mmonly found in Russia.
The present writer learned of two men, father and son, each bearing
this very unusual name. First information led to the belief that at
last the mysterious author had been discovered. The father was of
about the right age and was said to be a writer interested in
religious subjects. Further inquiry elicited the information that this
man had died in 1910, whereas the Nilus we are interested in was alive
as late as 1917. Greatly enlarged editions of his work, with new
personal matter added, appeared in 1911 and 1917. Obviously,
therefore, the man who died in 1910 was not our author. The anonymous
editor of an edition of the protocols issued in New York toward the
end of 1920 says that "a returning traveler from Siberia in August,
1919, was positive that Nilus was in Irkutsk in June of that year." No
clew is given to the identity of the editor who makes this statement.
And here let me remark in passing that it is a remarkable fact that
_all_ the editors of the numerous editions of the protocols, both here
and abroad, are very shy persons and hide under the mask of anonymity.
Nor is any clew given to the identity of the traveler from Siberia.
Another report, also by a traveler returned from Siberia, who may
possibly be the same person, makes it appear that the Nilus who was at
Irkutsk is the son of the man who died in 1910, and is himself too
young to fit the autobiographical sketch of the man born in 1862. I
can only add to the foregoing, which represents all that I have been
able to find out about Nilus, that there was an edition of the
protocols published in Kishinev in 1906, the name of the author of the
book in which they appeared being given as Butmi de Katzman.

Now with respect to the protocols. No reference to these documents
appeared in the first edition of the book in 1903. If the reader will
kindly bear this fact in mind it will help to an understanding of what
follows. A second edition of the book, greatly enlarged, appeared at
Tsarskoye-Selo, near Moscow, in 1905, the added matter being given the
title, "Antichrist a Near Political Possibility." This additional
matter consisted of (1) an introduction written by Nilus himself, (2)
twenty-four documents purporting to be disconnected portions of the
report of a secret conclave of an organization of Jews called the
Elders of Zion, and (3) some commentaries thereon by Nilus. Now, it is
very significant that Nilus himself has given different