Board entered by resolution into an agreement with the Jewish population protecting the children of Jewish parents from suffering any loss through absence from school on Jewish Holy Days. This Act was until 1924 rightly regarded by the Jewish population as their Magna Charta.

In 1906 an attempt was made to have School Commissioners elected by the rate-payers in the city of Montreal, as was done in the rest of the Province, and in the interpretation clause of the bill there was inserted a paragraph to the effect that the word "Protestant" shall include persons professing the Jewish religion. The bill was opposed by both school boards and was defeated. In 1909 a similar bill met the same fate. The Jewish population of Montreal had increased to over 40,000 in 1922 and the Jewish children attending the Protestant schools constituted from 30% to 35% of the total school population. The school tax on real estate owned by Jews had likewise been considerably increased. Suggestions were from time to time made to the Protestant Board that in view of the large Jewish attendance and of the large amount contributed by Jewish proprietors, one or two commissioners of the Jewish faith be added to the Board. These suggestions, in every case, were rejected by the Board and a legal opinion was obtained from the city attorneys that only Protestants were eligible for membership on the board.

In 1922 two bills were introduced into the Provincial Legislature at Quebec by the Protestant Board of School Commissioners of Montreal to relieve the burden which they alleged they were carrying on account of the education of non-Protestant and non-Catholic children. The taxation in the cities is divided under the heading of Roman Catholic,

Protestant and neutral, under the latter coming limited liability companies. The money collected by the neutral panel was divided between the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Boards in proportion to the number of children attending the schools of each. The Protestants, in asking for the passage of the 1922 bills, stated that the taxes collected from the Jews did not nearly cover the cost of education of the Jewish children, in that the largest taxpayers among the Jews were limited liability companies paying into the neutral panel. In the Province of Quebec the school taxes are levied on real estate and the allotment of taxes depends on the religious adherence of the proprietor, and not on that of the tenant. A strong deputation of Jews interviewed the Premier and were called by him into consultation with the two School Boards, with the result that the financial burden was relieved by making the cost of educating the Jewish children a first charge upon the neutral panel after which the balance was to be divided as before. The status of the Jewish children was maintained, which obliged the Protestant Board to continue to educate them.

At the 1923-24 Session, the Protestant Board of Montreal again tried to introduce legislation that would have left the Jews as neutrals privileged to attend either Roman Catholic or Protestant schools but with no legal rights in either. In order to endeavour to find a solution of the problem Premier Taschereau appointed a commission of three Protestants, three Roman Catholics, and three Jews, Michael Hirsch, S. W. Cohen, and Jos. Schubert, to study the question and report at the following session. The Commission, which held public sessions to give all interested

parties an opportunity of presenting their views, submitted three reports to the Premier. Messrs. Hirsch and Cohen, in their report, recommended the maintenance of the status quo, with Jewish representation on the Board of School Commissioners; Mr. Schubert handed in a minority report suggesting the establishment of a separate Jewish panel; while the Protestant Commissioners, in their report, questioned the legality of the 1903 Act which classified the Jews as Protestants for educational purposes. Before acting on these reports, Premier Taschereau wished to remove all doubts on the last point and referred the matter to the Court of Appeals which brought in a decision that the 1903 Act was ultra vires and that the British North America Act made no provision for the education of Jews. Permission has been granted for an appeal to the Supreme Court and thence to the Privy Council; and there the matter rests for the present, with the Jewish children of the Province in the meantime receiving their education as a favour and not as a right.

EMIL GUSTAVE HIRSCH

By S. D. SCHWARTZ

Executive Director of the Emil G. Hirsch Center of the
Chicago Sinai Organization

EMIL GUSTAVE HIRSCH was born in Luxemburg on May 22, 1851. He was the youngest child of Samuel Hirsch, Chief Rabbi of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, a great scholar and an original thinker, who, at the age of twentyseven years, had published a philosophic treatise wherein he criticized with keen discernment and understanding the Hegelian philosophy and showed Judaism's right to claim the rank of an absolute religion. Dr. Samuel Hirsch, the father, exerted a tremendous influence on the mind of his famous son, the future rabbi of Chicago Sinai Congregation.

The early education of Emil G. Hirsch was gained in Luxemburg, which, situated as it is on the borders of Germany, Holland and Belgium, gave him the opportunity of acquiring three languages with ease, and facilitated that linguistic mastery which made it possible for him in later years to delve into the lore and literatures of many peoples, ancient and modern. When Emil was fifteen, his father was called to the pulpit of Keneseth Israel of Philadelphia, and the youth came under Jewish as well as secular influences of a typical American city. He attended the Episcopal Academy and the University of Pennsyl

vania, from which he was graduated in 1872. He then went to Germany, studying at the University of Berlin, and at Leipsic. He also enrolled in the Hochschule für die Wissenschaft des Judenthums where, together with Felix Adler, he studied under the direction of that great leader of Reform Judaism, Abraham Geiger. Geiger was one of the early pioneers of Jewish reform who not only believed that religion to be vital must be readjusted to the needs of the time in conformity with its historical position, but who sought to inculcate in his pupils a fearless independence in religious thought. That this influence bore fruit the future work of men like Hirsch and Adler showed.

After a five year sojourn in Europe, Doctor Hirsch returned to America and was elected Rabbi of Har Sinai

Congregation in Baltimore. The following year (1878) he married Matilda Einhorn, daughter of Doctor David Einhorn, one of the great pioneers of Jewish reform in America. The same year he went to Adas Israel Congregation in Louisville, Kentucky, where he remained until 1880, when he accepted the call of Sinai Congregation of Chicago. With this congregation, many of whose members had been trained in Germany, Doctor Hirsch had the great opportunity of giving full force to his genius. Sinai Congregation had been from the outset organized primarily as a congregation of advanced thought and practice and had not gone through the preliminary stages of orthodoxy and conservatism to reform. By this group of men Doctor Hirsch was stimulated in the development of his great gifts. He soon became the pivot around which the Jewish community organized into a powerful factor in realizing its potentialities. Chicago Jewry forged ahead in all