American Jewish Archives

Transcription

1

2 American Jewish Archives Devoted to the preservatian and srwly oj American Jewish historical records DIRECTOR: JACOB RADER MARCUS, PH.D. Milton and Hattic Kutz Distinguished Scrvicc Professor of Amcrican Jmish History STANLEY F. CHYET, PH.D. Professor of Amcrican Jewish History ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR: Published by THE AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, CINCINNATI, OHIO ~SZZO on the Cincinnati campus of the HEBREW UNION COLLEGE- JEWISH INS~TU~ OF RELIGION VOL. XXII APRIL, 1970 NO. 1 In This Issue Now an American: The Autobiography of Louis E. Singer 3 "What...is the American?" asked Cr&vecoeur in the late 1700's and went on to answer his own question: a "new man!' Byelorussian-born Louis E. Singer's memoir suggests the answer still held a century later. A Methodist "Rabbi" in Reims: Passover, American Jewish Population Studies Since World War I1 RONALD M. GOLDSTEIN 15 When we speak of "the American Jew," what do we really mean? Using as his major source the local Jewish community surveys which appeared between 1948 and 1966, Rabbi Goldstein addresses himself to that question. CF The German Jewish Mass Emigration: RUDOLF GLANZ 49 The fifty years preceding Germany's unification in 1870 saw a sizable German Jewish emigration to the United States. Dr. Glanz discusses various aspects of this emigration to determine "the essence of the whole human problem" which it reflected.

3 The Impact of Jewish Overseas Relief on American Jewish and Non-Jewish Philanthropy, I 9 I ZOSA SZAJKOWSKI 67 "Separate Jewish philanthropic endeavor," writes Mr. Szajkowski, was in past generations "the most important attempt to unify and strengthen the American Jewish community." But never was it free of conflict. Brief Notices Selected Acquisitions 94 Illustrations Jewish Community Building, Los Angeles, page 17; Seventy-two percent of Providence Jewry is native to Rhode Island, page 18; German Jewish Clothiers, page 35; German Jewish brothers' firms, page 53; A bombedout synagogue in the Ukraine around 1920, page 7 1; "We have a Belgium of our own," page 72. Patrons for 1970 AND ARTHUR FRIEDMAN 4"t LEO FRIEDM AN 5"t BERNARD STARKOFF Published by THE AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES on the Cincinnati campus of the HEBREW UNION COLLEGE -JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION NELSON GLUECK 1970 by the Amcrican Jswish Archives

4 Now An American: The Autobiography of Louis E. Singer I was born on December 17, 1871, to a poor father and mother. They had a boy [me] and two girls older than I. We lived in a small town in White Russia (Byelorussia) by the name of Koidanove. When I was eight years old, our family increased with two more boys and three girls -altogether eight children. We all had to eat, but our food was mostly rye bread, a very little butter, cheese, and herring. For Saturday my mother baked white bread, and we had some meat. My father worked on a freight depot about ten miles fiom town and was seldom home. He used to come home Friday and stay over Saturday; on Sunday he had to go back. My father's father lived with us in the same house and was the chief adviser in the family. He was a Hebrew teacher, and his private students came every day to our house, which was used as a cheder, a classroom for religious studies. When 1 was five years old, my grandfather wrapped me up in his tallis, his prayer shawl, and he carried me in his arms to a cheder to begin learning alef, beis, the Hebrew alphabet and elementary Hebrew studies. The cheder was in the teacher's house, which had three rooms. One room was a dining room and a kitchen, one was a bedroom, and one housed the cheder. We were eight boys with our rabbi in a small room six.hours a day. Our food for all day was a piece of rye bread, and a piece of herring or dry cheese, and cold water to drink. For dessert, we used to get pinches and were punished with the rabbi's strap for any little thing. After six months, I was able to read, and my grandfather accepted me in his cheder, in a higher class. From grandfather's cheder, I went to another teacher to study Talmud. That was too hard for me, so I protested against it. I told my parents that I didn't want to become a rabbi. Louis E. Singer died in Duluth, Minnesota, on December 30, 1958, a fortnight after his eighty-seventh birthday. His grandson, Rabbi Merle E. Singer, who serves Temple Sinai in Washington, D. C., brought this memoir to the attention of the editors.

5 4 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 We had two rabbis in town, I told them, and they both were starving. I would do better to work for a living, I said. You HAVE A BETTER HORSE One day I told my mother that I would like to go to Minsk, the capital of White Russia, with a population of about 200,000. I asked Berl, the balagola, or drayman, who had a horse and wagon. He used to go every week to Minsk, so I asked him to give me a ride. I took a piece of bread in my pocket, and on Monday morning we left for Minsk, about thirty miles from Koidanove. We came there in the evening, and I was surprised to see such a nice town with two- or three-story buildings. I marched through the streets, looking in the store windows, and was attracted by one window with nice books. While I was looking, a Jewish man came out and asked me if I wanted a book. I told him that I would have liked one, but had no money. He said, "Come in, and I will give you one." He asked me if I could read Hebrew, and I said, "Yes, I can read Yiddish and Russian, too." "How old are you?" he asked. I told him I was ten years old, and he was surprised that, at the age of ten, I could read and write three languages. He asked me what I would do when I finished school. "You can never go to college as a Jew," he said. "The Russian government allows only 2 percent Jews in college or universities. But if you will change your religion to Christianity, you could live in any city you wish in Russia, and you will be able to go to college, and you will have a good education. You can be a doctor or an officer in the army, and if you wish, I will give you some money to buy some nice clothes and I will take care of you until you will be twenty-one years of age to go to the army." I told him I would go home and talk it over with my parents. He gave me three copies of a book, called in Hebrew Brith Chadosho, meaning "New Testament." I promised him to come back whenever I had a ride with somebody. When I came home, I told my grandfather about it and gave him the three Testaments. He took them from me and threw them into the stove. "Well, son," he said, putting his five fingers in his beard and wrinkling up his forehead, "that man is a missionary, and he wants

6 NOW AN AMERICAN: THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF LOUIS E. SINGER 5 you to change your religion, and he wants to pay you for it. When you trade horses with somebody, and they pay you the difference, that proves that you have a better horse." My grandfather's explanation appealed to me, and I didn't go back to see the missionary any more. When I was about sixteen years old, I went to work in a factory, where they prepared bristles for brushes, paint brushes and other types. I earned only two rubles a week. I worked for that small pay for about two years, then, went to the Ukraine, to Zwihil, a very nice town, with a much warmer climate than White Russia. The people lived richer lives. I worked there until I was twenty-one years old, and then I had to go to the army for two months' training. It was no pleasure to be a soldier as the food was dark rye bread, sourkraut, and meat which was not fit to be eaten. I had to buy sausage with my own money. One night it was Sukkos, the Feast of Booths, and I went to the synagogue. When I came back, I was told that the officer had been looking for me. I thought I would be punished for leaving without a permit. I asked the officer what he wanted me for, and he told me that I had won a watch which he raffled. The cost of the raffle was five kopeks. I was the only Jew among twenty-five Russians, and I was the only one who could read or write. I was the secretary for my officer, whose name was Antosh. Since I was his secretary, he was very good to me. He used to tell me to be at ease when we marched or used guns in drilling. After two months in the Russian Army, I went back to Zwihil to work in the bristle factory. The manager of the factory was a man by the name of Baskin. Mr. Baskin and his wife Rachel became my friends, but after I had worked there one year, the factory closed, and all the workers went back to their homes. Mr. and Mrs. Baskin went back to Telshi, in Lithuania, and I went home to Koidanove. I used to correspond with Mr. Baskin, and once I received a letter from Mrs. Baskin that Mr. Baskin had gone to America. She said that she knew a girl from a nice family, and if I would come to Telshi, she would introduce me to the girl. The girl's father said he would give me 300 dollars for a dowry. I told my parents about it, and they advised me to go. I went by train to a little town by

7 6 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 the name of Luknik, and from Luknik I went with a drayman and came to Telshi late at night. I went to Mrs. Baskin7s house, and the next day she went with me to see that girl. She introduced me to the girl's father and mother. The girl came in later and she was a nice, sensible girl, but not very good-looking. I found out later that the girl was sickly and had a weak heart. We made an engagement, and I wrote my father and mother about it. We set the wedding three months later. I stayed in their house after the engagement. One night the girl came home and fainted and got paralyzed. She lost her speech and the use of her legs and hands. They had a doctor for her, but he could not do anything for her. 1 felt terrible about it. The girl's father asked me what I would do. I said that I would go home to my folks, and he started to cry. He said that he liked me: "I wish you to stay with us and marry [my other daughter] Rachel." I agreed to stay, because I had pity on the father and mother. I wrote a letter home and told them everything, and they advised me to stay there and marry my fiancke's sister Rachel. My father and grandfather came to the wedding. My mother could not come on account of her poor health. About a month later, I went to work in the same town in a bristle factory and earned five rubles a week. In those days, that was good wages. About a year later, I became a father to a baby boy. My house expenses got bigger, and five rubles a week were not enough to live on. My wife's brother was in America, so I wrote him that I would like to come to America. He advised me to come. I left my wife and baby with her parents, and I went to America. I came to New York in June, My grandfather's brother met me and brought me to his house. I stayed in New York eight days. He took me to the train to go to Piedmont, West Virginia, where my wife's brother lived. On the way to the train, I was initiated by an Irish bum. I wore a stiff hat, and he recognized a greenhorn. He broke my hat with one slap, and my uncle told me, "Now you are an American." I came to Piedmont and stayed about

8 NOW AN AMERICAN: THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF LOUIS B. SINGER 7 one week at my brother-in-law's house, but he didn't have anything for me to do, so he sent me by train to Hagerstown, Maryland, to his uncle Ruben Leib Levine. Mr. Levine was peddling with a pack on his back. The goods he peddled were dry goods, and he distributed them among the farmers in West Virginia. He made me up a pack of dry goods and notions. The pack weighed about twentyfive pounds more than I weighed. He took me out to the country and told me, "When you come to a house, knock on the door, and if the people ask you what you want, open your pack and say, 'Madam, buy.' " And he told me how to ask them if I could stay overnight. The first week was very hard because I could not speak a word of English. Once I came to a house while they were eating. The woman asked me if I had had my dinner. I thought she was asking me if I wanted to eat. I nodded my head to indicate yes - and went without dinner that day. Another time they asked me if I wanted to eat, and I shook my head no, and that wasn't good either. So I made up my mind not to say anything, and maybe they would find out what I wanted. Little by little I started to understand English. I had my regular places to stop overnight and to eat. Once a month, after the twentieth of the month, I used to peddle along the railroad tracks on the Baltimore and Ohio Rail Road, because the workers on the track had payday. One Friday in Tunnelton, West Virginia, I wanted to make a short cut by going through the tunnel. That way I would save one mile. The tunnel was about one mile long, and I asked the watchman if any trains would be coming by soon. He said no trains were to come for about two hours. There were two tracks, one going east and the other going west. I walked on the track east to face a train if it came, but when I was in the middle of the tunnel, I heard a train coming. I felt the vibrations, and it was too dark to see anything, so I didn't know on which track the train was coming. I lay down between both tracks, face down with my pack on my back. In a few minutes a freight train with coal rushed by, filling the tunnel with smoke. When I felt the train was gone, I got up, but found the last car had torn a hole in my pack. My uncle knew that I had gone into the tunnel and was sure I had been killed by the train;

9 8 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 he was ready to go and pick up my remains. He had a black beard and his tears rested on his beard. When I came out of the tunnel, he was overjoyed to see me. The next day we took the passenger train and went to Hagerstown for shabbos (Sabbath). I went to the synagogue and said a prayer to God, the prayer you say when you come out safe from danger. On Monday, I went back to West Virginia and had my regular overnight stops with the farmers. One night I came to a West Virginia town and was told that a Dr. Bower wanted to sell his horse because the horse had become blind. I bought the horse and also a wagon and harness for fifteen dollars; altogether it cost me thirty dollars. That was a relief for me. I got a bigger stock of dry goods, and besides I used to buy produce from the farmers. I had a chance to make more money this &ay. Once, when I had to cross the Potomac river with my-blind horse, the water was very swift, and when I was in the middle of the river, I heard somebody cry, "Hay, hay, stop!" -which I did. There was a house by the river, and a woman was sitting on the porch. When she saw me coming toward a whirlpool, she sent her boy to warn me to turn to the right. In the Civil War, she said, a soldier had gotten in there with his horse, and they had never come up, as there is no bottom in that whirlpool. Not long after that, I had a letter from my wife. She was getting ready to come to America, because the baby had died, and she could not stay home any longer. About three months later, she came. I didn't have any rooms yet, so we stayed with our uncle and aunt for two weeks and then found a three-room apartment for fifteen dollars a month. We bought a table and chairs, a bed and a kitchen stove for about twenty dollars. My wife came in the spring of I left her in ~agerstown and went back with my horse and wagon to West Virginia. I started to make more money and was able to buy and sell. 1 received a letter from my brother Gershon that he had been called to go to the army. I told him not to go to the army and that he had better come to America. He came in 1900 to Hagerstown. I took him on my wagon to work with me, buying and selling in the farming country. A short time later, we sent a ticket to my sister Bessie and my brother Chaim. We took Chaim to work with us together.

10 NOW AN AMERICAN: THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF LOUIS E. SINGER 9 My sister met a boy in Thomas, West Virginia, and they got married. After my sister's wedding, my brother Gershon went to New York, and I opened a clothing store with a partner in a small town by the name of Hamilton, West Virginia. Sam was about three years old, and Lena about eighteen months old. The business in Hamilton didn't pay for two families, so I wrote a letter to my brother-in-law in Hurley, Wisconsin, about my problem, and he advised me to come to Hurley. My brother-in-law gave me a line of dry goods, and I made up a bundle of piece goods and went out peddling amongst the miners. Business was good. Our second daughter was born in Hurley, but by then we no longer wanted to live in Hurley. Because my brother-in-law had moved to Duluth, we moved to Duluth, too. We had rooms at the corner of 8th Ave. East and First St., where Issy was born. I was peddling most of the time in the Iron Range, Two Harbors, and Cloquet, Minnesota. I was the family pioneer in America, as I brought over two brothers, two sisters, and their children to America. To Duluth, I brought Nathan Singer and family and his brother B. Singer and his family, then some cousins and some friends. I opened a peddler supply store in Duluth, and when business was better, I took my brother-in-law as a partner, and for two years we managed to make a living. When the business went bad and didn't pay for two families, my brother-in-law dropped out. I remained in the business, and when Sam and Issy were out of school, I took them in the business, and we made a success. My two brothers and myself always sent money to our father and mother. After my father passed away, we kept sending to our mother every month. When the First World War broke out in 1914, we could not send any money to our mother and sisters. We could not get any mail from Russia during the war. In the meantime, my mother died, mostly from starvation, as they had lived on potatoes, cabbage, and beets, but no bread or meat. My sisters and their husbands died, and they left five children, three boys and two girls. One sister and one boy were living in Poland.

11 I0 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 When the war was over in 1918, I received a letter from my sister Rifka asking me to send some money for her and her boy, and for five children from my other sister. I wrote to my brothers Chaim and Gershon about it, and we sent them some money, so they would be able to have something to eat. I made a proposition that one of us should go over and bring them all to this country. I suggested that I would go, provided my brother Gershon would stand the expense. My wife said that she would like to go along, because she wanted to see her sisters. We left Duluth in March, 1922, and stayed in New York about two days. We took a boat in New York and went by way of England and Germany to Kovno, the capital of Lithuania. From Kovno, we went with a Ford to Telshi, where my wife's two sisters came out to meet us with tears of joy. The next Saturday morning, I went to the synagogue with my brotherin-law. Telshi was a nice town, with a population of about 4,000-9 percent were Jews. After I had a good rest for a few days, I left my wife in Telshi and went to Kovno to arrange to bring over my sister and the children from Poland to Lithuania, which was not very easy because Poland and Lithuania were not friendly. I was advised by the ticket agent to go to Poland and bring them to Lithuania. I hired a man and a horse and wagon to take me over to Vilna, Poland, where my sister was. On the wagon with me were the drayman and two more passengers, an elderly woman and a girl about ten years old. We came to the border about six P.M. and asked the Polish officer at the border for permission to cross the line. He answered that we would have to wait till tomorrow morning when his officer came. My fellow passenger could talk Lithuanian and Polish, so she asked a farmer near the border if we could stay overnight in their house. She had asked an old farmer woman, who said that she had only two beds, one for herself and one for her two sons and a soldier who slept on the floor. If we were willing to sleep on the floor or on the benches, we were welcome. In size, the house was about twenty-five feet square- just one big room with a brick stove which took up a big part of the room. There was a long table with long benches around it, but there were no chairs and no electric lights.-~t night they had a little kerosene lamp.

12 NOW AN AMERICAN: THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF LOUIS E. SINGER I I At seven o'clock, the farmer woman's two sons came home, big six-foot babies, and the soldier who slept there and ate his supper. She put a loaf of black rye bread and a big dish of potatoes, about half a bushel, and a big earthen dish of sour milk on the table. Those three boys ate it up in about ten minutes. My fellow passenger took a piece of bread from her bosom. She offered me some of it, but I said, "No, thank you." I was hungry, but I like my bread cold. She then gave some to the girl. I took off my coat and used it for a pillow. I lay on one bench with my clothes on, and the woman and the child used the other two benches. The benches were twelve inches wide. Besides us in the house, they had a newly born calf, an old dog, as it was too cold for it outside, and two or three chickens under the brick stove. Afier everybody went to sleep, the little kerosene lamp continued to burn. A few times during the night, I heard the woman on the bench groaning, "Oh, my sides hurt." About five o'clock in the morning, I heard the roosters in the village crowing. I got up and went outside to catch a little fresh air. It was still dark, and the stars were still shining bright. It was too cold to stay outside. I opened the door to go back in the house, but I couldn't stand the smell from the kerosene smoke and so many people and animals and the smell of the three men who had eaten up a half bushel of potatoes and sour milk. I stayed outside till it got light. The Polish officer came, and the woman asked him to permit us to go to Vilna, but he refused, and we had to go back. We hired a farmer, and he took us to a town they called Wilcomir. I inquired where I could get somebody to go to Vilna and bring my sister over. I paid a man three dollars, and he promised to get them over in about four days to a hotel. On the fourth day I came to the hotel and asked the keeper if a family had come from Poland. They had come, he said, and were eating now in the other room. I did not want to disturb them, so I stood outside while they ate. When I came into the room, my sister saw me and screamed, "Brother!" She cried for joy. The hotel man told me he had no place for all of us to stay. I took them one by one to my hotel, and the next morning we all went to Kovno to a hotel. The steamship agent told me that they would have to be examined by a doctor before we left.

13 I f AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 The next day the doctor put his 0.k. on all of them except the youngest boy, who had scabs on his head. The doctor said he couldn't cure him, and we would have to take him to Germany. We lefi the boy with one of the girls to take him to Germany, and we all went to Paris, France, and to Le Havre, where we took a ship to America. The boy and his sister stayed in Germany about four weeks, and then they came to New York. WANTED: CONGREGATIONAL minute books, board meeting minutes, financial records, cemetery records, charters, constitutional revisions, temple dedication and anniversary booklets, and other data tracing the religious life of American Jewry. FAMILY correspondence, diaries, memoirs, scrapbooks, photograph albums, naturalization papers, military medals, and personal souvenirs. JEWISH ORGANIZATIONAL minute books and transaction records : fraternal, cultural, social, and philanthropic. FILES of American Jewish periodicals, magazines, and journals. These and other similar manuscript materials will be gratefully accepted as: gifts; permanent loans in the name of the owner; or temporary loans to be examined, photostated, annotated, and returned to the owner. The American Jewish Archives CINCINNATI, OHIO

14 A Methodist "Rabbi" in Reims: Passover, 194)- First Methodist Church Monticello, Arkansas I I February, 1956 Upon the request of [Hebrew Union College Professor] Dr. Sheldon H. Blank, I am relating a most precious experience which occurred in Reims, France, on Wednesday evening, March 28, 1945: During the war, in the combat zone, it was my duty and high privilege to serve as a Hebrew Chaplain. We had no Jewish Chaplains in my area at this time. Hence the Friday evening services were held by me in the Chapel tent, wherever situated, and many of the Army personnel never did realize that I was not a Rabbi in uniform. I wore the customary robe with a prayer shawl and a black skull cap. The services were ordinarily conducted in English, although there were occasions upon which I did laboriously start them with carefully rehearsed Hebrew. The Jews always ran away from me [prayed far more rapidly in Hebrew than I could] and I continued in English while those with a facility for Hebrew neglected to check my faulty speech. The war had progressed into Germany, and Reims was a free city, free from bombings by the Nazis, and free for a fairly normal resumption of civilian life. The Jews in and about Reims, together - with those who had been in hiding for years, yearned for the Pesah [Passover] again. Investigation was made of the possibilities and everything was favorable to a degree. It was possible to hold the meeting, or preliminary, in the synagogue. To find a place large enough to seat and feed the number expected was very much of a problem. It was assumed that several hundred might wish to eat the Passover. Plans were made accordingly. But the idea grew apace. A thousand sent word they wished to honor this occasion again after the many years of absence. This changed the plans. Two thousand, and three thousand, and more requested permission to attend. Finally, it was necessary to secure the use of a -. gymnasium where three thousand could be seated at one time. And then provision was made for the overflow, or second group, to be served. Accordingly, two ceremonies were planned.

15 '4 A METHODIST "RABBI" IN REIMS : PASSOVER, 1945 It was my privilege as an acting ~ekish Chaplain to be a guest and I was considered the "youngest competent" and allowed to ask the hallowed question: "Wherefore is this night distinguished from all other nights?" According to the custom, special dishes and utensils were used. The one thing that impressed me most was the sublime bit of irony wherein the plates were from the German "Teller" mines, and the cups and bowls were stamped from the aluminum wings of downed German aircraft. The knives, forks, and spoons were flown in from New York, direct from a factory. Our service manual was a paper-backed publication from England. It was the Passover Haggadah in a revised English translation, 7th edition, printed in parallel columns of English and Hebrew. It had been arranged by H. Meiliz and was published by M. L. Cailingold of 6, Old Montague Street, E. I. London, 5705 [1945]. At that time I was presented with a little booklet, The Jewish Holidays, a Jewish Welfare Board Publication, and also a copy of A History of the Jewish People by [Max] Margolis and [Alexander] Marx. These were in recognition of my services to the Jewish soldiery and my sympathy for the Jewish refugees it was my duty and pleasure to succor from time to time. This is not an embroidered account, but is simply factual. There were many other matters that could be related that were in a minor vein, but time has dimmed some memories. Suffice it to be said that partaking of the Passover in Reims on March 28, 1945, with that great assembly of devout Jews was a most high point of my experience. ROLAND E. DARROW Minister CONVERSION RECORDS REQUESTED FOR THE ARCHIVES Members of the rabbinate are invited to deposit with the American Jewish Archives records of non-jews converted to Judaism, or copies of such records. Material of this type is an important source for the study of American Jewish history.

16 American Jewish Population Studies Since World War I1 RONALD M. GOLDSTEIN Historians and researchers have often expressed a desire for an accurate and complete demographic study of American Jewry. The fact that this desire has remained unfulfilled bespeaks the many difficulties and limitations of such a Utopian undertaking. My presentation in no way attempts to offer such a finished and complete work, but is indicative, rather, of selected trends and characteristics of American Jews during the past twenty years.' The sources utilized have been the available population studies of local Jewish communities. The limitations of such a work are axiomatic. Yet, notwithstanding the many problems, it is my contention that many facts and characteristics are to be gleaned from such sources. To be sure, the rationale for the communal surveys considered herein has varied. Some communities have utilized surveys for planning purposes, such as the building of schools and new community centers. Other studies have been undertaken for purposes of sociological interest and information. Many of the population surveys have differed in methodology and design. The obvious result of these differences is the difficulty in comparability. Some communal surveys have employed the best available scientific methods for the compilation and interpretation of data. Unfortunately, a few surveys are comprised of little more than crude estimates. Often, there are differences in the scope of inquiry among surveys. Many do not include data on intermarriage; several are unconcerned with religious education. It must be understood, too, Rabbi Goldstein was ordained at the Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion in He is currently serving Temple Beth Zion in Buffalo, N. Y. For a more complete and detailed presentation, see my unpublished Master's thesis, "The Nature, Character and Trends of Post World War I1 American Jewry as Reflected in Communal Surveys" (Hebrew Union College Library, Cincinnati, 1967).

17 that the size of the community must not be overlooked when interpreting statistical data. How much more this applies when we seek to compare these data. Certainly the most problematic area is that of identification, that is, by what means are persons selected to be interviewed by the researchers? One technique has been the use of "master lists." Essentially, this is the compilation of membership lists from synagogues, organizations, community centers, and Jewish community councils. The obvious problem with this method is that there are Jews who are not affiliated with organizations and agencies within the Jewish community. Consequently, when utilizing a communal survey based on this method, one must exercise caution regarding statistical accuracy. Another equally precarious technique is that of (( name lists," a method which compiles all "typical Jewish sounding" names from telephone or city directories. The apparent fallacy is that there are, of course, Jews without "typical Jewish names." The enigma of identification is especially important in the consideration of outmarriage or exogamy. Most of the population surveys have indiscriminately utilized the terms "intermarriage" and "mixed marriage" to refer to all aspects of the phenomenon of outmarriage. The terms "intermarriage" and "mixed marriage" have technical meanings. "Intermarriage" generally predicates a conversion status of the non-jewish partner; "mixed marriage" does not. Some researchers, however, speak of an "intermarriage," whether or not the non-jewish spouse converted. Other researchers are of the opinion that, when one of the marriage partners converts, the marriage should not be counted as an "intermarriage" but as an ordinary Jewish marriage. The situation, of course, reaches far beyond the concept of "Jewish." The phenomenon of assimilation must be considered, for it would seem that a population survey of the Jewish community would reach only those Jews who are affiliated with, or identified with, the Jewish community. However, those Jews who have in fact assimilated into the larger community are obviously not counted in the study. On the one hand, this would seem proper, for if an individual is no longer a member of a Jewish community, there would seem to be no apparent reason for him to be considered in a

18

19 Se\renty-t\\.o percent of Provider\ce Jewry is n;irivr to fihode l slan~l

20 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 I9 study of the Jewish community. On the other hand, communal surveys are sociological in nature, and if the study is to be concerned with questions of outmarriage, congregational affiliation, and organizational affiliation, it would seem that these persons must be counted if the survey is to be objective and accurate. Many of the communal surveys make the disclaimer that those individuals who were interviewed, and thus counted in the survey, were those persons whose self-identification was Jewish. The problems alluded to above, however, should not be understood to obviate or negate the importance of communal surveys. These problems must simply be understood when there is a desire to consider the data or the statistics as precise. That the data may be taken to be highly indicative of trends and characteristics which most American Jews share is certainly the thesis of my presentation. One final word of caution. The individual Jewish community must not be thought of as a homogeneous entity; that is, as a group of persons with common and like attitudes, interests, and modes of life. Ben Kaplan puts it this way: In considering the Jewish community as an entity one must be cautioned against conceiving the Jewish group as homogeneous or compact. From any point of view that one might measure Jewish community life - their synagogue affiliations, their economic or social status, their attitudes toward religion, education and social problems, and even toward the important question of the perpetuation of their own group identity -a great range of divergence will be found.' What is of interest, then, is that the dissimilarity of the Jews produces their similarity. Kaplan's statement is an adequate analysis and description of the Jewish community. Since, however, these differences apply to all Jewish communities, a comparison of several or more Jewish communities will produce certain univocal trends. Earlier, I called attention to the problem of methodological reliability, but I think it necessary also to question the geographical distribution of the communities considered herein. To be sure, until there are definitive studies available from major centers of Jewish population like New York and Chicago, our findings must be con- ' Ben Kaplan, The Eteml Stranger (New York: Bookman Associates, 1957)~ p. 50.

21 sidered tentative, rather than conclusive. Notwithstanding the lack of information from these cities, it is my opinion that a fair sampling is represented by my study, in terms both of geographical regions of the United States and size of the communities. SampIes have been considered from the major cities of the Northeast, the East, the Middle Atlantic area, the South, the Middle West, the North Central and Central areas, and the West Coast.3 Despite the absence of studies from the Northwest, the Southwest, and the Rocky Mountain regions, my presentation is, nevertheless, representative of the Jewish population of the United States. My investigation illustrates beyond question that the vast majority of America's Jews are native-born. A conservative estimate, based on the data, would place the average somewhere between percent. To be sure, it would not be unreasonable to assume that within several decades the Jews in America will be completely native-born. The evidence from a significantly large proportion of local surveys indicates that, of the small percentage of foreign-born Jews, most of these individuals are in the older age categories. In Providence, Rhode Island, where 83. I percent of the Jews were native-born in 1964, "59.0 percent of the foreign born persons are now concentrated in the age groups sixty years and over, and 8 I.o percent are at least fifty years of age. Just the opposite is true of the native born population, with 81.0 percent under fifty years of age."4 Indicative of the rapid decline in the number of foreign-born Jews is Des Moines, Iowa. In 1937, Des Moines' foreign-born Jewish population was 35.0 percent. In 1956, this percentage had dwindled to percent. In I 956, 5 I.o percent of Detroit's Jewish population was foreign-born, but in 1963, the figure was 38.0 percent. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, is also characteristic of a radical 3 See my thesis, p Sidney Goldstein, The Greatcr Providtnce Jewish Community (Providence, Rhode Island: General Jewish Committee of Providence, Inc., 1964), p. 34.

22 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 2 I trend. In 1938, 38.0 percent of Pittsburgh's Jewish community was foreign-born, compared to I I.9 percent in I 963. Sociologically, the fact that American Jewry is becoming almost totally native-born is of profound significance. This is especially true with regard to the acculturation process. Milton Gordon conjectures : Within a very few years, as the foreign born Jewish population becomes increasingly accentuated by age, and the next generation of American Jews at whatever class level become the native born children of native born parents, it seems reasonable to predict that all or nearly all differences in extrinsic culture traits between Jews and non-jews will disappear. This prognosis could be wrong if there were a large-scale immigration to the United States of Jews from other countries, but this eventuality is unlikely.5 Another interesting and convincing trend may also be posited about the Jews of America in general, and the native-born American Jews in particular. Generally, there is a high degree of stability, and, consequently, little migration, manifested with regard to living in, or near, one's birthplace or original place of settlement. In New Orleans, Louisiana, nearly one-half of the total Jewish population was born there, and 70.0 percent of the native-born Jewish population are from other parts of Louisiana. Eighty-nine percent of the native-born Jews of Port Chester, New York, were born in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and surrounding territory. Rochester, New York, Canton, Ohio, Charleston, West Virginia, and Washington, D. C., also indicate that close to 50.0 percent or more of the native-born Jews have remained in the region of their birth. Providence, Rhode Island, which accounts for 72.0 percent of the native-born Jews being born there, also typifies this high degree of regional stability. The evidence, then, not only demonstrates the above two trends, but also illustrates that they are interrelated. Charles Sherman has sagaciously observed that there are indications that, as the Jewish community becomes more native, its geographical stability increases. The community studies that include information on length of s Milton M. Gordon, Assimilation in American LifE (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), p. 190.

23 22 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 residence in the given areas indicate that the bulk of the Jewish population remains in the states of its birth or early settlement.6 My research indicates that, like other Americans, the Jews as a group look favorably on marriage. The most obvious fact is that at least three-fourths of the Jewish population of America is married. This figure is slightly - but only slightly - higher than that for the general population. There are, in addition, two aspects of sex differences which characterize each of the communities surveyed. The first is that there is a higher number of widows compared to widowers, and, secondly, that the average Jewish male marries later in life than the Jewish female. Lynn, Massachusetts, is indicative of this situation. In 1956, only 13.0 percent of the males in the age group were married, while for the females the respective figure was over 50.0 percent. Similarly, only 2.5 percent of the Jewish males were widowed, compared with 8.4 percent of the females. The Lynn survey also pointed out that the average age at which Jews, both male and female, marry is later than for the general population. Less than I.o percent of those under twenty years of age were married. One-third of those in the age groups were married, and 79.0 percent of those years of age were married. Washington, D. C., is also characteristic of these trends among Jews. The percentage of women who are widowed is about eight times higher than for men, and, in the age group 15-19, 99.3 percent are unmarried. South Bend, Indiana, has no married Jews under the age of twenty-one, and for the ages , only 25.0 percent were married. An analysis of the sexes within this 25.0 percent indicates that only I 2.0 percent of the males years of age are married, compared with qq.0 percent of the females. The causal factor for women marrying earlier than men is probably due to 6 C. Bezalel Sherman, "Demographic and Social Aspects," in Oscar I. Janowsky, ed., The American Jew: A Reappraisal (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 19641, P. 35.

24 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 2 3 the males' postponement of marriage until certain educational and professional training is completed. This is supported by the higher percentage of males who receive more higher education than females. Baltimore, Maryland, and Kansas City, Missouri, depart somewhat radically from the norm for the total percentage of married men and women. The data from these two cities indicate that at least 90.0 percent are married, but the figures for both of these communities were based on a sample of the adult population. Obviously, a survey on marital status will always produce a higher statistic from a fully adult sample. Three cities, New Orleans, Charleston, and Los Angeles, show a departure from the norm toward the lower extreme. The percentage for Los Angeles in 1953 was 63.9 percent (it had risen to 75.5 percent by 1959). New Orleans, also in 1953, revealed a percentage of 62.6 for married men and women. There are two probable explanations for these comparatively low percentages in First, most surveys indicate that in recent years marriage age has been declining, so that surveys conducted since 1953 call attention to a decreasing unmarried population. Second, the Jewish populations in both New Orleans and Los Angeles have achieved a younger average since Sidney Goldstein observes in his Providence survey that "perhaps the major challenge" facing present-day American Jewry is a "desire to fit into the social patterns of the country without losing its own group identity." Jewish education, he declares, plays "the key role... in insuring identity and avoiding complete assimilation." The proportion of children currently enrolled in programs of Jewish studies affirms the positive value which Jews place on maintaining their Jewish individuality while they struggle to fit into the social patterns of the United States. Yet a consistent threat to the maintenance of identification, and, in fact, to the demographic maintenance of the Jewish population is the proportion of Jews who are lost or gained through the process of inter-faith marriages. In a sense, the ultimate test of group conformity, loyalty, and cohesiveness is the degree to which the number of inter-

25 marriages is changing, and the extent to which Jews are losing their identification with Judaism through intermarriage.? In March, 1957, the U. S. Census Bureau issued its findings on marriage and religion. This was the first time that national rates of outmarriage were established. The Bureau's findings indicated that the Jewish rate was 7.2 percent, but that figure can be extremely misleading. It may, of course, be understood to indicate the total overall outmarriage situation through 1957, and yet, in terms of trends, it may not be accurate for current and future directions. "If successive minority generations experience a significant decrease in cultural differences from the majority, a substantial weakening of identification with ethnic or religious particularity, and a sharp decline in social distance from members of other groups," Eric Rosenthal suggests, "then significant differences in intermarriage rates for successive generations should be observed." That, he believes, is just what the data of his Washington, D. C., study demonstrated. For the first time, so far as he knew, it had "become possible to demonstrate empirically the relationship between generation and intermarriage. The level of intermarriage in the first generation (the foreign born) was I.4 percent, the second generation (native born of foreign parentage) had a level of 10.2 percent, and the native born of native parentage (the third and subsequent generations) had a level of I 7.9 percent." Rosenthal has succinctly demonstrated, then, that current figures must allude to the third generation for outmarriage trends to be accurate and meaningful - it is the third generation which constitutes the traffic in the marriage market. The Providence, Rhode Island, survey, conducted in 1964, was based on a "head of household" interview. Outmarriages constituted 4.5 percent of the total household units. The vast majority of this 4.5 percent involved a Jewish husband and a non-jewish wife. Sidney Goldstein has poignantly noted that this situation must not 1 Goldstein, p. I Eric Rosenthal, "Studies of Jewish Intermarriage in the United States, 1958," in Amnicun Jcwish Ycarbod: Vol. 60 (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1963). p. 19.

26 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 *5 mislead one into thinking that few Jewish women have outmarried. On the contrary, those who have are probably assimilated into the general community so completely that they have lost total contact with the Jewish community. The harsh reality here is that most studies do not include the number of Jews who have outmarried and subsequently ceased to identify themselves as Jews. Of the 4.5 percent of the outmarriages in Providence, 39.0 percent of the non-jews by birth had converted to Judaism. Although the rate of outmarriage tends to be higher among younger persons, the proportion of persons converted to Judaism is also higher among the younger generations. There is, then, an obvious increase in the outmarriage rate from the first to the third generation. While the reported rate of outmarriage among the first generation was 1.0 percent, the proportion among the third generation is 6.0 percent. During the years between 1959 and 1966, fifty-three Jewish men married in Charleston, West Virginia. Of these men, 52.8 percent married non-jewish spouses. Of the fifty-four Jewish women who married in Charleston during the same period, 14.8 percent outmarried. Consequently, during that seven-year period, outmarriages accounted for percent. For all the married couples residing in Charleston's Jewish community, the percentage of outmarriage is 25.5 percent. The conversion rates for these outmarriages are minimal. In 1961, the Jewish population of Rochester, New York, had an outmarriage rate of 8.0 percent. Of this total, 2.7 percent represented "intermarriages," that is, conversions by the non- Jewish mate, and 5.3 percent constituted "mixed marriages," unions which involved no conversion. The San Francisco Jewish population survey, conducted in 1959, indicates that, for San Francisco proper, the outmarriage rate was 17.2 percent. On the Peninsula, the rate was 20.0 percent, and for the suburb of Marin, it was 37.0 percent. Almost 50.0 percent more of the wives were non-jewish than the husbands. In 1959, the Los Angeles Jewish population recorded 6.3 percent of outmarriages. Of this total, 4.2 percent were marriages involving Jewish-born husbands, and 2.1 percent involved Jewish-born wives. This substantiates the trend in most communities for more Jewish men to outmarry than women. The Carnden, New Jersey, survey of

27 26 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I revealed an outmarriage rate of 6.0 percent. Of the total outmarriages, 84.0 percent involved Jewish men, and 16.0 percent involved Jewish women. One-third of the non-jewish mates converted to Judaism. Jacksonville, Florida, reported a 6.5 percent outmarriage rate for the total Jewish population in In 1946, it is interesting to note, the total had been 10.0 percent. A combined study in 1962 for the California communities of Long Beach, Lakewood, and Los Alamitos indicated a total outmarriage rate of 9.0 percent for the Jewish population. The Jewish males accounted for 6.6 percent; the Jewish females for 2.4 percent. Mixed marriages came to 7.1 percent, while I.9 percent were intermarriages. The Washington, D. C., survey of 1956 documents mixed marriages only. This mixed marriage rate was 11.3 percent, 7.8 percent involving Jewish-born males and 3.5 percent involving Jewish-born females. Analyses of occupational status, Ben Seligman concedes, are "primarily useful in evaluating economic status," but, he goes on to say, "occupation exerts so strong and varied an influence on demography that it is difficult to exclude it from consideration in a population study." The sort of work people do affects their social and cultural environment: "the occupation and industry into which a person enters may be affected by a special system of values; personality traits and, in the long run, maritai status, health, and reproduction rates are influenced by working conditions."g Because there is no occupational information available from several of the large centers of Jewish population, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the occupational status of American Jews. There are, however, sufficient similarities among the communities analyzed to permit some hypotheses. The two occupational groupings which contain the majority of Jews in the labor force are (I) proprietors, managers, and officials; and (2) professionals and semiprofessionals. 9 Ben B. Seligman, "Some Aspects of Jewish Demography," in Marshall Sklare, ed., The Jcws (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1958), P. 69.

28 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 27 Apparently, these two categories account for nearly two-thirds of the Jews in most communities. South Bend, Indiana, indicates that 17.5 percent of the total Jews in the labor force are professionals or semiprofessionals; 48.4 percent are proprietors, managers, and officials. Considering the latter category from the male population alone, this figure rises to 56.5 percent. The total white population in South Bend reports only I 1.4 percent in professions and 9.3 percent as proprietors and officials. The opposite end of the occupational ladder supports very few members of the Jewish community. Only 7.2 percent of the working Jews are in skilled or semiskilled jobs, while the general community reports 35.4 percent in these occupations. There are few Jews in South Bend's labor force under the age of twenty, though 54.0 percent of the Jews over this age are employed. Providence, Rhode Island, also finds the majority of the Jews in the labor force in either professions or as managers and proprietors. These two groupings account for 61.4 percent of the Jewish males, compared to 19.7 percent of the males for the total white population. For the total Jewish population of Providence, three-fourths of the males and one-fourth of the females are in the labor force. The male figure is comparable to the total white population, but 40.0 percent of the women in the total community are in the labor force. Over one-half of the Jewish males in the Providence labor force are self-employed percent. This compares to I 1.0 percent for the total white population. There is also a striking difference regarding white-collar occupations. For the Jewish males in whitecollar jobs, the percentage is 87.0, compared to 35.0 percent for the total community. For Los Angeles, California, the largest category for the Jews in the labor force is the proprietor and manager grouping. This level accounts for 3 I.o percent of the total Jewish population in the labor force, and for 36.8 percent of the Jewish males. Fred Massarik points out in his Los Angeles study that "the comparison between the occupational distribution of the Jewish population and the corresponding patterns of the total population highlights the relative concentration of Jewish employment in the proprietor-manager area." He notes that

29 3 I.o percent of all the Los Angeles Jewish employed find work, as contrasted with 14.9 percent for the total Los Angeles population. On the other hand, there is no significant over-representation of the Jewish people in the professions. But a rather decisive under-representation is fohd in the crafts and operative fields.1 More than one-half of the Jewish male labor force of New Orleans is self-employed. Here, too, the greatest percentage of Jews are in wholesale and retail trades and the professional services. These two vocations share a combined total of 61.5 percent for the Jewish community. This compares with 16.2 percent for the general white community. In part, suggests the Chenkin-Goldman New Orleans study, "the preponderance of Jewish employment in these two industrial groupings" is to be explained by "the fact that these [groupings] offer greater opportunities for self-employment." The survey, conducted in the early 1g507s, found that fully 62.0 percent of the Jewish males engaged in Wholesale-Retail Trades, and in Professional Services, were self-employed, corresponding with 38.0 percent for the remainder of the Jewish labor force. Even for females, the proportion of self-employed in these two industrial classifications was 30.0 percent, compared with 17.0 percent for all other industries.ll Generally, the trends emerging from almost each communal survey indicate that nearly one-half of the Jews are self-employed, that they are engaged primarily as proprietors, owners, and managers, or as professionals, and that very few Jews occupy blue-collar positions. The surveys presenting data on the level of education attained reveal an extraordinarily high achievement for the Jewish population compared to the general white population. For example, the Canton, Ohio, study indicates that, for persons over age twenty-five, 18.0 IO Fred Massarik, The Jewish Population of Los Angeks (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Jewish Community Council, 1953)~ p. 34. IX Alvin Chenkin and Benjamin B. Goldman, The Jewish Population of New Orleaus, La. (New York: Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, 1953)~ p. xxvii.

30 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 29 percent of the Jewish population have graduated fromxcollege, compared with 5.0 percent for the general population. Whereas 44.0 percent of the total white population of Canton had no higher than an elementary education, only z I.o percent of the Jews were in this category. Almost one-third of Canton's Jewish population over the age of six has had some college education. The New Orleans Jewish community manifests a similar high educational trend. For the ages twenty-one to forty, more than seven out of ten reach at least the undergraduate level of college. In 1953, 40.0 percent of New Orleans Jews had some college education, with 2 3.o percent graduating. By I 958, this figure had climbed to 27.0 percent. My research demonstrates that the Jews of Camden, New Jersey, have more than five times the college graduates of the total Camden population. At the lower end of the scale, 73.0 percent of the entire population have had less than four years of high school, compared to 20.0 percent for the Jewish population. Revealing the current trend of the third generation, 45.0 percent of all Jewish men between the ages of twenty-five and thirty-four have had more than four years of college, while only 17.0 percent of Camden's Jews in this age group were without a college education. The Jewish population of Los Angeles is characteristic of similar trends. "The shift towards greater educational attainment among the young adult members of the Los Angeles Jewish community is clearly in evidence," Massarik found in the early 1950's. "Among male young adults, more than one-half have completed some college work, and an additional 18.0 percent have completed some graduate work. On the other hand, among the aged, more than one-half have not gone beyond the eighth grade."== By 1959, almost one-fourth of the total adult Jewish population had graduated from college, and nearly one-half of this group obtained an advanced degree. Similarly, the adult Jewish male group of San Francisco is composed of a remarkably high proportion of college-educated males. Of the males between the ages of thirty and forty-four, 47.2 percent received a college degree or postgraduate degree. Of the total Jewish population of San Francisco, one-fourth are college graduates or post- la Massarik, p. 44.

31 graduates. Trenton, New Jersey, demonstrates the trend for the third generation to achieve higher educational goals. In 1949, 8.6 percent of the Jews over the age of twenty-five had some college education, and 18.1 percent either completed college or postgraduate work. By 1961, 19.2 percent had achieved some college education, and 26.7 percent were graduates or postgraduates. For the Jewish males alone, 24.7 percent completed college in 1949, compared with 36.9 percent in In Rochester, New York, the rate of college completion for the Jewish population is two to three times as high as the total white population. Of all Jewish males over twenty-five years of age, 43.7 percent entered college. This compares with 21.7 percent for the entire white community. Of this group which entered college, 74.0 percent of the Jews completed at least four years, compared with 58.0 percent of the males of the general population. Of all Jewish males over twenty-five years of age, 32.4 percent have completed at least four years of college, as compared to I 2.5 percent of the total white population of Rochester. Corresponding figures for females indicate that I 3.2 percent of Jewish women have completed four or more years of college, compared to 6.8 percent of the total white population. Thus, in each of the communities surveyed, the Jewish men and women have a much higher level of formal education than is true for the population at large. What is true for Providence, Rhode Island, may well be indicative for the entire country: "Proportionately more Jews have gone on to graduate education than have completed a college education in the total population."13 Although aspects of Jewish religious practice have changed and developed throughout the long history of the Jews, one aspect of Jewish life has remained constant - obviously, the high value placed on education. In the past, Torah was the essential element for the education of the Jew. In modern times, as my data have indicated, the emphasis on education has shifted from religious to secular learning. The section on occupational status demonstrates the relationship between educational achievement and occupation. To be '3 Goldstein, p. 7 I.

32 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION SI'UDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 3' sure, this emphasis on education must be understood not only as a means of self-hlfillment and satisfaction, but also as a means of social mobility. Goldstein, in his Providence survey, thinks it improbable that any question has concerned American Jewry "as much as the education of its youth." Even so, as late as the World War I1 period, he observes, "Jewish education in the United States remained unadjusted to the generally efficient tenor of American life." Only in recent decades has "the old world pattern" of numerous small, independent, poorly housed, financed, and staffed schools "given way in the face of an accelerated attempt to bring Jewish education to the level of efficiency of the other major institutions in the country, and to bring it more closely within the general context of American life."14 Massarik's I 9 59 San Francisco survey records a community-wide average of 70.8 percent for those ever receiving some type of Jewish education. Of these persons, 34.1 percent attended Sunday school, and 37.0 percent attended Hebrew school. My data indicate the decline in Jewish education as the Jews have moved out into the suburbs. For the community as a whole, however, nearly threefourths of the Jewish population have received some Jewish education. For Port Chester, New York, the outstanding conclusion to be drawn from the data on Jewish education is that 38.0 percent of the population report no exposure to any form of Jewish education or instruction. Canton, Ohio, reported in 1955 that slightly under three-fourths of the total Jewish population had had some Jewish education. For children between the ages of four and fifteen, over 70.0 percent were receiving or had had some type of Jewish instruction. Similar trends existed in South Bend, Indiana, where four-fifths of the Jewish children in the four to fifteen age group were receiving or had had some form of Jewish education. For the total population, 17.0 percent indicated having received no instruction. '4 Ibid., p. 157.

33 Baltimore, Maryland, Kansas City, Missouri, and Dade County, Florida, all conducted surveys for children in the six to fourteen age group. Baltimore was high, with 96.0 percent of the children involved in some type of formal Jewish education. The most popular type, attended by 51.0 percent of the Baltimore children, was a combination of Sunday school and afiernoon Hebrew program. In Dade County, Florida, the lowest of the three communities, 82.0 percent were receiving some Jewish education; 54.0 percent in Dade County were attending a combination of Sunday school and afternoon Hebrew program. Kansas City was the median, with 9 1.o percent involved in Jewish educational programs. Here, however, the most preferred program was Sunday school alone, with 63.o percent attending. The data for Providence, Rhode Island, clearly document the popularity of the Sunday school during the decades between 1930 and The Sunday school's popularity was accompanied by a decline of the older talmud torah school. Indicative of this trend is the fact that less than 4.0 percent of the males fifty years of age and older had never attended a Sunday school. In contrast to Sunday school attendance, the proportion of males enrolled in Hebrew school declined from 40.0 percent or more of those in the age group over forty, to only one-fourth of those in the twenty to twenty-nine age group, and to even fewer of those in the ten to nineteen age group. A similar decline has been manifest in the number of males receiving their Jewish education from a private tutor. The trends established by the data are apparently true for most Jewish communities. Enrollments have been steadily increasing, and new facilities are rising to meet this development. Summarily, these trends testify to an increasing amount of support and acceptance of Jewish education by the Jews of America. "One of the ways in which people may demonstrate attitudes is through the choice of organizations or institutions with which they affiliate," Manheim Shapiro has written. American Jews, he comments, "reveal some of their sense of what being Jewish means,...

34 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 3 3 by choosing - or not choosing - to affiliate with a Temple or Synagogue, and by choosing, when they do affiliate, a particular type of Synagogue."'s To be sure, the key which unlocks the full meaning to Shapiro's observation is the phrase "some of their sense of what being Jewish means." For American Jews, Jewishness is a complex and problematic matter. Not only does it embrace much more than a congregational choice, but the very congregational choice itself can be very misleading. Shapiro and others are wise to point out that the particular branch of Judaism with which an American Jew is affiliated need not represent a doctrinal choice. Indeed, congregational affiliation is seldom based on religious beliefs and positions, but more so on the basis of socioeconomic factors, for example, how far one is from immigrant generations and how far one lives from one or another synagogue. My data demonstrate the above to be a truism: the percentage of the population which affiliates with a particular type of synagogue is often different from the percentage of the population which identifies with that "denomination." Complicating the matter to an even greater extent is the fact that a substantial percentage of the unaffiliated population, nevertheless, identifies with one of the denominations. Observers do well not to consider an external act, that of affiliating or not affiliating, as necessarily indicative of an internal decision. Apparently there are Jews who find the Reform position most acceptable, but do not affiliate with a Reform synagogue. Obversely, there are those who affiliate with a Reform synagogue, but identify with Orthodoxy. The Los Angeles Communal Survey of 1953 illustrates the enigmatic character of synagogue membership and religious identification. When Massarik studied the Jewish community "in terms of its identification with any of the major religious categories of Judaism," he found that "the largest segment of L. A.'s Jewish households does not consider itself identified with Orthodoxy, Reform, Conservatism or the Sephardic group. Identification as used here is defined as an attitude, as an ideological orientation, Is Manheirn S. Shapiro, The Baltimo~e Surwey of Jewish Attitudes (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1963), p. r 2.

35 34 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 rather than as something which is necessarily expressed in terms of synagogue or organizational membership."^^ Thus, the largest portion of the Los Angeles Jewish population is non-identifying, 3 I.9 percent. Reform accounts for the next largest group, 29.5 percent, and 17. I percent represents the Orthodox response. Although there are more households identifying as Reform, this group actually had the smallest proportion of membership, 25.3 percent. Conversely, the low for identification was the Orthodox group, with 17.1 percent, but this group represented the largest proportion of synagogue members, or 42.6 percent. In 1953, for the total Jewish households responding to the survey, 23.7 percent stated that they were members of a synagogue, obviously a rather low proportion. By 1959, the percentage had climbed to 33.7 percent. Certainly age is a significant factor in terms of religious identification and membership. It is also important to note that only a survey containing data on the relationship of age and religion can point to current and future trends. The evidence in the Los Angeles study revealed that the largest proportion of the third generation, 37.4 percent, was non-identifying. This age group, twenty to twenty-nine, had its second largest segment, 27.3 percent, identifying with Reform. The Conservative response was very close, with 25.3 percent, and the low was 8.4 percent for Orthodox identification. For the age group of sixty and over, the very opposite was true. The largest proportion identified with Orthodoxy, 37.6 percent. The non-identifying group and Reform were the next largest preferences, with percent and t 3.5 percent, respectively. Concerning synagogue membership and its relationship to age, a similar pattern was demonstrated for both generations. Among the third generation, only 19.2 percent belonged to synagogues. Revealing the anomalous nature of identification and membership alluded to above, 8.0 percent, or the largest proportion of the third generation that maintains membership, belonged to Conservative synagogues. For the earlier generation, the age group sixty and over, 31.1 percent had membership in a congregation. '6 Massarik, p. 45.

36 1 SAMUEL BAKER, I i I Importer and Dealer in I No. 66 SACRAR/IENTO STREET, SAX FFANCCSSQ, p 9 I I am$e&s mb BOII~EI~ in ' FINE CUSTOM-I~DE : _ Montgomery Street, RECF:ITISO by WVFItY STEAMER i XEIY SUPI'LIES OF TIIE I BEST CUSTOM-MADE 'CLOTHING 141 washington street, A LAILGE A S~)I<T~~W~OR Shirts of every description, Undershirts, Mo\TGO>fERY BLOCK, / DBdWIBS, CRAVATS. ETC. I I 8J19 ~~~~~~~~~ 1 Jouvin's an4 Alexander's KID GLOITS 1 ' I E X N S T E X N NBOS. IAaPonrrF:Im OF ALL KINDS OF No. GI Ilattcry Strcct, ilea,r Califbrnia. 1 -.*-- ORDERS PUNCTUALLY ATTENDED TO: Adverti~e~ireirl in the Snn Fro~icisco Directory. IS50 ('orrr,lzsy,.canrrirl.yokobi,r. Alh~r.lo~r. Cnl Ger~nan ]eu.isll Clothiers like 1. ~~I~IIII'S :11)(1 II~C Finstein Kros. \\>ere pro~~~ilierlt in 11~icl-1~increcntI1-ccnt~lr) San Francisco (see p. 62)

37

38 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 3 7 The largest proportion of this percentage, 2 r.i percent, maintained membership in Orthodox synagogues. The Detroit, Michigan, Jewish community accounts for a 4.0 percent gain in affiliation from I 956 to Almost half, or 49.0 percent, of the Jews in Detroit were members of a synagogue in "The reduction of religiously unidentified persons...," Albert Mayer suggested, probably represents not so much a switch from non-identification to identification, as it does the dying out of foreign born Jews and consequent reduction in their absolute number. The diminishing proportion of Orthodox is an expression of the same phenomenon. (The foreign born, particularly the older persons, were not often Reform or even Conservative, but either Orthodox or nothing).'7 Similar trends emerged from the San Francisco Jewish community. Seventy-two percent of the population identify with one of the three groups, but only 37.6 percent are actual members. Equally low proportions of San Francisco's suburban Jews are members of a synagogue. The Peninsula has a 44.0 percent membership, and Marin County accounts for a 34.0 percent membership, of those identifying with one of the three denominations. Dade County, Florida, which includes Miami, has a large percentage of affiliated Jews, 87.0 percent. Fifty-eight percent are members of the Conservative branch, and 28.0 percent are Reform. What is interesting is that 30.0 percent of both the affiliated Reform and Conservative Jews consider themselves something other than their affiliation. This is also true for the 29.0 percent of the Jews affiliated with Orthodox synagogue^.'^ In Providence, Rhode Island, over three-fourths of the total Jewish population are affiliated, but the third generation is characteristic of those trends displayed by young adults in other communities. Two-thirds of the males in the twenty to twenty-nine age group are unaffiliated. The Jewish community of Rochester, New York, demonstrates parallels to the '7 Albert J. Mayer, Social and Ecrmwnic Charactc7iztics of thc Detroit Jewish Community: (Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, 1964), p Manheim S. Shapiro, Thc Baywillc Suwy of Jewish Attitudes (New York: American Jewish Committee, 1961), p. 39.

39 3 8 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 above cities. Of those who identified themselves as Reform Jews, over percent are not affiliated. Of those who consider themselves Orthodox, slightly more than one-half, or 50.5 percent, belong to an Orthodox synagogue. Of those who identified themselves as Conservatives, 53.2 percent are members of such congregations, while 2 I.8 percent are affiliated with Orthodox synagogues. In almost every community surveyed, therefore, a sizeable percentage of the Jewish population considers itself truly something other than that branch of Judaism with which it is actually affiliated. Evidence that a vast percentage of American Jews consider identification to be a matter of attitude or ideology is demonstrated by the fact of the number of persons who, though identifying with one of the three denominations of Judaism, maintain no congregational membership. It is not only through congregations that Jews attach themselves to Jewish life. "Another way in which people reveal their sense of themselves, their place in society, their aspirations and their obligations," Shapiro points out, "is through their choices of voluntary organizations to which they belong."'g He confirms the notion that American Jews are "joiners." They show, he says, "a marked inclination to join organizations, both absolutely and relatively. While 9 out of 10 American Jews, like those in our Baltimore sample, are likely to belong to at least one organization, the figure for Americans as a whole is 5 out of lo."1 My research illustrates that an overwhelming majority of the Jewish population of the communities surveyed belongs to at least one or more Jewish organizations. Close to 50.0 percent of the Jews belong, in addition, to at least one non-jewish organization. In almost each city studied, the most popular category of organizations is the synagogue-related group. In Providence, one-third of both the male and female population belong to these synagogue 19 Shapiro, Baltimore Survey, p. 14. lo Ibid., p. I 5.

40 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 39 auxiliaries. Perhaps this is indicative of the central role which the synagogue continues to play in American Jewish life. Membership in the Jewish community center ranks second to the synagogue groups in Providence. One out of every four males and one out of every five females are center members. Various Zionist organizations account for a large proportion of the Jewish population, but there is a significant sex differential with regard to membership in Zionist-oriented groups. Slightly under 25.0 percent of the females are affiliated with Zionist groups in Providence; yet only 6.0 percent of the males choose membership in these organizations. Two-thirds of the Providence Jewish community reported no membership in non-jewish organizations. Memberships in these groups seem, however, to show a preference for the fraternal type of organization. The Masonic organization ranks highest in membership. Baltimore Jews also prefer the synagogue auxiliary as their first choice in club membership. Twenty-five percent belong to synagogue organizations. Zionist groups maintain the second position in Baltimore, with 19.0 percent belonging. In third and fourth places were civic and community relations groups and educational and welfare clubs, respectively. The highest ranking category of non-jewish organizations was the professional or business association. It is interesting, however, that many of these associations are mandatory rather than voluntary. Thus, the disproportion in the tendency to join non-jewish organizations is apparent. Similar trends are observed in Memphis, Tennessee, whose largest preference, 56.0 percent, is for the synagogue-related organization. B'nai B'rith and Zionist groups were the second choice of the Jewish population. For Jewish organizations, the smallest percentage, 7.0 percent, opted membership in health, education, and welfare clubs. Among the nonsectarian groups, the Jewish population preferred lodges and fraternal clubs first, and then recreational and hobby organizations. In most cities, a larger percentage of women are members of Jewish organizations than men. The inverse relation is true of non- Jewish groups. The evidence from the Los Angeles survey suggests that this situation is operative there also. Los Angeles reports, in addition, that two-thirds of the young people, in the fifteen to

41 40 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 twenty-nine age group, are not members of any organization. In Des Moines, Iowa, more than 80.0 percent of the Jewish population are affiliated with at least one Jewish organization. Sixty-seven percent of the females and 45.0 percent of the males are affiliated with synagogue-related organizations. Des Moines has a very high percentage of Jews affiliated with non-jewish groups. Ninety percent of the Jewish population are affiliated with at least one non-jewish group. John P. Dean, writing about the participation of Jews in the community and their apparent desire not to belong to mixed groups, states: Jews, due to their common background, locale, or origin, generally mix together and form, through associational inbreeding, common interests, similar cultural traits and mutual ties of acquaintance, friendship and affection. These common, like, and mutual bonds perpetuate the associational inbreeding and cut down contacts with Gentiles.'= It is questionable, however, if Dean's analysis and observations will remain true for the third and future generations. Current rates, especially among the younger Jewish population born of American parentage, do not seem to demonstrate the desire for associational inbreeding."' My findings indicated, then, that the vast majority of Jews belong to at least one Jewish organization, and frequently, more than one. Approximately one-half of the Jewish population belong to at least one non-jewish organization. The synagogue auxiliary was the most popular organization in most cities, and, in many communities, Zionist-oriented groups ranked second or third. There is a substantial sex differential in Zionist group membership. A much larger percentage of women join Zionist groups than men. The fraternal group is the most popular non-jewish organization. ax John P. Dean, "Jewish Participation in the Life of MiddleSized American Communities," in Sklare, Thc Jm, p Cf. GoIdstein, p. 148.

42 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 Less than a century ago, large-scale immigration from Eastern Europe was the impetus for a rapidly increasing American Jewish community and for the creation of an institutional structure to care for and support the expanding American Jewish populace. Within a relatively short period, however, this inflated and white-crested wave began breaking up; by the r9zo's, it had become at most a ripple. Consequently, the imposing structure which at one time had reinforced traditional values and customs also began breaking up. The result was greater interaction with the non-jew, and thus acc~~lturation, if not assimilation. It may be assumed, in part at least, that this change in American Jewish life has been a major force behind the increasing number of self-studies conducted by locall Jewish communities. Comparing these studies with one another malies possible a more comprehensive evaluation of the American Jewish community. Complete accuracy regarding statistical data cmiot be guaranteed, of course - research methods often vary, and certainly population figures have changed in some communities since the surveys were conducted. Nevertheless, one may now attempt some significant generalities concerning American Jewish life. Unquestionably, the nativity composition of the American Jewish population is undergoing change. Nearly 80.0 percent of the Jews in America are native-born. The small percentage of foreign-born Jews are found in the older age groups, while at least three-fourths of the native-born Jews are under fifty years of age. Nativity composition is particularly important for assessing current trends. The fact that the third and hture generations are, and will continue to be, American-born of American parentage may well account for problems in the area of Jewish identity. American Jews have also demonstrated relatively little migration from, or near, their original place of settlement. This stability has manifested itself in almost each region of the nation where the Jews have settled. My findings indicate that the Jews of America are mostly married persons. According to the data, at least three-fourths of the Jewish

43 42 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 population are married. The Jewish male marries later in life than the female. This phenomenon is generally attributed to the fact that the male receives more higher education; thus he postpones marriage until his educational and professional goals are attained. Less than 1.0 percent of the Jewish males of America are married under twenty years of age. The second sex differential with regard to marital status is that there are many more widows than widowers. Women, of course, have a greater life expectancy than men, and widowers tend to remarry to a greater degree than widows. Husbands, moreover, are generally older at the outset of marriage, thus accounting for more widows than widowers. The U. S. Census Bureau, in 1957, issued its findings concerning the Jew and outmarriage. It was established that 7.2 percent of America's Jews have outmarried. Reliable studies like the Washington, D. C., survey, however, have demonstrated that current figures are much higher. The increase is linked to the marriage, or outmarriage, patterns of the third generation. Since the marriage market consists primarily of the third generation, the outmarriage percentage is probably much higher than most studies would indicate. In Washington, D. C., for example, the third generation was found to show a rate of 17.9 percent outmarriage. There are two other pervasive and salient considerations that often distort an accurst; view of outmarriage. One is that, as outmarriage increases in the third generation, so, too, does the rate of conversion among the younger population increase; the young, non-jewish spouse is becoming Jewish. The second is that the studies seem to indicate that more Jewish men are marrying non- Jewish wives than Jewish women non-jewish husbands. Generally, this is a truism, but it also appears that Jewish women who outmarry often lose complete contact with the Jewish community. Thus, not being considered members of the Jewish community, or perhaps not even known to the Jewish community, these persons are never included in survey samples. The lack of statistics, or even surveys, on the very small communities where outmarriage among Jews is known to be quite extensive leads to another element of confusion and possible distortion. Large communities like San Francisco indicate that suburban areas have a much higher degree of outmarriage.

44 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 43 The figure increased by 20.0 percent between San Francisco proper and one suburb. In communities of average size, that is, where the Jewish population is from 5,000 to 15,000, the amount of outmarriage ranges from 6.0 percent to 8.0 percent. A striking difference between the Jewish population and the total white population is evident after a comparison of occupational status. The majority of Jews in America are involved in two occupational groupings: proprietors, managers, and officials; and professionals and semiprofessionals. These categories account for nearly two-thirds of the American Jews in the labor force. Very few Jews in the labor force are found in skilled or semiskilled jobs, while nearly one-fourth to one-third of the general white population finds employment in this area. Overall, there is a significant underrepresentation of Jews in blue-collar positions. Jewish women do not serve in the labor force to the extent that females fiom the general white population do. Very few Jews under the age of twenty are in the labor force. Again, similar to marriage characteristics, we find that most young Jewish persons remain in school for a longer period of time than non-jews. This keeps the Jew out of the labor force until his vocational and educational desires are satisfied. It is also important to recognize that nearly one-half of the Jewish population in the labor force is self-employed. This is an obvious corollary to the Jews being employed mostly in the professions and as proprietors. An extraordinary percentage of the Jewish population attains a university education. Current figures estimate that nearly 80.0 percent of the young, third-generation Jewish population are college graduates. Although our findings are not primarily concerned with the third generation, it is axiomatic that these persons will cause the educational trends to be affected most sharply. My data, based on the adult population, or persons twenty and over, indicate that the general white population is far below the educational achievements of the Jewish population. In many cities, the number of Jews who have reached the postgraduate level of education is larger than the number of non-jews with college educations. Figures from the U. S. Census Bureau in 1960 indicate that 9.4 percent of the total white population are college graduates and/or postgraduates.

45 Relating this figure to a comparison of four Jewish communities, we find that from three to five times more Jews have a higher education. Approximately three-fourths of the Jewish population have received some sort of formal Jewish education. My findings indicate that changes in the area of Jewish education have taken place, but these changes appear to counterbalance a positive and negative value scale. Proportionately more girls receive a formal Jewish education today than ever before, a positive change, while the boys' education may be deemed less intensive, a negative change. For children of potential school age, our studies indicate that between 80.0 and 90.0 percent are actively involved in programs of formal Jewish education. The popularity of the Sunday school and the subsequent decline of the older talmud torah are also apparent. The majority of the communities surveyed indicate that a substantial number of Jews are affiliated with a synagogue. There are, however, several large cities where the percentage of affiliation is very small. An example would be San Francisco, where 59.2 percent are nonaffiliated. The suburbs account for an even larger number of unaffiliated Jews. It is curious that the remaining two communities where affiliation is not preferred are also on the West Coast. Los Angeles has 65.8 percent of the Jewish population unaffiliated, and the Long Beach area accounts for 66.0 percent in this category of nonmembers. Most of the East Coast cities have between 75.0 and 98.0 percent of the Jews affiliated. My comparison of synagogue affiliation pointed to an anomalous situation where affiliation and identification are concerned. Many Jews prefer not to affiliate with a congregation, but nevertheless identifjr with one of the three major branches of Judaism. Also, enigmatically enough, many Jews are affiliated with a synagogue of one branch, but identify with another branch of Judaism. It also appears that few Jews of the third generation maintain memberships in synagogues. One must be cautious here, for it is likely that Jews do not affiliate until they have families. Jewish males marry at later ages than the general population, and so the small number of affiliated third-generation Jews is more indicative of late marriages and family raising than dissatisfaction with religious affiliation. Contrary to common belief,

46 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR I1 4 5 moreover, my findings do not indicate that the Orthodox position is diminishing rapidly. There has been a relative decline, but it is possible that this is caused not so much by a change in religious beliefs as by the older generations dying out. Another way in which people indicate attitudes is by the voluntary organizations which they join. Generally, the Jewish population of America is a "joining" one. Most belong to at least one Jewish organization, and many belong to several. One-half of America's Jews belong to at least one non-jewish organization. The organizations with the greatest popularity are the synagogue-related groups. Concerning non-jewish organizations, those with the highest percentage of Jewish members are the fraternal and business or professional groups. Jewish females belong to more organizations than do Jewish males. This is especially true with regard to Zionistoriented groups. Although the Zionist-oriented groups stand high in terms of popularity - they are usually second or third on the scale - their membership consists primarily of women. What, then, are the major implications of these findings for the American Jewish community? The Jew of the future will be American-born and probably deeply entrenched in the culture of America. Since assimilation is the present cultural pattern, one would be remiss not to question religious assimilation for the future. My findings, however, indicate that Jewish identity is strong, that there is a conscious effort to maintain Jewish survival. Outmarriage will continue to increase on the basis of the present third generation, but conversion rates are also increasing among non-jewish spouses of third-generation American Jews. This would seem to be true at least for the non-jewish wife married to the Jew. On the basis of the past and present, Jewish women who outmarry will continue to lose contact with the Jewish community. The Jews of tomorrow's America will more than likely be collegeeducated professional or business people. The present desire to be self-employed will continue, for such arrangements offer a greater degree of security.

47 46 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 Jewish education will manifest itself in some form of the integrated program, that is, a combination of Sunday school and Hebrewlanguage education. More females will continue to be educated in things Jewish as the Sunday school continues to increase in popularity. The most likely change to occur will involve the synagogue. Since current studies illustrate the dichotomy between affiliation and identification, the banner of the synagogue may very well be different in the future. This will manifest itself by a change in the programming of the synagogue, and there may even be a perceptible change in the synagogue's raison d'ttre. The rationale for these changes is the fact that there are presently many Jews whose needs are not being met by the synagogue. Apparently, there are many Jews who are not affiliated, and among those that are affiliated, there is a sizeable percentage identifying itself other than its affiliation would indicate. Furthermore, there are many nonaffiliated Jews who are obviously expressing some need by virtue of their desire to identify. The Orthodox Jew will be harder and harder to find in the future, while the normative pattern of religious practice and belief will probably be somewhere between Reform and Conservative. Notwithstanding the many problems and difficulties of a study based on communal surveys, it is my opinion that a demonstrative and representative study has been presented. To a very large degree, the Jews of America, from a cross section of large and small communities, exhibit similar trends and characteristics. Admittedly, it is a fallacy to consider the Jewish community a homogeneous entity; the persons who constitute the average Jewish community have different attitudes, interests, and modes of life, but my findings have adequately demonstrated that these differences apply to all Jewish communities. Therefore, in a very real sense, the dissimilarities of the Jews produce their similarities.

48 AMERICAN JEWISH POPULATION STUDIES SINCE WORLD WAR U. APPENDIX: A LISTING OF LOCAL JEWISH COMMUNITY SURVEYS, All About Us! Jacksonville, Florida: Jacksonville Jewish Community Council, BAUM, SAMUEL. The Jewish Population of Des Moines. Des Moines: Jewish Welfare Federation, I 956. BECKENSTEIN, ESTHER. Report on the Jewish Population of Metropolitan Chicago. Chicago: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, BIGMAN, STANLEY K. The Jewish Populatia of Greater Washington in 19~6. Washington, D. C.: The Jewish Community Council of Greater Washington, CHENKIN, ALVIN, and BENJAMIN B. GOLDMAN. The Jmish Population of New Orleans, La. New York: Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, Community Self-survey of Social, Cultural and Recreatimal Needs and Services. Minneapolis: Minneapolis Federation for Jewish Service, Community Studies of Albany, Camden, New Britain. New York: Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, I 953. Congregation Ohev Twdek-Shaarei Torah Population Study. Youngstown, Ohio: Jewish Federation of Youngstown, GOLDSTEIN, SIDNEY. The Greater Providence Jewish Cbmmunity: A Population Survey. Providence: General Jewish Committee of Providence, Inc., The Jewish Commrnity of Pittsburgh: A Populatiun Study. Pittsburgh: United Jewish Federation of Pittsburgh, The Jewish Population of Rochester, New Ymk (Maroe Cmty), Rochester: Jewish Community Council of Rochester, The Jews of Worcester. Worcester, Massachusetts: Worcester Jewish Federation, 1958 and KAPLAN, SAUL. Jewish Births and Jewish Population in Cook County, Illinois Chicago: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, MASSARIK, FRED. The Jewish Population of Los Angeles. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Jewish Community Council, A Report on the Jewish Population of Los Angeles. Los Angeles: Jewish Federation-Council of Greater Los Angeles, The Jewish Population of San Francisco, Marin County and The Peninsula. San Francisco: Jewish Welfare Federation, A Study of the Jmish Population of Lmg Beach, Lakewood and Los Alamitos. Long Beach, California: Jewish Community Federation, MAYER, ALBERT J. The Detroit Jewish Community Geographic Mobility: ~ and Fertility - A Projection of Future Births. Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, Estimate of the Numbers and Age Distribution of the Detroit Metropolitrm Area: 19~6. Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, Income Characteristics of the Jewish Population in the Detroit Metropolitan Area: 19~6. Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, Jewish Population Study: 1963 Number of Persons, Age and Residential Distrihtion. Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, 1964.

49 48 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 MAYER, ALBERT J. Movement of the Jewish Population in the Detroit Metropolitma Area. Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, Movement of the Jewish Population in the Detroit Metropolitan Area: Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, Social and Economic Characteristics of the Detroit Jewish Community: Detroit: Jewish Welfare Federation, Our Life In Our Time. Newark, New Jersey: Jewish Community Council of Essex County, REISSMAN, LEONARD. Projile of a Cmmunity: A Sociological Study of the New Orleans Jewish Community. New Orleans: Jewish Federation of New Orleans, '958. ROBISON, SOPHIE M. Jewish Population Study of Trenton, New Jersey. New York: Office for Jewish Population Research, SCHMELZ, 0. (ed.). Jewish Demography and Statistics Bibliography for Jerusalem: Hebrew University, SCHRIEBER, ALBERT N. Basic Facilities Study for the Seattle Jewish Cmmrmnity Center. Seattle: Seattle Jewish Community Center, Self-study of the Social, Cultural and Recreational Needs of the Jewish Community of Seattle, Washington. Seattle: National Jewish Welfare Board, SELIGMAN, BEN B. The Jewish Population of Passaic, New Jersey. New York: Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, SELIGMAN, BEN B., and WALTER P. ZAND. The Jewish Population of Port Chester, New York. New York: Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, SHAPIRO, MANHEIM S. The Baltimore, Maryland, Survey of Jewish Attitudes. New York: American Jewish Committee, I The Bayville (Dade Cmnty, Florida) Survey of Jewish Attitudes. New York: American Jewish Committee, The Kansas City, Missmri, Survey of Jewish Attitudes. New York: American Jewish Committee, The Smthville (Memphis, Tenn.) Survey of Jewish Attitudes. New York: American Jewish Committee, STERNE, RICHARD S. A Demographic Study of the Jewish Population of Trenton, New Jersey, and Vicinity. Trenton: Jewish Federation of Trenton, Study of the Jewish Population in Northern Delaware. Wilmington: Jewish Community Center, Survey for New Jewish Center Building. Toledo, Ohio: Jewish Community Council and Jewish Community Service Association, Survey Report an Informal Education and Recreational Activities of the Jewish Cmmunity of Indianapolis. Indianapolis: National Jewish Welfare Board, I 948. We See Ourselves: A Self Study of the Jewish Community of St, Joseph County, Indiana. South Bend, Indiana: Jewish Community Council of St. Joseph County, WESTOFF, CHARLES F. Populatwn and Social Characteristics of the Jewish Community of the Camden Area. Cherry Hill, New Jersey: Jewish Federation of Camden County, 1964.

50 The German Jewish Mass Emigration: RUDOLF GLANZ The German-Jewish emigration of the mid-i goo's, roughly coinciding with the period of America's "old immigration" of West European peoples, embodied the highest aspirations of an entire Jewish generation. Nevertheless, it remained an incomplete historical process. Germany's rapid industrialization following her victory over France in interrupted the process and reduced it to a mere trickle. In this way, two characteristic Jewish migrations crossed: the trans-atlantic migration to America and the beginnings of an internal migration from small German communities to the cities and metropolises of the new Kaiserreich. The same factor which inhibited the trans-atlantic emigration also induced the internal migration - the tremendous new opportunities available in Germany after her victory and unification in It was this factor, too, which stimulated the immigration into Germany of East European Jews; their coming was a consequence of German prosperity. As an aftereffect of these new developments, a considerable growth of the Jewish population in Germany resulted. To understand all this, however, is only to comprehend the afiermath of a historical process; it is not to understand the process itself. The importance of the process lies, of course, in the solutions which a generation sought and found intuitively from its own perspective for its own lifetime - and also in the consequences the process had for the growth of American Jewry. The numerous monographs on Jewish communities in Germany do not treat the emigration process systematically at all, but tend rather to reflect it as a chain of remote reminiscences without Dr. Glanz has published studies on Alaska and California Jewish history. His most recent book, Jew and Irish: Historic Group Relations and Immigration, appeared in 1966.

51 permanent meaning.' This becomes understandable if we consider that all these monographs were written after 1870 and that they were designed to show the progress of post-emancipation German Jewry and its economic rise in what was at the time believed to be a widely responsive German homeland. Historiography of any other type would have appeared double-faced to the authors of the monographs. They could not be fully pledged to the struggle for actual equality in post-emancipation Germany and at the same time see some permanent good in the emigration process of a past which they believed so different from the "golden age" in which they themselves lived and wrote.= I As a typical clichc of how emigration was dealt with in these monographs, we may take the following: "[Because of] the sad economic situation at the end of the Forties and the reaction of the Fifties... many young people of both sexes emigrated then... to the New World. Soon nearly every family had relatives in America and the emigrants kept close contact with the old homeland and transplanted its religious and national traditions to the New World. In this way, many of them became brave pioneers of Germandom in America" (Berthold Rosenthal, Heimatgeschichte def baditchen Juden [Buehl, Baden, rgt?], p. 360). Information on the facts of the emigration process is often given merely descriptively in newspapers and fugitive literature; see Rudolf Glanz, "Source Materials on the History of Jewish Immigration to the United States, ," in Yivo Annual of Jewish Social Science, VI (1951)~ For the most part, such information is hidden in a mass of data scattered through or concealed in other sources, for example, lists of emigrants compiled at various occasions and for different reasons. Exclusively Jewish emigrants' lists of this type are, however, nearly nonexistent, though Aron Arnold Taenzer, Die Geschichte def Juden in Jebenhausen und Goeppingen (Berlin, 1927), pp , supplies a list of thirty-two Jebenhausen (Wuerttemberg) families which sent emigrants to America; on p. 90, he gives the names and years of emigration of thirtythree persons. According to Taenzer,.p 88, there emigrated from Jebenhausen in the years 1830 to 1870 all in all 329 indmlduals, 317 of them to America. Such lists are valuable in the case of whole families emigrating together (on the same ship, for instance), but tell us nothing about the families of emigrants who came as individuals. An entirely different list has been compiled in scholarly fashion by Adolf Kober, whose "Jewish Emigration from Wuerttemberg to the United States of America (I )," in Publication of the Ame~ican Jewish Histosical Society, XLI (I rg~z), , shows that altogether 640 Jews, registered by, all told, 380 administrative listings (Auswande~ungsakten), emigrated from Wuerttemberg during the seven-year period covered in his study. Emigration data in genealogical works, especially family trees, are exceedingly scarce, be they of German or American provenance. The fourteen volumes of the German periodical Juedische Familimforschung, with their many hundreds of genealogical tables and family trees, contain not a single date of emigration. Even Taenzer's Die

52 While post-factum statistics record the results of emigration, only insight into the course of the whole process can reveal the true explanation of its importance. The circumstances which determin; the mode of emigration, whether by family or individuals only, are the essence of the whole human problem. The size of the Gcschichte der Judcn in Hohennns und dm uebrigen Vorarlberg (Meran, 1905). which supplies hundreds of family trees, gives only sixteen names of emigrants to America - without their dates of immigration (see pp , 728, 730, 739, 741, 751, 759, 763, 769). This is the more remarkable because he states (p. 263) that, mainly due to this emigration, the number of Jews in Hohenems had diminished in the mid-1860's by nearly a half. Malcolm H. Stern, Americans of Jewish Descent: A Cmpendium of ~mealo~~ (Cincinnati, 1960), offers genealogical-data on some 25,000 most& before i840, but infrequently gives immigration dates: see pp. I I, 15, q6, 62, and 98. Happily, considering their nearly complete absence in this kind of source, Taenzer's Jebmhausen und Goeppingm, pp , supplies the family trees of 297 emigrants to America. Of these 297 names, 272 belong to the thirty-two big family-units (pp ) and twenty-five to additional family trees outside of these big units. The contribution to emigration data made by individual communal and congregational histories in America is likewise negligible. Herbert T. Ezekiel and Gaston Lichtenstein, The History of th Jews of Richmond from 1769 to 1917 (Richmond, 1917), bases years of arrival on petitions in which "intention of becoming a citizen" is declared in a few cases. Guido Kisch, In Search of Freedom (London, 1949), pp. 23, , 105-6, I 25, I 38-39, , gives at least the year of arrival of a greater number of emigrants from Bohemia, but in no case elucidates the situation of the whole family for any emigrant. Innumerable emigration data are scattered through many hundreds of biographical sketches of German Jews in America, contained in general, regional, or local biographical works. I have gone through many of them and dare to state that nearly none give a complete picture of the situation of the family of the emigrant who is the biographical subject. Of course, book-length biographies or autobiographies of individuals try to be complete in giving the whole family background. All in all, only Kober's Wuerttemberg study and Taenzer's Jebenhausen-Goeppingen study are sufficient for our purpose of extracting a greater number of emigration data and enabline - us to sift and order them from the view~oint of scholarlv research into the conditions of emigration in terms of the family and its surroundings. These sources both refer to Wuerttemberg. Taenzer's, on Jebenhausen, is purely local, while Kober's includes the whole kingdom. Kober notes, in the cases of-206 individuals, the assets they took with them as emigrants and their ages. Taenzer, however, says nothing about assets and never directly states ages, which can be computed only in cases where the year of birth together with the year of emigration is given. As to the scope of Kober's study: it includes altogether 640 persons from places in Wuerttemberg, seventy-one of them from Jebenhausen. Taenzer's Jebenhausen study includes 3 17 emigrants -though, of course, he covers a much lengthier period.

53 family, the ages and sexes of its children at the moment the first member of the family sets out for America, the order in which male and female children follow according to their birth dates - these are the most important human factors of the emigration movement. These factors must be considered if the pull of the first familymember to emigrate on those following is to be explained reasonably. This "pulling-after" of brothers, sisters, and other relatives is indeed the most significant feature of the German Jewish immigration to America. To be sure, when the assets of a family are ample enough, its course of emigration is preferably to go as a family unit.3 For instance, the core of the emigrating family units in Jebenhausen, Wuerttemberg, was two sizable family-groups, the Arnolds and the Einsteins. Their fortunes were well known in the community. They comprised all together ninety-one (fifty-two plus thirty-nine) emigrants; sixty-six of them set out as entire families, and only twenty-five traveled as individuals. By contrast, most other families could enable their members to go only as individuals, at intervals determined by age, sex, means, or special circumstances (marriage, business partnership, or at least employment by a relative) in America. Jewish emigration by whole families was generally handicapped in comparison with the emigration of non-jewish German families. The cause may be found to a great extent in the occupations of the Jews - liquidating its holdings could rarely bring enough cash to move a whole family. On the other hand, diligent saving could at least provide for the starting out of the first family member. Non- Jewish German emigrants, however, were mostly peasants who, by selling their farmsteads, could realize enough to take a whole family. Planning by prospective Jewish emigrants had, therefore, to proceed above all on prudential lines. We find this confirmed by a comparison with the emigration of the Old Lutherans around the middle of the nineteenth century. A far greater percentage of them- some 75 percent - than of the Jews could afford to go 3 Kober, while giving us no notion of the family circumstances of the individual emigrant, shows us, nevertheless, where families emigrating as one unit are concerned, that these families had ampler assets.

54 / 422 SAN FRANCISCO D'IREL'TORY. I-- - I POLLACK BROTI3ERS, ' I No. 87 CALIFORNIA STREET, San Francisco,, IMPORTERS AND JOBBERS OF ETO' ETC. ETO-.<- Agents for A. ;SL Polluk's celebnlted Water-proof Fancy Saloon Matches. (tleopold POLL.\(:& Snn Eranciaca) (JOSEPH POLLACK, Kew York ) RRTADTjB ~~OT~IIS, 1 Dry Goods Warehouse! - IMPORTERS OF j s L sruoa. / E. L SIMON. G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MSIBON E N BROTHERS. ' S (SUW- LO SIMOS PJOIIM,) Furnishing Goode, EusIeryS B ~ QGQQ~B, O ~ YANKEE NOTIONS, I cutmr. Pslwnsw, ETC. E'I'C. BATTERY IMPORTERS ARD JOBBERS IN FOBEICN AND I 59 Sacramento Street, TRE Ty (Between Bntte~~ and Front,) &TAB IiBABB8SI@. -. CORSER OF SACRAMENTO, 5AV S3ABd9%l@@a w. xsmbdter, lmt.dler, A Full Assortment of the above Gooh COXSTi\NTLY OX IImD. Omc in New Turk, Nu. 72 William RWt, I Romptw to, UP.8wr...- p--l MRS: D, NORCROSS, 144 sacramernto Street, m bowe Mon%omery C- &&9Qb%QB B$&dPBBT Q@Qb@, &8@3 D. NOROROSS. 144 Saoramento Street, above Montgomery. SAN FRANCISCO. Advertisenrr~tt in /he Snn Francisco Directory, 1859 Gcr~nan Je\vish brothers' firms aclvertise tllcil- warts in mid-nincrecnrh-cci~rury S~II Iirancisco

55

56 in whole families. The same percentage held true for those of rural employment among the Old Lutherans.4 When we concentrate on individual Jewish emigrants - and it is on them that the dynamics of the emigration process depend - we discern the following types of family relationship: I. Brothers and Sisters. Among the 207 individuals known to have emigrated from Jebenhausen before I 870, twenty-nine family groups containing brothers and sisters were to be found. These family groups included altogether 107 persons. 2. Brothers. A further twenty-eight family groups included only brothers - eighty-one persons in all. The largest of these groups were made up of five brothers (there were four such cases). 3. Sisters. In addition, there were twelve family groups of sisters only, including thirty-eight persons. It is remarkable that, in one case, six sisters without brothers and, in another, four without brothers emigrated individually. Here we have a statistical indication that the New World's scheming mother was supplanted by the scheming sister. There were so many more sisters imrnigrating!~ Although brothers and sisters formed the backbone of individual emigration and their "after-pull" created the dynamics of the whole emigration process, the single emigrant in a family may, nevertheless, have been indicative of the situation of a Jewish family in Germany and may even have fulfilled an economic function by his emigrating. In cases where the only emigrant was a female, marriage is to be assumed as the purpose of emigration, and no other family problem is likely to have been solved by her emigration. This becomes clear if, for instance, only sisters who had married in 4 See Wilhelm Iwan, Die Altlutherische Auswanderung urn die Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts (Ludwigsburg, r943), 11, 98, and Tables IV and V. 5 We count eight family groups with only one brother and one sister.

57 Germany remained behind.6 A daughter as the first-born in the family may have solved her marriage problem by emigration and may not have been followed by any of her brothers and sisters. This seldom happened, however.' It was extremely rare for the first-born son of a larger family not to draw brothers and sisters after him to Ameri~a.~ Against cases without an "after-pull," cases in which the assumption of planning may therefore be excluded, stands the great mass of brother and sister emigrations planned to insure the order of emigration most advantageous for the whole family. The special case of the unmarried female emigrating as an individual has a special meaning from several viewpoints and therefore deserves special treatment. Our two sources - the Wuerttemberg studies by Adolf Kober and Aron Taenzer - rather complement one another in this respect and permit a fuller analysis of the problem. Kober gives forty-nine individually emigrating unmarried females. The number of such females, we find, increased from five in 1848 to thirteen in 1854, and then fell to nine in This would suggest that Jewish girls were in some demand as brides in America and that they saw a better chance to marry there. The assets they took with them were no doubt in the nature of a dowry. Taenzer, Jcbenhuusm und Goeppmgcn, p. 347: of the four children of Wolf Liiwenstein, only Jeannette, the fourth-born (in 1845), emigrated. 7 See Taenzer, p. 301: of Samuel Lob Darzbacher's four children, the eldest, Golies (born in 1813), emigrated, while two younger sisters married in Germany. On p. 289, Taenzer lists the five children of Loeb Adelsheimer: the eldest, Fanni (born in r830), emigrated in 1854; the fourth, Roesle (born in 1839), married in 1878 in Germany; the second, third, and fifth were brothers who did not emigrate. See also p. 376: of Moritz Rothschild's five children, only the eldest, Rine, emigrated. The only sister, Roesle, the fourth-born, married in Germany. 8 Taenzer's Jebenhausen study uncovers, indeed, only two such instances. See p. 372 : of Bernhard Rosenthal's five children, the eldest, Wilhelm, emigrated in 1871 and later lived in London. See also p. 379: of Judas Wolf Sontheimer's fifteen children, the eldest, Seligman (born in 18 r I), emigrated; the other fourteen died in early childhood. 9 In the case of Jettle Rosenheim (Kober, p. 256). marriage was explicitly given as

58 Unlike Kober, Taenzer gives the ages of emigrating single females only in a limited number of cases; we can also reckon their ages from their birth and emigration dates. Aside from two widows, one forty-two years old and the other sixty-six, only six of sixteen girls, all told, were over twenty years of age - which conforms with the early marriage-age of that generation. Similarly, the likelihood of marrying in America is also suggested by these data.i0 Due to the marriage restrictions which the secular authorities imposed upon young Jewish males in the German territories of emigration, young Jewish females participated in the emigration fever from the beginning with the highest expectations. They had before them the examples of many engaged couples as well as the news of marriage ceremonies taking place on shipboard or immediately afier arrival in America. There were numerous reports in the Jewish press of young girls traveling with groups of emigrants. Under such circumstances, help to emigrating Jewish girls was regarded by the Jewish communities of Germany as a direct help to the bride in the old Jewish tradition.ll New economic possibilities were also reflected in marriages. A man might, in effect, marry into a new business by taking as his wife the sister of the owner. This was a frequent event, and it widened the existing family units as well as the associations from the old native regions in which all marital partners hailed from the same native districts. Numerous combinations for possible marriages overseas formed the substance of family letters back and forth, thus giving the feminine sphere in the New World new content. her reason for emigrating. Her assets amounted to 1,400 fl. Generally, indeed, the assets of single females were much higher than those of single males, who might set out with as little as too fl., though on the average they took with them several hundreds of florins per person. Whole families might set out with no more than 1, but generally went with several thousand. See Taenzer, Jebcnhmrscn und Gocppingtn, pp. 299, 301, 306, 338, 343, 364, For instance, of the four Rosenheim sisters, Therese (born in I 829) emigrated in 1859 at the age of thirty; Lotte (born in 1830) emigrated in 1859 at the age of twenty-nine; Henriette (born in 1833) emigrated in 1859 at the age of twenty-six; and Caroline (born in I 84 I) emigrated in I 859 at the age of seventeen (p. 368). 'I Der O ~ k (Ellwangen, t Wuerttemberg), May I I, (1859), ; Juedisches Volksblatt, VI

59 s8 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 In comparison with other emigrating peoples, the drawing power of the marriage instinct evinced by the young Jewish female was something of a peculiarity. A Gentile journalist made this observation at a time when German Jews were not yet numerous in America: In consequence of the obstacles which the Bavarian govemment have thrown into the way of marriages among the Jews, by requiring the possession of a sum of money by the contracting parties, and a large fee for license, not less than nine couples of that persuasion, the men all mechanics, have arrived here [in America] to be married under our laws, and to reside here in future. The confidence and constancy manifested by the young women, in venturing across the ocean to a new world with their lovers, where Hymen's torch burns bright and free, is worthy the best days of olden time, when seven years was deemed light servitude for a good wife. One of the females is a capital engraver of visiting cards...ii Only a small percentage of Jewish emigrants had the means and the opportunity to go as a family. Taenzer mentioned only twenty Jebenhausen families - eighteen men, two widows, sixteen wives, and seventy-six children, altogether I 12 persons - emigrating as a unit. It is remarkable that seven of these I I 2 emigrants belonged to the big family unit of the Arnolds and four to the Einsteins. These two units included the majority of the family-emigrations and also of the individuals involved (fifty-nine).13 If we consider the thirty-two big family units whose total Taenzer gives as 317 emigrants, we find that I 82 of them went as individual emigrants. In addition, further family trees outside the thirty-two units indicate twenty-five emigrants going alone, so that we have altogether 207 individual emigrants, all known to us by name. They formed the backbone, not only of the Jebenhausen community, but also of its If Niles Weekly Register, LI ( ), 37. Y See Taenzer, Jebcnhauscn und Goeppingcn, pp , 307-8, 343. The proportion given in Kober is much greater. Of the 640 individual emigrants he lists, half went as families (sixty-three families all told). But the dominant importance of the individual (non-family) emigration appears in the fact that the remaining 317 administrative emigration records cover altogether 320 individual emigrants.

60 emigration, which in the course of forty years emptied the community of its people.i4 Any consideration of the pull to further emigration of brothers and sisters may fittingly start with an exposition of the typical Jebenhausen Jewish family which contributed all these emigrants. Jewish souls there in I 828 numbered 440. In the years I 81 5 to I 839, sixty-four Jewish marriages had been concluded there. Their offspring amounted to 435 children, and they formed the backbone of the emigration from I 830 to I 870 (3 I 7 from the big family units plus twenty-five from other families - altogether 342). Although on the average only seven children fell to a family's share, there were actually numerous families where the blessing of children struck much more tellingly - two with sixteen children, one with fifteen, one with fourteen, one with thirteen, six with eleven, and eight with ten children. Such facts certainly emphasize the need to emigrate. Taenzer supplies the names of the children of a family in the order of their birth. In most cases, their years of birth are known, and sometimes the month and day as well. In the few cases where no birth years are available, the order of birth is given by numbering the family-offspring. All this is necessary in order rightly to characterize respective categories - if there are such things as categories -or degrees in the influence of certain brothers and sisters in accordance with the order of their birthright. The ideal case is where the son, as the first-born child, pulls all his brothers and sisters after him, as we see it in the case of the six children of Benedikt Abraham Rosenheim: the eldest, Ulrich (born in I 839), emigrated in 1856; the second, Bernhard (born in 1842), emigrated in I 852; the third, Moses Benedikt (born in 1845), emigrated in I 860; the fourth, David (born in I 847), emigrated in 1863; the fifth, Simon (born in I 849), emigrated in I 864; the sixth, Berta (born in 1851), emigrated in 1868.~5 Equally important was Towards the end of the Atlantic migration, the other historical process, migration from the rural communities to the cities, was already evident in Jebenhausen. New industries in neighboring Goeppingen absorbed the rest of the Jebenhausen community. 15 Taenzer, Jebenhausm und Goeppingm, p The three children of Simon Herz Rothschild are another case in point: see Taenzer, p. 376.

61 the case where a first-born son pulled his unmarried sister (or sisters) after him, and only married ones remained behind in germ any.^^ There were many such cases in which the whole structure of the family was permanently formed in this manner, while second-born and even later-born sons are known to have drawn a considerable number of their brothers and sisters after them.17 But the role of the daughter as the first-born child in bringing brothers and sisters to America is even more conspicuous. Here marriage, as we know from memoirs and biographical sketches, served to help two families to emigrate. This is even more remarkable where there were only girls in the family. For instance, the six daughters of Samuel Solomon Massenbacher emigrated as single individuals according to the order of their birth: first, Hefele (born in I 82 2); then, Behle (born in I 824) ; followed by Esther (born in 1826), Elise (born in 1828), Marie (born in 1831), and Jeannette (born in 1834).I8 The four children of Abraham Eaist Rosenheim emigrated, drawn by the first-born, a girl, in the following combination: first, Jentle (born in 1822) emigrated in 1844, then Made1 (born in 1825) in 1844, Moses (born in 1830) in 1850, and finally Jettle (born in I 832), in 185 I.19 In another combination, the three children of Abraham Bernheimer emigrated: Gudel (born in I 8 I 9), then Jakob (born in I 82 I), and finally Jeannette (born in I 824).20 In other cases where not all the children - but, nevertheless, a considerable number - followed the lead of a first-born girl, at least the marriage problem of the sisters was solved by the act of emigration," or else they remained in Germany as married women." '6 See Taenzer, pp. 291, tpq, (the Arnold, Lindauer, and Schiele families). '7 See Taenzer, pp. 368, (the Rosenheim, Rothschild, and Lauchheimer families). '8 Taenzer, p '9 Ibid., p lo Ibid., p There was also a sister and brother team (p. 317). " See Taenzer, pp (the Dettelbacher, Erlanger, and Ottenheimer families). la Taenzer, p. 344 (the Jakob Hirsch Lindauer family).

62 THE GERMAN JEWISH MASS EMIGRATION: I I Remarkable, too, is the case whereby the only son in the family became free to emigrate through the marriages of all his sisters in Germany. This happened with the seven children of Benzion Rosenheim, six of them girls. The eldest five and the seventh married in Germany; Albert, the sixth-born, emigrated in 1866 at the age of twenty-one.'3 The later emigration of parents to join their children in America seldom took place. Usually, emigrated children cared for their parents in the old homeland by generous contributions to their upkeep, thereby making them carefree in their old age. This help was proudly stressed by the Jewish press.'4 That it was generally accepted that parents would remain in the old communities is seen from the pedagogical controversy about the usehlness of "Juedisch- Schreibm" (German written in the Hebrew alphabet) in the curriculum of the Jewish schools in Germany. Its proponents asserted that Juedisch-Schreibm offered parents the only possibility of maintaining a correspondence with their emigrated children.'s Later parental emigration was usually a case of a widower or a widow who left following the loss of the spouse. Such cases in Jebenhausen did not differ from those reported occasionally in Jewish newspapers and biographical sketches of the lives of Jewish immigrants in America.16 Taenzer, p '4 Die Wahrheit (Prague), I1 (1872)~ 47: "Simon Kraemer." =s Israclitische Annalcn (I 84 I), p. I 5 5 : ''In our rural communities... there are still very many people who can neither read nor write German and can use only the Jewish- German (jucdisch dnrtsche Schrijt) for the purpose of their correspondence with their children living abroad!' l6 Taenzer, Jebcnhuscn und Gocppingcn, p. 306 : Baruch Einstein's widow emigrated in 1864 to join her three children in America. For other cases of widows, see Taenzer, pp (Lina Fleischer) and 3 18 (Rachele Frank). The case of a widower, Joseph Lauchheimer, who emigrated in 1865 to join his five children in America, is also recorded (p.338).

63 62 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 Is there testimony on the American side to bear out what we learn about the structure of the emigrating Jewish family? Such testimony can be found only indirectly by assembling data given on different occasions and by drawing conclusions to support what can be observed from the European side. Although biographical sketches of immigrants do not usually treat the whole family, they ofien contain supporting details; most of them say something about the main feature of Jewish immigration being an immigration of brothers. Much more is to be unearthed from the direct sources of American economic history, especially from business history. German Jewish business firms in America often bore names which included the addition "and Bros." or "Brother(s)." Legal principles lay down no such requirement. Firm names need only express an essentially true fact either in respect to their ownership or their activities. If a business concern is recorded as a brothers' firm, at least two brothers must have participated in the founding of the firm. Since there was no legal compulsion to indicate the brotherly relationship of the owners in the name of the firm, the will of brothers to publicize this relationship through the instrumentality of the firm's name is very significant. German Jewish immigrants favored firm names indicative of fraternal relationships. They regarded this kind of name as a guarantee of the double responsibility of the firm's owners. Wherever the business directories give complete lists of the merchants of different branches, we find a much higher proportion of brothers' firms among the German Jewish names in the branches where German Jews concentrated, than among other names in the same branch and other name-groups in other branches of business. This, however, does not mean that there were not many businesses carried on by German Jewish brothers without any indication in the firm's name. Often the particle "and Co." covered a brother younger than

64 the first brother, whose role as founder of the firm was to be stressed by giving his name 0nly.~7 Often, too, the particle "and Sons" in the firm's name covered brother partners. Granting all this, the brothers' firm was regarded as typically German Jewish and as such became part of American lore: "Half the Jewish firms in America are brothers, business continues in a family and descends from generation to generati~n.""~ It enables us to gain a notion of the scope of German Jewish brothers' firms when we consider wholesale clothiers, a branch in which German Jews were everywhere most strongly represented even before the Civil War. New York in 1859 counted altogether 106 such firms, of which fourteen were brothers' firms, nearly all of them with typical German Jewish names29 In Cincinnati around the same time, seventy-nine wholesale clothing firms included fifteen brothers' firms, nearly all of them with German Jewish names.30 The whole of Pennsylvania, in I 861, had altogether thirty-seven wholesale clothing firms, six of them brothers' firms, all with German Jewish names.3' Two out of eleven in Chicago during the late I 850's and four out of twenty-four in San Francisco during the early I 860's were brothers' firms.s2 1T For instance, Ransohoff and Co., of Salt Lake City, described in 1858 by a contemporary as "the leading Jewish firm, who built the best stone store in the city," was a common undertaking of the brothers Nicholas Siegfried and Elias Ransohoff: see Leon Watters, The Pioneer Jews of Utah (New York, 1952), pp Deseret News, (1872), 396. New York State Business Directory (New York, 1859)~ P. 7 I : Bernheimer Bros.; Cohen Bro. and Co.; I. Elias and Brother; J. Epstein and Brother; Figel and Brother; R. Goldschmidt and Brother; D. H. Goodman and Brothers; Martin and Brother; Neubrick and Bro.; A. Rich and Brother; Scholle and Brothers; Schoolherr and Brother; J. Stamper and Brother; A. Suause and Brother. SQ George W. Hawes, Ohio Gazetteer and Business Directory for 1859 and 1860, p sz Boyd's Pmsylvania Statc Business Di~ectory (1861), p. 319: Lauferty and Bro.; Reisenstein Bros.; Stem and Bro.; A. Frowenfeld and Bro.; E. Frowenfeld and Bro.; Morganstem and Bro. 3' G. W. Hawes, Illinois State Gazetteer and Business Directory for 1858 and 1859, p. 43 : Crane Bro. and Co.; Foreman Brothers. Gazlay's Sun Francisco Business Directory for 1863, p. 156: Hecht Bros.; L. King and Bro.; S. Mayer and Bro.; Scholle Bros.

65 64 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 To obtain a comparison with the existing Gentile brothers' firms, we chose lists containing Gentile firms, preferably German-owned, and used lists of predominantly German brewers. The choice of the brewing trade follows a historic pattern; the brewing trade did not accept Jewish apprentices in those regions of Germany from which the Jewish "mass" emigration came - a circumstance which explains why Jews were for a long time wealtly represented among the brewers in America.33 Here is what we found: in New York, of seventy-three brewers, only two were brothers' firms; in Cincinnati, only four out of 101; in the whole of Pennsylvania, only three out of 2 17; in San Francisco, only one of twenty-three were brothers' firms. In Chicago, there were no brothers' firms among the four brewers.34 A check of many lists of most of the different branches in city and state commercial directories revealed nowhere a proportion of brothers' firms even approximating that of the German Jewish brothers' firms in wholesale clothing. At smaller places, especially in the South, brothers' firms might exist only in one commercial branch, in which the German Jews were predominant. For instance, in all of Montgomery, Alabama, there were only five brothers' firms, all in dry goods and nearly all German Jewish.3~ In Jewish organizations and institutions, the activity of brothers was conspicuous. For instance, a correspondent wrote about the Order of B'nai B'rith, predominantly German Jewish until the end of the century, in the following humorous vein: 33 Der T w Ziunru~cchter, I1 (I 846). I I 9 : "Aus Unterfranken." 34 New York State Bus. Dir. (I 859), p. 5 2; Hawes, Ohio Gamtccr, p. 6 15; Boyd's Pm. State Bus. Dir., p. 201; Gazlay's S. F. Bus. Dir., p. 128; Hawes, Illinois State Gaz., P The Southern Business Dircct~sy (Charleston, 1854), pp. 8 (Montgomery, Ala., dry goods: J. Abraham and Bro.; M. Heller and Bro.; P. Kraus and Bro.; H. Lehman and Bro.; E. Fowler and Bro.), 57 (Nashville, Tern.: Franklin and Bro., the only brothers' firm in clothing; only two brothers' firms there), I I I (Memphis, Tenn.: Black Brothers, the only brothers' firm among groceries; only two brothers' firms there).

66 Brother Joseph Bien... brother of Julius Bien - there is such a large brotherhood - unbeschrien, that I get sadly mixed when I mix brothers of one blood, and brothers who are merely related by [lodge] benefits - the latter should be properly known as brethren; though the [B'nai B'rith] ritual does not call our attention to it.s6 Just as conspicuous is the appearance of brothers' firms in the only Jewish agency effective over the whole of America - the Jewish newspaper. They appear as subscribers, collectors of subscriptions, and correspondents. A list of subscribers to American Jewish newspapers up to the Civil War, based on receipts of paid subscriptions, shows, especially in the Western states and territories, a strong representation of brothers' firms. The Southern states, too, did not fall far below the standard set by the West. The Israelite in its first year, , already had brothers' firms as subscribers in twenty-two localities.37 This study, limited to one place in Germany and comprising only a small segment of the German Jewish mass emigration to America, may claim, nevertheless, to reconstruct the typical Jewish emigrant family and its behavior in the historical process of emigration during the period in question. In the regions of mass emigration, South and Southwestern Germany, the conditions Jews faced were nearly all the same. Legal restrictions against settlement by Jews, special taxes, and further discriminations continued well into the years after I 848; in Bavaria, they remained as late as I 870.~~ Such 36 Amcritan IsrucJitc (Cincinnati), Dec. 24, 1886, p. 8: "Maftir." 37 See lsruclitc (Cincinnari), I (1854-I~SS), 39, 48, 56, 64, 72, 88, 104, 136, 152, 207, 272, 296, 312, 400, 416. The localities were: Adrian, Mich.; Atalanta, Ill.; Baltimore, Md.; Detroit, Mich.; Hartford, Ky.; Holegondale, Ga.; Ironton, Ohio; Jacksonville, 111.; Jefferson City, Mo.; Lima, Ind.; La Salle, 111.; Louisville, Ky.; Lexington, Mo.; Morristown, Ohio; Napoleon, Ark.; Ottawa, Ill.; Paint Lick, Ky.; Peru, Ind.; Parkersburg, Va.; Rochester, N. Y.; San Francisco, Calif.; and Taylorsville, Va. ~lto~ether~ there were twenty-seven brothers' firm subscribers at twenty-two localities in the first year; in the first three years, such subscribers were to be found in sixty-six localities. $8 The Bavarian Matrikel, which gave settlement rights to only one son as the heir of

67 conditions produced everywhere the same pressure to emigrate as a means of escaping legal disabilities, social anti-semitism, and economic frustration. German Jewish emigration was thus in essential respects different from Gentile emigration from Germany. German Jewish emigration represented the rationally planned transplantation of a generation of youth with the subsequent founding of a family on new soil. The non-jewish German emigrations did not manifest the quality of rationality which the German Jewish emigration did in respect to preparations, the order of departure by family members who later drew brothers and sisters after them, and the matchmaking of emigrant couples. Furthermore, there was the decisive difference that no peasant elements were to be found among emigrating German Jews. They were entirely an urban element starting out to an urbanizing America, and this was a main reason for their rapid economic adjustment to the new country. It was the union of dire necessity with the ideal of freedom which, as so often in history, promoted the success of this historical process. his father, lasted nearly fifty years after the Judenedikt of I A female could acquire the right to settle only by marriage, on which a high tax was imposed - the Bavarian government was willing to encourage only unions between rich girls from abroad and sons with settlement rights. This fact explains the high interest girls had in emigration. I 1 The American Jewish Archives is eager to augment its collection of material - manuscripts, photographs, newspaper and magazine clippings, tapes - pertaining to relations between Negroes and Jews in the Western Hemisphere. It is hoped to secure as wide a geographic representation as possible. Readers are requested to send such items for deposit or copying to the American Jewish Archives, Clifton Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio

68 The Impact of Jewish Overseas Relief on American Jewish and Non-Jewish Philanthropy, ZOSA SZAJKOWSKI At the outbreak of World War I in August, 1914, there was no American Jewish organization for overseas relief. The National Committee for Relief of Sufferers by Russian Massacres, founded after the Kishinev pogrom of 1903, and the Committee for Relief of Jewish Sufferers by War and Massacre in Turkey and the Balkans, founded during the Balkan wars, had ceased to operate. The existing Jewish services were unprepared for and also unconcerned with problems of overseas relief.^ Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe were interested in overseas relief work, but American Jewish charity was then in the hands of Jews of German birth or origin. According to one source, American Jews of predominantly German background had donated $ ~oo,ooo,ooo for Jewish educa- Mr. Szajkowski, a Fellow of the American Academy for Jewish Research, is Research Associate at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research in New York City. Among his many publications is Analytical Franco-Jewish Gazerteer, rgjp-r9qf (New York, 1966). His paper is part of a larger study made possible through a grant of the National Foundation for Jewish Culture. The author thanks James Marshall and the Marshall family for permission to use material in the Louis Marshall Papers at the American Jewish Archives. The following abbreviations of sources arc used in the notes: AJAr =American Jewish Archives; AJHS =American Jewish Historical Society; Lehman Papers = Herbert H. Lehman Papers, Columbia University Library; Magnes Papers=Judah L. Magnes Papers, Historical General Archives, Jerusalem; NCJSS=Proceedings of the National Conference of Jewish Social Service at annual sessions. "Special committees were organized for the purpose of raising funds. In this particular instance the organizations directly concerned with Jewish charitable efforts in their country did not initiate this particular movement": Boris D. Bogen, Jewish Philmthropy (New York, 1917)~ p. 57; "me local American Jewish social service,] as a whole, has not been seriously concerned with the problem": Report by Louis M. Cahn, Washington, May 13-16, 1923, in NCJSS (New York, r924), p. 6; "While the [Welfare] Federations in most cities at this time were not the direct instruments for overseas fund raising": Harry L. Lourie, A Heritage Afinned (Philadelphia, 1961), p. 93.

69 68 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 tional and relief purposes between I 880 and 19 I O.~ Before 19 14, there were only isolated cases of collaboration between Jews of German origin and Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe in charitable agencies. In most cases, the "Russian" newcomers' charitable initiative was barely tolerated by their "German" coreligionists. the social worker Samuel A. Goldsmith put it this way: "Have we not neglected... the groups of the Eastern European Jews until they have almost become millionaires, until they have been able to build, without our guidance or help, million dollar structures, been able to finance their own systems of education, their own hospitals?"3 But there was also a profound gap between the administrators and the recipients of Jewish relief administered by the "German" Jews, an "unfortunate relation of benefactor and beneficiary, which was made still more difficult by unsympathetic treatment on the part of untrained and ill-paid charity clerks and even ignorant volunteer workers."4 After the outbreak of World War I, three American Jewish Agencies were created for the purpose of collecting funds for overseas relief: the Central Relief Committee [CRC], organized by the Orthodox early in October, 19 14; the American Jewish Relief Committee [AJRC], created on October 2 5, I 9 I 4, under the auspices of the American Jewish Committee and looking for support mainly to the rich Reform Jews; and the People's Relief Committee [PRC], founded on August 8, 1915, by labor and liberal organizations. On November 27, 1914, even before the PRC came into being, the CRC and the AJRC had joined forces to establish the Joint Distribution Committee UDC], in order to centralize the distribution of relief in war-stricken countries. a Address by Max Senior, Cincinnati, June I, 1938 (Senior Papers, AJAr). 3 NCJSS [Denver, June 7-10, (New York, 1926), p See also H. Silver, "The Russian Jew and Charity," Jewish Social Scrvicc Quarterly, IV, No. 2 (1927), I 29-44; Lourie, pp Morris D. Waldman. The Organization Problm of Jewish Cmmmrnity Life in America [Address delivered at the National Conference of Jewish Charities, Indianapolis, May 9, (n. p., n. d.), pp. 4-5.

70 At first some of the AJRC supporters opposed a separate campaign for Jews in the war-stricken countries. Two days afier the AJRC was created, Felix M. Warburg, who became its treasurer, wrote to Louis Marshall that, by establishing a separate Jewish committee, "we give the American Red Cross and their relief committees an excuse for excluding the Jewish sufferers from help from them."^ The Jewish Exponent of Philadelphia commented on November I 3, I g 14: "A Christian gentleman who takes an intelligent interest in Jewish affairs expressed surprise at the movement to organize a separate relief fund for the Jews in the war zone in Europe." It was, replied the editor, because of the peculiar position of the persecuted Jews that "a distinctive Jewish fund is needed, and not for any consideration of a separatist nature." That same day, in Cincinnati, the well-known Reform rabbi, Dr. David Philipson, also wrote Louis Marshall to express his opposition to a separate Jewish campaign. Marshall's answer is worth quoting in exmso: The raising of a special fund for Jews, either at home or abroad, is nothing new. Unfortunately we have been compelled to help one another for centuries, because nobody else has been willing to help us. It is all very fine to s eak about the brotherhood of man and to cast down all barriers, but the P act remains that conditions are such that they must be dealt with practically, and not from the standpoint of the millennium. The present war affects the Jews to a greater extent than has any calarnit in our history. The actual fighting is in progress, within the Jewish Pale o 1 Settlement in Russia. in the district in which the Tews live in Galicia, and in Eastern ~russia. More than six million of our &-religionists are directly affected. Their homes are over-run by the warring armies. Their property is being dissipated. They are subjected to all of the sufferings incident to the passage and repassage of hostile armies. It is calculated that over three hundred thousand are now in the Russian army. There are at least one hundred thousand in the Austrian army, and probably as many in the German armv., Before the war ends. there will be manv.! widows and orphans; many young and vigorous men crippled for life; disease and famine, and destitution, almost beyond the power of imagination. s Warburg to Marshall, Oct. 27, 1914 (Marshall Papers, AJAr).

71 Who will look afier these people? Will the Russians or the Poles, or the Austrians do it? What earnest have we in the history of the past decade, that anything may be expected from them? Even now the Polish boycott against the Jews is in full blast, and within the past few days the Poles have been engaged in conducting pogroms against the Jews. The general funds that are being raised will not help the Jews to any appreciable extent. The Red Cross Society is not organized for the alleviation of such suffering as that which we have in mind. The fund for the Belgians is intended for the alleviation of destitution. But why shall we deceive ourselves into believing that the Jews of Eastern Europe will meet with anything but rebuffs? When was it that this new idea, that it may be dangerous for Jews to help one another, came into existence? It was not recognized at the time of the Kishineff affair, or during the Balkan war, or at the time of the Morocco episode. It has not been recognized by our philanthropists, who have built up a remarkable chain of institutions intended solely to relieve Jews, although it occasionally happens, from a spirit of hypocrisy and selfdeception, that they are described as non-sectarian. 1 am afraid that I am behind the times when I assert that the duty of a Jew helping Jews in distress was never greater than it is today. That is probably the result of the training which I received from my earliest childhood, at my mother's knee. But apparently we are getting beyond such narrow-mindedness, with the consequence that a great many of us are helping neither Jew nor non-jew. So altruistic have some of our people become, so fearful lest they be considered as possessing the spirit of religion, that they are devoting their sole attention to settlement work, and to all kinds of ridiculous fads which begin and end in newspaper notoriety. So far as the Jews of Eastern Europe are concerned, I can assure you that they may with safety execute today a general release with respect to participation in any general relief fund, first, because it is not at all likely that one will be collected, and secondly, if it is, it will be so administered that the Jews will receive the same consideration which they are constantly enjoying from their stepfather-lands. As to the first of these propositions, we know that, as yet, no general fund has been collected, except for the Belgians; as to the second, we require no statistical information. As an offset to the criticism made by some of our own people, I desire to call your attention to a letter which I received a day or so ago, which touched me greatly. It was anonymous, and enclosed a dime. The writer said that he was a Gentile, whose earnings amounted to three dollars weekly in excess of his living expenses, that he was very much impressed by the needs of the Jewish sufferers of the war, and that he pledged himself to send ten cents week1 until the war was over to help them, hoping that thereby some poor un 2'ortunate might receive at least temporary relief.

72

73 ... i *,-*,.. I....,..-a,....-,.....;d ' I.,. 4..>,, *,.....,. '..,- "",.'*.,.-. -.,. "M'c havc a Bclgiuni of our o~vn" - rhc JI)C rclicvcs Jews in Eastern l;:i~ropc during I\'orltl \\.'nr I

74 THE IMPACT OF JEWISH OVERSEAS RELIEF ON AMERICAN PHILANTHROPY 7 3 I wish that some of our millionaires would act on this really broad theory.6 Marshall received other complaints. According to Henry H. Rosenfelt, an early historian of American Jewish overseas relief, one Jew declared that "outbursts of religious persecution as a secondary result of the war" would justify American Jewish Committee aid to "the Jews in the war areas," but that "to undertake to help certain nationals of the belligerent countries simply because of our community of faith is not the province of the American Jewish cornrnittee."7 Even Julius Rosenwald, who later donated large sums for Jewish overseas relief, had been at first "entirely opposed" to a separate Jewish b d, and A. G. Becker felt much the same.8 Perhaps the attitude of those who advocated a separate Jewish relief campaign was best expressed by the AJRC's Baltimore branch: There are as many Jews in the war zone in Russia and Galicia as there are inhabitants in, Belgium. Have you ever stopped to think that while the world is helping that unfortunate country, no one has raised a finger to help the stricken Jews.... We have a Belgium of our own.9 Later, after American entry into the war, Marshall wrote to Simon Wolf, who had criticized a separate Jewish campaign: There is no justification for the criticism upon the collection of moneys for Jewish war sufferers to which you have adverted. There has been collection 6 Marshall to Philipson, Nov. 18, 19x4 (ibid.). 7 Henry H. Rosenfelt, This Thing of Giving (New York, 1924), pp Judge Julian W. Mack to Becker, Nov. 16, $914, and to Louis D. Brandeis, Nov. 19, (Brandeis Papers, University of Louisville; microfilm copy, Zionist Archives and Library, New York City). 9 Jcwish Charities (Baltimore), V, No. 5 (Dec., 191q), 97. See also the American Jewish Relief Committee's Munthly Bullezin, No. I 2 (Jan., 19 I 6). P. 7: ''We have heard the story of Belgium recited over and over, and appeals for help for Belgians have been continuous and insistent. Yet the horrid cruelties inflicted by order of the Russian Government and the Russian military commanders upon the poor Jews in Poland and other provinces have been a hundred-fold worse than even the most exaggerated tales of Belgian suffering - and have hardly attracted artention in America."

75 of money for Belgians, Serbians, Armenians, Poles, for French orphans and English barristers, for Italians and Greeks, and every nationality under the sun, and nobody has made any criticism. Although the Jews have suffered in common with all other people in their countries, they have had sufferings of which others had not known. Thus in Russia, Poland, and Galicia they have been driven from their homes, they have been subjected to religious persecution, as well as to the vicissitudes of war. Nobody has sought to help them except the Jews. In Poland they have not been permitted to participate in the distribution made there of moneys collected through other agencies. Even in the midst of the war they have been the victims of an economic boycott waged against them. To say, therefore, that we should not help them is to my mind unjust. As an indication that the average man is not concerned in their fate, I point to the fact that although we have thus far collected over $ro,ooo,ooo, the total amount of money received from non-jews would not aggregate $ ~oo,ooo. We shall therefore proceed as heretofore.lo At the end of World War I, Secretary of War Newton D. Baker indicated to Jacob Billikopf his disapproval of a separate Jewish relief campaign. The Jews, he felt, should work through the American Red Cross. Billikopf was then active in the AJRC and communicated Baker's opinion to Marshall, who replied to him on December 5, 19 I 8: In the first place, as you [Billikopf] have shown, the Red Cross is not equipped to distribute the relief funds which we are collecting among the Jewish war sufferers. It has no adequate organization in Russia, Poland, Galicia, and in other lands where the Jews require immediate assistance. It is unfamiliar with their special needs, particularly those arising from their institutional life. Nor is its personnel of such a character as to understand and appreciate the unique status of the Jews amid the other racial and religious groups which surround them. There is no Jew connected with the Red Cross in any position of authority. There may be some Jews who work in a subordinate capacity, but they are not likely to be familiar with the exceptional conditions to which the Jews whom we are seeking to help have been subjected. For a long time the Red Cross, in selecting its personnel, laid down rules which made it practically impossible for any Jew to be accepted in its service. It was necessary for me to present a series of arguments to that body before it admitted into its service any persons whose ancestors three or four generations back were born in Germany. This placed a large proportion of the Jews who might have entered the service of the Red Cross on the blacklist. z0 Marshall to Simon Wolf, Nov. zo, 1917 (AJAr).

76 THE IMPACT OF JEWISH OVERSEAS RELLEF ON AMERICAN PHILANTHROPY 75 The Red Cross does not understand that, in the distribution of funds for the Jewish war sufferers in Poland and Romania for instance, it would be utterly impossible for any help to reach the Jews unless the money were distributed under Jewish auspices. In Poland the economic boycott initiated by Mr. [Roman] Dmowski, the president of the Polish National Committee, has been in active operation ever since 191 2, and is today more virulent than ever. Neither he nor Mr. [Ignace Jan] Paderewski, although urged to do so, has consented to call off the boycott. The Jews constitute thirty-eight percent of the population of Warsaw and are the poorest of the poor, and yet they have received practically nothing during the war from any funds distributed through the Municipal Council of that city to its destitute population. In view of this circumstance it is idle to say that the Red Cross, which necessarily must act through local organizations, could help the Jews to any extent. Secretary Baker forgets that the Jews in these countries are treated as outcasts by the general public, that communication except through Jewish organizations is practically impossible, and that any representatives that the Red Cross might send from this country, however well intentioned, would be unable to cope with the problem. Furthermore it should be remembered that, so far as the distribution of food is concerned, it would be entirely futile unless it conformed with the Jewish dietary laws and ritual requirements, and that many a pious Jew would rather starve than to accept food which does not conform to these requirements. The Red Cross could not deal with this phase of the ~roblem. It should also be remembered that, with great difficulty, we have organized distribution committees which are well calculated to accomplish the best results with the least possible expense and friction. The Red Cross would not be able to duplicate them. Finally, we understand the magnitude of the problem as it affects the Jews. It is our desire to assist in putting the survivors on their feet so as to enable them to earn a livelihood. We are quite confident that, taking into account the demands made on the Red Cross throughout Europe, however large the amounts that might be collected by that organization for its philanthropic work, the proportion that could be appropriated for the Jews would be but a small fraction of the amount that they require and which the Jews of this country are collecting and intend to collect for their relief I repeat that Jewish relief is complicated by the fact that the Jews of Eastern Europe are the victims of prejudice and persecution, that they are practically without civil and political rights, and that only Jews are thoroughly capable of comprehending their needs and the methods by which effective relief can be ~ranted. The Red Cross would be iust as likelv as D I not to select as its agents in Poland the men who for six years past have

77 tried to annihilate and exterminate the Jews by depriving them of the means of earning a livelihood. I may add that I have contributed largely to every campaign of the Red Cross and have been a member of that organization for many years and that I appreciate all that it has done, but I have no hesitation in saying that it is not qualified to deal with the problems affecting Jewish war sufferers.ll Billikopf sent a copy of Marshall's letter to Baker, who answered that he appreciated "the gravity of the problem presented by the Jews in the several countries where they have been... singled out for persecution and, therefore, present an unusual case of need for relief, assistance and protection.... " He feared, however, that American relief would "be enfeebled by multiplied appeals and scattered agencies." It seemed to him "far better to have some great central vehicle to carry American good will to oppressed people everywhere.... " He would "broaden the work of the Red Cross rather than set up an independent agency." Baker then went on to say: I am writing you this personal explanation not that I have thought out all the difficulties of the problem and feel myself safe from error in the matter, but chiefly because I find myself grieved at having any difference of feeling from Mr. Marshall, and the very distinguished company associated with him in the prosecution of this particular appeal. Needless to say I shall not seek to oppose my judgment to theirs, or in any way permit my feeling to be an obstacle in the work which their judgment approves as necessary, and my judgment approves as worthy and high spirited.iz In 1919, a manual for AJRC campaign workers stated that the American Red Cross was not equipped to distribute the relief h ds; it had no adequate organization in Russia, Poland, and other places where the Jews required immediate assistance. Moreover, the Red Cross was "unfamiliar with the special needs of the Jewish population, particularly those, arising out of their institutional life.... Marshall to Billikopf, Dec. 5, 1918 (AJAr). Baker to Billikopf. Dec. 8, 1918 (Jacob H. Schiff Papers, AJAr).

78 THE IMPACT OF JEWISH OVERSEAS RELIEF ON AMERICAN PHILANTHROPY 77 Only Jews are capable of comprehending their needs and methods by which effective relief can be granted."~~ In the summer of 1914, at the very beginning of the overseas relief effort, some "leaders were fearful of crippling our local institutions, without at the same time being of material assistance to the Jews abroad.... Time proved that they were thoroughly mistaken. Institutions did not suffer, but on the contrary they were tremendously benefited through the development of a new and higher standard of giving."14 As early as September, 1915, the influential Christian Science Monitor editorialized that American Jewish overseas relief work would have a great impact upon domestic Jewish relief, that the overseas effort would help to consolidate, centralize, and democratize it. In the post-war period, the Monitor predicted, American Jewry would "probably be ready to deal with some of its distinctly domestic and American issues with less separatism than in the past." The cooperative overseas relief effort they had launched would "tend to consolidate Jewish public opinion in the United States against growth of any militaristic policy" and "cause such influence as Jews may have to be cast increasingly on the side of internationalism when the United States hereafier may be tempted to be chauvinistic or jingoistic...." The Monitor thought "most encouraging" the American Jewish disposition shown to federate societies and institutions which serve the same ends, and to build up a more efficient and non-competitive organization on a national scale. The method by which this shall be brought to pass is being vigorously debated now, with intensity of feeling and great candor of utterance. Oligarchic and democratic tendencies are pictured as standing over against each other, striving for mastery of the new organization when formed; and refusal to cooperate in the enterprise is being based on its alleged exclusive and non-representative character. Fortunately the struggle is in the open now, and any defects of the project are likely to be seen and Campaign Workers Manual. Qucstiuns and Answers (Distributed by AJRC, 1919). pp. 4-5 (American Jewish Committee Archives). I4 Rosenfelt, p. 24.

79 changed in the light of full debate. Jewish ecclesiastical polity has traditions of independency that will, it would seem, defeat any autocratic trends; but they ought not to stand in the way of federated action if it be democratically defined and controlled. So that, if not this year then in the not distant future, there will probably be a national federation with unifying aims and enterpri~es.~s Such a democratizing influence did not come at once, however. It took some time before the influence of the joint effort by the Reform AJRC, the Orthodox CRC, and the radical PRC penetrated the domestic Jewish charitable institutions. On December 2 I, 19 16, the New York Yiddish Day asked in an editorial on the newly created Federation of Jewish Charities: Will all factions of New York Jewry be able to collaborate? Will it not become a bureaucratic institution, where donors will look with disgust upon the takers? Will the antagonistic spirit between the [uptown Arnericanized] "Yahudim" and the "simple" [East European immigrant] Jews of the East Side manifest itself there? Will the representatives of the dernocratic Jewish faction who will donate not thousands of dollars, but only their three dollars, have at the Federation equal rights in the meeting rooms or will they have to wait in the corridors? Jacob Billikopf, Boris D. Bogen, and others frequently drew attention to what they called the by-products of overseas relief work. By giving more dollars for such drives, American Jews became more sympathetic in their attitude toward local and national needs for social service. While some complained that the drives for overseas relief made by the Orthodox middle-class or working-class group had a disrupting influence on old-fashioned donations in many communities, a group of social workers contended that even those who had made donations on a class basis gradually improved themselves economically and in time were absorbed into the established general, non-class-oriented, social-work efforts of their communities, with a resultant democratizing influence on those efforts. Thus, more funds were now expended for Jewish education than had been the Editorial, Christian Scitncc Monitor (Boston), Sept. 30,

80 THE IMPACT OF JEWISH OVERSEAS RELIEF ON AMERICAN PHILANTHROPY 79 case before the Jews of East European immigrant stock joined the established charitable agencies. As Bogen saw it, "We are more interested in our brethren of Eastern Europe today than ever before. This enlarged interest necessarily affects the scope and content of our local charities." Overseas relief work, then, did not interfere with domestic charitable Jewish activities. The campaign for the New York Federation for the Support of Jewish Philanthropies had to be postponed in I 9 I 7 because of the overseas relief campaign, but when it was finally launched, it enjoyed greater success than ever.16 Some of the leading professional Jewish social workers became actively engaged in the work of collecting and distributing overseas relief. Among them were Boris D. Bogen, Jacob Billikopf, David M. Bressler, Lee K. Frankel, and Morris D. Waldman; many of them were of East European birth. After World War I, several returned to domestic relief work and tried to introduce a measure of democratization in that sphere. Their accomplishments need to be further investigated, but in 1919 Felix M. Warburg could say that Jewish social workers had "wiped out class feelings in groups where such a thing seemed to be impossible....we have dropped not only the walls between Orthodoxy and Reform, and Reform and Socialism, that all can go together within the city of New York, but we have dropped them all over the United states."^' I6 Jacob Billikopf, "The Ten Million Dollar Campaign," Jewish Charities, IX, No. I I (March, 19 19) ; Boris D. Bogen, "Unifying and Disrupting Forces in Jewish Community Life," NCJSS [Denver, June 7-10, (New York, 1926), pp: In 1923, for example, "about as much money was spent in constructive rel~ef work in Europe and Palestine as was spent in the local charities here [in the United States]": Samuel A. Goldsmith, in NCJSS [Toronto, June 22-25, (New York, 1925), p Felix M. Warburg, in Tenth Biennial Session [ofj the National Conference of Jewish Churities in the United States mansas City, May I 2-15, (New York, 1919). pp In general, the role of Jews of East European origin who attained wealth during and after World War I -the degree to which they effected quick and lasting changes in American Jewish social work -remains to be investigated. The same is true of their role in other aspects of American Jewish life: for example, the Zionist movement in the United States. While, in 192 I, the entire East European faction in American Zionism stood solidly behind the "nationalist" Louis Lipsky against the "antidemocratic" and "anti-nationalist" Brandeis group, the wealthy East European Jews, in later years,

81 In 1923, in a lecture given at the Solomon T. H. Hurwitz Memorial Lecture Foundation, Cyrus Adler proposed the creation of a national Jewish body in the United States, not "a superorganization" like the American Jewish Congress, which he opposed, but something in the nature of a benevolent organization.i8 The JDC was seeking then to liquidate its relief work in Europe, and Jacob Billikopf urged that the JDC be maintained as a central body for local and national religious, educational, and eleemosynary purposes in the United States.19 Such a project did not lack opposition, since ideologically the AJRC and the JDC remained closely tied to the aspirations of the American Jewish Committee. The Sentinel of Cleveland, for instance, wrote that American Jewry would never accept the authority of any national body constituted along the lines of the JDC, or the AJRC - or the American Jewish Committee. "What the Jewry of the United States needs is a national body which should be truly American; that is to say, democratic in spirit and composition." Billikopf, however, thought that the Yiddish dailies would not oppose "a perpetuation of the AJRC," because they believed that overseas relief needs had not yet come to an end.'" demanded the return of the Brandeis group to the leadership of the American Zionist organization. Despite all their traditions and aspirations, these middle-class Jews dreamed of being accepted in the company of Louis Marshall, Felix M. Warburg, and other American Jewish leaders of German origin; they looked to them for prestige and were happy to participate in campaigns under their leadership. It was easier to obtain a higher social Status through partnership with Marshall. Warburg, and their friends than through an organized opposition to the established leadership of the "philanthropists," the Jews of German origin who controlled the American Jewish Committee and the JDC; or through a partnership with "anti-nationalist" Zionists like Brandeis and his friends than with Lipsky. In 1928, the Yiddish Day recognized Marshall and his friends as the leading force in American Jewry. See, for example, Bernard Shelvin, in The Jewish Morning Journal, June 23, 1927; Samuel Margoshes, in The Day, May 5, 1928; Editorial, The Day, May 26, 1928; Abraham Coralnik, in The Day, Jan. 8, 1930; Chaim Arlozoroff, Ktawim (Tel Aviv. '935). v. '54. '8 "Who Will Lead," Jewish Daily News, June 22, '9 Jacob Billikopf, Shall the Great Foreign Relief Machine Be Scrapped? peprinted from The Jewish Expment] (Philadelphia, 1923); Jewish Chronicle (Kansas City). May 4, 1923; also in other periodicals. The Sentinel, May 25, 1923.

82 THE IMPACT OF JEWISH OVERSEAS RELIEF ON AMERICAN PHILANTHROPY 81 On the other hand, Cyrus Adler was enthusiastic about Billikopf s JDC proposal. On May 8, 192 3, Adler wrote to Billikopf: Were it not for the human difficulties that might be involved, the most workable outcome of your suggestion would in my opinion be a reintegration of the American Jewish Relief Committee and the American Jewish Committee out of which the former actually grew.... We would thus be creating in America an organization which would exercise the same function as the Alliance Isratlite Universelle de France but not have the disadvantage of attempting to play the role of an international society which I think is somewhat injurious to the Allian~e.~' The Billikopf proposal was discussed at the Conference of Jewish Social Service, held on May I 3-1 6, 192 3, in Washington, D. C. Louis M. Cahn, in his report to the Conference, suggested that the AJRC be asked to continue in existence for the purpose of raising the budget not only of the national organizations included in this study [HIAS, Desertion Bueau, etc.], but other national Jewish organizations ministering to the cultural and Jewish educational life of American Jewry... a number of influential Jewish citizens... suggested that the Conference ask the American Jewish Committee, which originally organized the [American Jewish] War Relief Committee to call another conference for the purpose of organizing a committee that would, if the Conference so decided, help to raise the money and to budget and distribute the monies necessary for the support of approved national ~rganizations.'~ This proposal had the approval also of the Bureau of Jewish Social Re~earch,~~ but some of the delegates to the Conference opposed such a move to put the direction of Jewish social work in America in the hands of a conservative organization. Isidore Hershfield, representative of the Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), asked Cahn why he had omitted the labor-oriented Adler Papers, American Jewish Committee Archives. NCJSS [Washington, D. C., May 13-16, (New York, 1923)~ pp Bureau of Jewish Social Research, Study of York, 1922). Budgeting of Natimal Organizatirms (New

83 82 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 PRC and the Orthodox-oriented CRC. "Nobody here knows, and it is nobody's business to know, whether I line up as a Reform Jew with the American Jewish Relief Committee or as an Orthodox Jew with the Central Relief Committee or whether I am a horny-handed son of toil and line up with the People's Relief Committee." Hershfield pointed out that HIAS' income came largely from those who supported the CRC and PRC. His organization, he said, could not agree or submit to a recommendation for a national organization which excluded the Orthodox and labor elemenm24 Not surprisingly, then, the plan advanced by Billikopf and Cahn was not to be realized, nor would the JDC find that it could give up its relief work in Europe. According to some Jewish relief leaders, the general, nonsectarian relief agencies profited from the experience gained by Jews in overseas relief efforts. There were many cases of non-jewish contribution to Jewish overseas relief.zs When the United States entered the war on April 6, 19 I 7, a closer contact between Jewish and nonsectarian relief agencies was unavoidable. In 191 7, Jacob H. Schiff accepted the chairmanship of the overseas relief campaign on condition that part of the money would go to the Jewish Welfare Board for Jewish religious needs in the United States armed f0rces.~6 The Jewish Welfare Board participated in the nonsectarian fund-raising drive of the United War Work Campaign, which was created in September, 1918, under the auspices of seven major organizations. It was agreed that the Jewish Welfare Board would get 2.05 percent of the funds raised; by September 30, 1921, it had received 3,804,750 from the collected total of $ I 89,645, I 58.'7 Billikopf convinced the American Red Cross to launch a campaign, not for Ibid., p. 27. Rosenfelt, pp , Zbid., pp ; JDC Minutes, Oct. 11, 1917 (Magnes Papers, F3-L82, p. 60). a7 Report of rhc United War Work Campaign. Septcmber 30, 1921 (n. p., 192 I).

84 $~,ooo,ooo, but for $~O,OOO,OOO -and the goal was later raised again to $~oo,ooo,ooo. If poor Jews were able to raise large sums from minimal donations, Billikopf told the Red Cross, then the American people as a whole could follow their example.28 A "welfare assimilation" - to use the expression of one social worker29 - was being realized as a result of America's entry into the war. Rosenfelt related a curious incident which occurred in a small community. A wealthy Jew came to a Jewish war relief meeting and pledged a large sum. Everyone was amazed, for this man had always given small sums. The next day, however, the man said that he had not intended "to subscribe anything to the Jewish relief fund7'- he had thought the meeting a Liberty Bond rally! "But he offered a compromise, which was promptly accepted."3o On November 3, 1918, Louis Marshall stated at a meeting in New York City that, in the past, interfaith cooperation "for the accomplishment of a united purpose" had been rare. Protestants, Catholics, and Jews had "gone their several ways," but "now together we are appealing to all Americans to supply the funds with which to further the welfare of soldiers and sailors."~' A leader of War Chest campaigns felt that nonsectarian fund drives had made "possible the democratization of giving," and that "a tremendously Iarger percentage" did "contribute under this [war chest] plan." He reported that "Protestant and Catholic, Jew and Gentile, black and white, all work together for the common good, without regard whether the funds they give or solicit from others are to go to the particular cause in which they are interested."3* "8 Jacob Billikopf, in The Jewish Daily Courier (Chicago), Oct. 29, '9 Robert Morris and Michael Freund, eds., Trends and Issues in Jewish Social Welfare in the United States, (Philadelphia, 1966), p so Rosenfelc, p Sx One Nath - One Cause [Report of the Meeting in Madison Square Garden, New York, November 3, 1918: A Gathering of the Clergy and Laity of the Three Great Religious Groups, Protestants, Catholics, Jews] (New York, 1918), pp Sa Horatio G. Lloyd, "The War Chest Plan," in American Academy of Political and Social Science Annals, LXXIX (19 IS),

85 The opinion of Jewish relief leaders was divided. When the War Chests were first organized, a conference was held between representatives of the radical PRC and the Orthodox CRC at the latter's New York City office. A resolution was adopted in which c < voice was given to the dangers to our committees," and the delegates of these two constituent agencies of the JDC were asked to discuss the question at a meeting of that body.33 The JDC decided that participation or nonparticipation in War Chests was a matter of local initiative over which neither the Joint Distribution Committee nor the executive committee of its three constituent agencies had any control.34 On the local level, the attitude to the War Chests followed mostly the class line of the three constituent agencies of the JDC. The rich Jews of the AJRC branches favored Jewish participation in War Chest campaigns; the middle-class Orthodox Jews of the CRC were ofien undecided; the working-class relief workers of the PRC opposed joint campaigns. At its convention in Cleveland, held from May 30 until June 2, 19 I 8, the PRC made its position clear. Baruch Zuckerman, general manager of the PRC, stated then that the War Chest endangered the Jewish character of relief work. The War Chest leadership could not, for example, understand that Jews held it a legitimate part of relief work to extend help to Jewish public schools in Eastern Europe. Also, the Jewish members of the War Chest committees, he was sure, would most commonly be rich Jews and not representatives of the masses.3s On October 23, 1918, Nathan Sand, of the Milwaukee Ezra Batzor Society, notified the PRC that "the rich Jews desired to participate" in the local War Chest campaign with a contribution of 3 I oo,ooo. On October 28, 191 8, Zuckerman replied in Yiddish: "Every time a city is dragged into a War Chest 33 Baruch Zuckerman to the editor of The (Philadelphia) Jmish World, Feb. I I, 1919 (PRC Archives, AJHS). 34 Minutes of the JDC Sub-committee of War Chests, June I I, 1918, and of the Executive Committee, June 19, 1918 (Magnes Papers, F 14=L 165, pp. 46, 59). 35 People's Relief Convention. Report of the Administratiun Committee. May 30, 31; June I, 2, At the Temple, Clcvcland, Ohio (New York, 191 8), pp. I 1-1 2,

86 plan, I have the feeling that a stone has been taken away from our building. The practical results of such collaboration are known to me from the mere fact that the German yahudim are always in favor of such plans." Even so, he advised Sand to participate in the War Chest campaign, to get from it as much as he could for Jewish overseas relief, and to go on in the meantime with smaller separate Jewish campaigns. In Cleveland, a large sum was credited to the PRC from a joint campaign with the War Chest in May, Though all the activities of the local PRC branch ceased, they were renewed a year later at the time of a separate Jewish campaign.s6 The attitude of the Zionists was similar to the one held by the PRC. On August 21, 1918, Judge Julian W. Mack addressed Dr. Harry Friedenwald on joint campaigns with non-jewish relief agencies : k' Jacob de Haas and I are of the o inion that it is a matter to be settled on the basis of the situation in eac specific community, always bearing in mind that it is tremendously important to us to identify men and their donations -an impossibility under the War Chest scheme. The Chief [Louis D. Brandeis] feels very strongly this way.37 In March, 1919, the Detroit PRC branch was publicly criticized for refusing to participate in a joint campaign of the local Patriotic Fund. The Detroit Jewish Chronicle called the PRC "an irresponsible group of our co-religionists of the class who are characteristically unable or unwilling to co-operate with others."38 The PRC Conference, held in May, 1919, at Cleveland, was not impressed, for it adopted a resolution against joint campaigns with the War Chests: The greatest danger involved is that it will undermine the existence of special Jewish relief activities. Without special Jewish relief activities the American Jews will never be in a position to meet the special Jewish needs of the Jewish war sufferers. Least of all will they be in a position to meet those problems which will arise when the war will be over AJHS. 87 Jacob de Haas Archives, 4 (Zionist Archives and Library, New York City). 38 Jewish Chronicle (Detroit), March 2 I, AJHS.

87 8 6 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 A particularly sharp conflict broke out at Philadelphia in There, Cyrus Adler of the AJRC had been very active in gaining Jewish support for a joint War Chest campaign. The Orthodox CRC was willing to follow Dr. Adler's lead, and Leon Kamaiky declared that such a campaign would win over Jews who usually refused to donate to separate Jewish finds. The PRC, however, insisted on a separate Jewish campaign and was sharply criticized by the local Yiddish newspaper, The Jewish World. The PRC defended itself by claiming that it sought only to avoid the complete liquidation of Jewish relief work. On February I I, 1919, Zuckerman wrote to the editor of The Jewish World: In every city where the War Chest was organized, our Committee, as well as other Jewish relief organizations, have entirely been wiped out of existence.... I know that some may give the argument that there were some prosperous [Jews] in Philadelphia, who have singly contributed more money than our Committee has succeeded in raising from their several thousands of people. That may be true. But our very pride is that we collected our money in the form of nickels, dimes, and dollars, instead of thousands or millions. which others rnav succeed in receiving. from anv other individual. ~ eyork i City has r&ently closed its reli:f campaigh for five million dollars, which was successfully conducted under the leadership of our Mr. [Felix M.] Warburg, who is chairman of the Joint Distribution Committee. No less than two months have been spent on that. Hundreds of people, rich and poor, have devoted days and nights to meet individuals to solicit their pledges. There is a probability that if some "right minded man" could have approached five or ten prosperous Jews of the city of New York, he could have raised the five million dollars, without spending so much time of so many volunteers and paid men such as we employed in the New York campaign. Would you or the readers of your paper discourage campaigns among the masses of Jews in behalf of their own brethren? The argument that may be advanced by some, that more money is being given to the Jewish relief b the War Chest than has been raised? previously by the Jews alone, and or that reason justify the War Chest, is both wrong and dangerous. If we were the beneficiaries of more money throu~h the War Chest during. the vear of we will lose more in the 0 0, > year of 1919, when our relief committees went out of existence, because so much more time and energy and money will be wastefully spent to reorganize our Jewish relief committees now that the War Chests are no more in existence.do 40 Zuckerman to the Philadelphia PRC, Feb. 2, 1919, and to the editor of The Jewish

88 There is no reliable estimate of Jewish contributions to the Chests. According to various sources, the War Chests contributed between five and ten million dollars for Jewish overseas relief,41 but such estimates are exaggerated. For example, from its creation on August 8, 1915, until its liquidation on June 30, 1924, the PRC had a global income of $7,588,125, including $784,561 (10.34 percent) from War Chest collections. Of the $3,901,688 contributed by the AJRC to the JDC from January I, 1918, until February I 5, 1919, a sum of $1,052,881 (27 percent) came from the War Chests. Of the $1,006,807 contributed by the CRC during that period, $3 23,963 ( percent) was derived from War Chest sources, and of the $765,842 contributed by the PRC, $242,972 ( percent) came from the War Chest.d2 In 1919, Felix M. Warburg believed that the overseas relief work effort would "have as great an effect on American life as upon Jewish life."43 After World War I, the "assimilation" of Jewish relief work consisted in Jewish cooperation with the community chests which had replaced the War Chests and similar emergency drives.44 Some social workers have even ascribed the origin of community chests to Jewish welfare federations and their pioneering role in centralized campaigns.45 Most Jewish social workers favored World, Feb. 1 I, 1919 (AJHS) ; The Jewish World, Dec. 10, 1918, Jan. 30, 1919; The People's Relief of America. Facts and Documcnts. rpr5-rgtg (n. p., n. d.), pp The Jewish World, April 23, 1924; Rosenfelt, p. Peopk's Relief, pp. v-xxxvrt, 344; Bulletin of the Joint Distribution Committee [Supplement to June, 1919, issue]. It should be noted that the Jewish radicals of the PRC were not alone in opposing the War Chest. Some Orthodox CRC leaders were also in opposition, and a variety of reasons led some leaders of the Young Men's Christian Association, the Knights of Columbus, and the Christian Science Monitor, among others, to an anti-war Chest stand. See Zuckerrnan, in Yidishcr Kmfer, May 31, Much material on this problem can be found in the PRC Papers at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research. 43 Rosenfelt, p " pp , 104-5, , s Frank Dekker Watson, The Charity Organization Movement in the United States (New York, 1922), P. 428; Morris D. Waldman, Nor by Powm (New York, 1953)~ p. 420.

89 88 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, 1970 Jewish participation in the community chests, but they also warned against completely giving up separate Jewish drives for purposes which were not covered by nonsectarian community chests - purposes like Jewish education and overseas relief. At the Conference of Jewish Social Service held in Denver on June 7-10, 1925, Dr. Bogen conceded that the community chest movement might prove "of very great significance in uniting the various factors in the community. The Jews undoubtedly share in the beneficial influences, but it does not follow that the Community Chest movement will strengthen the Jewish communal interest." While the community at large might be benefited by the tendency to absorb private relief efforts into state and municipal relief, specific group interests might be adversely affected. The individual and volunteer interest of the Hull House days in communal life, Bogen noted, had largely disappeared by the time Jewish participation in War Chests was discussed. The professional, paid social worker had taken the place of the volunteer, and the danger that these efforts would lose their Jewish dimension was great. Thus, separate Jewish relief campaigns were important, campaigns on behalf of Jewish education, for example. Separate Jewish philanthropic endeavor remained, moreover, the most important attempt to unify and strengthen the American Jewish community. It bridged the gap between Jewry's common experience of persecution and an Americanization which was ofien only chimerical and full of self-complacency.s6 At the same conference, Morris D. Waldrnan defined his attitude to nonsectarian charitable work in these terms: The development of community chests has complicated the problem of Jewish community organization. For the so-called liberal Jew who is averse to the distinctly Jewish activities, the Community Fund offers a comfortable escape. The one who genuinely believes that such affiliation promotes greater co-operation suffers from a confusion of ideas. Co-operation and central [nonsectarian] fund raising are not necessarily identical... there 46 Bogen, "Unifying and Disrupting Forces," NCJSS (New York, 1926).

90 is no doubt that the Community Fund, by virtue of its control of the finances, ultimately controls the destiny of all its beneficiary institutions. Under such conditions, the growth and development of the Jewish activities affiliated with the Community Chest depends upon the sympathy, understanding, vision and fund raising capacity of the community chest.... Jewish education and foreign relief, for which the community chest cannot legitimately provide funds, suffer from inadequate support because many hide behind the Community Fund.... To some extent, therefore, the Community Chest may be considered a disrupting factor in the development of Jewish community life.47 Joseph Hyman, of Baltimore, feared that Jewish entrance into the community chests "weakens Jewish unity and often tends to lower the standards of Jewish giving." Also, "foreign relief and Jewish education remain outside the Chest - and the Jewish Community must devise means of financing these important appeals." William J. Schroder contended that contributions to the chests should supplement Jewish communal needs, but not serve as an excuse for contributing less to the Jewish community. Louis hl. Cahn stated that the chest did "not eliminate the group questi0n."4~ Two years later, in 1927, Waldman, then executive director of the Detroit Welfare Federation, reiterated his view that Jewish agencies were better off financially through their association with community chests. Still, he agreed that this association had "complicated, perhaps retarded, at any rate made more difficult though not impossible, the development of a comprehensive and effective Jewish community organization."49 As Samuel C. Blumenthal saw < < it, to some extent the community chest may be considered a disrupting factor in the development of Jewish community life."so Similar, nonconclusive statements were made in later years: Jewish community organization in chest-affiliated cities was "limited to local philanthropic interests." Auxiliary Jewish organizations "had to be set up for the support of local and non-local Jewish 47 Ibid., pp (reprinted in Waldman, pp ). r8 NCJSS (New York, 1926), pp > NCJSS (New York, 1927), p so Ibid., p. 102.

91 interests (education, foreign relief, etc.)." Those who concerned themselves with questions of individual adjustment "generally identify themselves with the Community Chests. Interests of a distinctly cultural survival character tend to find expression most frequently in the Uewish] Welfare Fund."sx During World War 11, the old arguments which had been used during World War I by the partisans and adversaries of the War Chests were again used, and the same questions were asked: how much should Jews donate to nonsectarian drives, and should they also continue their own drives for specific Jewish relief work which could not be supported by nonsectarian campaigns?s2 sr Michael Freund, "The Community Chest and Influence on the Jewish Community," Jewish Social Service ~rterly, VII (June, 193 I), Set also Lourie, p. 104: "After several years of experience with community chests, the Jewish federations learned that the chests could not solve two basic problems facing the Jewish community: I) they made no provision for raising capital funds for plant renewal and expansion, and 2) they did not undertake any financial obligation for national and overseas causes and for local services of a religious character." All the information available on the ratio of Jewish contributions to community chests and withdrawals from Jewish agencies is always based on sample studies and is thus too fragmentary for conclusions. Scc, for example, Freund, "Community Chest and Influence," Analysis of Expcndimres of Fcdcrations and Wclfare Funds and Budgeting [Studies of the Bureau of Jewish Social Research]. sa S. D. Weinberg, Thc 1943 War Chcst (Detroit, 1943) [Yiddish]. In a way, these discussions about Jewish versus nonsectarian relief, both domestic and overseas, were part of a much broader post-world War I discussion on Jewish and non-jewish financing of certain social activities. The following is but one example: on March 25, 1926, Edward Lawrence Hunt, director of America's Good Will Association, wrote to Joseph Lande on the difficulties of raising funds for the Association: The Jew says that the chief support must come from the Christians.... The Christian says: The Jews ought to back you up for they are the ones who suffer from the growing antisemitism.... I have always preached that the hater is more hurt by the hating than is the hated. Therefore the Christian should get the Christian to quit the intolerance which destroys all that is best in man. But a serious condition, not a theory, confronts us. And the horrible fact is that there are fewer Christians than Jews who are likely to do what you asked to do (Lehman Papers). On April I, 1926, Herbert H. Lehman wrote to Lande that, for the Association to be funded preponderantly by a Jew or a group of Jews "would certainly lead to no good purpose and might be actually harmful" (Lehman Papers).

92 Brief Notices GOLDSTEIN, SIDNEY, and CALVIN GOLDSCHREIBER. Jewish Americans: Three Generations in a Jewish Community. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, xvii, 274 pp. Part of the "Prentice-Hall Ethnic Groups in American Life Series" under the general editorship of Milton M. Gordon, this study of generation change, the authors tell us, is "very largely a report on the Jewish population of the metropolitan area of Providence, Rhode Island!' Dr. Goldstein, Professor of Sociology at Brown University, and Dr. Goldschreiber, Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of California in Berkeley, address themselves to such questions as Jewish identity, demographic changes, socioeconomic changes, marriage, fertility, mortality, intermarriage and conversion, and religiosity. They include a selected bibliography and indices of authors and subjects. GREENSPAN, SOPHIE. Westward with Frmont: The Story of Solomon Carvalho. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, pp. $2.95 Solomon Nunes Carvalho (I 8 I ), scion of a distinguished South Carolina family, served as photographer and artist for Colonel John C. Fremont's fifth expedition through the Rockies. Carvalho's In the Far West w'th Frcmont was published in In the present volume, part of the Jewish Publication Society's "Covenant Books" series for younger readers, Mrs. Greenspan retells the story of Carvalho and Fremont in fictional form. GROLLMAN, EARL A., Edited by. Explaining Divorce to Children. Boston: Beacon Press, xii, 257 PP. $5.95 Like his earlier collection, Explaining Death to Children (1967), Rabbi Grollman's present book is designed to help children cope with crisis. Ten essays by experts are included along with an introduction by Louise Bates Ames. Notes, references, and bibliographies are also supplied. OIGRADY, JOSEPH P., Edited by. The Immigrants' InfIuence on Wilson's Peace Policies. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, x, 329 pp. $8.50 Eleven scholars collaborate in this volume to illuminate "immigrant group influence on policy" during the Wilson Administration "as an example of the influence of public opinion on foreign affairs!' Austin J. App writes on German immigrants, Joseph P. O'Grady on the Irish, Dennis J. McCarthy on the British, John B. Duff on the Italians, George Barany on the Hungarians, George J. Prpic on the Yugoslavs, Otakar Odlozilik and Victor S. Mamatey on the Czechoslovaks and Carpatho-Ruthenians, Arthur J. May on "the Mid-European Union," Louis L. Gerson on the Poles, and Morton Tenzer on the Jews. A comprehensive index is included. RUKEYSER, MURIEL. The Speed of Darkness. New York: Random House, x, I 13 pp. $4.00 The London Times Literary Supplement knows Mrs. Rukeyser as "one of America's greatest poets." The Speed of Darkness, her tenth volume of poetry, vindicates that judgment. Of particular Jewish interest in this volume is a long poem on the talmudic sage Akiba.

93 92 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 SANDBERG, SARA. My Sister Goldic. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday & Company, pp. $4.95 My Sister Goldie is a sequel to the author's Mama Made Minks (1964). Mrs. Frank Rosen (nie Sara Sandberg) carries the story of the Sandbergs from "plebeian Harlem" to "plush Riverside Drive." SHAPIRO, KARL. Selected Poems. New York: Random House, xiii, 333 PP. $7.95 Baltimore-born Karl Shapiro, whose V-'-LCtter and Other Poems won a Pulitzer Prize in 1945, has been Consultant in Poetry at the Library of Congress and editor of both Pocffy: A Magazine of Verse and Prairie Schoaner. He is by any standard a leading American poet, but what this volume recalls is that he deserves also to be ranked among the leading Jewish poets of this century. Poems from his seven previous volumes plus twenty-five "new and uncollected poems" are brought together here. SILVERMAN, WILLIAM B. Religion for Skeptics. New York: Jonathan David Publishers, pp [Paperback] The author, rabbi of Congregation B'nai Jehudah in Kansas City, Missouri, has subtitled his book "a theology for the questioning mind." Dr. Silverman does not wish "to make skepticism a religion," but does think it "essential to provide a direction, an opportunity for honest dissent, creative doubt and rational inquiry, which are the definitive requisites of a religion for skeptics." SINGER, ISAAC BASHEVIS. The Mmr. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, r pp The Shce and Other Stories. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, pp Though not published in English translation until 1967, the novel The Mmr was originally written in Yiddish in the early 1950's and is, in some respects, reminiscent of Singer's earlier The Family Moskat. The Siance is a new collection of short stories, one of which, "Two Corpses Go Dancing," first appeared in Yiddish in 1943, and another of which, "The Dead Fiddler," dates from Three of these stories, L'The Skance," "The Lecture," and "The Letter Writer," are set in North America. There are sixteen stories, all told, in this fourth collection of Singer's tales. Both volumes, it seems hardly necessary to add, fortify Singer's reputation as a master fictionist. SOLIS-&HEN, ELFRIDA C., Prepared by. American Jewish Year Book: Index to Volumes I-JO ~709). New York: Ktav Publishing House, pp. $12.50 As American Jewish Year Book editors Morris Fine and Milton Himmelfarb say in their foreword, this index "opens to the student of Jewish affairs invaluable source material for the history and development of the Jewish community in the United States, as well as a record of Jewish life throughout the world." SYRKIN, MARIE, Selected by. Hayim Greenberg Anthology. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, pp. $3.95 [Paperback] Professor Syrkin puts it very well in her fine introduction to this book: the Zionist journalist-spokesman-philosopher Hayim Greenberg ( ~), editor of the American Labor Zionist Yiddish weekly Yiddisher Kemfer and the English-language monthly Jewish Frontier, "had that rare combination of poetry and lucidity which

94 BRIEF NOTICES 93 makes a great essayist and a great teacher." Essays by him on religion and ethics, Jews and Zionism, and socialism and communism have been selected by Miss Syrkin, as well as a number of "Sketches" -of the poet Hayim Nahman Bialik, immigrant life in New York, and Greenberg's experience in late Czarist-early Soviet Russia. TARR, HERBERT. Heaven Help Us! New York: Random House, pp. $5.95 Rabbi Tarr's first novel was The Canversian of Chaplain Cohen (1963), which dealt with a Jewish Air Force chaplain. Heaven Help Us! has a civilian and suburban setting, and its protagonist is a congregational rabbi - but this novel concentrates nonetheless on a war, the apparently never-ending war between pulpit and pew in contemporary Jewish suburbia. There is not only blood, there is humor, too. THAYER, GEORGE. The Farther Shres of Politics: The American Political Fringe Today. New York: Simon and Schuster, pp. $7.95 "In a spirit of neutrality and pure inquiry," the author tells us, he has concerned himself with "examining the minor political groups in America as they exist today - those relatively small political parties and pressure groups outside the two-party system whose primary objective is to alter all or part of the existing political institutions and attitudes in America." Dividing his account into seven parts, he deals with a variety of political expressions : racists, the "Far Right," Nationalists (including the so-called "Black Muslims"), Left Revolutionists, the Moderate Left, and Independents (including Prohibitionists, Greenbacks, Suffragettes, Tax Cutters, and Theocratics). Judeophobe groups like those of George Lincoln Rockwell, John G. Crommelin, Gerald L. K. Smith. and Conde McGinlev are all discussed. Mr. Thaver supplements his well-documentkd text with appendices reproducing the ~ttorie~ General's List of subversives and fascists.. exdainine. Ku Klw Klan oreanization L. L. and terminology, and noting the fringe party presidential and vice-presidential candidates in national elecrions from 1860 to An index is also supplied. They Dared to Dream. New York: National Women's League of the United Synagogue. - - of ~merica, pp. This history of the National Women's League, , offers biographical sketches of the League's presidents and appendices on the League's leadership and activities in addition to a readable narrative chronicle and an introductory statement by Dr. Louis Finkelstein, Chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America. WAIFE-GOLDBERG, MARIE. My Father, S h h Akichnn. New York: Simon and Schuster, pp. $7.50 Mrs. Waife-Goldberg is at once wife to the noted Yiddish journalist Ben Zion Goldberg and daughter to the celebrated writer Sholom Rabinowitz (Sholom Aleichem). Her father's fame notwithstanding, she points out in her foreword, "there is not a single book in any language that tells the complete story of his life." In this memoir, Mrs. Waife-Goldberg has attempted to fill the gap. She also supplies a list of her father's works available in English translation. An index adds to the value of this rather exceptional book.

95 Selected Acquisitions Baltimore, Md., Har Sinai Congregation. Bylaws, revised 1942; cemetery rules and regulations, adopted 1942; Typescript; Printed copy Boise, Idaho, Temple Beth Israel. Certificate of incorporation, I 88 3 ; constitution, n.d.; minutes, I I 5 and 193 I- I ; Manuscript and Typescript (Received from Arthur Oppenheimer. Jr., Boise.) Chicago, Ill., Sinai Congregation. Constitution, adopted 1895, amended 191 I, further amended I 9 I 6; Typescript; Xerox copies Cleveland, Ohio, Anshe Chesed Congregation (Euclid Avenue Temple). Constitution, adopted 1946; Typescript; Printed copy Detroit, Mich., Congregation Shaarey Zedek. Constitution and bylaws, 1904; Typescript; Printed copy Duluth, Minn. Correspondence and miscellaneous material relating to the activities of Temple Emanuel, the sisterhood, and Ladies Aid Society ; account book of Temple Emanuel. I ; Manuscript and Typescript; Original, Typescript. and Microflm copies (Received from Mrs. Harry W. Davis, Duluth, and Temple Ehanuel.) East Liverpool, Ohio, Congregation B'nai Jacob. Minutes, ; Manuscript; Yiddish; Microfilm (Received from Rabbi Gerald Raiskin, Burlingame, Cal.) early years, I 85 I ; Manuscript; Xerox COPY Kansas City, Mo., "Tales from the First Synagogue in Kansas City," by Howard F. Sachs, I 968; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Howard F. Sachs, Kansas City.) Lawrence, Mass., Temple Emanuel. Minutes, rgzo-1gz1,19z4-1925, ; Executive Board minutes, I I ; bylaws, 1939; constitution and bylaws, I 95 7 ; Manuscript and Typescript (Received from Temple Emanuel.) Los Angeles, Cal., Congregation Talmud Torah. Correspondence, various programs, and miscellaneous items, ; membership list, 193 I ; Manuscript and Typescript; Xerox copies (Received from Julius Bisno, Los Angeles.) Louisville, Ky., Congregation B'rith Sholom. Minutes of the Board of Trustees, ; Manuscript and Typescript; Micro/Zm (Received from Congregation B'rith Sholom.) Meridian, Miss., Congregation Beth Israel. Constitution and bylaws, 1898; Printed copy (Received from Henry S. Loeb, Meridian.) Mobile, Ala., Congregation Shaarai Shamayim. Constitution and bylaws (incomplete), 1844; application for incorporation, I 877; Manuscript; Photostat Hartford, Conn., Congregation Beth Israel. Montgomery, Ala., Kahl Montgomery Letter from L. Mosbacher to Isaac (Temple Beth-Or). Constitution, 1852; Leeser describing the congregation's Typescript; Photostat

96 SELECTED ACQUISITIONS Pontiac, Mich., Temple Beth Jacob. Minutes, and ; Manuscript and Typescript; Microfilm (Received from Temple Beth Jacob.) Sandusky, Ohio, Oheb Shalom Congregation. Minutes and correspondence, I 96 z ; Manuscript and Typescript; Microfirm (Received from Oheb Shalom Congregation.) Victoria, British Columbia, Congregation of Emanuel. Minute books, I ; constitution and bylaws, I 893, amended IQI 3; marriage register, I ; btrths, ; marriages, ; deaths, ; correspondence, ; bills and receipts, ; ledgers, ; Manuscript; Microfilm (Received from Provincial Archives, Victoria.) Brooklyn, N. Y., Brooklyn Jewish Community Council. Files, ; Manuscript and Typescript (Received from Brooklyn Jewish Community Council.) Cincinnati, Ohio, Jewish Community Relations Committee. Newspaper clippings, correspondence, pamphlets, and miscellaneous material, ; Manuscript and Typescript (Received from Jewish Community Relations Committee.) Denver, Colo., National Jewish Hospital. The Birth of a Hos~ital. by Milton L. Anfenger, aid "A Rriei ist tor^ of the National Jewish Hospital at Denver," by Samuel Schaefer and Eugene Parsons, 192 8; Printed; Xerox copies (Received from Jeffrey Levine, Denver.) Detroit, Mich., Minute book of the Hebrew Club "Hashakhar," ; and contract between the Talmud Torah Ahavath Achim and M. Michlin, 1920; Manuscript and Printed; Hebrew (Received from Michael Michlin, Detroi t.) Helena, Mont., United Hebrew Benevolent Association. Constitution and bylaws, I 889 ; Typescript; Photostat (Received from Norman Winestine, Helena.) Menorah Society, University of Minnesota. Brief historical sketch, 19 I , by Mrs. Harry W. Davis; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Mrs. Harry W. Davis, Duluth.) National Jewish Welfare Board, Women's Division. Correspondence regarding their activities during World War 11, ; annual reports, , ; bulletins, ; Typescript; Typescript and Mimeographed copies (Received from Mrs. Alfred R. Bachrach, New York.) Seattle, Wash., Jewish Family and Child Service. History, ; Typescript; Microfilm (Received from Jewish Family and Child Service.) Sioux City, Iowa, United Hebrew Charity Association. Articles of incorporation, I 895 ; Typescript; Photograph (Received from Oscar Littlefield, Sioux City.) Waltham, Mass., Havurat Shalom Community Seminary. Information on the Havurah's formation, 1968; Typcscript; Xerox copy (Received from Eugene Mihaly, Cincinnati.)

97 BUTTONWOOD AGREEMENT, New York, N. Y. Agreement which established the Stock Exchange, 1792 ; Munuscript; Photograph (Received from Museum of the City of New York.) CHAPLAINS, JEWISH. Petitions contained in the U. S. Senate file relating to Jewish Chaplains in the army, ; Printed and Manuscript; Xerox copies (Received from the National Archives, Washington, D. C.) HOMBERG, MOSES; Philadelphia, Pa. Request for payment of a draft, 1786; Manuscript (Purchased from K. W. Hottle, Allentown.) LEVY COUNTY, FLA. An act to organize Levy County, I 845 ; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Bernard Postal, Oceanside, N. Y.) PHILLIPS, ELLEN; Philadelphia, Pa. Last will and testament and codicils, I 890; Manuscript; Xerox copies (Received from Register of Wills, Philadelphia.) ROTH, HARRY A.; Lawrence, Mass. Certificates of conversion, 1969; Typescript (Received from Harry A. Roth.) SIMSON, NATHAN; London, England. Will, probated I 725 ; Manuscript; Photostat (Received from Principal Probate Registry, London.) ALTMAN, HAL; Sacramento, Cal. Correspondence and miscellaneous items relating to his numerous activities and interests, ; Mmu~cript and Typescript; Original, Typescript, Mimeogruphcd, Microjilm, and Printed copies (Received from the late Hal Alunan.) ANTISEMITISM; Meridian, Miss. Letter attacking the "Synagogue of Satan Jews" in Meridian, and letter from Student Rabbi Me1 Hecht with additional information, I 968 ; Typescript; Xerox copies (Received from Me1 Hecht, Cincinnati.) APPEL, JOHN J.; East Lansing, Mich. Correspondence and miscellaneous material relating the influence of Christian Science on Jews and Judaism, ; Munuscript and Typescript; Original, Typescript, and Xerox copies; Restricted (Received from John J. Appel.) BELASCO, DAVID; New York, N. Y. Signed letter, expressing pleasure at being an honorary member of the American Dickens League, 1929; Typescript (Purchased from Paul C. Richards, Autographs, Brookline, Mass.) BERNSTEIN, PHILIP S.; Rochester, N. Y. Correspondence regarding the emigration of refugees in the Displaced Persons Camps in Europe, ; memorandum from Rabbi Bernstein to General Joseph T. McNamey regarding the state and future of Polish Jewry, and his recommendations as Adviser to the Theater Commander on Jewish affairs, 1946; memorandum to Arthur Creech Jones, British Secretary of State for the Colonies, describing the situation of the Jewish Displaced Persons in the U. S. Zones of Ger- many and Austria, 1947; Typescript; Xerox copies (Received from Philip S. Bernstein.) BLANK, AMY (MRS. SHELDON H.); Cincinnati, Ohio. Letter from Richard Beer- Hofmann, regarding plans to translate "Jadkobs Traum" from German into English, 1925; and letter from Louis Untermeyer, regarding the same subject, 1929 ; Ty@SCT$Jt; Gtnnl??l

98 SELECTED ACQUISITIONS 97 (Received from Mrs. Sheldon H. Blank.) BOROCHOV, BER; Russia. Correspondence and writings, primarily concerning the Poale Zion movement, I 7; and several biographical sketches, 1918; Manuscript and Typescript; Yiddish, Russian, and English; Xerox copies (From the Labor Zionist Organization of America papers at the American Jewish Archives.) COHEN, JOSHUA I.; Baltimore, Md. Letters on various subjects, ; Mmmscript; X m copies (Received from Irving Halpern, Carnegie Book Shop, New York, N. Y.) DAVIS FAMILY; Pittsburgh, Pa. Letter of Esther Davisky to her relatives concerning family matters, Russia, 1900; and letter from Maurice Davis regarding his family, 1968; Manuscript and Typescript; Xerox cobicr --r--- (Received from Maurice Davis, Pittsburgh.) DE HAAS, JACOB; Boston, Mass. Correspondence; articles and reports by him; numerous reports concerning Palestine; minutes of various meetings; correspondence, minutes of meetings, financial reports, and miscellaneous items relating to the activities of the Zionist Organization of America; manuscript copy of Lmis D. Brandeis -A Biographical Sketch, by de Haas; ; M~cript, Typescript, and Printed; English, Gem, Hebrew, and Yiddish; Microfilm (Received from Zionist Archives and Library, New York.) DEUTSCH, GOITHARD; Cincinnati, Ohio. Letter to Rabbi George Zepin requesting that a small congregation in Miami, Fla., beaided in forming a Sabbath School, 19 18; Manuscript EDELMAN, SAMUEL; Philadelphia, Pa. Letters and newspaper clippings relating to his numerous activities, ; Manuscript and Typescript (Received from Samuel Edelrnan.) EINSTEIN, ALBERT; Princeton, N. J. Correspondence between Dr. Julian Morgenstern and Dr. Einstein regarding Professor Franz Oppenheimer, 1936; letter to Oscar Littlefield who had asked Einstein for help in counselling a refugee physicist, 1938; letter from Einstein regarding the peaceful use of atomic energy, 1.948; Typescript; English and Gemun; Orrgtnal and photograph cqpies (Received from Samuel Edelrnan and Oscar Littlefield.) FREUDENTHAL, PHOEBUS; Solomonsville, Ariz. Letter describing some of his experiences in the early West, r 9 (?); Typescript; Xbrox copy (Received from Louis Freudenthal, Las Cmces. N. M.) GOLDWATER, BARRY; Washington, D. C. Letter relating to his Jewish ancestry, I 955; TypCsrript; Xerox copy (Received from Irwin J. Miller, Stamford, Conn.) GOLUB, MARK S.; Vietnam. Letter from Chaplain Golub describing High Holyday services in Viemam, 1968; Typesmipt (Received from Stanley F. Cincinnati.) Chyet, HERZBERGER, MAX; Rochester, N. Y. Letters from Dr. Albert Einstein to Dr. Herzberger dealing with scientific matters, ; and letters of recommendation for Herzberger, by famous scientists, ; Manuscript and Typescript; Xmx copzes; Rest~ictcd (Received from Max Herzberger.) HISTORY, GERMAN PERIOD. Letter from Rabbi Kenneth D. Roseman concerning the number of German Jewish immigrants in the United States during the Civil War, I 968 ; Typescript; Xerox copy HOLMES, JOHN HAYNES; New York, N. Y. Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn concerning personal matters, 1933; correspondence between Dr. Judah L. Magnes and Reverend Holmes relating to Zionism and world affairs, ; Manuscript and Typescript; Manuscript and Xemx copies; Restricted

99 98 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 (Received from Carl Hermann Voss, Saratoga Springs, N. Y.) HONOLULU, HAWAII. Letters concerning the Jewish community ; Typescript; Typescript copies HUMPHREY, HUBERT H.; Washington, D. C. Letter from Vice President Humphrey to Rabbi Albert G. Minda, regarding the Presidential election of 1968; Typescript (Received from Albert G. Minda, Minneapolis.) INTERMARRIAGE; Wilmington, Del. Letter from Rabbi Arthur Gilbert about the marriage he performed between Michael Davis and Mary Lunger, whose mother is a dupont, 1968; Typescript (Received from Arthur Gilbert, New York.) ISAACS, NATHAN; Cambridge, Mass. Manuscripts on various subjects; newspaper clippings and miscellaneous material, ; correspondence between Professor Isaacs and Casimir P. Palmer, concerning investigations of propaganda and espionage, anti-semitism and Nazi activities in the United States, ; Manuscript, Typescript, and Printed; Original and Typescript copies; Restricted (Received from Mrs. Nathan Isaacs, Brookline.) JOHNSON, LYNDON B.; Washington, D. C. Letters from President Johnson, outlining the policy of the United States government during the Middle Eastern crisis, 1967; Typescript KALLEN, HORACE M.; Brooklyn, N. Y. Correspondence to and from Kallen, manuscripts, material dealing with the Vietnamese War, and miscellaneous items, ; diary, 1926; Manuscript, Typescript, and Printed; Original, Typescript, and Mimeographed copies (Received from Horace M. Kallen.) KANDER, LIZZIE BLACK; Wisconsin. Correspondence, clippings, speeches, diaries, minutes of various meetings, and miscellaneous items, pertaining to her numerous activities, ; Manuscript and Typescript; Microfilm (Received from the Wisconsin Society for Jewish Learning, Milwaukee, through the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Madison.) KAPLAN, GERALD; Ottumwa, Iowa. Correspondence pertaining to his professional activities, and ; Manuscript and Typescript; Restricted (Received from Gerald Kaplan.) KAPLAN, KIVIE; Chestnut Hill, Mass. Correspondence, newspaper clippings, magazine articles, photographs, awards, and miscellaneous items pertaining to his various activities, ; correspondence relating to the Emily R. and Kivie Kaplan Religious Action Center, r ; and talk before the HUC - JIR, Cincinnati, student body, 1968; Manusm'pt, Typescript, and Printed; Original, Tape Recording, Photographs, Xerox, Typescript, and Mimeographed copies (Received from Kivie Kaplan.) LA~N AMERICA. Correspondence regarding the situation of the Jewish communities, ; Typescript (Received from Leon Klenicki, Buenos Aires.) LEIBERT, JULIUS A.; San Francisco, Cal. Manuscripts and articles written by Rabbi Leibert, n.d.; Manuscript, Typescript, and Printed (Received from Mrs. Julius A. Leibert, San Francisco.) LEVY, MOSES; Philadelphia, Pa. Letter written in an attempt to collect several large bills from various merchants, 1795; Manuscript (Purchased from K. W. Hottle.) LOPEZ, AARON; Newport, R. I., and Leicester, Mass. Letterbooks, shipping papers, account books, receipts, shipping and journal books, I z; Manuscript; Microjilm and Xerox copies

100 SELECTED ACQUISITIONS 99 (Received from the Newport Historical Society.) LOTH FAMILY; Cincinnati, Ohio. Business papers and correspondence, I ; Manuscript; English and Geman (Received from Mrs. Albert Sapadin, Cincinnati.) Lou~s, JULIUS; Norfolk, Va., and Baltimore, Md. Correspondence during the Civil War, ; genealogy of the Hirsch Pollock family, ; birth, marriage, and death records of the Pollock, Bernstein, and Louis families, I 965 ; Typescript. Manuscript, and Printed; Xerox copies (Received from Mrs. Morton Goldmom, Cherry Hill, N. J.) MACK FAMILY; Cincinnati, Ohio. Correspondence, ; Manuscript and Typescript; Original and Typescript copies (Received from Richard J. Mack, Cincinnati.) MANNER, JANE; New York, N. Y. Scrap books, correspondence, and miscellaneous material, ; diary, 1930; Manuscript, Typescript, and Printed; English and German (Received from Miss Edna B. Manner, New York.) MENKEN, ADAH ISAACS. Correspondence and miscellaneous material relating to her biography, Enchanting Rebel, by Allen Lesser, ; Manuscript and Typescript; Original and Typescript copies (Received from Allen Lesser, Washington, D. C.) MINDA, ALBERT G.; Minneapolis, Minn. Letters from Jacob R. Marcus, ; letter from Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey, in honor of Rabbi Minda's 70th birthday, 1965; telegram from Humphrey accepting an invitation to a dinner in honor of Minda, 1965; Typescript and Manuscript (Received from Albert G. Minda.) MORGENSTERN, JULIAN; Cincinnati, Ohio. Correspondence with Bishop Francis C. Kelley regarding Charles E. Coughlin. I ; Typescript and Printed; Original and Typescript copies MULTER, ABRAHAM J.; Washington, D. C. Congressional records, appendix, and indices, 1947, , and testimony on Select Committee on Small Business, I 957 ; Typescript; Printed copics (Received from Abraham J. Multer, Brooklyn.) ROSENAU, MILTON J.; Chapel Hill, N. C. Letter on the occasion of his tooth birthday, 1969; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from E. M. Bluestone, East Hampton, N. Y.) SACKLER, HARRY; New York, N. Y. Manuscripts, reviews, and correspondence, ; diary, (not complete) ; Typescript and Manuscript; English, Hebrew, and Yiddish; Original and Microfilm (Received from Harry Sackler.) Sasso, MOSES DE CASTRO; St. Thomas, Virgin Islands. Correspondence, congratulatory messages, sermons, and miscellaneous items pertaining to his activities, ; Manuscript, Typescript, and Printed; Microjlm (Received from Murray Blackman, St. Thomas.) WALDMAN, MORRIS D.; Long Island, N. Y. Correspondence, 19 I ; manuscripts; correspondence concerning the Joint Defense Appeal, , the American Jewish Conference, , and the Joint Distribution Committee, I I 948 ; magazine and newspaper articles; Manuscript and Typescript (Received from Lester D. Waldman, New York.) WALLENSTEIN, HENRY; Cincinnati, Ohio, and Wichita, Kan. Correspondence and newspaper clippings, ; Typescript; Xcrox copics (Received from Stephen A. Arnold, Wichita.)

101 WEIZMANN, CHAIM. Correspondence, Correspondence, newspaper clippings, and manuscripts, and miscellaneous items, miscellaneous items pertaining to the ; Manusc~ipt, Typescript, and Wise family; family pictures, f Printed; Microflm; Restricted 1967; Manuscript and Typescript; Orrginal, (Received from Yad Chaim Weizmann, Printed, and Typescript copies Rehovoth, Israel.) (Received from Mrs. Gilbert Bettman, Cincinnati.) WISE, ISAAC MAYER; Cincinnati, Ohio. ADLER, DANKMAR; Chicago, Ill. Autobiography, n.d.; letters from Adler to his family, I ; letter from Liebmann Adler to his granddaughter, 1891 ; Munuscript, Typescript, and Printed; English and Gem; Xerox copies; Restricted (Received from Mrs. Irving D. Salczstein, Milwaukee.) GERSTLEY, MRS. HENRY M.; Chicago, 111. Reminiscences, I ; notes by Sarah Nunes Falter, describing her trans- Atlantic trip in the 1850's; Manuscript, Typescript, and Printed; Xemx copies (Received from Joseph Levinson, Chicago.) GOLDWATER, MORRIS; Temple, Ariz. Biographical information, 1968 ; Typescrip; Xemx copy (Received from Norton B. Stern, Santa Monica.) HA~TENBACH FAMILY; Sioux City, Iowa. "Excerpts from History: The Godfrey Hattenbach Family," n.d.; letter giving additional biographical information, 1969; Typesc7ipt; Xemx copies (Received from Monroe Hattenbach, Sioux City.) NORTH DAKOTA. Article by Martha Thal, "Early Days -The Story of Sarah Thal," from Pioneer Stories written by People of Nelson County, North Dakota, n.d.; Typescript; Xemx copy (Received from Howard 0. Berg, Devils Lake, N. D.) SAN DIEGO, CAL. Biographical sketches of Marcus Schiller, Joseph S. Mannasse, Abraham Klauber, Simon Levi, and Dr. D. Cave, from The City and Cmmty of Srm Diego, 1888; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Norton B. Stem.) SELTZER, JULIUS; Lexington, Mass. Biographical sketch, newspaper clippings, and photograph, 1969; Typescript; Original and Xerox copies (Received from Harold Handley, Lexington.) SLATER, LOUIS; Fresno, Cal. Biography by Mrs. David L. Greenberg, 1969; Typescript; Mimeographed copy (Received from David L. Greenberg, Fresno.) TAYLOR, I. BRIAN; Carlsbad, N. M. Autobiographical sketch, 1967; Typescript copy (Received from Abraham I. Shinedling, Albuquerque.) BIBO FAMILY; Albuquerque, N. M. Family LOPEZ FAMILY; Charleston, S. C. Geneatree, ; Typescript; Xerox copy logical information, ; Type- (Received from Norron B. Stern.) script; Xemx copy (Received from Mrs. Edward L. North- ISAACS FAMILY. Genealogy, I 8 I ; way, Denver.) Manuscript; Xerox copy (Received from Joakim Isaacs, Dayton.)

102 SELECTED ACQUISITIONS AARONSOHN. DORA; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1963 ; Tape Recording BECK, FRED; Cincinnati, Ohio. Reminiscences, 1966; Typcscript copy BERNSTEIN, PHILIP S.; Rochester, N. Y. Transcript of interview, n.d.; Typescript COPY BETTMAN, IPHIGENE MOLONY (MRS. GIL- BERT); Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1964; Tape Recording BOHNEN, ELI A.; Providence, R. I. Transcript of oral interview, 1962; Typescript COPY BRICHTO, HERBERT C.; Jerusalem, Israel. Transcript of oral interview, 1964; Typescript copy CRONBACH, ABRAHAM; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1963; Tape Recording GOLDMAN, ROBERT P.; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, I 964; Tape Recording GOLDMANN, NAHUM; Jerusalem, Israel. Transcript of oral interview, 1961 and 1965 ; Typescript copy HERTZ, RICHARD C.; Detroit, Mich. Transcript of oral interview, 1963; Typescript copy KALLEN, HORACE M.; New York, N. Y. Personal reflections, 1964; and interview, 1969 ; Tape Recordings KLAUSNER. ABRAHAM J.; Yonkers, N. Y. Transcript of oral interview, n.d.; Typescript copy KLEIN, ISAAC; Buffalo, N. Y. Transcript of oral interview, 1963; Typescript copy KREMER FAMILY; LOS Angeles, Cal. Interview, 1966; Typescript copy DALSHEIMER, HELEN (MRS. HUGO); LEE, EDWARD; Scarsdale, N. Y. Tran- Pikesville, Md. Transcript of oral inter- script of oral interview, n.d.; Typesc7ipt view, n.d.; Typescript copy C W ETTELSON, HARRY W.; Philadelphia, Pa. Interview, 1967; Typescript copy FEUER, LEON I.; Toledo, Ohio. Transcript of oral interview, 1963; Typcscript COPY FINESHRIBER, WILLIAM H.; Philadelphia, Pa. Interview, 1967; Typcscript copy FRANKLIN, HARVEY B.; Long Beach, Cal. Report of an interview, 1968; Typcscript COPY FREEHOF, SOLOMON B.; Pittsburgh, Pa. Transcript of oral interview, 1963; Typescript copy GELBER, S. MICHAEL; New York, N. Y. Transcript of oral interview, 1964; Typescript copy LEVINTHAL, LOUIS E.; Philadelphia, Pa. Transcript of oral interview, 1962 and I 964; Typescript copies LEVY FAMILY; LOS Angeles, Cal. Interview, 1966; Typescript copy LEVY, MRS. J. L~NARD; Pittsburgh, Pa. Interview, discussing her family and the career of her husband, Rabbi J. Leonard Levy, r 968; Tape Recording LUBIN, MRS. SIMON J.; Sacramento, Cal. Interview, 1954; Xerox copy LYONS, MAXWELL; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1963; Tap Recording; Restricted MARCUS, JACOB R.; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1963; Tape Recording; Restricted

103 I02 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, APRIL, I970 MORGENSTERN, JULIAN; Macon, Ga. Transcript of oral interview, 1963; Typescript COPY PETUCHOWSRI, JAKOB J.; Cincinnati, Ohio. Transcript of oral interview, 1964; Typescript copy SANDMEL, SAMUEL; Cincinnati, Ohio. Typescript of oral interview, n.d.; Typescript copy SCHMIDT, SAMUEL MYER; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1 964; Tape Recording SEASONGOOD, MURRAY; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1964; Tape Recording; Rtstricttd SEGAL, HENRY C.; Cincinnati, Ohio. Interview, 1964; Tape Rccording; Restricid SHNEYEROFF, MICHAEL M.; Berkeley, Cal. Interview, 1960; Xerox copy STONE, EARL S.; Denver, Colo. Transcript of oral interview, 1963; Typcscript copy SZOLD, ROBERT; New York, N. Y. Transcript of oral interview, 1961; Typcscript COPY TORF, ELIAS; Cincinnati, Ohio. Transcript of oral interview, 1965; Typescript copy Voss, CARL HERMANN; Saratoga Springs, N. Y. Interview, 1965; Tape Recording; Restricted WEINSTEIN, JOSEPH; Rock Island, Ill. Interview, 1969; Tape Recording BARTH, NANCY L. "~istory' of the Publication of the Jewish Encyclopedia," Master of Arts, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill., 1969; Typcscript copy COHEN, IRIS GILDA. "A Social Service Survey of the Auburn, N. Y., Jewish Community," Master of Social Work, Syracuse University, Syracuse, N. Y., I 969; Xerox copy GLAD, DONALD. LLAttitudes and Experiences of American-Jewish and American- Irish Male Youths as Related to Differences in Inebriety Rates," Ph.D., Stanford University, Stanford, Cal., 1945; Microfilm GOLDSTEIN, JERROLD. 'LReform Rabbis and the Progressive Movement," Master of Arts, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn., 1967; Typcscript copy JACKOFSKY, LAWRENCE I. "Negro-Jewish Relations on the Contemporary American Scene," Ordination thesis, Hebrew Union College -Jewish Institute of Religion, Cincinnati, 1969; Xerox copy LAZAR, ROBERT J. "From Ethnic Minority to Socio-Economic Elite," Ph.D., University of Minnesota, 1968; Xerox copy LITTLEFIELD, OSCAR. "The History of the Hebrew Sheltering Guardian Society," Master of Social Service, School for Jewish Social Work, New York, N. Y., 1940; Typescript copy PRICE, ISABEL B. "Gerald L. K. Smith and AntiSemitism," Master of Arts, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N. M., 1965; Xerox copy

104 SELECTED ACQUISITIONS 1 3 GOLDMAN, RICHARD J. "The History of Anti-Semitism in the Rosenberg Case," the Reform Jewish Youth Movement in HUC - JIR, 1969; Xerox copy America and Europe since 1880," Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Reli- ROSEMAN, KENNETH D. "Changes in gion, 1968; Xemx copy American Jewish Demography: ," HUC - JIR, 1968; Dittograph KAPLANSKY, HOWARD. "The Question of copy ANTISEMITISM; Cincinnati, Ohio. Survey EVANS, JANE; New York, N. Y. Remarks of the Employment Problems Committee by Mrs. David M. Levitt at the HUC - of the Jewish Vocational Service, showing JIR Board of Governors dinner in honor the presence of discrimination against of Miss Evans, and citation presented to Jewish accountants in Cincinnati, 1948; her, 1968; Typcscript; Typescript and Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from George Newburger, Xerox copies (Received from Mrs. David M. Levitt, Cincinnati.) Great Neck, N. Y.) BEN-GURION, DAVID. Address at HUC - JIR, New York, 1967; film of his visit to New York School, 1960; Video Tape Rccording and Motiun Pictun Film BLUESTONE, E. M.; East Hampton, N. Y. Manuscripts, ; Typescript; Xerox COPY (Received from E. M. Bluestone.) BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY; Waltham, Mass. Black Bulletin numbers r and 2; letter from President Morris B. Abram on demands by Black students, 1969; Typescript; Mimeographed and Xerox copies (Received from Judea B. Miller, Malden, Mass.) CINCINNATI, OHIO. Reports and proceedings of mass meeting of Jewish citizens, to organize a local branch of the Jewish Defense Association of the United States, 1906; Printed copy (Received from Mrs. Gilbert Bettman.) COHEN, MANUEL F.; Washington, D. C. Informal remarks which he made at the HUC - JIR, Cincinnati, ordination luncheon, I 969; Typcscript; Xerox copy (Received from Manuel F. Cohen.) Exodus Information regarding British Navy's encounter with the Presidmt Warjitld, 1947; letter from the High Command, Jewish Resistance Movement in Palestine, to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, protesting against the British attack on the ship, 1947; his- tory of the steamer Presidmt Warjie~d, renamed Emdus 1947 and used as part of the immigrant fleet to transport refugees through the British blockade to Palestine, r 948 ; Typescript; Xeror copies (Received from Judea B. Miller.) FELSENTHAL, BERNHARD; Chicago, Ill. "The Wandering Jew," a sermon by Rabbi Felsenthal for the Young Men's Christian Union, Chicago, 1872; Typscript; Printed copy (Received from Jacob J. Weinstein, Chicago.) FRIEDLAENDER, ISRAEL; New York, N. Y. "The Case of Professor Israel Friedlaender," by Sefton D. Temkin, describing the circumstances surrounding his being found unacceptable for inclusion in a Red Cross Commission to Palestine in I 9 I 7, I 967 ; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Sefton D, Temkin, New York.)

105 GOLDWATER, MICHAEL; San Francisco, Cal. "Michael Goldwater Wimesses the Ketubbah of a Rabbi" [Rabbi Jacob Nieto, 18941, by Rabbi William M. Kramer and Justin G. Turner; Typescript; Typescript copy (Received from Justin G. Turner, Los Angeles.) HUC - JIR; New York, N. Y. Founder's Day Services, with address by Charles P. Snow, 1969; Tapc Recording; Restricted HOLIDAY OBSERVANCE. Portions of a sermon against Jews' observance of Christmas in their homes, by Rabbi Samuel Schulman, I 895 ; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Frank J. Adler, Kansas City, Mo.) INTERMARRIAGE. Portions of a sermon by Rabbi Henry Berkowitz, "Should Jews and Non-Jews Intermarry?" I 895; Typescript; Xeroz copy (Received from Frank J. Adler.) JANOWSKI, MAX; Chicago, Ill. Thirtieth Anniversary Concert honoring Janowski, sponsored by Congregation K.A.M., Chicago, I 969; Tape Recording (Received from Congregation K.A.M.) JANOWSKY, OSCAR I.; New York, N. Y. Studies on education, compiled by Dr. Janowsky, ; Typescript; Micr0- film (Received from the American Jewish Historical Society, Waltham, Mass.) JONAS, JOSEPH; Cincinnati, Ohio. Speech in defense of slavery, 1861; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from the Cincinnati Historical Society.) Los ANGELES, CAL. Probable and known Jewish residents of Los Angeles, listed in the United States census of 1860; Typescript; Typescript copy (Received from Norton B. Stern.) MATTHEW, WENTWORTH A.; New York, N. Y. Notes of Sue Buckholtz, regarding Rabbi Matthew and Negro Jews, 1968; Manuscript (Received from Mrs. Lee Steele, Toledo, Ohio.) MISSISSIPPI. References to Jewish activities in the state, published in Amcrim Israeli&, , compiled by Rabbi Meyer Lovitt, 1957; Typescript; Xerox COPY NEGRO-JEWISH RELATIONS. Discussion at Wayne State University, Detroit, Mich., 1969; Tape Recording NEW YORK, N. Y. "Declaration of Dependence," a ringing affirmation of fealty to the British Crown, signed by 700 New York citizens in rebuttal to the American Declaration of Independence, 1776; Printed and Manuscript; Photographs (Received from the New York Historical Society, New York.) NIXON, RICHARD M.; Washington, D. C. News clipping and letter relating to his remarks at the site of the former Warsaw Ghetto, 1959; Typescript; Xerox copy (Received from Colgate S. Prentice, Washington, D. C.) WORLD WAR I. Poster issued by the Jewish Welfare Board for its United War Work Campaign, 19 I 8; Printed (Received from Max Shapiro, Minneapolis.) ZANGWILL, ISRAEL; England. "In Memoriam: Israel Zangwill on his Twentyfifth Jahrzeit ( ), a Personal Reminiscence," by Ruth Sapinsky (Mrs. Henry) Hurwitz, n.d.; Typescript; Typescript copy; Restricted ZIONISM; Cincinnati, Ohio. Invitation to talks by Louis D. Brandeis and Julian W. Mack, 1916; letter from Robert P. Goldman, relating to this event, 1968; Typescript and Printed; Original and Xerox copits (Received from Robert P. Goldman, Cincinnati.)

106

107