Boers side there were 2 killed and 14wounded. Your husband was among the last.He was mortally shot in the stomach. As soon asI heard of it I went to the ambulance, but he hadnot yet been brought there.

I went again in the afternoon, but to learn that hehad succumbed to his wound. He died in theambulance wagon on his way to the ambulancetrain, which was to carry him to Johannesburg….

The unusual nature of Harry’s passing, wherebyhe had been shot by his own side, the Boers, and thenbayoneted by the other side, the British, and the fact

that he was a foreign soldier (a Jew, at that) and aperson well-known in the halls of power in the BoerRepublic, caused his funeral to gain a magnitude thatmight not have been felt for a regular soldier.

The following is a government report of whattook place in Pretoria on December 13, 1899, withPresident Paul Kruger in attendance:

The certified burial certificate for Harry wasattested to by S. [Sigmund] Wolfson, of The PretoriaJewish Helping Hand and Burial Society, on 1January, 1901. It states that Harry was buried in theJewish Burial Ground, Block B, Grave #3, Pretoria,SA, on 10 December 1899. Of course, the funeraltook place three days later. It appears that poor HarrySpanier not only was killed twice, but according tothis document was buried before his death! He hadnever been able to consummate before his death anyof the deals that were in the works and which hadkept him in South Africa for three long years awayfrom his beloved family. In the end, he joined thelosing side in the war and got himself killed almostas soon as he was deployed in battle.

All one can conclude is that, unlike the popularYiddish song Wie Nemt Men A Bissele Mazel, HarrySpanier, poor fellow, had no mazel whatsoever!

17


I wish to thank the SA Jewish Board of Deputiesfor asking me to speak at this memorial service inhonor of the great Helen Suzman. It is indeed aprivilege because Helen and I were bosom buddiesand we talked a lot. “The reason you and I get on sowell,” Helen used to say, “is because we are so muchalike; you are just worse!” In many ways Helen keptme on the strait and narrow. Whenever my columnswere too strident, she would coax me out of it, verywisely. The more I got to know Helen, the more Irealized that one comes across someone with suchprofound wisdom, only once in a lifetime.

We are all familiar with Helen’s illustrious life asthe country’s most famous Member of Parliament,who used the powerful forum of Parliament to fightfor the rights of those who were excluded fromParliament. She believed very deeply that Parliamentwas that space where public representatives transactedthe business of citizens in public. She believed in theinstitutions of Parliament, in the rule of law, in anindependent judiciary, and she became one of theworld’s most famous human rights campaigners,fighting tooth and nail against every bill that violatedthe rights of people, citizens and non-citizens alike.There are few politicians today who combine theseroles, of politician and human rights campaigner, sofantastically well, something aptly acknowledgedby Chief Albert Luthuli in a letter he wrote to her in1968:

In moments of creeping frustration and tiredness,please pick courage and strength in the fact thatthousands of South Africans, especially amongthe oppressed section, thank God for producingHelen, for her manly stand against injustice,regardless of consequences. For ever remember,you are a bright Star in dark Chamber, wherelights of liberty of what is left, are going out oneby one. This appreciation covers yourcontribution since you entered Parliament asmember of the Progressive Party. Thismeritorious record has been climaxed by your

Rhoda Kadalie, a distinguished South African humanrights activist and academic, currently serves asExecutive Director, Impumelelo Innovations AwardTrust and Director: Restitution of Land Rights. Thisarticle is adapted from the address she delivered atthe Helen Suzman Memoriam held at the Green andSea Point Synagogue, Cape Town, on 8 February2009.

“A BRIGHT STAR IN A CHAMBER OF DARKNESS”:HELEN SUZMAN AND HER LEGACY

*

Rhoda Kadalie

fittingly uncompromising stand in the rape ofdemocracy by Parliament in the debate thatmade law, which was one of the most diabolicbills ever to come before Parliament. Not onlyourselves - your contemporaries - but alsoposterity will hold you in high esteem.

What sets Helen apart for Luthuli was her“uncompromising stand’, taking up issues “regardlessof the consequences”. Often alone, Helen wasfearless, politically incorrect, and courageous infighting for what was so obviously right. She was aliberal when to be liberal was not in fashion. Sheopposed sanctions when it was politically incorrectto do so, and she may have lost the Nobel Prizebecause of it. “Posterity will hold you in high esteem”says Luthuli, and that is exactly what happened.When Helen died, the entire world, even the ANC,graciously acknowledged her contribution towardsbuilding democracy in this country. In eschewingpopularity and populism, she became popular.

In her old age, Helen increasingly despairedabout South Africa’s double standards on Zimbabwe,and frequently pointed out that Mugabe’s tyrannystarted with his destruction of Parliament and itsinstitutions, the rule of law, the judiciary, the mediaand its exemplary education and health systems.This enraged Helen, so much that she literally wantedto die. South Africa’s consistent support for therogue states such as Zimbabwe, Sudan, Myanmar,and Iran at the United Nations Security Councildestroyed her faith in the current regime and oftenmade her feel that all her work was in vain. She couldnever understand why our government flirted withdictators and human rights delinquent regimes andwhy we consistently voted with China and Russia invetoing Western-instigated resolutions. She despairedover South Africa’s schizophrenic approach, whichthe Democratic Alliance has described as “a courtshipwith the West on one hand, while giving succour tothe West’s adversaries on the other, harming ourinternational credibility and all but obliterating themoral high ground we attained through our transitionto democracy”.

This brings me to the topic that I was asked tospeak about tonight - Human Rights in general, thestruggle for Human Rights in this country and whatit means to be an activist.

In July last year, a group of local activists went ona tour of Israel and the occupied territories to inspecthuman rights violations in the region, and the Israelioccupation in particular. They visited one side of the

18


conflict during their five day visit and came backsmugly condemning Israel from a dizzy height.Immediately, others got on the bandwagon,supporting them because it was the politically correctthing to do. They did not for one moment reflect onwhy it was important to see both sides of the conflict,how they could help both the Israelis and thePalestinians find solutions to it and how we couldshare some of our experiences to help two relatedpeoples imagine a future together, just as we havedone. There was no modesty in their condemnationgiven what was going on in our country and howashamed and modest we should be about the beam inour own eye. Intrinsic to human rights investigationsis the weighing up of all sides; of weighing up oneright against another, as Helen did so adeptly.

Last week we were greeted by a headline: “TopJews condemn War on Gaza”.1 Can you imagine aheadline: “Top Christians condemn Hamas”?President Motlanthe called the war on Gaza‘savagery’ in his opening address to Parliament,when Zimbabwe on our doorstep is ravished by anunstoppable barbarism that has rendered 3000 deadfrom cholera alone, not to speak of all the otherhuman rights abuses he is guilty of. Mugabe, ofcourse, will never be called a savage, because thenthat would be called racism.

Let me pose a question to SA: if Israel sent ahuman rights delegation to SA, what would it find?

The HR delegation went to Israel at a time whenSA was reeling in the aftermath of the embarrassingoutbreak of xenophobic violence, in which hundredswere killed simply because they were foreign andblack; in a matter of weeks over 32 Somalis werekilled for simply being entrepreneurial. Bishop PaulVerryn’s church is overflowing with thousands ofZimbabwean refugees, treated like dirt by the verySouth African regime that is quick to uttercondemnation of others.

On every international index, this country hasgone down a notch or two, such as for example theHuman Development Index, because of thedevastating rates of maternal health and infantmortality rates. We have a HIV/AIDS pandemicwhich kills a thousand people a day; over 6 millionare infected, mostly young women between the agesof 15 and 29; we have a multiple drug resistant TBepidemic that is out of control; and now hundreds ofpeople are infected with cholera.

Recently, I hosted a professor from Holland whois an expert analyst of sexual violence in her country.She could not believe our figures on rape, and childrape in particular. The fact that rape against womenis not declining, given our strong representation ofwomen in government, is one of the biggestindictments against women in public office. Giventhe proportional representation electoral system, ourwomen politicians are beholden to the men in theparty who put them there. Party interests overridetheir commitment to gender interests, and oncewomen are catapulted into power they forget theirobligations as politicians. Helen was never like that.

She set the tone.I have yet to find a politician of Helen Suzman’s

calibre that effectively combines human rightscampaigning with their role as politician. She left hercomfort zones; she went where angels feared totread; she challenged and took on the police fearlessly,recently shown in one of the video clips on CNNwhen she died.

Armed with devastatingly accurate informationgleaned from her insistence “on seeing things forherself”, she became a “boots-on politician”, goingwhere the action was. In 1973 she went to Kliptownto see the unrest at first hand; she visited the squattercamps in Cape Town in the winter of 1981, aftershelters had been demolished by governmentofficials; she addressed crowds at a mass funeral ofvictims of police shootings in Alexandra in 1986; shetook statements from Moutse residents who hadbeen assaulted by vigilantes; she visited Oukasieresidents who were threatened by forced removals;and she pleaded the fate of the Sharpeville Six in1988.

Going into these areas were often life-threatening,but Helen knew that people relied on her to get theinformation out and expose to the world the atrocitiesof apartheid. Beneath Helen’s tough veneer of takingon the apartheid bullies, prime ministers and securitypolice alike, lay a warm compassionate soul, whosemission was driven not only by a deep respect fordemocracy, equality for all, and human rights, butalso by a deep compassion for those who were notrepresented, the ‘Other’ and the oppressed, by lawsshe considered fundamentally inhumane.

I am always sad that Helen died disappointed inour new democracy; disappointed that Parliamenthad become captive to liberation politics andmajoritarianism; that our legislators are implicatedin one corruption scandal after another. She detestedhaving to acknowledge that life for her in the apartheidparliament was more tolerable than the post-1994parliament is today for opposition MPs.

The lesson for us today: we cannot leave thebusiness of Parliament to politicians alone. Helenbelieved so profoundly that an opposition was crucialbecause without one there could be no dialogue; andwithout dialogue, one could not begin to approachthe truth. No one person, and no one party, can layabsolute claim to the truth, whatever their credentials.And the person or party that does so is almostcertainly going the Mugabe route to fanaticism,fascism, and thuggery.

Let us commit ourselves to continuing Helen’slegacy of speaking truth to power as much as wespeak power to the truth.

NOTES

1 Mail & Guardian, 30 January 2009

19


Helen and I first met in June 1954, over lunch inthe Oak Room of the Manchester Hotel that oncestood at the corner of Strand and Burg Streets, CapeTown. I was about to become a member of the CapeProvincial Council. Helen was completing her secondyear as MP for Houghton.

The meeting had been arranged by Cape Timesparliamentary correspondent Tony Delius, who hadphoned me and said, “Colin, there is one MP amongthe new members I believe you should meet - she isHelen Suzman. She is bright. And, one way oranother, she is going to make an impact on thepolitical scene.”

How accurate both Tony’s assessment andprediction turned out to be! For Helen was bright -very bright. And over the years, she certainly madeher impact on the political scene.

I found Helen to be very attractive: physically,politically and intellectually. I realized that behindher sparkling blue eyes, there was a sharp mind anda very tough will. We seemed to be on the samepolitical wavelength, and to share the same judgmentof the main political players at that time. That lunchmarked the start of a personal friendship and amutually supportive political relationship that lastedfor the next fifty years.

Over those years, I came to appreciate her keenintellect, to understand her commitment to principle,her intolerance of hypocrisy, her scorn for positionseekers, her anger at injustice, her concern for people.I also came to realize that she did not suffer foolsgladly.

I enjoyed her sense of fun. She was a great mimic– at her best when mimicking John Vorster, or thewarder at Roeland Street prison barking at theshivering woman prisoners at an early morningparade.

I appreciated her warm and generous hospitality.Helen loved her home, with it its garden and herdogs. Her home was the focal point of her domestic,social and a large part of her political life. It was inher home that

mission editorial board - sajbd · 2019. 8. 5. · mission editorial board in publishing jewish...

Documents