IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ... IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

dataspace.princeton.edu
from dataspace.princeton.edu More from this publisher
20.04.2013 Views

He wrote to Bargāsh explaining that “I am telling you all this so that you will understand and know how to answer, should someone say that we judged the first Jew who was killed in Safi one way and judged the matter of the [other] aforementioned Jew another way.” 82 Meanwhile, the two suspects were to be kept in prison. Following Lalouche’s execution, Moshe Pariente wrote a letter to Moses Montefiore, the AIU, and the Board of Delegates of American Israelites on behalf of the Jewish leaders of Tangier (introduced above). 83 The letter urgently pleaded with the representatives of international Jewish organizations to intervene with their respective governments to save the “innocent” suspects: “A recommendation from these governments to their representatives, to this effect, would be a great reprieve and breath [of relief] for the Jewish communities of Morocco.” 84 On the one hand, Pariente argued that Ben Yehudah and Lalouche had been executed without a proper trial; he reminded his western Jewish addressees that “these Muslim countries lack the laws familiar in Europe, and there is no tribunal where one can appeal a case to have it justified by judicial examination.” 85 On the other hand, Pariente clearly placed much of the blame for the executions on the Spanish government (contrary to the interpretation offered by Fenton and Littman). He recounted how the Junta of Tangier repeatedly appealed to Merry y Colom, the Spanish ambassador, in an attempt to convince him to pardon Lalouche—without any success. Pariente also explained that after Lalouche was executed, the Jews of Safi first approached local Makhzan officials in the hopes that they would agree to stay the executions of 82 Wa-a‘lamnāka li-takūna ‘alā baṣīratin wa-ta‘rifa mā tujību bihi man ‘asā an yaqūla mā lanā ḥakamnā fī almaqtūli bi-Asafī awwalan bi-shay’in wa-ḥakamnā bi-nāzilati hādha al-yahūdī al-madhkūri bi-shay’in ākhar (ibid.). 83 The letter is reproduced in the original Spanish in Bashan, Moshe Montefiore ve-yehudei Maroko, 221-5, and in a contemporary French translation in Fenton and Littman, L’exil au Maghreb, 397-401. See also Littman, “Mission to Morocco,” 177-8. The Board of Delegates of American Jews was founded in New York in 1859, and had already sent funds to support Moroccan Jewish refugees from the Spanish occupation of Tetuan in 1860 (Kenbib, Juifs et musulmans, 140). 84 Bashan, Moshe Montefiore ve-yehudei Maroko, 225. 85 Ibid. 352

the remaining two subjects. Only after this failed did the Jews appeal once again to foreign representatives, including those of France and Britain. 86 Mawlāy Muḥammad was correct in assuming that foreign diplomats would question the Makhzan’s handling of the matter. On October 6, the British consul Thomas Reade wrote to Bargāsh insisting that an investigation take place and claiming that “the two Jews who were executed in Safi and Tangier [Akkan and Lalouche] as suspects in the death of the Spaniard [had been executed] without a proper investigation.” 87 Bargāsh reassured Reade that the sultan had already stayed the execution because the suspects’ guilt had not been firmly established, since one of them denied any involvement and the other had recanted his confession. 88 Nonetheless, the British ambassador wrote to his superiors about plans for Britain to take all Moroccan Jews under its protection if he deemed this necessary. 89 In late November, Aflalo and Ben Moyal were released from prison following Montefiore’s visit to the Queen of Spain in Madrid, whom he convinced to drop Spain’s demands for the execution of the perpetrators. 90 In Moroco, Montefiore went on to have two audiences with Mawlāy Muḥammad, during which he obtained a famous ẓahīr on behalf of Moroccan Jews, dated February 5, 1864/ 5 Sha‘bān 1280. 91 The ẓahīr reiterated the principles of the dhimma contract, albeit with new language that was undoubtedly a response to foreign intervention on Jews’ behalf; for instance, the ẓahīr declared that “all people are equal in 86 Ibid., 224. 87 Al-yahūdiyayn al-maqtūlayn fī Asafī wa-fī Ṭanja ‘alā tuhmati mawti al-isbanyūlī dūna taḥaqquqin ‘alayhim (DAR, Yahūd, 17018, Thomas Reade to Muḥammad Bargāsh, 6 October 1863/ 22 Rabī‘ II 1280). 88 DAR, Safi, 16349, Muḥammad Bargāsh to Thomas Reade, 24 Rabī‘ II 1280. 89 Kenbib, Juifs et musulmans, 145. 90 DAR, Safi, 4736, al-Ṭayyib al-Yamānī to Muḥammad Bargāsh, 18 Rajab 1280. See also Littman, “Mission to Morocco,” 184-7. 91 The ẓahīr is published in al-Nāṣirī, Kitāb al-istiqṣā, v. 8, 129 and translated into English in Stillman, The Jews of Arab Lands, 371-3. 353

He wrote to Bargāsh explaining that “I am telling you all this so that you will understand and<br />

know how to answer, should someone say that we judged the first Jew who was killed in Safi<br />

one way and judged the matter of the [other] aforementioned Jew another way.” 82 Meanwhile,<br />

the two suspects were to be kept in prison.<br />

Following Lalouche’s execution, Moshe Pariente wrote a letter to Moses Montefiore, the<br />

AIU, and the Board of Delegates of American Israelites on behalf of the Jewish leaders of<br />

Tangier (introduced above). 83 The letter urgently pleaded with the representatives of<br />

international Jewish organizations to intervene with their respective governments to save the<br />

“innocent” suspects: “A recommendation from these governments to their representatives, to this<br />

effect, would be a great reprieve and breath [of relief] for the Jewish communities of<br />

Morocco.” 84 On the one hand, Pariente argued that Ben Yehudah and Lalouche had been<br />

executed without a proper trial; he reminded his western Jewish addressees that “these Muslim<br />

countries lack the laws familiar in Europe, and there is no tribunal where one can appeal a case<br />

to have it justified by judicial examination.” 85 On the other hand, Pariente clearly placed much<br />

of the blame for the executions on the Spanish government (contrary to the interpretation offered<br />

by Fenton and Littman). He recounted how the Junta of Tangier repeatedly appealed to Merry y<br />

Colom, the Spanish ambassador, in an attempt to convince him to pardon Lalouche—without<br />

any success. Pariente also explained that after Lalouche was executed, the Jews of Safi first<br />

approached local Makhzan officials in the hopes that they would agree to stay the executions of<br />

82 Wa-a‘lamnāka li-takūna ‘alā baṣīratin wa-ta‘rifa mā tujību bihi man ‘asā an yaqūla mā lanā ḥakamnā fī almaqtūli<br />

bi-Asafī awwalan bi-shay’in wa-ḥakamnā bi-nāzilati hādha al-yahūdī al-madhkūri bi-shay’in ākhar (ibid.).<br />

83 The letter is reproduced in the original Spanish in Bashan, Moshe Montefiore ve-yehudei Maroko, 221-5, and in a<br />

contemporary French translation in Fenton and Littman, L’exil au Maghreb, 397-401. See also Littman, “Mission to<br />

Morocco,” 177-8. The Board of Delegates of American Jews was founded in New York in 1859, and had already<br />

sent funds to support Moroccan Jewish refugees from the Spanish occupation of Tetuan in 1860 (Kenbib, Juifs et<br />

musulmans, 140).<br />

84 Bashan, Moshe Montefiore ve-yehudei Maroko, 225.<br />

85 Ibid.<br />

352

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!