Witherby stood, then, for the Restoration of _Israel_ as well as for Jewish Emancipation. There can be no stronger and more convincing protest against the fallacious assumption of the irreconcilability of Zionism and Emancipation than Witherby’s interesting and instructive pamphlet. His ideal――a noble and statesmanlike ideal――was to do justice to those Jews who lived in the country, and accordingly formed an integral part of the organism of the State, working like others for the prosperity and safety of the realm. Equally he considered it a sacred duty of humanity to enable this ancient and disinherited nation to rebuild a central home for those of its members who saw the necessity of such a home, and had the inclination to go there. The policy of the State towards the Jews was to be based on these broad principles. Witherby was a man of practical sense and clear sight; he stated clearly and forcibly the anomalies of the Jewish position, and, unhampered by petty prejudices, sought earnestly for a solution of the Jewish problem in its entirety. Illustration: _Rev._ JAMES BICHENO DAVID LEVI _Rev._ WILLIAM WHISTON _Dr._ JOSEPH PRIESTLEY _President_ JOHN ADAMS In concluding this part of the review of the Zionist idea in Christian England, we may mention the name of Dr. Joseph Priestley (1733‒1804). Dr. Priestley was an eminent English philosopher, theologian, and chemist. Though not a conversionist in the true sense of the term, he was nevertheless somewhat influenced by that point of view. He was assisted by the Rev. Anselm Bayly (1719‒1794), LL.D., Sub-Dean of His Majesty’s chapels, _alias_ Anti-Socinus, and John Hadley Swain. In his _Letters to the Jews_ (Appendix xlvii) and in _A Comparison of the Institutions of Moses ... And An Address to the Jews on the present state of the World_ (Appendix xlviii) he threw his arguments into a series of hypothetical syllogisms, the only defect in which is that his premises could hardly be proved. Yet the stress which he laid on the acknowledgment of _Israel’s_ dignity atones for the sophistry of the argument. Having cast a good idea in the stereotyped mould of conversionism, he seems to have expected that a great impression would be produced upon the Jews; but, naturally, his conversionist methods evoked a storm of protest.