Great Britain, British Jews, and the international protection of Romanian Jews, 1900-1914: a study of Jewish diplomacy and minority rights

 
 
68
 
noise, and disturbing peace.
38
 In spite of this, the Romanian Conservative 
government, led by Gheorghe Grigore Cantacuzino, took an encouraging 
outlook on emigration at first, perhaps seeing it as a convenient way to get rid 
of Jews.  
 
Not everyone began their journey on foot as fusgeyers — many emigrants 
boarded a train to Austria-Hungary. Yet others boarded a ship at the Romanian 
Black Sea ports in order to sail to Near East destinations such as Cyprus, 
Palestine, and Anatolia. Hungary did not allow Romanian Jews to enter its half 
of the Dual Monarchy at all if they did not have sufficient finances, or at least it 
did not permit them to leave their trains while in Hungary. The Vienna Allianz, 
the main Viennese Jewish organisation, sent some emigrants back from Vienna, 
after which they ended up in Budapest. They were not allowed to remain in 
Budapest, however, and were sent back to the Romanian border. At the border, 
it turned out that the Romanian authorities did not permit re-entry, because the 
passports issued to the emigrants did not allow for a return. Some Jews did not 
dare to attempt to go back to Romania at all, preferring to camp at the border 
area.
39
 As for other problems in emigration during the year 1900, there were 
some disturbing incidents such as defective ships carrying too many passengers 
and unusual, ultimately unsuccessful choices of destination, such as Cyprus.
40
 
 
In 1900, failed colonisation schemes of Romanian Jews attracted some 
attention in Britain, both among the Anglo-Jewry and among the government 
officials. Some Romanian Jews had emigrated to Turkey and Cyprus, but both 
projects soon proved to be total failures. The Cyprus episode is interesting as it 
indirectly involved Britain, the colonial landlord of Cyprus, and there was some 
debate on the matter between the British representatives in Romania and the 
Cyprus colonial administration. Davis Trietsch, ‘one of German Zionism’s most 
inveterate utopians’
41
, was planning a Jewish settlement in Cyprus. He was 
keen to include some Romanian Jews in his settlement scheme.
42
  
 
As early as 1899, Trietsch went to Romania to distribute emigration 
propaganda, after which some enthusiastic Romanian Jews began to make 
somewhat unrealistic emigration plans. There was even a piece of news about a 
group of young Jews from Galaţi who wanted to join the British forces as 
volunteers in the Boer War in South Africa. Their object was to settle in Cyprus 
after the war — if they were still alive.
43
  
                                                           
38
  
FRUS 1903, 704, American Minister in Athens (also accredited to Romania) John B. 
Jackson to Secretary of State John Hay, 7 Sept. 1903. 
39
  
JC, 3 Aug 1900. See also The New York Times, 16 July 1900. The New York Times pointed 
out that a number of emigrants were actually professional men, such as lawyers and 
doctors, who spoke many foreign languages.  
40
  
FO 104/146/6. Trotter to Salisbury, 30 May 1900. The same dispatch is also in FO 
770/56. 
41
 
 
Penslar 1991, 51.Trietsch believed Cyprus was suitable for Jewish colonisation 
because of its proximity to Palestine. 
42
  
JC, 20 Oct. 1899, Davis Trietsch to the Editor. For the Cyprus project, see also Bar-Avi 
1961, 40-46.  
43
  
JC, 10 Nov. 1899. 

---

 
 
69
 
Eventually, Trietsch could not handle the situation. After hearing about 
far-fetched plans like the Boer War scheme, he had to begin to hold back 
prospective emigrants. He also tried to persuade them to make all the necessary 
arrangements prior to leaving Romania.
44
  
 
When problems appeared at the Cyprus end in spring 1900, Trietsch 
contacted the British representative at Bucharest, John Gordon Kennedy, asking 
for help.
45
 It had transpired that the Cyprus authorities would not allow the 
immigrants to land unless they had some guarantees for their maintenance and, 
in the case of the possible failure of the settlement, guarantees of their removal 
from Cyprus. Consequently, the shipping company that the migrants had made 
a deal with refused to carry them from the Romanian port of Sulina. The main 
question seemed to be whether the group of Romanian Jews was going to be a 
burden on the Cyprus population — although the required guarantees 
appeared to be available from Jewish activists and some well-to-do Romanian 
Jews. There was also an implicit fear of the arrival of more Jewish immigrants 
from Romania to Cyprus, especially as Trietsch himself was so dedicated to the 
settlement idea, envisioning several Jewish agricultural colonies being 
established on the island.
46
 
 
The Cyprus authorities opposed Trietsch’s project, and argued that 
Trietsch had not made sufficient provisions for the maintenance of immigrants, 
although he had been ‘instrumental’ in bringing or attempting to bring them to 
Cyprus.
47
 Strict guarantees on financial support, adequate housing, medical 
care, and payment of possible expenses of removal were required from the 
sponsors of the settlement.
48
 Trietsch claimed that he had brought only two 
small groups to the island in early 1900, twelve individuals at first and then ‘28 
families’. None of them were rejected at the port on arrival, but some 
admittedly did not have sufficient means. Those unfortunate individuals then 
became a burden on the Jewish agricultural colony and some fell ill or, in a few 
cases, died. In addition, Trietsch refused to take responsibility for the actions of 
a group of 250 Romanian Jews who had sailed from Galaţi to Cyprus in May 
1900 despite his warnings.
49
    
 
Several hundred, or at highest one thousand, Romanian Jews moved to 
Anatolia. A group of 160 Jews from Tulcea sailed to Constantinople, where the 
Ottoman authorities granted them aid and forwarded them to the Anatolian 
inland, where they were then given land for agricultural settlement. The first 
group to arrive in Turkey was ‘destitute’ and so were the subsequent migrants. 
                                                           
44
  
JC, 17 Nov. 1899. 
45
  
FO 770/55/3, Kennedy to Trotter, 30 May 1900.  
46
  
FO 104/146/7, Trotter to Salisbury, 1 June 1900, enclosure: letter from Trietsch to 
Kennedy, 28 May 1900. This matter can also be found in FO 770/56/10, Trotter to 
Kennedy, 2 June 1900. 
47
  
CO 67/123/18763, High Commissioner for Cyprus Sir William F. Haynes Smith to 
Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain, 4 June 1900; CO 67/124/24125, Haynes 
Smith to Chamberlain, 16 July 1900.  
48
  
CO 67/124/24114, Haynes Smith to Chamberlain, 16 July 1900. 
49
  
JC, 14 Sept. 1900; JC, 12 Oct. 1900, article by Trietsch. 

---