< Back

Moses Samuel, Liverpool Hebraist

Bernard Wasserstein

<plain_text><page sequence="1">Moses Samuel, Liverpool Hebraist1 BERNARD WASSERSTEIN Moses Samuel was born in London in 1795, the youngest of three sons of Hanna (Hinde) and Emanuel (Menachem) Samuel (born c. 1755). Emanuel Samuel, who bore the Hebrew title 'the learned', had left his birthplace, Kempen in the province of Posen (now Poland) and settled in London in about 1775. Emanuel died in 1800 when Moses was just five. The two elder sons, Nathan and Louis, moved to Liverpool to seek their fortunes. The eldest, Nathan, became a pawn? broker and navy agent and in 1820 became president of the Liverpool synagogue. The second, Louis, followed him to Liverpool: starting out as a pawnbroker, he became a silversmith and watchmaker and made enough money to retire in 1846 and return to live in London. In 1805, at the age of ten, Moses too was brought by his widowed mother to live in Liverpool.2 Moses Samuel remained in Liverpool for most of the rest of his life. He was proud of his prosperous, rapidly expanding, forward-looking and technologically innovative home city. 'All that is good', he later wrote, 'has possibly, in some degree, emanated from Liverpool.'3 The city's Jewish community in this period was the largest in England outside London: between 1812 and 1846 it grew from 400 to 2300 souls.4 Moses became known in the community as Moses Samuel Junior to distinguish him from another, older Moses Samuel (no relation), a well-known philanthropist, known as 'Rother Moshe' ('Red Moses'), who became a member of the Liverpool Athenaeum and presented it with a Torah Scroll.5 Our Moses Samuel followed his brothers into business as a watchmaker and silversmith. In 1821, at the Hambro Synagogue in London, he married Harriet (1793-1843), the sister of his brother's wife (i.e. the two brothers mar? ried two sisters). She was a daughter of Israel Israel of Bury Street, St Mary Axe, London. Moses and Harriet had two daughters and three sons; the latter followed the previous generation's example by marrying three sisters, daughters of Schreiner Wolfe of Great Yarmouth, first mayor of Kimberley, South Africa. Moses Samuel was a man of lively mind, wide-ranging intellectual enthusi? asms, a quirky sense of humour, and a sometimes combative temperament. He seems to have received little formal education. As he later recalled: 'College Education was to us inaccessible; we had no opportunities of sweet Scholastic Peace, or means allotted to us for pursuing, with advantage, the Course of gen? eral Popular Studies; we have snatched learning eagerly from every useful source, amidst toils and troubles, and often amidst the pain of neglect.'6 In spite of his lack of means, Samuel collected a library that included a number of rare 93</page><page sequence="2">Bernard Wasserstein Hebrew books. He managed also to get hold of copies of early Hebrew period? icals published in Eastern Europe such as Ha-Me 'assef and Kerem Chemed; and he attained sufficient proficiency to write in the holy tongue. Samuel was, in fact, an outstanding linguist and is said to have mastered twelve languages, including Chinese.7 His self-education was a formidable achievement, even if he suffered from the typical autodidact's credulity and undiscriminating judgement. His Hebrew writing, as we shall see, was characterized by the melitzah (flowery language) typical of the age. In English too he wrote with a grandiloquence that occasionally skirted the edge of absurdity, but was redeemed by a certain naive freshness and idiosyncratic charm. Samuel first made his name as a pamphleteer against Christian proselytization among the Jews. Con versionist efforts in England had been energized in 1809 by the foundation of the London Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews and they were given a further impetus by the Philo-Judaean Society, established in 1826. Liverpool was one of the centres of proselytizing activity by such organizations and Samuel published anti-missionary pamphlets in 1819, 1822 and 1827. The last of these was translated into Italian and, according to Samuel, 'circulated through Italy'.8 Samuel sent the English version to the Chief Rabbi, Solomon Herschell, accompanied by a Hebrew letter. The Chief Rabbi replied congratulating him on his Hebrew and on avoiding intemperate polemics, for, as he put it, he was 'equally vexed with the mistaken Jewish Disputants, as with the fanatic tirade of some of the Christian and Jew-Converted Missionar? ies'.9 In both his moderation and his Hebrew, Samuel had, if not a teacher, never? theless a master, whose thought and example he revered. This source of inspira? tion was Moses Mendelssohn whom he called 'the grand luminary of science and knowledge'.10 Mendelssohn's work had hitherto attracted some attention in England; Isaac D'Israeli, for example, had published an essay in 1798 praising Mendelssohn as a 'sublime genius'.11 But it was Samuel who became the chief English interpreter and translator of Mendelssohn. In 1825 he published a long biographical essay entitled Memoirs of Moses Mendelsohn [sic], in which he included a translation of Mendelssohn's famous correspondence with Lavater. In 1838 he published an English edition of Mendelssohn's Jerusalem (London, 1838). The Memoirs went into a second edition, but Jerusalem did not sell well and in 1842 the price was reduced from ?1 to 7 shillings in an effort to dispose of the remaining stock. The Voice of Jacob commented that the price reduction 'would appear to justify the reproach that "the English Jews have not been a reading people" \12 Samuel praised the 'inimitable mellifluence' of Mendelssohn's style and the 'pleasing ductility of his most exquisite cogitations'. He denounced Mend? elssohn's opponents and detractors as 'querulous frogs who were still croaking in their muddy pools'.13 Samuel favoured 'a plain, almost literal, flowing, easily 94</page><page sequence="3">Moses Samuel, Liverpool Hebraist comprehended translation'.14 His renderings of Mendelssohn succeeded in con? veying the charm and lucidity of the original and remained the standard English versions for more than a century. In the first half of this century Israel Abrahams wrote that Samuel's 'conscientious annotations' were 'fragrant with genuine Jewish thought'.15 More recently, the late Alexander Altmann, the great bio? grapher of Mendelssohn, told me of his respect for Samuel's translation, as did the other day my colleague David Patterson (another Liverpool Hebraist!). Samuel also translated into English the pseudo-biblical 'Book of Jasher', a supposedly ancient Hebrew text which Samuel convinced himself was authentic. After failing to persuade the Royal Asiatic Society to publish it, he sold his translation for ?150 in 1839 to the American-Jewish newspaper-owner and phil? anthropist Mordecai M. Noah. It appeared in New York the following year but with Noah's name and not Samuel's on the title page. 'I did not put my name to it as my Patron and myself differed about its authenticity', Samuel later explained.16 This was odd since Noah seems to have had a lower opinion of the work's authenticity than Samuel. The translation was accepted as accurate, but the publication provoked criticism by scholars who rejected the claims made on behalf of the text. It won acceptance, however, by the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. In the later part of Samuel's life two great issues divided Anglo-Jewry. The first was the religious schism that resulted from the foundation of the West London Congregation of British Jews, the first Reform congregation in Britain, between 1836 and 1842. The second was the lengthy struggle over Jewish eman? cipation. These divisions had their echoes in Liverpool. In at least one respect the city had pioneered changes in synagogal practice: in 1806 the first English sermon in any synagogue in the country had been preached there. In the early 1830s the Liverpool community tolerated the progressive ideas of the Revd David Marks, the synagogue's young Assistant Reader, who had, for example, refused to read the Torah on the second days of festivals. In 1838 a group seceded from the Old Hebrew Congregation in Seel Street and, a few years later, established their own place of worship. In December 1841 a group of Liverpool Jews held a dinner in honour of Marks who had been appointed a year earlier minister of the West London Synagogue. Only 38 of the 130 tickets to the dinner were sold, but among those present was the Revd D. M. Isaacs, minister to the com? munity.17 A reformist breakaway seemed imminent. In the event, however, the synagogal schism in Liverpool, when it came, was not between Orthodox and Reform, but rather between an old establishment and an impatient new elite. The new congregation remained within the Orthodox fold. Like his hero Mendelssohn, Samuel combined strict Jewish Orthodoxy with attraction to the rational ideas of the Enlightenment. While opposed to the incipient Reform movement in Judaism, he favoured modest innovations in syn 95</page><page sequence="4">Bernard Wasserst ein agogal practice, such as the institution of lectures in English. Although he remained a member of the old synagogue (at least until 1851), he attended the inauguration of the new one in 1844 and he strongly supported Isaacs against those who complained that his sermons were too lofty and too long (they lasted over an hour). Samuel was careful always to insist on his opposition to Reform Judaism; yet, as we shall see in a moment, his Orthodoxy, like that of his hero, came under suspicion from some precisians. Liverpool - and Samuel - played more of a role in the struggle over emancipa? tion. With its large Irish Catholic and non-conformist population, among whom the Unitarian influence was particularly strong, Liverpool was a stronghold of pro-emancipation sentiment. In 1830 a petition calling for Jewish emancipation was presented to Parliament bearing the signatures of more than two thousand Liverpool worthies, including the mayor, prominent merchants, bankers and clergymen. The petition was supported in the House of Commons by the liberal minded Tory statesman, William Huskisson, one of the two members for Liverpool, in one of his last speeches before being run over and killed by a steam engine at the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway. Like most of his family a Liberal in politics,18 Samuel was a vigorous campaigner for the emancipation cause in print and in person. While attaining some recognition in public affairs, Samuel was assailed by a number of woes in his private life. Although his watchmaker's shop on Paradise Street had an excellent location, the business does not seem to have prospered. Mr J. Wolfman, who has examined the Liverpool Jewish records on the subject, informs me that these show that Samuel was often in debt to the congregation. By 1841, indeed, he was the largest debtor, owing no less than ?22 is. Nor were finances his only worry. In 1840, while attending a meeting on Jewish emancipation, he collapsed, apparently with a stroke. In 1843 he had endured a further blow when his wife died at the age of about fifty. In 1844 Samuel published An Address on the Position of the Jews in Britain with reference to their Literary, Political, Civil, and Religious Condition. In this essay Samuel called for peace between the warring factions in the Jewish com? munity. He also made a somewhat surprising withdrawal from his earlier attacks on missionaries: 'Seventeen years have elapsed since I published my Address to the missionaries. I regret that it was too harsh and that it did not contain a little more argumentative learning.' Samuel explained his new-found emollience by reference to his recent troubles: 'Father of Israel! bear with me, if I am too bold in giving advice - the advice of peace. One domestic affliction, one heart-stirring illness has followed the other. I feel a consolation in imparting light - rational - national light. Worldly joy can no longer be mine, when it cannot be shared with me by the beloved partner of my life, snatched from me by an all-wise Providence. In the leisure hours of melancholy I am relieved by my pen. I glory in defending our faith, and engaged in that, I must give vent to my feelings - I 96</page><page sequence="5">Moses Samuel, Liverpool Hebraist must defend my people.' But the main thrust of this work lay elsewhere: Samuel expressed confidence in the ultimate achievement of Jewish emancipation in England. He gave an account of the controversy over English lectures in the Liverpool synagogue, expressing his support for them while stressing that any innovations must take place only with the concurrence of the Beth Din. Above all, he hailed the rise of the modern Hebrew enlightenment, while lamenting its failure to arouse much interest in England. He called for the cre? ation of an Anglo-Jewish periodical that would help 'bring about a national literary change'. 'Our periodicals must be enriched with good Hebrew type, no expense must be spared; the poet's unparalleled effusion in Hebrew and the translator's attempt to transfer its spirit into our vernacular tongue, must be placed side by side.' Samuel added: 'I wish I could contribute my quota of humble talent to such a noble cause; but I am prevented taking part in it at present, owing to my being engaged in an elaborate work of fifteen hundred pages; the prospectus of which, comprising forty pages, will, I hope, with God's blessing, be published in three or four months.' The Voice of Jacob congratulated Samuel: 'Mr Samuel's learning had already won for him a reputation and he has recently held himself only too much aloof; we therefore hail his reappearance on the stage with considerable satisfaction'.19 The pamphlet also won a measure of approval from an unwelcome source. The Jewish Intelligence, a missionary magazine, noted that, by contrast with Samuel's earlier attacks on missionary efforts, 'he now expresses himself in a different strain'.20 The pamphlet nevertheless led Samuel into a slightly ridiculous literary con? troversy with the Revd Moses Margoliouth, a Polish-born Jew who had visited Liverpool in 1837 and converted to Christianity. In 1843 Margoliouth was appointed 'instructor of Hebrew, German, and English at the Liverpool Institute for Inquiring Jews'. He founded a Hebrew Christian magazine and became an energetic proselytizer of Christianity among the Jews. The two men in fact shared many literary interests and enthusiasms but, given their diverging reli? gious courses, it was inevitable that they should fall out. Margoliouth sought to discredit Samuel's scholarly credentials by disputing an assertion in Samuel's Address that 'the sayings of the wise men of Norwich and York are quoted in some of the additions made by the expounders of the Talmud'.21 In a letter to the Jewish Chronicle, Margoliouth quoted against Samuel a statement by the eminent German-Jewish scholar Isaac Marcus Jost scoffing at the suggestion that medieval English Jews had played any significant role in Jewish scholarship. The editor of the paper, taking up the cudgels on Samuel's behalf, relied that the Tosaphot contained a reference to the wise men of Norwich.22 He undertook to give the exact citation in a forthcoming issue of the Jewish Chronicle - but, as Margoliouth later sneeringly pointed out, he never did so. The merits of the question, which revolve round an obscure question of 97</page><page sequence="6">Bernard Wasserstein orthography, have never been resolved. In 1887 Samuel's view earned authoritat? ive support from Chief Rabbi Hermann Adler, but in 1949 Cecil Roth dismissed the hypothesis.23 The most recent discussion, by the late Vivian Lipman, in his history of the Jews of medieval Norwich, is more cautious and leaves the matter 24 open. Samuel's taste for this kind of antiquarian dispute found further expression around this time in a lengthy analysis of a Hebrew inscription on an ancient metal pot found in Suffolk in 169625 and in a respectful exchange with Dr Louis Loewe concerning another Hebrew inscription, this one on an ancient medal found at York in 1829.26 In 1845 Samuel suffered another stroke, as a result of which he became para? lysed. He gave up his watchmaking business to one of his sons and for some years earned a precarious livelihood as a teacher of languages. 'I prefer writing for the benefit of the house of Israel, to the bewildering uncertainty of trade', he declared.27 The fifteen-hundred-page magnum opus never appeared. 'My doctor informed me that if I did not give up my abstruse calculations I should have another attack', he later wrote.28 Samuel nevertheless persisted in his liter? ary activity and attributed his partial recovery to his embrace of the great mid Victorian cause of abstinence: 'I am bound to declare, for the good of my fellow creatures,' he wrote, 'that nothing has so tended to my recovery, with providential aid, from apoplexy and paralysis, a very awful and heavy affliction, a sickness, the terrors of which no pen can sufficiently describe - as that strict sobriety unfolded by the heaven-inspiring system of total abstinence'.29 In August 1845 Samuel announced that he was embarking on a new and ambitious venture. Together with the Revd D. M. Isaacs, he issued a prospectus for a monthly magazine, Kos Yeshuoth ('Cup of Salvation'), which, the editors assured prospective customers, would be 'based upon the strictest Orthodoxy'. Connecting the two great issues facing English Jewry, they asked: 'Shall we now dissent, rebel, murmur, become severed, and, by a want of knowledge, show unfitness for Emancipation? Shall we toss ourselves in mental intoxication and confusion about reform, little understood and badly carried out?'30 While insisting on their own adhesion to Orthodoxy, they called for a gentle approach to Reform: 'Remember the advice of the illustrious Mendelssohn . . . Do not offend, insult or upbraid the Reformers ... Be peaceful: argue without vitupera? tion . . . Guide them back to the truth.'31 But the 'Introductory Address' in the first issue of the magazine in March 1846 uttered some dangerous questions: 'We would ask', wrote the editors, 'is the system of reading or singing the Liturgical Services in the Synagogue such as readily to conduce to pious meditation?' They called for 'correction of those abuses, whose practice, we venture to assert, is not orthodox\ And they opened again the vexed question of English lectures: 'Most sincerely we assure our readers, that it is with no ordinary laceration of feeling we observe that spiritual 98</page><page sequence="7">Moses Samuel, Liverpool Hebraist instruction is not heard in the Vernacular Tongue in many of our Synagogues. The healing efficacy of preaching the word of God in a language that might be generally understood, seems quite disregarded.' The magazine's contents consisted of a mixture of transcripts of sermons by Isaacs, unsigned articles on Hebrew philology by Samuel,32 poems by Moses Samuel's young nephew Edwin Samuel, other poems, reviews and essays on edifying subjects, and occasional news of the Jewish world. Some of the contri? butions appeared in Hebrew with English translations. The magazine's publica? tion of original articles in Hebrew on secular subjects was unusual for the period, particularly in England. Of particular interest is one such essay, written by Samuel himself, lauding the 'Wonders of the Rail-Road &amp; Steam-Engine'. The Liverpool and Manches? ter line, opened in 1830, had been the first railway to achieve spectacular com? mercial success and the 1840s were the height of the 'railway mania'. In introdu? cing his essay, Samuel explained that it specifically referred to the Liverpool and Manchester Railway 'which, indeed, is no bubble, and deserves to be celeb? rated in the golden letters of the Hebrew, which, although not so copious as the other tongues of the earth, is still capable of expressing our thoughts upon abstruse subjects in natural philosophy, arts and sciences, correctly, suitably, and intelligibly'. The essay, couched in the typically neo-biblical style of the Haskalah (the Hebrew Enlightenment) may well be the first in Hebrew to dis? cuss the railway. For railway it uses the term kav barzel ('iron line'). The article is marked by a curious digression on the subject of pigs being transported to market. Samuel said he hoped this would 'not render this piece, or its Author, reprehensible by the orthodox or the heterodox part of the Jewish community'.33 The appearance of the magazine was welcomed by the Jewish Chronicle - but with a slight sting: 'Much praise is due to the editors of an "Orthodox Maga? zine" as it is (in our opinion inaptly) called, for their speaking out on the defects of our ritual worship and on the necessity of remedying them'.34 In spite of such encomiums, the difficulty of securing a sufficient number of subscribers to keep the magazine going became apparent soon. In an effort to increase circulation, the editors announced in July 1846: 'So intent are we in the promulgation of our Orthodox Principles and liberal views that Mr Moses Samuel will shortly visit the principal towns in the United Kingdom to promote its sale, where, for twenty years he had formed an acquaintance with men of learning, intelligence, and liberality'. Given his state of health, the trip was a brave undertaking. It appears to have yielded scant results (if, indeed, it took place), although the editors were able, in December 1846, to announce proudly one significant new subscriber - Sir Moses Montefiore. But even his influence could not save the enterprise. Expressing a certain frustration, the editors com? plained that what they called the 'Ultra-Orthodox light-preventing class' were refusing to support them.35 Samuel complained that the ultra-Orthodox had 99</page><page sequence="8">Bernard Wasserstein taken umbrage from the outset at the statement in the Prospectus that the maga? zine sought Christian as well as Jewish subscribers. Some Christians did in fact subscribe, among them the prominent Liverpool Unitarian minister and politi? cian, William Shepherd.36 Samuel's enemy Moses Margoliouth wrote with evid? ent Schadenfreude that 'Kos Yeshuoth proved abortive; it dragged on a miserable existence for eight months, but want of support and natural weakness brought it to an untimely end'.37 In March 1847 it ceased publication. Kos Yeshuoth was, in fact, a remarkable achievement, but after its collapse Samuel did not produce any significant publications. The reason seems to have been his state of health. Far from following the advice of his doctor and aban? doning 'abstruse calculations', he embarked on the ambitious mathematical ven? ture of squaring the circle with the aid of medieval Hebrew texts and exercises in gematria - the search for significance in the numerical value of the letters of Hebrew words. In February 1850 he wrote a long letter to Lord Brougham, the former Lord Chancellor, in which he presented his findings, together with a rambling accusation against one of his Hebrew language pupils, a Welshman, who, he said, had stolen his mathematical discovery and sold it to the press. Alas, the letter suggests some mental disturbance in the writer. In his last years Samuel lived with or close to his son Walter and his daughter Hannah and her husband, Samuel Woodburn, a convert to Judaism. For a time he seems to have moved with the Woodburns to Southport.38 He died in Liverpool on 17 April i860 and was buried in the Liverpool Jewish cemetery. Unlike his brother Louis, who died the previous year a rich man worth some? thing under ?12,000, Moses Samuel remained poor to the end. He left his family 'effects under 100 pounds', including his books and seventeen lever move? ments.39 With the aid of these small scraps, his watchmaking business was resur? rected by his descendants and prospered greatly. By the turn of the century it developed into the first multiple shop jeweller in Britain and it eventually became the most successful retail watch and jewellery chain in the country. The firm, of which Moses Samuel's great-grandson, Gilbert Samuel Edgar, served as Chairman from 1935 until his death in 1978, is still trading today in almost every high street in the land under the title H. Samuel. At one level Moses Samuel was very much a man of his time. He was thrilled to live in 'an age', as he put it, 'teeming with events extraordinary and interest? ing'.40 But in another sense he transcended the limitations of his place and time: from the unlikely perch of his watchmaker's shop in Liverpool he joined hands with the pioneers of the Hebrew Enlightenment in Germany, Austrian Poland and Russia. Together with them, he sought, by reconnecting with the Hebrew literary classics of the past, to refashion Hebrew and Jewish culture as the basis for a Jewish future. In some respects Samuel may be compared with his great hero Mendelssohn. Like Mendelssohn, he taught himself languages and became an accomplished 100</page><page sequence="9">Moses Samuel, Liverpool Hebraist translator. Like Mendelssohn, he was fascinated by mathematics. Samuel's dis? cussion of Mendelssohn's early years of poverty could perhaps be applied equally to himself: 'Poverty drives a man back to himself; there it compresses all his feelings, all his thoughts, imparting to the former more intenseness, to the latter, more profundity. It animates, it winds up imagination, and gives a peculiar tact and nicety to the observative faculty; all of which, united, constitute that charac? teristic of genius - originality.'41 Like Mendelssohn, Samuel came to public attention because of literary disputation with conversionists. Samuel's later years were clouded by medical worries that in his own case, as he wrote of Mend? elssohn, 'made him a valetudinarian for the remainder of his life'.42 Both men suffered from paralytic attacks and both also seem to have passed through periods of mental disturbance. Some of Samuel's descendants, like Mend? elssohn's, left the Jewish fold: they included a Roman Catholic priest, Father Edward Hill. Others, however, remained Jews. More important than these biographical parallels are the conceptual ones. Samuel adopted wholesale Mendelssohn's system of thought and fashioned it into a programme for his life. In particular, he seized on the idea that a Hebrew literary revival could be the basis for a broader regeneration of the Jewish people. This was his project. Samuel was not a proto-Zionist. He recorded no interest in his patron Mordecai Noah's ideas for Jewish political revival - nor had Mend? elssohn when such a scheme was put to him. Nevertheless, we can be sure that Moses Samuel would have felt a kinship of spirit with the role played both in British politics and in the establishment of the Jewish National Home in Palestine by the first High Commissioner under the British mandate, Herbert Samuel, who later took the title Viscount Samuel of Mount Carmel and Toxteth, the district of Liverpool in which he had been born, thus reconciling and trans? lating the dual themes of his (as of his great-uncle's) life - liberal and Jewish, English and Hebrew, literal and poetic. NOTES 1 I am grateful to Professor Todd Endelman, Mr Peter Jones, Professor David Patterson, Mr Edgar Samuel, Professor Jonathan Sarna, Mr Jeremy Schonfield, Professor David Wasserstein and Mr J. Wolfman for their guidance and assistance with this paper, which was presented to the Society on 28 May 1998. 2 Arthur Ellis Franklin comp., Records of the Franklin Family and Collaterals (2nd ed., London 1935) 140-1. 3 Moses Samuel, An Address on the Position of the Jews in Britain (London 1844) 23 4 Jewish Chronicle, 9 Jan. 1846. 5 Moses Samuel (b. 1741 or 1742, d. 1839). B. L. Bertas, 'Records of the Jews of Liverpool', Transactions of the Historical Society of Lancashire and Cheshire for the year i8gg (O.S.) LI, (N.S.) XV (Liverpool 1901) 68. See also, Liverpool Jewish records (now held at Liverpool Public Library) and the records of the Liverpool Athenaeum. 6 Prospectus of a Work . . . Entitled Kos Yeshuoth (Liverpool, Aug. 1845) 9. 7 R. D'Arcy Hart, The Samuel Family of Liverpool and London from 1755 Onwards (London 1958) 84. 8 See Samuel, Address (see n. 3) 25. 101</page><page sequence="10">Bernard Wasserstein 9 Prospectus (see n. 6) 12-13. 10 M. Samuels [sic], Memoirs of Moses Mendelsohn (London 1825) vi. 11 See James Ogden, Isaac D Israeli (Oxford 1969) 196. 12 Voice of Jacob, 18 Feb. 1842. 13 Samuels, Memoirs (see n. 10) 21. 14 Samuel, Address (see n. 3) 11. 15 Israel Abrahams, By-Paths in Hebraic Bookland (Philadelphia 1943) 183. 16 Letter to Lord Brougham, 24 Feb. 1850, Brougham Papers, University College, London. 17 Jewish Chronicle, 17 Dec. 1841. 18 See Liverpool poll books for 1837 and 1841, Liverpool Athenaeum. 19 Voice of Jacob, 7 June 1844. 20 Jewish Intelligence, May 1845. 21 Samuel, Address (see n. 3) 27. 22 Jewish Chronicle, 19 Sept. 1845. 23 Cecil Roth, The Intellectual Activities of Medieval English Jewry (British Academy Supplemental Papers, VIII, London 1949) 58 9 24 See V. D. Lipman, The Jews of Medieval Norwich (London 1967) 156. 25 Voice of Jacob, 5 July 1844. 26 Kos Yeshuoth, Nov. 1846. 27 Samuel, Address (see n. 3) 23. 28 Letter to Lord Brougham, 24 Feb. 1850, Brougham Papers, University College, London. 29 Kos Yeshuoth, Dec. 5607 [1846] 421. 30 Prospectus (see n. 6) 6. 31 Ibid. 6-7. 32 See Letter to Lord Brougham, 24 Feb. 1850, Brougham Papers, University College, London. 33 Kos Yeshuoth, Dec. 5607 [1846] 414-21. 34 Jewish Chronicle, 16 April 1846. 35 Kos Yeshuoth, Sept. 5606 [1846] 319. 36 See letter to Lord Brougham, 24 Feb. 1850, Brougham Papers, University College, London. 37 Revd Moses Margoliouth, The History of the Jews in Great Britain (3 vols, London 1851) 3:103 38 Mr J. Wolfman deduces this from Samuel's letter of resignation from the Liverpool Seel Street Synagogue, dated 16 March 1851, in the Liverpool Jewish archives, and from examination of Liverpool and Southport directories. 39 Will, Somerset House. 40 Samuel, Address (see n. 3) 3. 41 Samuels, Memoirs (see n. 10) 10. 42 Ibid. 5. 102</page></plain_text>