Here's one that sounds anti-Semitic at first blush, but it probably isn't, at least not for the era.
The Thirty-Nine Steps (1915) by John Buchan
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/55 ... mages.html
When I asked why, he said that the anarchist lot thought it would give them their chance. Everything would be in the melting-pot, and they looked to see a new world emerge. The capitalists would rake in the shekels, and make fortunes by buying up wreckage. Capital, he said, had no conscience and no fatherland. Besides, the Jew was behind it, and the Jew hated Russia worse than hell.
“Do you wonder?” he cried. “For three hundred years they have been persecuted, and this is the return match for the pogroms. The Jew is everywhere, but you have to go far down the backstairs to find him. Take any big Teutonic business concern. If you have dealings with it the first man you meet is Prince von und zu Something, an elegant young man who talks Eton-and-Harrow English. But he cuts no ice. If your business is big, you get behind him and find a prognathous Westphalian with a retreating brow and the manners of a hog. He is the German business man that gives your English papers the shakes. But if you’re on the biggest kind of job and are bound to get to the real boss, ten to one you are brought up against a little white-faced Jew in a bath-chair with an eye like a rattlesnake. Yes, sir, he is the man who is ruling the world just now, and he has his knife in the Empire of the Tsar, because his aunt was outraged and his father flogged in some one-horse location on the Volga.”
I could not help saying that his Jew-anarchists seemed to have got left behind a little.
With fiction, the words are in the mouths of fictional characters, and we can't necessarily assume the statements reflect the author's views. (This ambiguity can also give authors cover to float things with plausible deniability.)
In this instance, Buchan actually appears to be satirizing conspiratorial anti-Semitism. This isn't immediately obvious, but later in the book, most of this is walked back.
The little man had told me a pack of lies. All his yarns about the Balkans and the Jew-Anarchists and the Foreign Office Conference were eyewash, and so was Karolides. And yet not quite, as you shall hear. I had staked everything on my belief in his story, and had been let down; here was his book telling me a different tale, and instead of being once-bitten-twice-shy, I believed it absolutely.
And here,
“I don’t know what to make of it,” he said at last. “He is right about one thing—what is going to happen the day after tomorrow. How the devil can it have got known? That is ugly enough in itself. But all this about war and the Black Stone—it reads like some wild melodrama. If only I had more confidence in Scudder’s judgement. The trouble about him was that he was too romantic. He had the artistic temperament, and wanted a story to be better than God meant it to be. He had a lot of odd biases, too. Jews, for example, made him see red. Jews and the high finance.
The villains in the novel are actually German conspirators, as with many British adventure stories of this era.
While I don't think this particular book is anti-Semitic, you wouldn't see many post-1945 books like just because the walk-back is too subtle. Today, if a character is presented as anti-Semitic, the portrayal would need to be unmistakably negative.
This was 1915, just a couple years before the surge in anti-Semitism in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution.
