Catoctin clarion. [volume] (Mechanicstown, Md.) 1871-1940, 1896-06-04


thought fail to see how anyone can avoid
the conviction that he has strong grounds
for the lodged hate he bears Antonio" Re-
yied and scorned, spit upon and spurned,
called "misbelieving cut throat dog" and,
reading between the lines, subjected to per-
sonal indignity ON every possible occasion
by his enemy, how could he ieel aught but
hatred? Moreover imagine his prosecutor
while in the act of asking favor coolly tell
ing him he lis like to spit on him again and
spurn him too;' aggravate the feeling by
Antonio continued and open opposition to
his taking what was then regarded-not
usury as we use the word but lawful interest.
Now add injury to insult With what Shylock
believed 10 he Antonio's share in the abduc-
ton of his daughter; still more, take into
consideration the terrible dread in which the
Jews lived in that age and do still in some
parts of Europe the constant apprehension
of being plundered, burnt out and exiled--
add all this and you can begin to appreciate
the Jews grounds for hatred. In considering
his personal hatred, the question here sug-
gests ITSELF what motive took precedence, his
avarice or his wounded selfrespect? Accor-
ding to the answer we give this question:
does the man appear more or less ignoble.
I an, inclined to the opinion that Shylock
was man Of large pride both personal and
national, and the scorn and abuse. the taunts
and jibes of his oppressors had SO wounded
his self respect rs to take supreme place in
bis desire for revenge. Did not his keen
sense of outraged justice take precedence Of
his avarice he never could have sacrificed
his 5000, nay the 10000 ducats offered him
in the courtroom.
Now to sum up he hates Antonio because
of his unjust treatment, that is human; you
and could do no less. He hates him because
he IS christian, that is natural, the instinct
of race He hates him because he lends out
money gratis, and brings down the rate Of
usance; that is contemplate, the ground l
can least forgive him for; but still more, he
hates him because he hates our sacred nation
Now we touch the secret springs of conduct
and catch glimpse of the possibilities ofthe
man smothered under ages Of Christian per
secution.
Thus tar have dealt only with his personal
animus leaving out OF the account the larger
motif of national pride. doubt it any ofus
can from q christian standpoint, rightly ap'
prcciate his feeling in this respect. Mingled
with all the hate and bitterness eAgendercd
by the personal insults hcaped upon him was
tue keen sense of injustice to his people
The desire for revenge follows inevitably, a
sense ofoutraged justice. HIS national pride
towers over his ayarice Ofstrong passion,
passion and determined will belong to great
character, he feels as one entrusted with
avenging the suffering of his race, ! firmly
believe he spoke and acted less in the spirit
of private malice than by the dictates of a
passion inherited from long line Of rerse-
cuted ancestors. SHAKESPEARE meant this by
texalting his hatred above all rival feelings
In spite Of his ferocious cruelty, the energy
of passion and resolve implied in his words
command our admiration: If every ducat
in 5000 ducats were in six parts, and every
part ducat. would not draw them; would
have my bond"
A man whose predominating passion was
ayarce, never could have uttered those words
The thot is simply preposterous. And
draw the same inference from that wild
speech with reference to his daughter:
Il would she we're dead at my foot, and
the jewel in her ear
Would she were hearsed at my foot, and
the ducats in her coffinw
from which speech Mrs. Jameson draws the
the conclusion that "he valued his daughter
beneath his wealth" fail utterly to get
any such meaning from his words, but the
direct contrary. What good could the ducats
in her coffin do him? file values his daugh-
ter above his wealth, and still more, his
daughters honor above her life BY her
marriage with a christian, she had disgraced
herself and her tribe. That is the sole infer
ence | can draw from it.
Granting then the question that his cruelty
was prompted less by private and personal
malice than by race loyalty, we can perceive
the germ of good, even the possible nobility
of the man. I believe he possessed that
genuine love for his nation which under
favorable circumstances, would have trans
formed him into patriot and hero. Be
cause lie was splendid hater, he was equally
capable with Antonio, of being also splen
did lover.
Don't think am exaltng the Jew at the
expense of the Xn, 1t falls to another tC
present Antonlo's side of the question, my
whole paper brings me back to the position
taken at the beginning of our study; that the
Xn ideal Of to day justi6 es neither man IN
his hatred andresentment ofthc other Neither
does it condemn, inasmuch as both sinned
thru ignorance. The belief of the Christian
world in the mythical curse of the Jewish
race must be held responsible for their hatred
Race cxclusiveness inherited prejudice on
both sides. The religious training and mar
row sympathles Of the age all tended to
widen the breach between them, and in a
measure justified both men in their resent
ment. And this thought brings us to the
central and leading lesson of the play; the
lesson we believe the poet intended to
teach--charty in its largest sense. Knight
in his introduction holds forth the same idea
charity not alone between different races and
religious, but between all creeds and factions