American Jewish Archives

In This Issue 

THE COVER: 

Portrait of Rebecca Gratz by Thomas Sully. The original is in the pos- 

session of the Henry Joseph family of Montreal. 

CRISIS AND REACTION: A STUDY IN JEWISH GROUP 

ATTITUDES (1929 - 1939). .......... .HENRY COHEN 'ji 

The reactions of major social groups within the American Jewish community, 

during periods of crisis, are influenced by the role the particular 

group played in the American social and economic structure. The 

author illustrates his thesis by a study of American Jewish social groups 

in the ~gso's, in relation to the Depression and to Hitlerian German 

anti-Semitism. 

REBECCA GRATZ ON RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY. ......... 114 

AMERICAN JEWRY IN 1753 AND IN 1853.. ......... 115 

LETTER TO THE EDITOR.. .......................... 120 

AN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY 

AMERICAN RESPONSUM ..... .SOLOMON B. FREEHOF 121 

Manuel Josephson, American Jewish communal leader and student of 

rabbinic lore, wrote a legal opinion in 1790 It touches on the use of the 

shofar ("ram's horn") and the question of permissibility to read the 

lesson of the week in the synagogue from a printed book. 

REVIEWS OF BOOKS: 

Albert M. Hyamson, THE SEPHARDIM OF 

ENGLAND, by JACOB R. MARCUS. ................. 126 

Simon Rawidowicz, editor, THE CHICAGO PINKAS, 

by LEONARD J. MERV~S.. .......................... I29 

Matthew Josephson, SIDNEY HILLMAN, 

by PHIL E. ZIEGLER ................................ 132 

Elliot E. Cohen, editor, COMMENTARY ON THE 

AMERICAN SCENE, by FRANCES FOX SANDMEL.. ...... 136 

THE LAND OF ISRAEL IN 1985. ...................... 139 

ILLUSTRATIONS: 

MANUEL JOSEPHSON ................................. 122 

THE AMERICAN ALCOVE-SALIG KAPLAN MEMORIAL- 

TEMPLE ISRAEL, MINNEAPOLIS ................... 13 I 

THE AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES BUILDING.. .......... l4O 

Patrons for 1953 

ARTHUR FRIEDMAN LEO FRIEDMAN BERNARD STARKOFF 

Manuscribts for consideration by the publishers should be addressed to: 

DIRECTOR, AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, CINCINNATI 20, OHIO

DIRECTOR: JACOB KADEK MARCUS, rn. D., Adolbh S. Ochs ProfessoroJ3ewbh History 

ARCHIVIST: SELMA STERN-TAEUBLER, PH. D. 

AMERICAN JEWISH 

Crisis and Reaction 

HENRY COHEN 

72 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

by native social conditions? Why did some Jews favor the boycott of 

Germany and mass meetings while others opposed both, while still 

others favored the boycott but opposed mass meetings? Why were 

some Jews lured to support Communist front organizations and Birobidzhan-a 

Siberian Jewish colony-while others opposed both, while 

still others opposed front organizations but supported Birobidzhan? 

Why did some Jews support the New Deal in its early days and later 

turned against it, while others opposed it in its early days and later 

supported it, while still others never supported it? Social analysis is 

the pattern that can best group the gopings, and that can demonstrate 

that these reactions are not random but are consistent with the 

needs of different social groups within the American lewish community. 

This analysis does not deny other influences-religious or personal. 

It simply maintains that the social groupings are important factors in 

determining major and minor currents of American Jewish opinion. 

It is hoped that through understanding these social influences, the individual 

may gain a more objective view of reality. 

What were the social groups that formed American Jewry during 

the thirties and what organizations and periodicals expressed their attitudes? 

The "old middle-clas~"~ of German background was composed 

of merchants, bankers, real estate men, as well as of the legal, 

medical, and rabbinic professions attached to this social class. 'The 

voice of this group was heard in the American Jewish Committee 

through its Year Book and in the leadership of the B'nai B'rith until 

1937 through the R'nai R'rith Magazine. The American Hebrew was 

one of several periodicals that consistently represented the group's 

viewpoint. In this and all other groups, differences between the attitudes 

of the leadership and of the rank-and-file can frequently be observed. 

The "new middle-classn3 of Eastern European background, from 

white collar workers to wealthy business men, supported the American 

Jewish Congress and the Zionist Organization of America. This 

group's leadership consisted of Reform and Conservative rabbis, other 

professional men, and the wealthier business men. The Congress' Bulletin, 

Courier, and Index, the ZOA's New Palestine, and Opinion were 

organs for this group. The B'nai B'ritlz Messenger of Los Angeles represented 

this element as it strove for leadership in the national B'nai 

B'rith. 

A small but influential group were those manufacturers and business 

men of comparatively recent Eastern European origin (along with 

their professional appendages) who led a loosely organized movement 

sometimes labeled "neo-Orthodoxy" and consisting ol some workers 

and members of the lower middle-class. This group was virtually limit-

CRISIS AND REACTION 7 3 

ed to large metropolitan centers. Spokesmen for Mizrachi, Hapoel 

Hamizrachi, and anti-Zionism were found in its ranks. But some con- 

sistency of attitude was discovered in its periodical, the Jewish Forum. 

And Mizrachi's Jeurish Outlook reflected the dominant Zionist atti- 

tude of this element. 

A fourth group might be called the "Jewish professionals." This 

consists of all workers and directors of Jewish social welfare organiza- 

tions, of center leaders-in short, of all those engaged in secular Jewish 

organizational activity. This heterogeneous group can be divided, for 

attitudinal purposes, into individuals economically integrated into the 

non-Jewish social service world, workers of old middle-class German 

background, workers of Eastern European background, and organiza- 

tional directors or federation heads. The latter two categories (more 

especially the last) favored the program of an "organic Jewish com- 

munity" and spearheaded (along with some Conservative and Reform 

rabbis) the Reconstructionist movement. The Jewish Social Service 

Quarterly contained a cross-section of the attitudes of these profession- 

als. The SAJ Reziew ('The Society for the Advancement of Judaism) 

and The Reconstrz~ctionzst reflected the views of those favoring a 

stronger secular Jewish community. 

Jewish labor was the most complex group. Union leadership made 

itself heard in the editorials of Advance (Amalgamated Clothing 

Workers) and Justice (International Ladies' Garment Workers). A 

different view held by the rank-and-file of the workers was frequently 

apparent between the lines of editorials and in the columns of such 

intellectual journalists as the Advance's Charles Ervin. It is true that 

during the thirties the proportion of Jews in these unions diminished 

considerably. But Jewish leadership remained. There were important 

divisions of Jewish labor along Zionistic lines: The Workmen's Circle 

was a socialist anti-Zionist group with a core of Bundists lrom North- 

ern Russia, Poland, and Lithuania-a group led by workers with a 

consistent working-class and anti-nationalist ideology. Its organs of 

opinion were The Call and The Call of Youth. 

The National Workers' Alliance represented socialistic Zionism. 

This group had a more middle-class orientation: it had many middle- 

class leaders; many of its members were from South Russia, where vio- 

lent pogroms had given rise to the Poale Zion movement, which grew 

in power until its co-operation with other Zionist groups left marks of 

middle-class attitudes on the early radicalism of its leader, Ber Boro- 

chov. Vanguard, Labor Palestine, and the Jewish Frontier spoke for 

this group. 

The Jewish Labor Committee was a defence organization officially 

led by members of all Jewish labor groups but actuated by the anti- 

Zionist members.

74 

AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 19.55 

The Stalinist group was composed of a few groping workers and 

intellectuals and ruined disillusioned individuals fallen from the mid- 

dle-class. Jewish Life and the Jewish People's Voice spoke for this 

group.4 

The task of this study is to examine the reactions of these different 

groups to the trials of the American economy from 1929 through 1939 

and to the tragic plight of German Jewry. After the attitudes and pro- 

gram of each group are stated, the influence of its social needs and in- 

terests on its reaction will be discussed. 

I. REACTIONS TO THE AMERICAN ECONOMY, 1929 - 1939 

DEPRESSION (1929 - 1932). The American Jew was confronted with the 

Crash that sent an America so accustomed to prosperity groping for 

answers: Why had the wheels of industry and progress stopped turning? 

Why were there millions unemployed? And what should Hoover 

do about it? American Jewry was divided in much the same way as 

was the general American community. 

The old middle-class (American Hebrew) maintained, for the public 

at any rate, the front of optimism through 1930 and 1931: 

We believe that the so-called depression will be short-lived and 

that the country with its excellent recuperative powers will be in 

excellent shape within a few months.5 

Present problems (are) not from weakness, but from the profound 

strength of our country. Time has always been a great healer, and 

it is no different in the stock market.6 

By the summer the crash of last October and its effects will be 

pretty much out of the picture.7 

And in 1931: "We face 1931 with a spirit of optimism grounded in our 

past and in the faith we have in the economic and cultural soundness 

of our country."8 In November: "Mlhatever the cause of the setback 

that has hit so many so hard, virile America will not long indulge in 

lamentation. Though, alas, too many are jobless, the world is still on 

the job and the universe spinning in its groove."g And even in March, 

1933: publisher David Brown admits that he is optimistic and that 

America will come out of this Depression, because it came out of the 

others1'-' 

These examples show not only optimism but also the belief that 

the cure is in the very virility of America, in the past, and in a uni- 

verse which will continue spinning in its groove. The charge that 

America is indulging in lamentation indicates that the cause is emo- 

tional, is one of undue fear. And in 1932, Brown believed that the 

cause lay to a great extent in the fear of the consumer (especially the 

worker) of buying! The length of the Depression has a "close relation- 

ship to the psychology of the worker." It seems that there is some un-

CRISIS AND REAClION 7 5 

employment and this instills fear in the worker. He is so afraid that he 

cuts down his living expenses and buys less. This only makes further 

unemployment. And this is unfortunaie because capital-and this 

means, the people-suffers. For "Industry today, great public utilities, 

railroads, are all being financed by the people of modest means."ll 

But what should be done about the Depression? Industries should 

expand.12 The government should not interfere with business; in fact, 

the decline in grain and cotton in 1930 was due to the interference of 

the Farm Labor Board, which refused to let the law of supply and de- 

mand operate.13 In 1931, with more unemployment, 200 million dol- 

lars for relief purposes was favored. This might even start the wheels 

of business turning. 

It is very clear that here is the upper middle-class point of view. 

And the German-background Jews ulho had accumulated money for 

two generations or more would naturally have this view of the Depres- 

sion. It flows quite logically from their position in society. Naturally, 

they espoused the theory of fear, the brave public optimism, the faith 

in the nature of America and in the past repeating itself, and the 

remedy of renewed confidence of investor and worker. All these atti- 

tudes we can find in their non-Jewish counterparts. The members of 

the Chamber of Commerce were the most successful businessmen in 

America with accumulations sufficient for considerable investments. 

Their president, Silas H. Strawn, in one statement capsulizes all the 

views just given in the American Hebrezu: 

Nations and individuals all over the world are in a state of nerv- 

ous hysteria . . . . What is needed most is the restoration of con- 

fidence. Why should we not have this confidence? We have had 

at least seventeen of these cycles of depressions in the last 120 

years. The depression of 1837 was, in many respects, much worse 

than this and lasted five years . . . . While I would not minimize 

present conditions, I feel very strongly that we are emphasizing 

too much the evil factors and that we are overlooking the great 

natural resources of our country and the splendid courage and 

enterprise of our people . . . . let us awaken in ourselves the lat- 

ent spirit of our forefuthers . . . . let those who are complain- 

ing of their lot here go to some other country and see how much 

better off we are than the people of any other nation on earth. 

Let us cease to whine about depression and devote ourselves to 

the diligent performance of our daily duties, confident that the 

day is not far off when the sun will again begin to cast its warm 

rays upon a happy and prosperous people.14 (Italics mine.) 

So spoke the American old middle-class. 

But what were the attitudes of the Jewish new middle-class of East- 

ern European origin? They had not been in America long enough to

76 

AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JIINE., 1958 

be as thoroughly integrated as their brethren of German background; 

nor, for the most part, had they invested their wealth in the same man- 

ner. Consequently a comparatively larger number suffered economical- 

ly from the Depression. 

It is now necessary to distinguish further between the economic 

roles of the Eastern Europeans and the Jews of German background: 

In his sociological analysis of the White Collar, Charles Mills dis- 

tinguishes between the old middle-class (established merchants, some 

of whom have been pushed out by the trend towards centralization) 

and the new middle-class (white collar people on salaries-managers, 

salaried professionals, salespeople, office workers). Because of the new- 

ness of Eastern European Jews to the American economy, most of 

them would fall into the new middle-class. The Jews of German origin 

are, of course, members of the old middle-class. Stressing that the 

middle-classes are too heterogeneous to have any unity of social phil- 

osophy, Mills does make distinctions according to the economic roles 

of members of those classes: 

In matters of wages and social policies, new middle-class people 

increasingly have the attitude of those who are given work; old 

middle-class people still have the attitude of those who give it 

. . . . Small businessmen, especially retailers, fight chain stores, 

government, and unions-under the wing of big business. White 

collar workers, in so far as they are organized in unions, in all es- 

sentials are under the wage workers. Thus old and new middle- 

classes become shock troops for other more powerful and articu- 

late pressure blocs in the political scene.15 

It may be concluded fro'm a general analysis of American society that 

the Easter11 European Jews-being in the new middle-class having lit- 

tle controlling interests in corporations-would (as Mills puts it) have 

the "attitude of those who are given work." 

The very meager evidence available for the period, 1929 - 1932, 

points in this direction. Opinion is non-socialist but very ffiendly to 

Norman Thomas.l"t attacks the Republican platform of ig32.l7 

The counterpart of Opinion in the non-Jewish world was the Na- 

tion. In fact, Horace Kallen and Ludwig Lewisohn wrote for both. 

The liberal middle-class view at this time was drifting to the Left. 

However, a question-and-answer game between Norman Thomas and 

Oswald Garrison Villard showed that the middle-class was friendly to 

socialism but still clung to Hobson's theories of cconomics: just put 

more spending power into the hands of those who will buy-here is 

the voice of the underconsumptionists who would soon spearhead the 

New Deal.l8 

Labor during the early years of the Depression presented (some- 

times simultaneously!) conservative and radical views as to the cause


of the Crash. At first the leaders told their rank and file members that 

the cause was the capitalistic system with its overproduction and technological 

unemployment. Uneinployment is due "to the rapid advance 

of technology (and) . . . . constantly increasing output."1g That is what 

Justice was saying. Along the same line, the Advance claimed that depression 

would no longer produce prosperity because technological 

unemployment means that prosperity will return fewer and fewer people 

to work.20 

Six months later the Ad71ance stated that the Depression was not 

due to overproduction but to underc~nsumption!~~ This implies the 

New Deal school of inflationary economics that would prevent socialism.2"nd 

it was on the basis of underconsumptionist theories that 

social reform later replaced radical transformation of society as the 

labor program. 

Regarding the remedies for the crisis there were two similar divisions 

of opinion. Following from the view that the cause of the crisis 

lay in the social system, public works were discounted as no "solution 

of the problems which is inherent in our social ~ystem."~3 (But in the 

same breath a six-hour day and a five-day week and unemployment 

insurance would be some aid.) In editorials the dominant opinion 

favored a re-working of the whole economy: [We need] socialization 

of the products of human ingenuity.24 

No humanitarian point of view can possibly justify a system that 

breeds poverty because that system also creates millionaires who 

cast some of their surplus bread upon the waters . . . . The exist- 

ing order with its chaotic distribution of wealth by the interplay 

of chance, chicanery, oppression and submissiveness, is an ab- 

surdity and is indefensible from the viewpoint of economic sense 

and ordered progress.*" 

Charles Ervin, a consistently radical columnist well into the New 

Deal, blasted Republican and Democratic platforms and said that la- 

bor will be the loser no matter who is nominated.26 And the Advance's 

editorial policy in 1932 was pro-socialist in the election! Clarence Dar- 

row's remark that he favored Roosevelt because of four years of 

Hoover was (according to the editorial) like the man who said he pre- 

ferred stale bread because he had just drunk four cases of hooch. The 

alternative to bad hooch is good whiskey-not stale bread!2i 

Despite the official socialistic ideology of the unions during the 

depression period, Sidney Hillman and Jacob Potofsky came up with 

concrete programs that were anything but socialistic. The Hillman 

Plan, that eventually sent Hillman to the conference rooms with the 

Chamber of Commerce to plan the NRA, advocated "staggered ein- 

ployment," shorter work days and hours, unemployment insurance 

from the funds of industry, and a Board of Industry for long-range

78 

AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

planning.28 Potofsky's program added to this high wages, public works, 

and housing projects.29 Whereas the Advance had previously told the 

workers that such reforms were not sufficient and that only a complete 

reshaping of the economy would be the sound answer, it now claimed 

that reform was desirable. 

What conclusions can be drawn from these conflicting views? It is 

known that the Jewish workers were largely from the socialist (Bund 

or Poale Zion) groups of Eastern Europe. But their leaders were prom- 

inent in the anti-socialist New Deal. Would it not be a logical policy 

of union leaders (who for whatever reasons had more middle-class 

views) to write about the evils inherent in society, to say that only a 

radical transformation could improve conditions? This they must say 

to keep the support of the workers. But the program they adopted was 

one of social reform sanctioned by big business interests. For these 

union leaders were wearing white collars and were clothed also in the 

ideological garb of the capitalistic world. They held positions that 

brought them into conference rooms with the leading powers and 

politicians of the land. But no "old-world socialists" would be allowed 

in this capitalistic planning. So while frequently resorting to radical 

terminology, they spoke simultaneously in terms of undaconsump- 

tion and a respectable reform program. 

Exactly the same trend can be seen in the non-Jewish unions. True, 

socialist sentiment was stronger among Jewish workers than among 

non-Jewish workers-because only a small percentage of the general 

American proletariat was fresh from European socialist movements, 

whereas, practically all the Jewish workers had just emigrated from 

such movements in Eastern Europe. In the American Federationist, 

edited by William Green, an official organ of the AFL, are found state- 

ments supporting underconsumptionist theories: 

The purchasing power of consumers will determine the level of 

production. (Since this power has dropped,) business must turn 

its attention to the deliberate development of consumer buying 

power in order to restore and maintain prosperity. Every employ- 

er, public or private, who cuts wages is working against revival 

of business and a restoration of production activity.30 

It would seem that Green could afford to be less radical in his publi- 

cations than could the ACWA or ILGWU since he had a much smaller 

percentage of radicals in his unions. However, before the 1932 AFL 

Convention, Green spoke radical words that shocked the Nezu York 

Times and pleased the left-wing publishers of Labor Age when he 

made the following statement concerning the six-hour day and the 

five-day week: "The world must know we must be given it in response 

to reason or we will secure it through forces of some kind!"31 But by


and large Labor Age was dissatisfied with Green's analysis and claimed 

that capitalism was collapsing. The only answer of capitalism is wage 

cuts, and these will only deepen the crisis. "Across the whole indus- 

trial world falls the shadow of Karl Marx."32 

NEW DEAL (1933 - 1939). All groups of American Jews had decided 

reactions to the Roosevelt remedy in its various phases. Three indices 

of opinion will be noted: The New Deal in its early days of Blue 

Eagles and pump-priming; attacks on the New Deal centering around 

the Supreme Court controversies of 1935-36; the "recession" of 1937 

when ten million were unemployed and production had fallen to 20% 

below the 1929 level-followed by the preparedness program which 

ushered in a new era of expansion. 

It will be recalled that the "old middle-class" Jews of German 

background echoed the voice of the Chamber of Commerce (or vice- 

versa). And in 1933, as the American Chamber of Commerce helped 

write the NRA, the American Hebrew was shifting to the New Deal 

position. David Brown attacked the opponents of the NRA with their 

stand-pat capitalism of another day!33 And Brown is all praises for 

Hugh "Sock-in-the-nose" Johnson.34 Brown admits having been a 

Hooverite-Republican but explains that he has been pleasantly sur- 

prised by Roosevelt.35 

- 

In thk stormy years of 1935-36, when H. L. Mencken in the Ameri- 

can Mercury was leading his last barbed attacks against Roosevelt 

("Quacks are always friendly and ingratiating fellows . . . ."),36 he 

spoke for many Jews and non-Jews of the old middle-class. 

Not for all, by any means, because, as Mills maintains, "the politi- 

cal psychology of any social stratum is influenced by every relation its 

members have, or fail to have with other strata . . . ." And there was 

great diversity, even in the old middle-classes. Still, many members of 

the old middle-class would naturally oppose the New Deal at this 

time. They possessed the reserve of middle-class wealth. They were, by 

and large, the people more closely affiliated with the larger corpora- 

tions. Some were living on fixecl incomes and so they wanted to stop 

the inflation. And, as Mills pointed out, the members of this group 

would tend to have the attitude of those who give jobs.37 

Although the American Hebrezu editorially took no sides in the 

election, some wealthy Jews of this class campaigned on Landon's 

behalf.38 James \Warburg in his Hell Bent for Election calls the New 

Deal socialism!" An A.merican Hebrew columnist opposes Roosevelt's 

Supreme Court Plan as he praises Governor Lehman for not swallow- 

ing "the court reform plan, hook, line, and sinker, for the sake of good 

old democracy."'O 

There is no record of this group's endorsing the preparedness pro- 

gram-despite the Hitler menace to the Jews-any sooner than did


Gentiles of the same social class. In 1937 the American Hebrew hailed 

the appeasement policy of Leon Blum: Instead of aggression, "Blum 

proposes to reverse the process and to pull the Hitler fangs in the in- 

ternational scene with kindness and conciliation. That is the Jewish 

way."41 But as the International Chamber of Commerce was told that: 

"The potential strength of the peace-loving nation is the essential 

stabilizing influence in the world today . . ." and that "the super- 

nationalism which seeks a self-contained economy as the greatest good 

(is) unsound . . . ,"42 the American Hebrew gradually came over to the 

policy of firmness towards Hitler. A United States preparedness pro- 

gram would make the Fascists think twice before beginning a war.43 

That the reaction of the Jewish old middle-class to the Depression 

and New Deal flows from its social position seems obvious from the 

evidence given. That its members follow the reaction of their Gentile 

social counterpart (from the early view of the Depression which re- 

flected Silas Strawn's statement to riding the waves of the preparedness 

program)-this is indirect proof. This element was not likely to criti- 

cize sharply a society that had bestowed upon it so many real blessings. 

Jews of the old middle-class might well be even less likely than Gen- 

tiles to look for flaws in the existing order. For their pattern of Jewish 

life was directed to the proposition: American society is our salvation, 

and because we have become integrated into that society, we are in a 

position to enjoy the great opportunities which it offers. If they were 

to believe for a moment that there was something fundamentally 

wrong with society, they would be undermining their whole position 

as American Jews and would be without a Jerusalem. 

What were the attitudes of the Eastern European new middle- 

class during the New Deal? Along with the majority of Americans they 

supported Roosevelt's early program.44 They were especially attracted 

by technocracy-an economic messianism that opposed the existing so- 

cial order and proffered a government by scientists and engineers who 

would give new relative values to all commodities and eliminate the 

present price system. Roosevelt and the NRA, Opinion claimed, were 

moving towards technocratic goals45 The Nation was briefly attracted 

to technocracy but soon decided that this pseudo-economics was 

"scrambled egg~."4~ 

When some segments of the pcpulation turned against the New 

Deal, the new middle-classes remained loyal. In 1936, Bernard Rich- 

ards wrote in the Jezuish Spectator about "Roosevelt-Friend of the 

Oppressed," and Lewisohn in the same issue called his voice "the voice 

of reason, humanity, and authentic hope,"47 even as did The Nation. 

Regarding the preparedness program, The Congress Bulletin main- 

tained that "The United States does not turn militarist because the 

President demands a greater air force and equipment for a minimum

CR~S~S AND REACTION 8 1 

army." This was on Armistice Day, 1938. The Nation had already ad- 

vocated the cash-and-carry program48 . . . . despite the cries of Oswald 

Garrison Villard, who saw very clearly the relation between the re- 

cession and t.he re-armament. He even quoted the Roosevelt of 1936: 

(Employment through armament) is false employment, it builds 

no permanent structure and creates no consumers' goods for the 

maintenance of a lasting prosperity. We know that nations guilty 

of these follies inevitably face the day when either their weapons 

of destruction must be used against their neighbors or when an 

unsound economy like a house of cards will fall apart.49 

The evidence shows that the Jewish new middle-class followed 

generally the same lines as the non-Jewish. If anything, they seemed 

a little more naive with their gullible acceptance of technocracy. More 

important is the eagerness for preparedness. Because of the keenness 

with which they felt the Hitler tragedy, the Villardian element was 

absent in their counsels. 

While the new middle-class, after crisis, entertained an ideology 

which called for replacing the existing social order, it never developed 

a program which would challenge that order. Its extreme plight in 

time of crisis would lead this group to search for scientific solutions 

and to use radical phrases. However, its desire for the well-being and 

privileges of new middle-class status would preclude a program that 

would abolish the social structure which grants such a status. 

What did the neo-Orthodox group led by manufacturers and busi- 

ness men think was the cause of the Depression? An interesting article 

in the January, 1936, Jewish Forum by a midrashic-economist deals 

with the Depression and reads like a page from the Soncino Talmud. 

The author seems to be attempting to lay the blame on a group of 

large property-owners and big bankers-not on the manufacturers and 

labor. (This sounds as though it were written for worker consumption). 

He first talks about the "so-called 'upper-strata' of society, the prop- 

erty-or land-owners." Then he throws in from Midrash Rabba a 

homily about the land-owner Cain versus the good producer, Abel. 

These Cain-ites . . . . "These lords of the land withhold the opportun- 

ity of using (money) intensively until capital and labor are compelled 

to give up the lion's share of the future products for the mere permis- 

sion jointly to produce wealth." Through high taxes the government 

then takes too much of the wealth that is produced. Therefore, Jews 

(capital and labor) should unite against the property class and the gov- 

ernment. Who are these property classes? Do they own property which 

the producers must rent? Or are they the bankers and holding com- 

panies who have power over "the opportunity of using money"? Prob- 

ably they are the latter, as the author condemns them: "The so-called

8 2 AMER~CAN JEW~SH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

owners of these opportunities create fictitious booms guilefully to en- 

tice the simpletons to invest their last savings in their holdings."50 So, 

the bankers and government become scapegoats for the Depression. 

The Forum was, however, enthusiastic about the early days of the 

New Deal. In fact, the idea of a five-day week (the NRA) had its ori- 

gins-says the Forum-in Jewish circles: a Dr. Sam Friedman brought 

it to the attention of the AFL.51 In addition to the NRA, the Torah 

was spoken of as a solution to the economic problems: When Israel is 

at home with the Torah, then will their problems be solved.52 Since 

trade will always reward the industrious and deny those lacking in 

industry, the problem of interaction between wealth and poverty will 

always be present. Since there will always be rich and poor, the poor 

should not be "envious of the possessions of the rich," and the rich 

should not be "self-centered and greedy."53 The proletariat should not 

lose hope: as Rabbi Jung put it, hereditary proletarianism should be 

an impossibility; this is the meaning of the Jubilee Year.54 This seems 

to be a call to the worker not to collapse into proletarian ideologies. 

Dr. H. I. Schenker writes that all current political programs are sim- 

ply catch phrases to ease the poor man's soul. What is needed, he says, 

is improvement of the ethical individual: "Superman, in the Biblical 

sense, enters into the formation of a supercommunity; the supercom- 

munity enters into the formation of a supernation; and a supernation 

serves as the nucleus for a super-humanity-that is, in short, the Judaic 

scheme of social justice."55 

Regarding preparedness, the Forum said of Roosevelt's Chicago 

speech (1937) that a "great service has been rendered humanity."5" 

And from that point on the Forum supported preparedness. 

The needs of the specific group of manufacturers and businessmen 

are seen in these attitudes: the existing economic and social order is 

basically sound. Its difficulties do not stem from the manufacturers or 

their employees. With most management, they support the early New 

Deal. But, by 1936, they assert that the Depression is caused by big 

bankers and government. Manufacturers may have felt hostile to those 

on whom they were dependent for credit. The Orthodox worker was 

persuaded that he and his employer had identical interests and en- 

emies. 

Religious authority-more meaningful to this group than to the 

middle-class-was used to strengthen loyalty to institutions which had 

offered undreamed of opportunity and protection. Although it was ad- 

mitted that economic inequality existed, it was pointed out that this 

was part of the divine order of things. Political programs give no 

answer. But if men are good individuals (the rich should be good rich 

and the poor should be good poor) and follow the Torah, then they 

will be happy.

CRISIS AND REACTION 83 

The heterogeneity of the Jewish professionals has been noted, and 

so views of the old and new middle-classes and of academicians would 

be expected. Louis Kirstein of Filene's Department Store, after urging 

Jewish support of the New Deal, gives an interesting reason: 

I think that it is particularly fitting for Jews to help in this pro- 

gram because certainly the NKA has done a great deal for the in- 

dustry in which so many Jews are interested and engaged in, and 

that is the needle industry, and the distributive trades, to say 

nothing of the great good that has been accomplished in the elim- 

ination of the sweat shops.57 

This was the old middle-class in January, I 934. 

In June of that year the new middle-classes are addressed and en- 

couraged by Morris Krugrnan. In true new middle-class tradition, he 

shows technocratic sympathies: " . . . . engineers and economists are 

just beginning to realize that they are working towards the same ends." 

He then encourages the white collar workers: "Wholesale redirection" 

of vocations will not be necessary, for "when employment opportuni- 

ties occur again, the proportion of white collar workers to others will 

probably be greater than it has been in the past."58 

There is also the pessimism of the detached academic theorist: 

. . . Capitalism cannot solve its own problems of employment 

(and) has entered into a stage of contraction therefore. Those that 

don't like the word "contraction" call it "stabilization . . , ." The 

NRA is . . . . a sort of return to the guild psychology. It is a mani- 

festation of a scarcity consciousness, and perhaps that scarcity con- 

sciousness is there with very good reason. It is an intelligent atti- 

tude, because, as I look upon it, I think that capitalism has seen 

its best days. 

But socialism will not be next: 

I do not share that optimistic view. I look upon the modern west- 

ern world as a society which, if the world were governed by logic, 

would have to go on to socialism, but the world not being gov- 

erned by logic, but by psychology and by the fear of strong 

vested interest groups, I am afraid that the trend or the next step 

does not lie in the direction of socialism or communism, outside 

of Russia.59 

And so the academic world has gone left. 

What would be the attitudes of that group of immigrant social 

workers and federation heads who spearheaded the Reconstructionist 

movement? Dependent on support of the Jewish communities, these 

federations suffered tremendously during the Depression. Salaries were 

cut to such an extent that a threatening "rank-and-file" movement 

grew up anlong the workers-Jewish and Gentile. The financial re-

84 


ports and problems of the federations told them that the New Deal 

was not succeeding. The groups furthermore were in close touch with 

the relief needs of America. Since they were in touch with the vast 

number of unemployed, they had an increased awareness of the fail- 

ures of the New Deal. Abraham Duker, Harry Barron, and Nathaniel 

Bronstein were members of a committee that drew up a paper at the 

Practitioners' Session of the 1935 National Conference of Jewish Social 

Service. In view of the influences noted above, the following skepti- 

cism towards the New Deal might be expected: 

. . . . After two years of the New Deal, we can see that this attempt 

to benefit the forgotten man and business has resulted only in 

bringing benefits to industrial owners . . . . 

Profits and dividends of the large industrial concerns were not 

only safeguarded, but increased as much as 600 percent in 1934 

over 1932. In contrast to this we find that during this period the 

(real) wages of the industrial worker declined . . . . Speed-up and 

mechanization have further intensified the problem of unemploy- 

ment and have helped considerably in swelling the number of un- 

employed. In agriculture under the New Deal we find the lower- 

ing of income, reduction of standards of living, increase of ten- 

ancy, forced sales, mortgage indebtedness, and heavy taxes. Un- 

employment stood at i7,157,000 men, women, and young workers 

in November, 1934. This is 800,ooo more than the estimate for 

November, 1933.60 

An examination of The Reconstructionist gives abundant evidence of 

this group's views. What do they want? ". . . . a thoroughgoing change 

in our social and economic order . . . . establishment of a co-operative 

society, the elimination of the profit system and the public ownership 

of all natural resources and basic industries."61 

Meanwhile, however, they will struggle with labor for more equal 

distribution of the income of industry. A radical program is to be 

achieved through reformist measures-but true reforms, not the pseu- 

dereforms of the New Deal. 

The Reconstructionists reverse the pattern of the old middle- 

classes with the latter's initial support and later attack against the 

New Deal. The avid disapproval of The Reconstructionist gives way 

by 1937 to acceptance and even support of the New Deal program. 

Roosevelt is unpacking the Court, cries The Reconstructionist.62 And 

the social justice committee of the Rabbinical Assembly, a committee 

composed of some Reconstructionists, admits that the New Deal is of- 

ten inconsistent but should be supported because it is in the right 

human s~irit.63 

The attacks against the New Deal program have been explained. 

But why this change in attitude? The leftist groum rallied around the


New Deal whenever it was seriously attacked in 1936 and 1937. After 

all, these Reconstructionists were not leaders of a revolutionary movement. 

They were primarily concerned with repairing the faults in the 

structure. Hence, although they may have liked more sweeping reforms, 

they nonetheless rallied to the support of Roosevelt whenever 

a threat existed that even the minimum program was in danger. 

The Reconstructionist was slow to shift >way from its stand on 

neutrality. After the President's Chicago speech, it stated: "Our real 

danger is that the interests that would profit by our participation in 

the war, both those of Americans and of foreigners, will be able to beguile 

us with plausible idealistic reasons for joining it."64 Recognizing 

preparedness as an attempt to solve an economic problem: "NO economic 

crisis can be as tragic as the death of a single man on the battle 

field." And of the possible war: "(It will be a war of) conflicting imperialisms 

and there is mighty little moral principle at stake."65 

After Munich, this attitude changes and the Christian Century is 

attacked for its pacifism: "If military aggression is a crime, then to invite 

such aggression by military weakness is to make oneself in part 

responsible for the crime . . . . Until the fiasco of the Munich pact The 

Reconstructionist favored a policy as is now advocated by the Christian 

Century." But now America must be strong. (February 10, 1939.) 

Torn between its opposition to the use of preparedness in solving 

national economic problems in an ultimately unhealthy way and its 

recognition of the menace of Hitler, The ~econstructio~ist slowly began 

to give its support to a strong America. Lying somewhere in between 

the new middle-classes and the Socialist organizations on the 

political spectroscope, the ~econstr.uctionists-more quickly than the 

Socialists but more slowly than the new middle-classes-came to the 

support of the preparedness program. 

In the world of Gentile social work, there is the same divergence 

of opinion as in the Jewish group: New Dealer Hany Hopkins addressed 

the National Conference of Social Work in Detroit-July, 

1933.66 The radical voice was that of Miss Mary Van Kleeck, whose 

fiery speech set the tone of the 1934 conference: Social workers should 

dispel the illusion that the New Deal is trying to creare. She thus 

characterizes the New Deal: "How far must government yield to the 

demand for change in the status quo in order to maintain the status 

quo?" We need, she said, a form of collectivism that is neither fascism 

nor communism. Miss Van Kleeck was director of the department of 

industrial studies at the Russell Sage Foundation. She found support 

from a large minority at the conference.07 

Although it is impossible to ascertain statistically, there is some 

indication of less radicalism in the ranks of Gentile social workers 

than in those of the Jewish. Two factors may account for this: The

86 AMER~CAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

Gentile federations received their backing not just from old middle- 

classes but from big industrialists who were not hard hit by the De- 

pression. So non-Tewish federation leaders were in better financial con- 

dition than weri the Jewish and were not so likely to scc the inade- 

quacies of the New Deal. Furthermore, the radical influences of an 

Eastern European proletarian ideology did not appear in the non- 

Jewish group. 

Before analyzing the differences in reactions of Labor Zionists and 

Bundists, it is necessary to examine the attitudes of the most conserva- 

tive branch of Jewish labor-the union leadership. The dual attitude 

of the union leaders from 1929 to 1932 has been obselved: an official 

socialism and yet a social reform prog~am based on underconsump- 

tionist theories. It was seen that the radical front was needed to keep 

the support of the workers. But with the New Deal's labor program 

and propaganda, it was finally possible to drop the pretense of radical- 

ism and to hail the New Deal. 

Yet, from January through May, 1933, the voice ol Jacob still was 

radical while the hands of Esau were clasping the New Deal eagerly. 

Technocracy was looked upon as a complete neglect of social and polit- 

ical power problems and as an influence that would distract from the 

real problem of how to wrest social contro'l Erom the anti-social ele- 

ments. (This would make it seem that the new middle-classes wel- 

comed the opportunity to dodge the real problem.)68 Whilc the Hill- 

man plan for social reform was being hailed on the editorial page, 

Charles Ervin was writing (as if on behalf of the forgotten workers) 

that Roosevelt does not understand that the hull of the ship of state 

is too broken down for any kind of patch-up job.6" 

In June, 1933, there is the first official endorsement of the New 

Deal-"an entirely new departure from American legislative prac- 

tice."70 The NRA was adopted, because the Depression showed that if 

"businessmen and bankers were left to lead the country to recover by 

their own wisdom and considerations, there would never be any re- 

covery."71 But surely Sidney Hillman, who worked with the Chamber 

of Commerce in planning the NRA, knew that American business was 

behind the NRA and the 1933 New Deal! The Junc issue was New 

Deal all-the-way. Even Charles Ervin writes that if the workers organ- 

ize well as a result of provision 7a, they will come out of the period 

with gains in conditions and wages.72 

It is from Ervin-a labor intellectual-that one hears the last ex- 

pressions of the old radicalism. In October, 1933, he remarks that the 

chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufactur- 

ers have their new offices in the NRA.73 And in February, 1934, he 

stresses that the purpose of the NRA is to re-create the pro-business 

conditions of the twenties-the NRA is an uphill struggle.74


Hillman, meanwhile, argues that while the NRA may have been 

meant as aspirin, it will still help change the system; that one should 

distinguish between what was meant and what will happen.75 In the 

fall of igyj, Hillman was appointed to the National Industrial Rela. 

lions Board. And fromi 1935 on, the progress made by the New Deal 

was ~tressed.~Vn 1936, progressive labor is committed to the re-election 

of Roosevelt, and even Charles Ervin wrote warmly of FDR's 

convention speech.77 

Now completely in the New Deal orbit, the Advance saw the recession 

only as the result of not enough New Deal! "Is it possible that 

so soon the lessons of yesteryear are forgotten!" Therefore, enact more 

labor legislation.78 And, in September, 1938, America should call the 

bluff of the Fascists. There was all praise for Roosevelt's "clear and 

clean reaction to the German gangster-government's savage campaign 

of destruction of the defenseless Jews of Germany."79 It is interesting 

to note that the Hitler campaign against the Jews was not stressed in 

the Advance until non-Jews of the same class were ready to take up 

arms. 

The Labor Zionist group, while having many middle-class members 

in its leadership and while being an intensely nationalistic group, 

claimed to be socialistic and attacked Roosevelt's early program. In 

1935, when union leaders were supporting the New Deal, the Frontier 

stated that a vote for the administration was a vote for a relief program 

and not lor intelligent economic planning.80 The Frontier bemoaned 

the fact that the socialist vote was only a protest.s1 Still some 

Labor Zionists supported Roosevelt-and these Labor Zionists were not 

only Reform rabbis in the movement's leadership. The Labor-Zionist 

Newsletter stated in 1937 that the New Deal should be supported 

against reaction, as long as one is not fooled by the "amorphous sea of 

Roose~eltism."8~ In 1939, this group favored a "benevolent neutrali- 

ty." Military expenditures were approved, for they would inspire fear 

in the fascist nations. Besides, the worlci is not black and white, and 

in the event ol: war, the democratic countries should win.83 This de- 

parture from strict socialist doctrine was made with explicit qualifica- 

tions by the LeEt Poale Zion group: "The struggle against fascism 

must . . . . be permeated with the struggle against capitalism. Al- 

though the blade may temporarily be dulled by tactical motives, we 

must not for one single moment lose sight of the fact that the final 

struggle is against capitalism, the evil of evils."84 Still the departure 

was made. 

And so, along with the most radical of the middle-class (the Jewish 

professionals), the Labor Zionists at first attacked the New Deal. Then, 

as Roosevelt was placed under heavy fire by conservative interests in 

1936, they (and the Reconstructionists) s~vitched to qualified support


of the New Deal. The Labor Zionists, liaving a rank-and-file of socialistic 

workers, were somewhat more reluctant to support the Kew Deal 

than were the Reconstructionists. Still their partially middle-class 

leadership and the organizational needs of Labor Zionism to sheathe 

the sword of the class struggle in order to work with other Zionist 

groups underlay the driit &om a radical working-class ideology to a 

sanctioning of social reform and support of capitalistic delnocracies in 

the Second Mrorld War. 

In the Workmen's Circle (its youth magazine, Call of Yorrth, and 

its official Workmen's Call) there is found the most consistent social 

philosophy of all Jewish groups. Consistency does not prove truth, but 

at least the Circle begins the Depression with a radical revolutionary 

philosophy and is never drawn, before the outbreak of World War IT 

(along with the other leftist

CRISIS AND REACTION 

At last has reappeared. 

It really wasn't lost at all: 

It was hiding behind my beard. 

BRANDEIS: And I am Louis Brandeis. 

A liberal I'm supposed to be. 

It never does you any good, 

Because I'm in the minority. 

It makes a perfect set-up 

For Morgan and his minions. 

The masses are demanding bread, 

And they get dissenting opinions!!8" 

The intimation of the Brandeis speech is significant since it shows the 

liberal and conservatives conspiring against the people. 

The Workmen's Call sees in the 1937 recession evidence that the 

New Deal has been unable to save American capitalism without re- 

sorting to a dangerous armament program: 

. . . . the palliative measures enacted (by the New Deal) . . . . did 

much to alleviate the suffering of the destitute . . . . and they un- 

doubtedly did give a fillip to industry which for a while sent pro- 

duction levels soaring and provided increased employment and 

purchasing power for millions-a not inconsiderable achievement; 

but alas, his methods were nonetheless palliatives. (The crash , 

came) with punctual fidelity. 

Despite the illusion of purposeful activity so ingenuously treat- 

ed by his tirades against big business, Roosevelt's policy in this 

second stage of the New Deal is essentially one of drift. He has 

submitted no new legislation of importance in the past month, 

nor is any in the offing. His positive measures have been limited 

largely to reducing relief appropriations and sky-rocketing arma- 

ments expenditures. The latter-a sop to heavy industry- may 

serve to relieve economic distress, but at best it is a temporary ex- 

pedient which must inevitably lead to a new and more precipitate 

decline and which enhances a thousand-fold the danger of em- 

broiling this nation in world conflict.90 

Following this analysis of the relation between recession and prepared- 

ness, and in consonance with the Workmen's Circle's anti-nationalist 

ideolagy, Harry Gersh in January, 1939, attacks the "Dangerous Ap- 

plause" with which the confused Jewish community greets Roosevelt's 

anti-Hiller speeches. This bravado is simply a means by which the 

American ruling powers can edge the people towards militarism.91 

The Workmen's Circle was the only Jewish group that did not ac- 

cept the preparedness program before the outbreak of World War 11. 

After the invasion of Poland, there was dissension in the ranks as to 

whether or not to support preparedness: some said the socialists could 

get concessions from the capitalists in return for their support;92

90 


others countered that a victory for the Allies would mean defeat of 

revolution in the defeated nations and continued exploitation of 

colonial pe0ple.~3 The editorial policy eventually took the first view. 

In view of the social background of the Circle, it would certainly 

be expected that this group would have the most critical and consist- 

ent analysis of the capitalist system. A group enjoying few benefits 

from that system did not need to rationalize on its behalf. And the 

Circle was workman-born, bred, and led, with none of the New Deal 

connections of the Advance. The Circle was a proletarian group of 

long-standing. While Labor Zionism had to cooperate with middle- 

class Zionist leaders in its quest for power in the world Zionist move- 

ment, the Jewish Bund did not have a similar organizational need. 

Consequently, this group could analyze the Depression, New Deal 

remedies, and the Recession without concern for the survival of capi- 

talism. In their eyes the Recession showed that the great challenge of 

capitalistic overproduction was still far from solved in a pea~e-time 

economy. 

This concludes the analysis of the reactions of American Jewry to 

the Depression and the New Deal. The reaction of each group has 

been shown. The tremendous influence of the status of that group in 

society on its reaction has also been demonstrated. The old middle- 

class could not doubt thc merit of that system which had produced 

such prosperity and which had bestowed so many palpable benefits; 

and so it spoke of faith in America and opposed preparedness until 

the International Chamber of Commerce condemned a "self-contained 

economy" as super-nationalism. Orthodox manufacturers and business 

men could blame neither manufacturers nor the workers they em- 

ployed, so they said that the government and bankers caused the De- 

pression and they emphasized the crucial importance of religious ideol- 

ogy. The new middle-class, the Reconstructionists, and the Labor 

Zionists (reading from right to left) all expressed varying degrees of 

political ambivalence. They all felt the crisis keenly and spoke of 

radical solutions. The new middle-class, dependent on the existing 

order for its new-found status, was the first to support the reforms of 

the New Deal. The Reconstructionists, although more reluctant, final- 

ly supported the New Deal. (Social workers would rather have a mini- 

mum program of reform than none at all.) Last of the three to sup- 

port Roosevelt was the Labor Zionist group: its partially middle-class 

leadership, institutional needs, and inore emotional approach to na- 

tionalism led this group to deviate from an orthodox, socialistic ap- 

proach. Only the Jewish Bund, workman-born, bred, and led, seemed 

to follow a consistently socialist ideology. The Jewish groups followed 

the pattern of their non-Jewish counterparts, unless specific needs dic- 

tated otherwise.


11. REACTIONS TO HITLER 

The advantages of hindsight provide the observer today with an ob- 

jective understanding of what caused the Nazi regime and why the 

Jews were chosen for extermination. But American Jewry of the 

thirties had no such hindsight and was bitterly divided as to what 

underlay Nazism and as to what its answer to it should be. 

Today it is commonly recognized that the fascist solution was re- 

sorted to by German industrial leaders. Their world market was very 

limited by the competition of thosc countries which won the First 

World War, and buying power at home had become insignificant. So 

wages were cut, and this could be done (since standards were already 

so low) only through a fascist dictatorship. But someone had to be 

blamed for the privations of the populace. So the traditional scape- 

goat in Germany, the Jew, was used as the target for the antagonism 

and frustration of the German masses.94 

Groups within A~nerican Jewry immediately differed as to what 

their answer to Hitler sholild be. Some hoped that an economic boy- 

cott would weaken a German economy which desperately needed an 

export trade sufficient to pay for those imports required for rearma- 

rnent.95 Others considered mass meetings to be an effective counter- 

move. And most Jews felt that the Voice of America-the protests of 

our government-would arouse the conscience of the world and that 

Germany would then respond to world opinion. The hindsight of 

history has shown that Germany feared neither mass meetings nor the 

Voice of America so long as the words were not backed by action. And 

the action of the Allies was determined independently of the rhetoric 

in Madison Square Garden and the remarks of American officials that 

often prompted apologies from the State Department to the Nazi gov- 

ernmen t.96 

These differences in programs to combat Hitlerism were based on 

the much more important differences in interpretation of the cause 

of Nazism. Since the economic and social problems which Germany 

faced were not confined by national boundaries, it was important that 

American Jewry and all America should understand the crisis of Ger- 

many. And yet, many segments of American Jewry never saw Nazism 

as a result of a most desperate economic and social crisis. Anti-Semit- 

ism was rarely seen as necessaly for the preservation of the basic social 

structure in Germany. Little wonder that ineffective programs were 

hailed as salvation as American Jews spent their energies attacking 

each other. 

To understand precisely how American Jewry differed as to the in- 

terpretation of thc rise of Nazism, and therefore differed as to counter- 

programs, it is helpful to return to social analysis and to discover just

g2 


what the reaction of each group was and how that reaction was af- 

fkcted by status in society. 

What were the old middle-classes of German descent saying from 

1930 through March 19, 1933, when the Reichstag abdicated? Let the 

American Hebrew speak for itself: 

(September 19): "The successes of anti-Semitic parties in Ger- 

many possess no quality of permanence." Why? Germany would 

not want to lose the respect of the world, as Roumania and Hun- 

gary have done. 

(October 24): German Jews should not become panicky because 

of riots in the Reichstag. "Hitlerism cannot prevail in the Reich." 

Why not? because 

(October 3): The Germans are "not a people who love revolu- 

tions." 

In 1931, the Nazis suffered a minor setback in a Prussian plebiscite. 

While, said the American Hebrew, this did not mean the shattering 

of the anti-Semitic party, it was a straw in the wind: 

(Aupst 21): ". . . . a saner spirit does prevail throughout the en- 

tire Reich." 

(November 20):-after further Hitler victories-"Comfort is de- 

rived from Hitler's conference with Von Hindenburg. He will 

stop Hitler through a coalition cabinet. Besides, Germany does 

not want to be looked upon as a medieval state. When Hitler 

gains representation, he will no longer need the anti-Semitism!" 

The sane (or insane) spirit is seen as the determinant of the fate of 

the Reich. The need of the ruling classes for a fascist alliance is not 

seen, so the conference with Von Hindenburg becomes the chance for 

the saner elements to assert themselves. The scapegoat role of the 

Jews is recognized. However, it is seen as it was played in an expancl- 

ing society: the Jew was often the target for dissatisfied parties (French 

Catholics, Socialists, Populists) that were minority groups in the na- 

tion. The American Hebrew hopes that when the minority Hitler 

party gains some success the need for anti-Semitism will cease. How- 

ever, it is not seen that Germany, in its chronic crisis, now is ready 

for a government-sponsored scapegoat. 

Events moved rapidly in 

'932 

(January 15): There are two possibilities: either the Teutonic 

temperament can be trusted or there will be a Hitler triumph 

followed by a clash with the Communists.

CRISIS AND REACI ION 93 

(March 18):-after Voil Hindenburg was re-elected-"Faith in the 

stability and practicality of the German people was restored after 

the general elections last Sunday, even among those who, under 

the emotional influence of Nazi propaganda, doubted these mo- 

mentarily." 

(April 15):-after Hitler gained two million more votes-"As the 

economic situation over there clears, so will the cohorts of the 

Swastika fade from the political picture." 

(June 10):-after Von Hindenburg dismissed Bruening and his 

cabinet-"Pessimism is warranted. Hitler may get a majority in 

the next election." 

(November 18):-after the famous election when the votes of the 

Nazis declined-'rhis is "a clear recession of the Nazi flood with 

indications that it is not likely to rise again to threatening heights 

. . . . this result was not unexpected . . . . The only combinations 

that can make for defeat of the government are like oil and water 

in their principles and cannot coalesce." 

Here is the belief that "Teutonic temperament" will allow things to 

continue as of yore. Again, the stress on characteristics of a people as 

determinants of its history. Social factors are either omitted or mis- 

understood: history showed that in politics groups which seemed to be 

like oil and water could coalesce. 

And the few months just before the tragedy were taken especially 

calmly by the American HeD~ew: 

(February 3):-after Von Hindenburg had appointed Hitler on 

January 31st to his cabinet-"\'on Hindenburg has copied Abra- 

ham Lincoln (!) and brought the enemy within the camp in order 

to control him. The 'irresponsible agitator is taken off the street.' 

He will now be chained down to national sanity. Even the Ger- 

man Democratic Party's official bulletin states that Hitler is now 

'an ex-corporal amidst a count and four barons . . . . under the 

supervision of the foxy capitalist, Hugenberg.' " 

(March lo):-the Nazi-Nationalist coalition was now in the ma- 

jority and there were rumors of the dissolution of the Reichstag 

-Should the Reichstag adjourn, anti-Jewish legislation would be 

less likely with twelve responsible men running the country than 

with an assembly of Gjo in charge! "Von Hindenburg-sane, civil- 

i7ed. loyal to his constitutional oath-will never descend to the 

status of a rubber stamp for Adolph Hitler." 

And when Hitler made public his condemnation of further anti- 

Semitic practices . . . . ?'his shows he is "attempting to slay the 

anti-Semitic beast with unequivocal warning to his followers." 

The beast is no longer of \slue now that the Nazis are in power.

94 


The American Jewish Congress is doing a disservice to German 

Jewry by demanding mass meetings at this time! 

(March 24):-the anti-Jewish excesses that could not be denied be- 

gan on March 20-The headline: "Outraged world must protest 

against Nazi barbarism." "Hitler has failed to subdue the anti- 

Semitic beast-German psychology doesn't change its spots." 

Down to the very end there is the same false hope, the same misunder- 

standing of the Nazi phenomenon. An interesting twist is the confi- 

dence in "twelve responsible men" as opposed to 650-that is, demo- 

cratic policies are to be achieved by a few intelligent and capable men 

at the top of society. And once the excesses have begun, the same fac- 

tor that was to prevent them (the German mind) is seen as their cause: 

"German psychology doesn't change its spots."97 

The crucible of experience clid not alter this interpretation which 

the events of 1933 had proved invalid. In the American Hebrew of De- 

cember 22, 1933, it is pointed out that Hitler had fertile soil in the 

German people. Germany never was a civilization in the sense in 

which England and America are: "Can one conceive of an Englishman 

or an American doing what the Germans are now doing? Can one 

imagine a Frenchman being so br~ltal?"~s 

The belief that a people's spirit is the cause of its good and bad 

achievements-an idea very common in the nineteenth century-was 

eagerly accepted by the old middle-class. This belief had great value 

in assuring the old middle-class Jew that Hitlerism could not happen 

here. It was the result of the German spirit, and the American spirit 

was different. 

Social factors were completely overlooked in this group's explaria- 

tion. For an adequate social analysis of the rise of fascism would re- 

veal that the sort of crisis which makes fascism possible is by no means 

limited to a particular country. The slightest implication that such a 

phenomenon could occur in the United States was avoided by a re- 

jection of the social analysis and the ardent acceptance of the belief 

that fascism could appeal only to the people of certain nations, such as 

Germany. 

Simply being members of America's old middle-class would lead 

this group to such an analysis. But its Jewish affiliation may have rein- 

forced this interpretation. Could what happened to the well-integrated 

Herr So-and-so happen to me? This reaction is immediately sup- 

pressed by a complete negation of social factors and a seizing on the 

German spirit as the explanatory key. Furthermore, there was the des- 

perate wish that Hitler is not so; hence, the extreme optimism. 

The program of the old middle-class flows from its interpretation 

of Nazism and so from its social position. The Voice of America or the


Conscience of the World-these expressions of public opinion were 

widely hailed by this group as effective weapons against the Nazis. Be- 

fore the worst Nazi atrocities, the B'nai B'rith Magazine, in its April- 

May, 1933, issue, claimed that public opinion had so far restraincd 

Hitler. And after the excesses began, public opinion was deemed the 

great chance for the Jews. Publisher Brown of the American Hebrew 

wrote an article entitled, "Roosevelt and Hoover Can Influence Hit- 

ler." The American leaders are urged to protest for the sake of Ameri- 

can interests in German trade and investments in Germany.99 Related 

to the stress on public opinion is the faith in facts. The Anti-Defama- 

tion League informed the world that loo,ooo Jews were in the German 

army in World War 1.100 This program, of course, flows from the in- 

terpretation of Nazism as the result of a people's spirit. Just as a na- 

tion has a spirit and a conscience, so has the world. And the United 

States, the citadel of freedom for the old middle-class, by its protests 

can stir the conscience of the world. When Germany sees that the 

civilized world is against her, the free spirit of Goethe and Heine will 

re-awaken. Therefore, soul-stirring government protests and thought- 

provoking facts will change the German spirit and defeat Hitler. 

The American Hebrew supported the opposition of the American 

Jewish Committee and the B'nai B'rith to mass meetings: Jews in 

Germany who have displayed their patriotism through solemn pro- 

tests resent Stephen S. Wise's passionate talks. These meetings only 

give Hitler more material.101 The B'nai B'rith urged that discretion is 

the better part of valor and added that some of the finest German Jews 

are members of B'nai B'rith. Public protests may harm them. Anti- 

Semitism has happened before in Germany, and Jews have sur- 

vived.102 Since the social factors behind anti-Semitism are not per- 

ceived, other factors must be invented. The most assimilated members 

of any minority group are known to stress conformity and to fear be- 

ing too different. Being too obviously different is, therefore, viewed as 

a cause of anti-Semitism. So showy mass meetings might, according to 

the logic of the old middle-class, arouse anti-Semitism in Germany and 

perhaps even in America. 

Regarding the boycott, there seems to be a division between the 

leadership and the rank-and-file of the old middle-class. The Com- 

mittee and B'nai B'rith issued a joint statement: "Governed by the 

known wishes of the Jews of Germany as well as by our own judgment 

of the effect of certain activities, notwithstanding our own keen sense 

of outrage . . . . we counseled against public agitation in the form of 

boycotts and mass meetings."l03 Such agitation, continues the statement, 

are futile and ineffecti~e channels for the release of emotion. 

They give pretexts for prejudice to bigots, and they distract those who 

should look for more constructive methods. Judge Joseph M. Pros-

g6 


kauer opposed the boycott and stated that its observance interfered 

with American business transactions and is therefore opposed to one's 

duty as an American citizen!l04 The German-born industrialist, Ludwig 

Vogelstein, chairman of the American Metal Co., Ltd., opposed the 

boycott, and was called by his opponents a representative of German 

Jewish bankers.10" 

Most members of the old middle-class were not averse to the boycott-especially 

when major trade unions and other non-Jewish organizations 

had sanctioned it. Rabbis Irving F. Reichert and Ephraim 

Frisch of the "Classical Reform school" favored the boycott.106 The 

American Hebrew on March 31, 1933, opposed the "irresponsible agitation 

for the boycott of Germany and German goods." But, on September 

zgth, the American Hebrew was urging the AFL to boycott. 

By March 16, 1934, the American Hebrew opposed only secondary boycott, 

that is, boycott of stores that sold German goods; this was using 

Hitler's tactics. And on January 3, 1935, the American Heb~ew, attacked 

for its anti-boycott stand, claimed that it favored boycott and 

had opposed only an all-Jewish boycott. And so, the Am.erican. Hebrew's 

ambivalence is resolved in favor of what seems to be the rankand-file 

of its readers. Why the wealthier leadership opposed the boycott 

is an open question. 

What were the reactions of the new middle-class of Eastern European 

background? In the Index of 1930: "If Hitler should succeed in 

his ambition to establish a Fascist dictatorship in Germany, it would 

undoubtedly constitute the greatest calamity for German Jewry. (However, 

this is) not very likely (since Hitler will never join the National 

Party)."107 

Opinion, in 1932, saw in Germany a "ghastly outlook" that was 

obvious-said Stephen S. Wise-to all save the professional optimists. 

Hitler may not succeed, but the forces of hate will continue.lO8 But by 

March of that same year (after Von Hindenburg was re-elected), Opinion 

felt a "lightening of the heart3'-while the American Hebrew also 

had its "faith in the stability and practicality of the German people" 

renewed. But Opinion cautions that Hitler is "more formidable in 

partial defeat" than in triumph.lOQ 

Thus far it will be noted that the new middle-classes, while not indulging 

in the excessive optimism of the old middle-classes, did not 

demonstrate a grasp of the Nazi phenomenon and did echo-albeit 

faintly-some of the misconceptions of the old middle-class analysis. 

No inkling is given that Nazism and its concomitant antisemitism are 

based on the effort of a decaying economic and social system to preserve 

itself in the face of chronic crisis. The belief that Hitler is more 

formidable in defeat shows little understanding of government-sponsored 

anti-Semitism in a state suffering from chronic depression. The


extreme optimism of the old middle-classes is decried, but the new 

middle-class is swayed to optimism by the Hindenburg election and 

speaks not in terms of economic forces but of forces of hate . . . . that 

is, the psychological approach. 

But £rom May 2, 1932, the new middle-class press takes on a different 

tone. Hitler had gained two million votes in the spring election. 

The American Hebrew was saying that as soon as the economic situation 

clears, the Swastika will fade . . . . and after November expressed 

extreme optimism. But the new middle-class saw by May end that: 

"The dread event has come to pass. Hitler is in power."l10 The answer 

is unashamed self-defense. And from this point on, the new middleclass 

attacked the old middle-class for its foolish optimism (do not be 

fooled by the fact that Hitler has joined Von Hindenburg; Hugenberg 

is a slight brake).lll From this point on, the new middle-class prepared 

for boycott and suggested that this was 'all the more reason for a World 

,Jewish Congress. 

Only aft& Hitlerism was well established and only after the American 

depression had given cause for reflection, did Opinion-April, 1934 

-consider fully the social factors involved. "Its roots are deeply and 

inextricably entwined in that capitalistic economic order which' is itself 

thc contradiction and the foe of freedom, of brotherhood, of 

peace." The fate of the German Jew is the "logical, almost automatic" 

fate of any minority group when social revolutionary forces are thwarted 

by reaction. We should beware of the fascism that does exist in 

America and that advocates "politer forms of dictatorship."ll3 So the 

new middle-class interpretation changes from one stressing psychological 

factors and optimistically ignoring social forces to an analysis 

which recognizes social factors that make Nazism "logical, almost automatic." 

What was the program of the new middle-class? The B'nai R'rith 

Messenger of Los ~ngeles, representing the "rank-and-file" new middle-class 

membership which was rebelling against the Grand Lodge, 

claimed that the American Jewish Committee and the Grand Lodge 

had interfered with a successful boycott. The boycott is certain to 

bring the German people to its senses.l13 Jews will gain and not lose 

the respect of the world through the boycott.114 And in April, 1934, 

Opinion offers evidence that the boycott is working: Macy's and Woolworth's 

have stopped buying German goods because of consumer resistance. 

A few rabbis in the Conservative Rabbinical Assembly opposed 

the boycott as a "not reliable weapon."ll5 But the dissent to the 

boycott in the new middle-class was so small as to be insignificant. The 

Congress and its adherents were behind the boycott. 

The leadership of the new middle-class was the spearhead of the 

mass meetings. The Congress Courier hailed a protest march led by 

97

98 


Bernard Deutsch and Stephen S. Wise on May lo, 1933-book-burrling 

day.llVn an April, 1933, editorial, Opinion asks "What Shall be 

Done?" In addition to financial help for refugees and appeals of the 

United States government and League of Nations and the boycott, the 

mass meeting renders a service that is not measurable. However, "the 

will and the words of the men who addressed it constitute a memor- 

able-record." In answer to Vogelstein's claim that the meetings violate 

the "amenities of Western civilization," Opinion, in July, 1933, bit- 

terly replies with an attack on those 

. . . . willful and tyrannical Prussians who are Germans first, some 

sort of Americans second, and no sort of Jews third except as they 

use the Reform Temple as a shield wherewith to guard them- 

selves against the contamination of brotherhood with all non- 

German Jews. (May the) contemptible gesture of Stadlanut ["di- 

p1omacy"j mark the beginniffg of the end of the Bavaro-Prussian- 

Jewish regime in the Anlerican lil'e. 

And so, in the heart of a controversy which conccrns the fate of 

world Jcwry there is clear indication of those intra-Jewish tensions 

that are grounded in a strugvle for power within the Jewish commun- 

ity: the end of the German %egimey~ is the climactic hope. 

What was the attitude of the new middle-class towards the Voice 

of America and the Conscience of the World? This group has a strong 

belief in the efficacy of the Voice and the Conscience, but this faith is 

shaken at times during the thirties. In February, 1936, Opinion ranked 

the McDonald Report with J'accuse and the Balfour Declaration. 

James G. McDonald, High Commissioner of the Commission on Jew- 

ish and Other Refugees from Germany, resigned and gave forth a 

statement that attacked German barbarism. He was called another 

soldier in the war for humanity. This report, it was asserted. will 

arouse public opinion against Hitler. Koosevelt's address to Congress 

in January, 1938, was deemed all the more powertul because it did not 

mention Hitler by name!l17 And, of course, once America and the 

world had become aroused to the danger of Hitler, in 1938, the verbal 

protests of world leaders were hailed with even more enthusiasm: 

"The very outburst of righteousness sounded like a new lease on life 

to a people whose existence depends on righteousness."118 

However, there is not complete idealization of the Voice of Ameri- 

ca. Cordell Hull's opposition to the boycott was attacked by Opinion 

in October, 1934. 1n 1937, the State Department had to apologize to 

Germany for the aggressive remarks and actions of Mayor Fiorello H. 

LaGuardia. Opinion, in April of that year, again was displeased with 

the American government. But the clearest statement of the disillu- 

sionment of the new middle-class in its faith that the conscience of the


world would rise up in wrath against Nazism is an editorial in the 

Congress Bulletin of December 3, 1937, an editorial which is tragic in 

its bitter awakening from a delusion: 

We could not visualize a democracy in whose interest it would be 

to help stabilize Nazism and discuss with it areas of expansion 

. . . . Today we are the forgotten victims of a barbaric regime 

which is dictating its own terms to civilization. Our continuous 

victimization will not in one iota change the treaties to be drawn 

up between Nazism and Democracy. 

Four and one-half years ago we arose to the struggle against 

Nazism in the belief that allied with us were not only groups and 

elements in this and other democratic countries, but the coun- 

tries themselves, their peoples and their governments . . . . To the 

democracies of the world functioning as diplomatic bodies Poland 

is only part of one or another possible combination of armed Eu- 

ropean powers. 

And Opinion recognized that education is no safeguard against preju- 

dice . . . . witness Germany.119 

In what ways might ;he new middle-class "dual interpretation" 

and program be influenced by its social position? As was the case in 

its reaction to the American depression, even so in reacting to Hitler, 

the new middle-class before the crisis turned its head awav from men- 

acing social forces, after the crisis turned to an analysis which recog- 

nized those social forces, and after this analysis turned to a program 

that ran counter to the analysis! In prosperity the new middle-class 

has no reason to examine its society critically; consequently it could 

be caught unawares by crises in America and Germany. Hitler was 

thought to be more formidable in defeat. The Von Hindenburg elec- 

tion signalled the decline of Hitler. But after the economic crisis of the 

Depression this class suffered tremendously. And so a radical analysis 

of the roots of worldwide depression is called for by these more in- 

secure members of the middle~class. While this analysis finds the cause 

of the crisis to lie within the nature of the present social structure, no 

program which would call that structure into question is seriously 

forthcoming from the new middle-classes. For they are committed to 

that system which has given them so many benefits and advantages. 

So, after the radical analysis, a program stressing mass meetings and 

the Voice of America was advocated. 

The extreme optimism of the old-middle-class is not found in this 

group which had so recently. fled from a land of oppression and which 

did not have behind it such a long tradition of integration. Anti- 

Semitism was an accepted fact in their Jewish existence. The reaction- 

formation of more marginal Jews who turned to extreme optimism 

and to a complete elimination of social factors was not necessary for


the new middle-class-located more towards the core of the Jewish 

group. Similarly, the fear of non-conformity so common to marginal 

minority psychology was not there to dissuade the new middle-classes 

from stirring mass meetings. These meetings also served as rallying 

points for the institutions of the class-the American and World Jew- 

ish Congresses. The Vogelstein incident showed that the issues of boy- 

cott and mass meetings could be used to challenge the rule of the old 

middle-classes. 

The bitter disillusion expressed in the Bulletin as to the effective- 

ness of the Voice of America may be related to the tremendous faith 

placed in the New Deal. Roosevelt could do no wrong. But the ideal- 

ized President, until late in 1957, never allowed an official protest to 

be sent to Germany. The analysis made by the new middle-class might 

have warned them. But this group always seemed a little afraid of its 

theories. 

What were the New York manufacturers and businessmen, the sup- 

porters of neo-Orthodoxy and the Jewish Forum, saying about Hitler- 

ism? 

(July, 1931) There appears to be a tendency to view the Hitler 

movement as of only temporary nature. It is true that Hitler's seed 

could bear such abundant fruit only in times of economic despair. 

But it must be borne in mind that the business depression in Ger- 

many, which was so conducive to National Socialist doctrines, is 

not a temporary occurrence. Germany's economic hardships are 

not due to a previous period of over-production, but are attribut- 

able to the losses incurred by Germany during and after the 

war.120 

(And in October) Such economic difficulties make for extremist 

political movements, and the future must be viewed pessimistical- 

ly.121 

(And in November) A great number of German industrialists and 

businessmen, too, are not free from responsibility. Without the 

financial support of these circles, Hitler would have been doomed 

to failure . . . . One may wonder at the inducements offered to in- 

dustries to support a political movement which claims to oppose 

capita1ism.l" (The solution proposed in this article was to abol- 

ish all reparations.) 

In May, 1932, while calling those who claim Hitlerism is a "passing 

phase" ostriches with their heads in the sand, the Forum maintains 

that "political parties are the outgrowth of economic conditions and 

sociological changes." And these are the conditions in Germany: 

World War I losses, inflation, reparations, and the spread of cartels 

eliminating the middleman.123 

As for the role of the Jew as scapegoat: "(Nazism) aims to make


the Jew the target of mass hatred, diverting the punishment of those 

guilty for the misfortune of the masses, to the Jews."124 No delusional 

optimism is here. World War I is the primary social factor. Overpro- 

duction is not considered to be related to Germany's crisis. The social 

function of the scapegoat is understood. Nazism is considered as a 

movement opposing capitalism. 

The nature of German Jewry is seen as a cause of its troubles. 

These Jews lacked the iclealisin needed for their struggle, idealism 

possessed by Eastein European Jews. This lack derives from eight dec- 

ades of assimilation and from a desire to "delegate Jewishness to an 

inconspicuous corner." German Jewry is so pro-German that it will 

not make the necessary protestations.125 What is more, this assimila- 

tion, this sin of apostasy, has actually caused the persecution! The 

prayer umipne hataenu ("because of our sins") is cited to show that 

because of the "renunciation of the glories and duties of the past," 

Nazism has arisen in- Germany.126 

The program of this group stresses the boycott. This is called the 

only self-defence the Jews have! The American Jewish Committee is 

severely criticized for its opposition to the boycott. The Committee 

cannot admit the cruelties of the Fatherland. Why not? This would 

be a confession that its members come from no better a place than do 

their Eastern European brethren "whom they always considered their 

inferiors as coming from 'inferior' countries."l27 A boycott by all the 

people is advocated.128 The boycott and the stand of the Committee 

give rise to frequent expressions of social and religious antagonisms: 

boycott not only German-made goods but also German-made Juda- 

ism!129 

The mass meeting is ineffective--this is the general theme, although 

there is some support for such meetings. Theodore Nathan claims that 

the ineffectiveness is caused by too many self-styled leaders, by lack of 

coordination, and by lack of non-Jewish participation.130 Such meet- 

ings are seldom calculated to motivate action. More helpful would be 

the strengthening of the freedom-forces in Germany and the systematic 

education of Americans.131 Rabbi Jung admits that every weapon, 

such as the impressive mass meeting, will help but will not save. The 

Jew must return to the Rock of Ages. iAssyria will not help us. We 

shall not ride the high horsew-he quotes from Hosea.132 

The influences of this group's social situation on its interpretation 

and program are varied. Its interpretation is economic but incomplete. 

That the crisis was caused by the failure of that European country 

with the most powerful production potential to find markets-this 

basic cause is not seen: "Germany's hardships are not due to a previ- 

ous period of over-production." Instead, World War I seems to be the 

basic cause. While the loss of this war was a basic factor in sending


Germany down the road to ruin (otherwise Great Britain or France 

might have been forced into a similar crisis), its role seems to be taken 

out of social context. Perhaps World War I is singly stressed so that 

American society may be protected from the implications of a more 

thorough analysis. If Hitlerism were caused by the loss of the War, 

America would be safe, for she won the War. But if Hitlerism were 

related to the failure of the world market to find a place for a power- 

fully productive nation, then America would still have to face the 

problem of finding markets for an even greater productive mechanism. 

The social antagonisms of this group are clear in its reactions. The 

German Jews, who always looked on Eastern Europeans as inferiors, 

are held responsible for their own misfortunes; German-made Judaism 

should also be boycotted. Mass meetings are opposed with expressions 

of antagonism against the new middle-class leaders who headed those 

meetings. And the neo-Orthodox group frequently expresses hostility 

towards the American Jewish Congress leadership in which its mem- 

bers have little part.133 

And the authority of religion, so prominent in this group's pro- 

gram, is finally evident: Assyria will not help. Return to the Rock of 

Ages. 

How did the labor groups view the crisis in Germany? Although 

there were many divisions within the Jewish laboring class, during the 

period of Hitler's rise, all these groups were to some extent expressing 

a socialistic ideology. And so, the interpretation of events in Germany 

given by intellectual socialists, Charles Ervin and Ludwig Lore, for- 

eign experts of the Advance, was in the early thirties the interpreta- 

tion of Jewish labor in general. What was the attitude of the Advance 

towards the rise ol Hitler? 

(July 31, 1931) (The Dawes and Young Plans are trying to keep 

life in a condemned man until the date set for his execution. The 

financial and industrial lords are in a plight:) Not only do the 

forces of socialism and communism menace their privilege but a 

middle-class, ruined by the aftermath of the war, is throwing in its 

lot with the Fascist movement led by Hitler. (German depression 

needs more than a moratorium on debts.) Unless demands are 

radically cut, a revolution is sure. And this coming from either 

Right or Left means anothpr war.134 

The criminal foolishness of the world war and the essential 

weakness of the capitalist system have to be liquidated. The near 

future is big with events that will further change the face of the 

world.135 

Germany has her pollyannas the same as we have in the United 

States. They see "trends" towards better times in the same way 

that our White House and the Chamber of Commerce see them.

CR~SIS AND REACT~ON i 03 

"Trends" don't put food in people's mouths nor warm clothes on 

thcir backs.13" 

Fascism was in Italy, and will be in every other country, the last 

force to which capitalism will take recourse in the face of the on- 

coming forces of labor. It is likely to be the last, and in all proba- 

bility, the strongest bulwark ol the employing class against the as- 

piration of the toiling masses for liberation from exploitation and 

oppression. 

It will not be long before the bourgeoisie parties will have to 

recognize the victory of Fascism by admitting one or several Na- 

tional Socialists into the government. The participation of the . 

Hitlerites in the government will undoubtedly subject the Jews in 

many ways to indignities and hardships . . . . Fascism is a very real 

danger to labor, especially to organized labor. Capitalism in Ger- 

many feels itself endangered by the growing strength and militan- 

cy of the working masses. Prompted by fear, all parties of capital- 

ism, the Liberals, the Conservatives, and the Catholic Center Par- 

ty will unite in supporting Fascism in the task of destroying the 

house that labor has built for its own protection and the preser- 

\ation of the best in civilization.137 

All this in the year 1931 ! 

In 1932, anti-Semitism is called the "trump card of lascism," and 

Ludwig Lore fears that American progressive labor will be called on 

to perform a duty of international solidarity to gain admission for 

Jewish refugees into this cou11try.l" In February, 1933: "There is no 

fundamental difference between the reactionarv non-fascists and the 

fascist reactionaries." The communists are attempting to wreck the 

Social Democrat party.l3" 

All these expressions come from the Advance. ILGWU's lustice is 

virtually silent concerning the Nazi crisis. Owen Darragh writes in 

1932 "HOW Wage-Cutting Has Brought Germany to the Brink of 

Ruin": wage-cutting means more profit to, industry; this means more 

machinery, which means more unemployment.140 But Jewish consid- 

erations do not seem to enter into the policy of ILGWU's Justice as 

much as in the Hillman publication. 

Returning to h he Advance, .one is struck by the accuracy of its pre- 

dictions. While all other groups in 1931 were completely blind to the 

possibility of a coalition between the industrialists and the Hitler 

forces with a resulting fascism, the Advance saw this as not only likely 

but inevitable as thc industrialists would try to save themselves: "all 

parties of capitalism . . . . will unite in supporting Fascism." The 

middle-class was seen as throwing in its lot with the big capitalists to 

save the system through fascism. The possibility of revolution to Right 

or Left is recognized, and either way the end result would be war. The 

need for a scapegoat under fascism is recognized. The possibility of a

104 


Jewish refugee problem is envisioned. The destructive role of the 

communists is understood. And it all came to pass as predicted. Fascism 

was analyzed as the most desperate resort of a capitalist system in 

chronic crisis . . . . which led to the statement: "There is no fundamental 

difference between the reactionary non-fascists and the fascist 

reactionaries." 

So while the old middle-class was indulging in frantic optimism 

and tirades against the German spirit, and while the new middle-class 

was paying little heed to the problem, the labor groups as early as 1931 

were acutely aware of the tragedy that was about to strike and had an 

accurate understanding of the nature of Nazism! These socialist 

spokesmen for labor were antagonistic to the capitalistic system, and 

so they placed great emphasis on the economic factors responsible fo~ 

fascism. 

To understand the reactions of the Jewish groups within the working 

class to Hitler it will be necessary to analyze the attitudes of the 

Frontier (nationalistic socialists), the Jewish Labor Committcc, and 

the Call (an ti-Zionist socialists). 

In an interesting issue the Frontier, in 1935, presents a series of 

articles by Raymond Swing, Norman Thomas, Sidney Hook, and Jacob 

Lestschinsky on the middle-class in the thirties. No differentiation 

is made between anti-Semitism in America and in Germany. About 

the Jewish middle-class, the editor writes that being a minority, the 

Jewish middle-class is free "from illusions and aspirations which other 

middle-classes are prone to adopt." Ample evidence to the contrary 

has already been given. 1,estschinsky's analysis maintains: "There is a 

crisis in world Jewry because all Jews in virtually all countries are undcrgoing 

the ravages of a common set of conditions from which they 

vainly seek relief." The nineteenth century saw a trend towards a nor- 

~nalization of Jewish economic life; there was even a proletariat. But 

with a crisis this normalization stops and the Jews are de-classed: "The 

fascist national integration in the period of capitalistic decay again 

displaces the Jews from the framework of the majority nation, isolates 

them economically and politically from the related social 

classes."l41 The answer to this problem is the Jewish state, where there 

can be a normalized Jewish society. ~ittle regard is paid to the other 

remedies so stressed by the middle-classes. Indeed, mass meetings are 

hardly mentioned. And there is extreme skepticism as to the efficacy 

of the conscience of the world. After the Evian Conference, the Frontier 

reports that "every country has its alibi."l4"ut there is support 

for the boycott, the primary economic measure being taken against 

Germany: The German economy desperately needs exports; therefore, 

the boycott is effective.143 

The social influences on the Frontier's attitude become clear: The

106 AMER~CAN JEW~SH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

funds came from the member organizations, not all of which were 

exclusively Jewish. The middle-class orientation of this Committee 

therefore becomes more explicable. Since it was a creation of the nonsocialistic 

AFL, a more conservative tone may have been set from the 

beginning. At any rate, the Committee was primarily a "defence" organization 

and, as such, must have felt that the best defence is conformity 

to society and its attitudes. A labor organization for Jewish 

rights could accomplish very little if it proclaimed that the American 

system was inherently unstable. Hence, the development of a platform 

quite inconsistent with the ideology of the thoroughgoing socialists 

who officially supported the Labor Committee. 

But why did the socialist group take over the leadership of the 

JLC? A possible explanation of the need felt by non-Zionist socialist 

leaders for a Jewish defence organization is that Zionism was having 

tremendous appeal to the masses of Jewish workers. What answers 

could the non-Zionists give to the pressing problem of anti-Semitism 

other than a socialist future that would be very long in coming. Some 

concrete program through a Labor defence organization-even though 

at some variance with strict socialist ideology-was perhaps needed to 

keep the non-Zionist socialist loyal to his Jewish Bundist ideology and 

his Arbeiter Circle! 

What was the reaction of the Labor Committee towards the mass 

meeting? "Meetings are a result of a movement, not a justification for 

it."145a This coolness towards the mass meeting seems to reflect a certain 

rivalry with the American Jewish Congress, which was the main 

organization behind such meetings. For in speaking of the boycott 

which the Labor Committee supports, Vladeck maintains that this 

technique was not original with the Congmress but originated with 

Samuel Untermyer and the Jewish veterans. 

The boycott is the most effective weapon. By 1938 the Congress 

and Labor Committee had formed a Joint Boycott Council which exposed 

German generators disguised as American products.146 What underlay 

the attitudes towards mass meetings and the boycott? The mass 

meeting would not be too highly favored within a labor defence organization 

that stressed conformity and also that was well aware of 

the lack of effectiveness of such meetings. The boycott, on the other 

hand, was AFL policy and also made some economic sense to the labor 

leaders. 

It is interesting to compare the attitude of the Labor Committee, 

of which the Workmen's Circle was a member, to that of the official 

periodicals of the Circle. The Circle scorns the Voice of America and 

the Conscience of the World: 

Yes, the democracies are to blame. Sooner than see working class 

government in Germany, they preferred fascism . . . . Liberation

CRISIS AND REACTION '07 

of Germany depends upon the German workers . . . . Dare we be- 

lieve that a warring capitalist England, capitalist France, semi- 

fascist Poland, and Quixotic America will set up the foundations 

for a warless world?l47 

Fulther understanding of the lack of a "conscience" among the West- 

ern democracies is given: "Why should British wink at Fascist aid to 

Spain? Clearly because its Tory government fears the consequences of 

a left government in Spain far more than it does a Fascist dictator- 

ship."148 Joseph Baskin's "The Answer" states that the United States 

is not now protesting against Germany. But even if she should: "The 

Beasts of Berlin do not fear protests." However, " . . . . if we can fig- 

uratively beat them over the head, we sho~tld do so. With a strong eco- 

nomic boycott, we can obtain the support of many non-Jewish ele- 

ments."l49 

There is cynicism regarding the Evian conference. Writes Benja- 

min Gebiner: "I do not belong to those optimists who believe that 

eventually a 'country' of extraordinary possibilities can and will be 

found."l50 And so, the Workmen's Circle demonstrates a long-range 

understanding of why another war is not the final answer. The Circle 

naturally is skeptical regarding the Conscience of the World. Its only 

positive action seems to be consistent support of the boycott . . . . and 

a prayer for the German workers.l61 Such a program we might expect 

from the most consistently socialist group that is not so "public rela- 

tions-conscious" as the Labor Committee. 

The effects of Communist activity on the reactions to Nazism are 

so complex as to require special treatment beyond the limits of this 

paper but are so important as to require a brief review.1" After the 

rise of Hitler, the working class would not be attracted to any move- 

ment which failed to attack fascism. So, in 1935, the United or Popu- 

lar Front became Communist Party policy: all liberal elements should 

unite in such "front" organizations as the League against War and 

Fascism to fight for democracy. The answer to all anti-Semitism was 

such united action. The Popular Front did not attract an old middle- 

class which would have no sympathy for a group that had only recent- 

ly challenged the existing social order. It did not attract the workers 

who were fresh from bitter battles with the Communists in the late 

twenties when disruptive "dual-unionism" was attempted. In fact, 

Vladeck, Franz Borkenau, and Solomon Schwarz provided constant 

insights into the nature of Stalinism. The new middle-class leadership 

in the American Jewish Congress officially disavowed the front organi- 

zations. However, important members of the new middle-class and of 

the Jewish professionals were attracted to the front organizations: 

"Events have proved the utter and senseless futility of liberals and 

leftists fighting among themselves the while reaction prevails . . . .


that is the whole justification of the popular front . . . . at this precise 

moment democracy needs the united support of all who will defend 

her."153 But after the Stalin-Hitler pact, a prominent leader of the 

new middle-class stated: "We should admit our elror and revise our 

course."154 It will be recalled that these two groups were the most 

radical groups outside of the working class itself. Some of their mem- 

bers would naturally be attracted to programs filled with liberal and 

messianic phrases. (Technocracy was an attractive economic messian- 

ism.) And, lacking the understanding of the basic deceptiveness of the 

Communist Party that workers had gained through bitter contact, 

many of these liberal new middle-class and professional people were 

led in good faith to join with the Communists in popular front organi- 

zations. 

It has been demonstrated that the reactions of the groups within 

American Jewry to Hitlerism were strongly influenced by the social 

needs of those groups. 'The old middle-class thought that the rise of 

Hitler was the result of the German spirit. The bare possibility that 

fascism might be resorted to in this country would be too challenging 

to the security of the old middle-class Jew. And so, the idea of a na- 

tion's spirit was taken from the nineteenth century heritage-and the 

old middle-class used the same type of racist ideology that Hitler was 

using in his anti-Semitic attacks. There were good spirits and bad, and 

the Voice of America was thought to be a great spirit that would 

speak and the waves of history would flow backward. Opposition to 

mass meetings may be understood in the light of this group's tremend- 

ous stress on conformity as the guarantee of integration and pros- 

perity. 

The marginal economic position of the new middle-class probably 

accounts for its failure to understand crisis until it strikes, and for a 

program which is often inconsistent with its analysis: stressing the 

conscience of the world in the face of a social analysis that bespeaks 

its ineffectiveness (just as mild social reforms follow an analysis that 

called for a complete re-shaping of American society). With no fear of 

non-conformity, a program of mass meetings was possible and aided 

the group in its aspirations for power within the American Jewish 

community. 

The neo-Orthodox group of manufacturers, business men, and 

their professional appendages would be unwilling to recognize that 

American capitalism may some day have to face the problem of mar- 

kets for a tremendous industrial apparatus. But with its economic 

orientation, this group did stress such social factors as the defeat of 

Germany in World War I-such factors that would not challenge the 

American social structure. Social antagonisms inspired the theory that 

German Jews were responsible for their crisis. And mass meetings were

CRISIS AND REACTION O9 

opposed in editorials directed against new middle-class leadership. 

Socialist intellectuals in the labor movement, having no commit- 

ment to American or capitalistic social structure, were free to give an 

objective analysis that actually predicted the advent of Hitler in many 

particulars. Labor Zionist groups, with their minimal commitment to 

the American social order, would put no faith in mass meetings or the 

Voice of America. The boycott (a universal labor move) was advocated, 

but Palestine was viewed as the only solution. The Jewish Bundists 

could not admit Palestine as a solution. Perhaps this underlay the 

need for a Jewish Labor Committee, supported by Bundists but de- 

veloping a program in contradiction to socialist analysis. 

The reactions of major social groups within the American Jewish 

community to the crises confronting America and Germany during the 

thirties have been recorded. Many of these reactions were influenced 

by the role which the particular group was playing in the American 

social and economic structure. The nature and extent of these influ- 

ences are sometimes clear and unmistakable; at times they are subtle 

and debatable. An attempt has been made to' illuminate a small por- 

tion of this "social unconscious." In the light ol the evidence cited, 

the conclusions may be considered tentarive. But there is more evid- 

ence-in reactions of American Jewry to native anti-Semitism, to the 

Communist Party, to Birobidzhan, to the Jewish communal structure, 

to Zionism, and even perhaps to Judaism-there is more evidence that 

illuminares the social influences which affect our life and thought. 

When we are better able to understand the effect of social forces upon 

ourselves, then perhaps we ourselves may have greater freedom to 

mold society. 

'Henry Cohen, "Reactions of the Amer- 

ican Jewish Community to Major Prob- 

lems During the Years 1929-1939. as 

Reflected in the English American Jew- 

ish Press" (Rabbinic Thesis, Hebrew 

Union College. 1953). 

2The term, "old middle-class," and its 

usage are explained in Mills, White 

Collar (New York: Oxford, 1951). 

3The term, "new middle-class," is also 

discussed in White Collar. 

4Periodicals other than those cited were 

employed. Evidence for this over-sim- 

plified capsulizing of a complex com- 

munity is found in the rabbinic thesis, 

op. cit., pp. 9-57. 

=.4H, February 7, 1930, p. 484. 

NOTES 

OZbid., January 31, 1930. 

7Zbid., hiarch zi, 1930. 

sfbid., January 2, 1931. 

gZhid., November 20, 1931. 

1°lbid., March 17, 1933, p, 307. 

"Zbid., April I, 1932, p. 506. 

121bid., January 3, 1930, p. 350. 

I3Ibid., March 7, 1930, p. 622. 

14Natio?~'s Business, January, 1932, p. 15. 

15Mills, op. cit., p. 351. 

laStephen S. Wise, "As I See It," Opinion, 

August 1, 1932. 

170pinion, June 27, 1932. 

18Nation, July 20, 1932. pp. 53-54. 

lQJustice, January 31, 1930. 

20ddvance, January 17, 1930. 

211bitl., June 6, 1930.

221f there is insufficient purchasing power, 

inject more money into the economy 

through wage hikes, government loans 

to industry, new money. Then pro- 

ducers can raise prices and the profit 

rate will be restored. This is bascd on 

Irving Fischer's Quantity Theory of 

Money and was the basis of the New 

Deal. Critical econolnis ts point out 

that production will be stimulatetl 

temporarily but that these inflationary 

measures do not solve the more basic 

problems of over-production and sat- 

uration of markets. John Strachev, 

The Nature of the Capitalist Crisis 

(New York: Covici-Friede, 1935). pp. 

43 ff. Fritz Sternberg, Capitalism and 

Socialisna on Trial (New York: John 

Day, 1950). pp. 277-320. 

23dduance, January 17, 1930. 

24Ibid., june 17, 1930. 

251bid., September 5, 1930. 

26Zbid., July, 1932, p. 23. 

27Zbid., November, 1932. 

28Zbid.. November 28, 1930, p. 2. 

291bid., May, 193% p. 7. 

30American Federationist, November, 

1932. Also John Clark, "The Riddle 

of the Business Cycle," American Ped- 

erationist, October, 199% 

31Labor Age, December-January, 1933. 

32Zbid., May, 1931. 

%AH, August 25, 1939. 

3*Zbid., September I, 1933, p. 231. 

3SIbid., February 2, 1934. 

3"Three Years of Dr. Roosevelt," Amer- 

ican Mercury, March, 1936, p. 257. 

37Mills, up. cit., p. 324. 

38AH, October 2, 1936 

3@Norman Thomas, After the New Deal, 

What? (New York: Macmillan, 1936). 

40AZf, April 1, 1938, p. 4. 

"lZbid., January 22, 1938. 

42Natioit's Busii~ess, June, 1938, p. 53. 

438H, August 19, 1938. 

440pinion, April, August, October, 1933. 

""lid., February, 1934. 

"6h1ation, January 25, 1933. Also Hazlitt, 

' Scrambled Eggs," Nation, February 1, 

'933. 

47JS, November, 1936, pp. 3-4. 

48Nation, March 18, 1937. 

'QIbid., November 19, 1938, p. 536. 

LICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

50JF, January, 1936, pp. 13 ff. 

5'JF, September, 1933. 

52IBid. 

53 JF, June, 1935. 

"4Zbid., p. 120. 

55Ibid., A~gust, 1935, pp. 183 R. 

561bid., October, 1937. 

57 JSSQ, January, 1934. 

jslhirl., June, 1934, p. 276. 

5Q1bid., September, 1934, p. 1 I. 

ODIbid., March, 1936, p. 288. 

61Reco~zstructionist, Januarv 11, 1935. 

O2Zbid., March 5, 1937. 

=Ibid., May 28, 1937. p. 14. 

64Zbid., October 8, 1937. 

051bid., December 17, 1937. 

oGS~~e)', July, 19339 p. 243. 

O71bid., June, 1934, p. 179. 

68Advance, January, 1933. 

eaZbid., May, 1933, p. 74. 

701bid., June, 1933, p. 13. 

'llbid., p. 14. 

72Zbid., p. 18. 

73Zbid., October, 1933, p. 28. 

74Z6id., February, 1934, p. 12. 

751bid., January 16, 1934. 

76Zbid., April, 1935, p. 4. 

77Z6id., October, 1936, p. 8. 

7816itl., October, 1937. 

7Vbid., Decembe~, 1938, p. 1. 

801FR, January, 1935. 

SlIbid., July, 1936. 

BZLZN, June 4, 1937. The author is S. 

Grodzinski. 

83 JFR, February, 1939. 

84Youth at the Crossroads, 1998, p. 7. An 

obscure anonymous pamphlet (Hebrew 

Union College Library). 

85CY, March, 1934, p. 5. 

s6Ibid., September, 1934, p. 5. 

87Zbid.. Janua~y, 1935, p. 2. 

8*Zbid., August, 1935, p. 4. 

ssZ6id., July, 1936, p. 6. 

90Cal1, February, 1938, p. 9. 

"'Zbid., January, 1939, p. g. 

"21bid., October, 1939. 

Q3Ibid., November, 1939, p. 12. 

g4This is a frequent phenomenon in contracting 

societies. When the feudal 

world was in decline (14th-to-16th 

century Germany, 18th-and 19th-century 

Poland, 20th-century Russia), 

anti-Semitism became the official gov-


ernment policy. And with the downfall 

of the flourishing city-states of Renais- 

sance Italy (when the Jews who had 

lent money to the impoverished Italian 

artisans could no longer be paid back, 

as early Italian capitalism was in a 

state of chronic depression) the official 

policy of the city-states became anti- 

Semitic. 

05"And there was a great danger that 

Germany's exports would not prove 

suflicient to pay for all the imports she 

needed for her re-armament program." 

Sternberg, op. cit., p. 360. 

96Between 1933 and 1938 there were no 

official representations to Hitler. The 

only official intercessions were apologies 

for the actions of such rambunctiolls 

Americans as Magistrate Louis Urodskv 

and Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia. ("I 

very earnestly deprecate the utterances 

which have thus given offense to the 

German government. They do not rep- 

resent the attitude of this government 

toward the German government.") 

With the launching of the prepared- 

ness program in 1938, it was national 

policy to oppose Hitler. The Voice of 

America was controlled by national 

interests and not by the mass meetings 

that began in 1933. 

97Similarly, "typical also of the Rou- 

manian mind" is the desecration of 

cemeteries (AH, May 30, 1930)). The 

answer to anti-Semitism in Roumania 

is public education (AH, September 5, 

1930). And despite a Bulgarian student 

riot, "there is nothing fundamental in 

Bulgarian life or tradition that can 

turn the masses against the Jews of the 

country" (AH, August 28, 1931). 

98AH, December 22, 1933, p. 118. 

9gIbid., April 14, 1933, p. 385. 

loOADL Review, October, 1939, p. 2. 

1°'AH, April 21, 1933, p. 403. 

102BBMG, May, 1933. 

lo3AH, April 28, 1933, p. 432. Also see 

"B'nai B'rith and the Boycott," BBMG. 

November, 1933, p. 56: Patience and 

submission have saved the Jews 

throughout the years. Being a minority, 

the Jews can have little influence. 

Io40pinion, March, 1935, p. 5. 

1050pinion, July, 1933. 

"Tlpinion, August, 1933. Also, AJCC, 

April 21, 1933. 

lo7AJCI, October, 1930, p. 7. 

lo80pinion, January, 1932, p. 11. 

'OnIbirl., March 21, 1932. 

llOIbirl., May 2, 1932. 

ll1Ibid., March, 1933. 

112Reco~~structionist, June 17, 1938 

""BBM, May 26, 1935 

l140piiaion, August, 1934. 

l151bid., August, 1934. 

l16AJCC, April 21, 1933. 

l17CB, January lo, 1936. 

l18Ibid., November 25, 1938 

190pinion, August, I 933. 

lZ0JF, July, 1931, p. 243. 

1211bid., October, 1931, pp. 361-62. 

lZ2Ibid., November, 1931, p. 415. 

1231bid., May, 1932, pp. 148 ff. 

lZ4Ibid., June, 1931. p. 403. 

Iz5Ibid., May, 1932, p p 148 ff. 

'2eIbid., September, 1933, p. 48 

L271/~ir/.. p. 71. 

lZ81bid., pp. 44 ff. 

1291bid., June, 1935, p. 124. 

130Ihid., November, 1934, p. 307. 

1311bid., August, 1935. 

1321bid., October, 1953, pp. 102 ff. 

133JF, March, 1937, and April, 1938. The 

World Jewish Congress, spearheaded 

by the American Jewish Congress, is 

very reluctantly supported. "How far 

from a majority of Jewry are rep- 

iesented in the Congress?" asks the 

Forum and goes on to say that its 

purpose is to belittle anybody con- 

nected with rival organizations. 

134Advar~ce, July 31, 1931, p. 11. The 

author is Charles Ervin. 

1351bid., September 18, 1931, p. 8. 

laGIbid., November 13, 1931, p. 18. Again, 

Ervin. 

'37Ibid., December 25, 1931, p. 6. The 

author is Ludwig Lore. 

1381bid., January, 1932, p. 18. Again, Lore 

1391bid., February, 1933. 

140Justice, March, 1932, p. 15. 

141 JFR, October, 1935, pp. 18 ff. 

1421bid., August, 1938. 

1431bid., November, 1938, p. 26. 

14*AH, April 1, 1938, p. lo. 

145Call, January 1939, p. lo.


145aAH, April I, 1938, p. lo. 150Call, September, 1938, p. 11. 

146AH, April 1, 1938, p. 10. l"'lhid., February, 1938, p. 13. 

147Call, May, 1939, p. 6. 15'Henry Cohen, op. cit., pp. 231-52. 

14"CE; January, 1934, p. 4. 153Keconstructio?zist, April 22, 1938 

14YZbid., September, 1935, p. 5. 1540pinion, September, 1939. p. 21. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The following Jewish periodicals were primary sources. Every issue 

available in the period 1929 - 1939 was investigated. This included: 

Advance (New York: 1929 - i939), usually weekly. 

American Hebrew (New York: 1929 - 1939). weekly. 

American Jewish Congress Courier (New York: 1933 - 1934). irregular. 

American Jezuish Congress Index (New York: 1929 - 1930), irregular. 

American Jewish Year Book (New York: 1929 - 1939), annual. 

B'nai B'rith Magazine (Chicago: 1929 - i939), monthly. 

B'nai B'rith Messenger (Los Angeles: 1929 - 1939)~ weekly. 

Call of Youth (New York: 1934 - 1937). monthly. 

Congress Bulletin (New York: 1935 - 1939)~ weekly. 

Contemporary Jezuish Record (New York: 1938 - 1939). bi-monthly. 

Jewish Forz1.m (New York: 1929 - ig39), monthly. 

Jewish Frontier (New York: 1934 - 1939)~ monthly. 

Jewish Life (New York: 1937 - 1938), monthly. 

Jewish Outlook (New York: 1938 - 1939). monthly. 

Jewish People's Voice (New York: 1938 - 1939). 

Jewish Social Service Quurterly (New York: 1929 - 1939). 

Justice (New York: 1929 - 1939). usually weekly. 

Labor Palestine (New York: 1933). monthly. 

Labor Zionist Newsletter (New York: 1936 - 1939), fortnightly. 

Menorah Journal (New York: 1929 - 1939), monthly. 

National Conference of Jewish Social Service: Proceedings (New York: 

1929 - 1936), annual. 

hTational Conference of Jewish Social Welfare: Proceedings (New 

York: 1937 - 1939). annual. 

New Palestine (New York: 1929 - 1938)~ monthly. 

Opinion (New York: 1931 - 1939), monthly. 

Reconstructionist (New York: 1935 - 1939)~ bi-weekly. 

SA J Review (New York: 1928 - i929), weekly. 

Scribe (Portland: 1929 - 1939), weekly. 

Vangtlard (New York: 1929 - 1930), monthly. 

The following non-Jewish periodicals were used: 

American Federationist, American Mercury, Fortune, Labor Age, Na- 

tion, Nation's Business, New Masses, Suruey.

CRISIS AND REACTION Ilg 

The following secondary sources were used: 

BEARD, CHARLES A. and MARY R. Arnerica in Midpassage. New York: 

Macmillan, 1946. 

CHURGIN, P., and LEON GELLMAN (ed.). ~Mizrachi Jubilee Publication. 

New York: Posy-Shoulson Press, 1936. 

ELBOGEN, ISMAR. A Century of Jewish Life. Philadelphia: The Jewish 

Publication Society, 1944. 

GLASSMAN, LEO. (ed.). Biographical Encyclopedia of Anzerican Jezos. 

New York: Maurice Jacobs and Leo Glassman, 1935. 

HURWITZ, MAXIMILIAN. History of the Workmen's Circle. New York: 

The Workmen's Circle, I 936. 

KARPF, MAITRICE, Jezuish Conznzunity Organization in the United 

States. New York: Bloch, 1938. 

MII.~.~, CHARLES. White Collar. New York: Oxford, 19.51. 

SIMONS, JOHN (ed.). PVlro's Who in ilmerican Jewry, (1938 - 1939). New 

York: Na~io~lal News Assn., 1939. 

STERNBERG, FKI-IZ. Capitalism and Socialisnz on Trial. New York: John 

Day Co., 19 jo. 

STRACHEY, JOHN. The Kature of the Capitalist Crisis. New York: Covici-Friede, 

I 935. 

Who's LVho in American Jezury, 1928. New Yoi-k: Jewish Biogaphical 

Bureau, 1928. 

EXPLANATION OF ABBREVIAI'IONS 

[NOTE: In the case of periodicals anti newspapers: when page numbers are noL given. 

the reference can be found 011 the editorial page.] 

AH 

A JCC 

A JYB 

BBM 

BBhfC, 

CB 

CJR 

American Hebrezu 

American Jewish 

Congress Courier 

American Jezuish 

Congress Index 

American Jezuish Year 

Book 

B'nai B'rith Messenger 

R'nai B'rith Magazine 

Congress Bulletin 

Contemporary Jewish 

Record 

Call of Youth 

Jewish Forum 

Jewish Frontier 

Jezuish Life 

Jewish Outlook 

Jewish People's Voice 

Jewish Spectator - 

Labor Palestine 

Labor Zionist 

Newsletter 

National Conference of 

Jewish Social Service: 

Annual Report 

New Palestine 

SAJ Review 

Jezuish Social Seruice 

Qun~terly


This excerpt is from a letter of Rebecca Gratz of Philadelfihia to her 

brother, Benjamin, in Lexinglon, Kentucky, July 12, 1844. It is made 

available through the courtesy of the American Jewish Historical Soci- 

e@ of New 2Tork (Rosenbach Collection) which possesses the original. 

REBECCA GRATZ 

ON RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY 

After the Catholic-Protestant Riots in Philadelfihta in Whzch 

"-- - Dozens oj Persons Were Kilted or Maimed (1844) 

The present outbreak is an attack on the Catholic 

Church, and there is so much violent animosity be- 

tween that sect and the Protestants that unlcss the 

strong arm of power is raised to sustain the provisions 

of the Constitution of the U. S., securing to every 

citizen the privilege of worshipping God according to 

his own conscience, America will be no longer the 

happy asylum of the oppressed and the secure dwell- 

ing place of religion. Intolerance has been too preva- 

lent of late, and many of the clergy of different de- 

nominations are chargable with its growth. The 

whole spirit and oflice of religion is to make men 

merciful and humblc and just. If such teaching was 

preached by the pastors to their own congregations 

and the charge of others left to their own clergy, God 

would be better served and human society governed 

more in accorclance to His holy commandments.

American Jewry in 1753 and in 1853 

Moses Lopez, an older half-brother of Aaron Lopez, who had come to 

America in the early I~~o's, probably, and had been naturalized in 

1740 or 1741, was licensed by the General Assembly of Rhode Island 

to make potash (Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society, 

VI [1897], 72). 

Abraham Sarzedas, a merchant, became a freeman of New York in 

1753 (Zbid., p. 102). Abraham's son, David, was a lieutenant in the 

Georgia Continental Line. 

David Merldez Machado, the great-grandfather of Mordecai M. Noah, 

who had left Lisbon, Portugal, in 1732, died in New York. He was 

the hazzan of the Spanish and Portuguese Congregation Shearith Is- 

rael (PAJHS, I1 [18gq], 44 ff.). 

Joseph Solomon Ottolenghe, an Italian convert, who came to Georgia 

to superintend the new silk industry, received a grant of three hun- 

dred acres of land from the Trustees of the colony (PAJHS, X [1go2], 

90). 

MINUTES OF THE CONGREGATION SHEARITH ISRAEI, NEW YORK. 

MAY 14, 1753 

At a general1 meeting of the whole congregation, Elias Solomons was 

duly ellected in the room [place] of Asher Campanel, des'd [deceased], 

to serve the Kaal as samaz ["beadle"] under the following ristrictions, 

vizt.: 

First To keep the sinagogue clean, see that the tamid (perpetual lamp) 

is allways light, and attend duly there. Allso at berritts ("circum- 

cisions") and f uneralls. 

2d To make the candles for the use of the sinagogue. 

gd To call at the yehidims ["members"] houses on Fryday after- 

noons and Ereb Yomtobs ["eve of holidays"]. 

4th To keep the buring ground clean, and obey the parnazes ["presi-


dent's"] orders in everything that relatcs to the sinagogue affairs, 

and act in the office of samaz in every shape whatsoever. 

And in consideration of the above service, he is to be paid at the 

rate of twenty pounds, curr't money, p'r annuln with his massott ["un- 

leavened bread"], but no wood to be given him. 

At the same meeting it was unanimously agreed to allow Rachel 

Campanel the sum of twenty pounds, curr't money, p'r annurn, in 

consideration of her age and infermities, any law to the contrary, not- 

withstanding. 

Ve Salom ("And let there be peace."). 

Henja Gomez 

Jacob Franks. 

(PA JHS, XX1 [ 191 33, 69-70) 

CENTENNIAL ANNIVERSARIES 

JANUARY TO APRIL 

Erection of a new synagogue in Cincinnati, Ohio, at the corner ol 

Sixth Street and Broadway. "It is a beautilul edifice" with "an impos- 

ing appearance" (Tlze A~nzoncan, VII [1853], 185). 

The congregation of Mobile, Ala., consecrated its new synagogue on 

March i I th. "The city authorities, the clergy, and a considerable nui- 

ber of citizens of both sexes attended by special invitation; and men 

of all denominations could have becn seen moving toward the build- 

ing, the first that ever was dedicated for that purpose in the State of 

Alabama" (The Occident, XI [i853], 114 if.). 

Organization of a congregation in Danville, Pennsylvania (Ibid., p. 

420). 

Adoption of a new constitution by the Bnai El congregation of St. 

Louis, Mo., lately formed by a union of two previously existing com- 

munities (Ibid., p. 123). 

The German congregation of New Orleans, La., organized under its 

new charter, under the name of Shangarai Chassed, on the 25th of 

March, elected its new officers (Ibid., p. 124). 

In Chicago a mob interposed in favor of a poor fugitive slave who 

had been arrested by the Federal authorities and liberated him. The

JEWRY IN 1753 AND 1853 "7 

mob was led by Michael Greenebaum, and a mass meeting was held 

that evening to ratify this act (PAJHS, V [1897], 154). 

"It is generally understood that Mr. August Schonberg, formerly of 

Hanau, Germany-better known in this country by his Frenchified 

and beautiful alias of Auguste Belmont-lately Consul-General for the 

United States of his Royal-Imperial Majesty of Austria, but more recently 

an independent Democrat of this city, is an applicant for the 

post of chargk d'affaires at Naples. 

"We don't wish to interfere in Democratic family matters, but we 

desire to show our appreciation of the effective and weighty character 

of the late Consul-General's services to the present administration and 

the cause of human rights and universal democracy in the late election. 

And. accordin~lv. " ,. we here add our voice to the various other Democratic 

recommendations which urge his appointment to that easy and 

luxuriolls place. There can be no doubt of his qualifications to represent 

the hard-fisted democracy at the ~ea~olitan Court, and to carry 

out there the Monroe Doctrine, Cuba and Mexico, fifty-four forty, and 

all other points of that energetic foreign policy which is going to be 

the glory of the Pierce administration. We hope there may [be] no 

delay in his nomination" (The New York Tribune, March 22, 1853. 

Quoted in PAJHS, XXVII [ig20], 5 10). 

The Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise, of Albany, N. Y., was elected again 

to officiate as chaplain to both branches of the legislature of the State 

of New York (The Asmonenn, VII [1853], 305). 

Samson Simpson, the president of the Theological Seminary and 

Scientific Institute in New York, donated to this institution five acres 

of valuable ground, in the most elevated part of Yonkers, for the build- 

ing of school houses (The Asmonean,, VIII [1853], 25). 

From a report on the Jews in California: "The Israelites are steadily 

increasing in numbers and importance in that new state, and several 

hold public trusts. Mr. Joseph Shannon is treasurer of San Francisco 

County, and Mr. Sol Heydenfeldt is judge of the Supreme Court of 

the state. Mr. Elkan Heydenfeldt, his brother, and Mr. Isaac N. Car- 

dozo, are members of the House of Representatives" (The Occident, XI 

['853], 78 ff.). 

MAY TO AUGUST 

In an address delivered in the senate chamber of the Empire State, on 

May 31st, Senator Cooley, while criticizing the sale of rum, attacked 

the German Jews of America: "If the sale was confined alone to pure


liquors, the evil would be vastly less; but it is almost impossible to find 

a drop of pure liquor in New York, or Albany, or .Troy. Adulterating 

establishments abound-German Jews mix up the adulterated poison, 

and it is working the greatest mischief to the community. This is about 

the only reason why we cannot have a decent government in New 

York" (The Asmonean, VIII [i8;3], 64). 

On the 3rd of May, the Jews of Philadelphia held a meeting for the 

purpose of buying a suitable plot of ground for a cemetery (The Oc- 

cident, XI [i853], 184). 

Solomon Cohen, a citizen of Savannah, Ga., who was elected a mem- 

ber of the representative branch of the state legislature in 1830, and 

was appointed by President Martin Van Buren district attorney of the 

United States, for the District of Georgia, in 1840, "has been invested 

with the responsible and honorable post of U. S. Postmaster, at Savan- 

nah, Ga., tendered lo him unsought, and urged on his acceptance by 

President Pierce and his cabinet" (Zbid., pp. 267 ff.; Tlze Asmonec~n, 

VIII ['8531. 99). 

Under the name of "The Well of Life" a new congregation was or- 

ganized and a synagogue was dedicated in Cumberland, Maryland 

(The Occident, XI 118531, 187). 

Election of M. Seligson, formerly a resident of Philadelphia, as mayor 

of Galveston, Texas (Zbid., p. 188). 

Establishment of a Hebrew Benevolent Society in Marysville, Calif. 

Isaac Leeser, of Philadelphia, was elected an honorary member of the 

Society (Zbid., p. 329). 

SEPTEhlBER TO DECEMBER 

From a report on the yellow fever in New Orleans: "The first interment 

(in thc German Hebrew Burying Ground) took place on July 

loth, and the last on September ~3rd. Such a vast amount of death 

among a comparative small population is truly appalling. Whole 

families have been swept away, and left perhaps a lonely survivor" 

(Zbid., p. 537 f.). 

From a letter written by the Hebrew Benevolent Association of New 

Orleans to The Occident on the epidemic: "The season we have just 

passed may justly be said to have tried men's souls. Those who were 

eye-witnesses to the devastating effects of the pestilence saw distress, 

affliction, suffering, death, and desolation, on every side. At home, old

and young, rich and poor, were engaged day and night in attending 

to the wants of the sick, in performing the last offices to the dead, in 

relieving the distresses of the bereaved and destitute; whilst from all 

sections of our country charitable contributions were sent in aid of the 

sufferers" (Ibid., p. 582 f.). 

In September, the congregants of Shangarai Chassed of New Orleans, 

who "have nobly fulfilled their sacred duties," appealed for aid to the 

Jewish congregations of America (The Asmonean, VIII [1853], 160). 

The synagogue of the Bnai Israel congregation in Cincinnati, Ohio, 

was consecrated with the usual ceremonies on the 14th of September. 

Dr. Morris J. Raphall of New York delivered an impressive oration. 

The services were conducted by the Reverend Hart Judah, the local 

minister (The Occident, XI [1853], 423). 

A new Portuguese congregation, "Gates of Heaven," was organized in 

San Francisco, California (Ibid., p. 427). 

A congregation was organized in Sacramento, California (Ibid., p. 329). 

The First Hebrew Benevolent Society of San Francisco was reorgan- 

ized under a new constitution (Ibid., p. 329). 

On October rljth, Isaac M. Wise of Albany was unanimously elected 

minister of Congregation Bene Jeshurun in Cincinnati (Ibid., p. 532). 

The Mount Sinai Cemetery Association of Philadelphia was organized 

under the presidency of Mr. Hcnry Mayer. "They have purdiased a 

considerable tract of land, and have laid out a portion in family bury- 

ing lots" (Ibid., p. 476). 

Samson Simpson of New York laid the cornerstone for the building of 

a hospital on the lot presented by him to the Jewish Hospital Society, 

on Twenty-Eighth Street, between Seventh and Eighth Avenues. Mr. 

Hcnry Hendricks, the treasurer of the Society, made an address, and 

handed Simpson a silver trowel to do the work expected of him. 

Thanking him for the honor, Simpson placed a box containing the 

usual mementoes in the corner-stone (Ibid., p. 530 f.). 

The death is announced of Solomon Mencken, "who originated and 

aided in establishing the first synagogue ever erected in Cincinna~i" 

(Ibid., p. 540). 

Dr. Isaac M. Wise paid a formal visit to Cincinnati and preached in


all the congregations to the "great satisfaction" of their members 

(Ibid., p. 587). 

Joseph Simpson, a resident of Baltimore, a generous, learned, highly 

respected man, and a well-known lapidary seal engraver, published a 

pamphlet entitled The Scapegoat. The title page showed a scapegoat 

riding a rooster. He refuted an anti-Jewish article, written probably 

by a Christian missionary, and published in one of the Baltimore 

newspapers under the title "On the Day of Atonement" (PAJHS, XI 

[1903], 160). 

This year marked the publication of the first complete English trans- 

lation of the Holy Scriptures by a Jew. This was the Leeser Bible, a 

pioneer work, written for Jews by the Reverend Mr. Isaac Leeser of 

Philadelphia. It was the only English Bible which American Jewry 

used until the year 1917. 

Dr. Jacob R. Marcus, Editor 

American Jewish Archives 

Cincinnati 20, Ohio 

My dear Sir: 

LETTER TO THE EDITOR 

February 16, 1953 

As Managing Editor of Jewish Life, I wish to record certain facts about the au- 

spices under which the magazine has been and is published, in order to correct 

misstatements on this point by Ellis Rivkin in the American Jewish Archives of 

January, I 953. 

Jewish Life was published by the Morning Freiheit Association from November, 

1946, to July, 1950, and then by Morgen Freiheit, Inc., from August, 1950, to July, 

195.1. These bodies also published the Yiddish daily newspaper, Morning Freiheit, 

wh~ch, however, is not an official organ of the Communist Party of the United 

States, any more than is Jewish Life. 

Since August, 1951, Jewish Life has been published by Progressive Jewish Life, Inc. 

These facts about the publication of Jewish Life may help your readers determine 

the validity of, Dr. Rivkin's attempt to divert attention from the merits of Morris 

U. Schappes's A Documeiztary History of the Jeus in the United States, 1654-1875 

by the statement, not only of questionable relevancy but untrue, that Jewish Life 

is an official organ of the Communist Party. 

Very truly yours, 

(Signed) LOUIS HARAP 

Managing Editor

An Eighteenth-Century 

American Responsum 

SOLOMON B. FREEHOF 

It is almost a commonplace by now that the responsa literature is a 

unique source for the social and religious life of Jewry through the 

ages. Ever since Benzion Katz published his little study of the history 

of the Jews of Russia, Poland, and Lithuania (Berlin 1899) there have 

been a number of other studies using the responsa as background for 

Jewish history. The early history of American Jewry can, likewise, be 

enriched from this source. Some pioneer work in this field was done 

in America in Hebrew Literature by Dr. Mendel Silber of New Orleans 

in 1928. Much more material will yet be uncovered from two 

sources: one, the existing literature of the European rabbis, and, 

second, the letters written during the early history of American congregations. 

One such letter is found in the Publications of the American Jewish 

Historical Society, XXVII (igeo), 185-90. The American Jewish 

Archives, through the courtesy of the American Jewish Historical Society-which 

possesses the original letter-made a photostat copy available 

to me. 

The author of this responszsm was Manuel Josephson of Philadelphia. 

Josephson, a German immigrant, had come to these shores 

no later than the time of the French and Indian War of the i75o's, 

and had worked as a sutler at Fort Edward, near Lake ~eor& Bnd 

Lake Champlain. Later, as a successful merchant, he had lived in 

Philadelphia and was responsible for the letter addressed to George 

Washington in 1790 by the Jewish congregations of New York, Philadelphia, 

Richmond, and Charleston. He was one of the best Hebraists 

in the colonies and was versed in rabbinic literature. 

The Josephson letter was sent on February 4, 1790, from Philadelphia 

to Moses Seixas of Newport, Rhode Island. It is an answer to 

a ritual query which the Philadelphian received on December 3, 1789. 

The problem posed is the permissibility of certain ritual variations in 

the worship of the Newport synagogue. 

The fact that the responszlnz is in English (and not in Hebrew) 

does not make it less authentic a part of the responsa literature. Many 

Dr. Solomon B. Freehof is rabbi of Temple Rodef Shalom, Pittsburgh, and is a11 

authority on rabbinic responsa.

122 AMERICAN JEWISH ARCI-IIVES, JUNE, 1953 

Po. -;ir h? 1cvtaii.ih T1,~:rr Ow,zrd by llii Inn~lly oj Dr. 1. Mi,,,r Hnyr 

MANUEL JOSEPHSON 

1Cigh~een~ll-Century Jewish Com~nunal Leadel.

AN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY RESPONSUM '23 

of the responsa of the Geonim, and most of the responsa of Maimonides 

and Alfasi, were in Arabic. It is perhaps somewhat untypical in 

that it contains very little of the usual minute dissection of the relevant 

texts (pilpul), but is a straightforward citation of relevant authority 

on two main questions wherein there was some variation of 

observance in the synagogue: first, as to the reading of the Torah, and, 

second, as to the blowing of the shofar. 

The second question with regard to the shofar is of no especial 

importance. The man who blew the shofar was not of good character, 

and Seixas preferred to have no shofar blowing at all rather than to 

have it blown by a man of dubious character. Besides, the shofar was 

cracked. ~ose~hson agrees (as a temporary measure) to the first con- 

sideration but tells how the shofar cracks may be repaired: They may 

be bound but not plugged. - -- 

It is the first auestion which is of " meat interest. It seems that there 

was no one available to read the weekly portion from the Torah, from 

the Scroll, with proper grammatical pronunciation and cantillation. 

Therefore, Seixas had the Torah taken out everv Sabbath merelv as a 

symbol, but the reading was done from a printed book (humash). 

Josephson denounces this procedure. He cites from Joseph Caro 

(from the Bet Yosef to the Tur, Orah Hayyim, 143) all the opinions 

marshalled there against the proposal that the Torah may be read 

from a humash. Of course, he bases most of his argument upon Joseph 

Caro, who is particularly strict in the matter. He does not, however, 

mention the fact that Maimonides in his responsa (ed. Freimann Nos. 

43) makes the opposite decision and says that the blessings may be recited 

over reading from any kind of book or even an imperfect 

(pasul) Torah: "for the blessing does not depend upon the book (or 

the Scroll) whether it be kosher or not, but upon the reading." Caro 

himself finds it necessary to undo the effect of this forthright decision 

of Maimonides, and says that it was the opinion of the sages of Narbonne 

that Maimonides changed his mind about this matter in later 

years (compare with Yad, hilkot sefer torah, X, I). 

It is of interest that this question (whether in an emergency one 

may read the Scriptural portion on the Sabbath from a printed book) 

comes up frequently. Torahs are not always available or, if available, 

often become pasul, or there is no skilled reader who knows the punctuation 

and the cantillation. That is why all the legal codes have to 

transmit laws on this question. (See Isserles to Shulhan Aruh, Orah 

Hayyzm, 143, NO. 2, as to what to do when the cantor does not know 

the cantillation.) 

The same question was raised by Jews who regularly crossed 

the Sahara with caravans. May they read from a printed humash since 

the journey occupies a number of weeks? The question and answer is

124 


in a manuscript collection of the rabbis of Marrakeesh and is cited 

by Joseph Messas, rabbi of Tlemcen, in his Mayyim Hayyim, No. 79. 

Also the same question was recently asked of the Division of Religious 

Activities of the Jewish Welfare Board by the Joint Chaplaincy Board 

(of the Defense Department), whether it would be permissible to use 

a photostated miniature Sefer Torah in field services and recite the 

blessings over it. 

The responsum of Josephson, by its very strictness, carries out the 

intention of the law, that we should be strict on the matter and insist 

that the reading be from a kosher scroll, or otherwise the people might 

be neglectful in securing one. 

Besides the specific questions (the Torah and the shofar) which 

Josephson discusses, the responsunz gives a fine picture of the state of 

religious observance in the American congregations. 

Josephson was discussing the difference between law and custom, 

the law being fixed and custom variable. In order to describe how 

variable customs can be, he gives a description of the contemporaly 

observance of religious rites in the American congregations. He says 

that in the historic congregations, in the Old World, even the local 

customs have been carefully written down and are scrupulously ob- 

served, but in America the observance of ritual customs is chaotic: 

As to our North American congregations, not much can be said 

in that respect, as in reality they have no regular system, chiefly 

owing (in my opinion) to the smallness of their numbers, and the 

frequent mutability of the members from one place to another. 

And as from their first establishment they had no fixed and per- 

manent rules to go by, so they have continually remained in a 

state of fluctuation. And every new comer introduced something 

new, either from his own conceit and fancy, or (what is more 

probable) from the custom of the congregation where he was bred, 

or the one he last came from. 

This I can averr from my own observations to have been the 

case frequently at New York ever since I knew it, as well by tran- 

sient persons as the several lrazanim they have had there from 

time to time, the present one [Gershom M. Seixas] not excepted, 

who during his being in office has collected some materials from 

one and another and patched up a system of ceremonies of his 

own, which will be followed during the time he remains in ofice. 

But no sooner another one succeeds, some new customs and form- 

alities will be introduced, especially if he happens to be an Eu- 

ropean. He will alledge (as most of the narrow-minded part of 

them are apt to do): What did your late lzazan know about these 

matters, or indeed how should he, seeing he never was out of 

America, etc., etc. 

I say such arrogant language is common among the unpol-

AN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY RESPONSUAI 1 25 

ished Europeans, more especially among Our People who suppose 

it next to impossible any knowledge can be obtained out [out- 

side] of Europe. Whereupon the rulers [of the synagogue], who 

mostly are men of yesterday, strangers to the Portugaise minhag 

["rite"], and as much so to the Dutch minhag, altho' bred to it, 

because having been of little consequence in their own country, 

[are] of course, not in the way to know or in fact to trouble them- 

selves about matters of that sort. Or, should it even happen that 

some of the rulers and members are Portugaises, the same observa- 

tion may hold good with them as the others, and both descrip- 

tions [German and Portuguese Jews] (being Europeans) will most 

probable unanimously subscribe to the opinions of the new hazan 

and adopt them, as doubless he must know better than the late 

one. 

Now this circumstance does not, nor can not find place in the 

large and old established congregations abroad, as they have their 

customs and ceremonies even the most minute, reduced to a regu- 

lar system, etc. 

This vivid description of the lack of order in ritual observance in 

eighteenth-century America comes up incidentally in the discussion of 

the relationship between din ["law"] and minhag ["custom"], as in- 

deed most of the historical descriptions come up in the responsa litera- 

ture. They are perhaps all the more trustworthy because they are not 

a conscious attempt at historical description. 

THE AMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES with its staff of technical 

experts welcomes your interest in its efforts to preserve the 

living history of the Jew in America. 

If you have papers, manuscripts, journals, record books and 

the like at home, that are gathering dust in some chest or 

attic, the ARCHIVES would welcome them as your gift. Let 

us preserve them for you and the future. 

Photostat and microfilm services are available to reproduce 

documents. 

May we cordially invite your full use of our resources and 

facilities ?

Reviews of Books 

THE SEPHARDIM OF ENGLAND. By Albert M. Hyamson. Lon- 

don. Methuen G. Co., Ltd. 1951. xii, 468 pp. 35s. 

This new book of Albert M. Hyamson is interesting and eminently 

worthwhile. It is a substantial volume, replete with relevant data and, 

like all his writings, very readable. 

As the title makes clear, the history is that of the Spanish-Portuguese 

Jews of England, not of America. However, a chapter, "The 

Sephardim Beyond the Seas," addresses itself largely to the West India~ 

and to the British North American mainland. It is only this section 

which concerns us. 

So excellent is the book as a whole that it is worthwhile to discuss 

more focally here some facets of the items which are, of course, only 

peripheral to Mr. Hyamson's purposes. 

. # . # * 

Beginning with the seventeenth century, congregations of the Spanish- 

Portuguese rite began to emerge in the West Indias, in Jamaica, Bar- 

bados, Nevis, St. Eustatius, and possibly even in Tobago and in Trini- 

dad. On the continent to the north there were synagogal communities 

in Montreal, Newport, New York, Philadelphia, Charlestown, and Sa- 

vannah. 

It is imperative to bear in mind that the congregations of the West 

Indias were, for the most part, larger and more important than those 

on the British-American mainland, at least commercially. This was 

certainly true up to the Revolution of 1775. 

The author points out that many notable Anglo-Jewish Sephardic 

families traveled back and forth for commercial reasons between Lon- 

don and the West Indias. It is equally true that they included North 

America in their travels; the mainland, too, can document the pres- 

ence of Bueno de Mesquitas, Gideons, Navarros, Baruch Lousadas, 

and, later, Massiahs (Massias'). 

Mr. Hyamson helps us put the North American colonies "in their 

place," not only commercially but also religiously and culturally. 

Though most of the congregations in the West Indias and in North 

America, prior to 1800, were or became spiritual heirs of the London 

Sephardic synagogue, of Bevis Marks, yet they arose independently of 

that synagogue. None-with the exception of Savannah-were direct 

"colonies" of the London congregation. Indeed, Bevis Marks main- 

126

REVIEWS OF BOOKS 

tained a deep interest in all Sephardic synagogues in the colonies even 

long after the Declaration of Independence, and these, in turn, re- 

mained spiritually subject to that English congregation. Thus, Sheai- 

ith Israel of New York, having no ordained rabbi until after the Civil 

War, continued to turn for spiritual guidance to London. 

Our author is of the opinion that in matters of architecture, of 

ritual, and of the conduct of services, the eighteenth-century American 

Sephardic synagogues patterned themselves on the example of Bevis 

Marks. This may be true in a general sense. I suspect, however, that 

a comparison of the minutes and regulations of the North American 

synagogues with those of the London congregation would reveal only 

such similarities as are common to all European Sephardic communi- 

ties. Montreal and New York and Savannah-whose regulations are 

available at some length-do not, I believe, show, in matters of detail, 

a special dependence on the London synagogue. 

One cannot wholly agree with the conclusions Mr. Hyamson draws 

from the publication by Shearith Israel of New York of its regulations 

in 1706. Mr. Hyamson seems to imply that a new community was con- 

stituted in that city at that time. It does not seem, however, that any- 

thing in the 1706 "rules and restrictions" indicates that the congrega- 

tion arose then or began its life anew. The existence of the New York 

synagogue is documented no later than 1695 (PAJHS, 111, 46 ff.). 

There were, of course, periodic crises and rebirths in all colonial syn- 

agogal communities. New ordinances and bylaws document such 

changes. It is not sale to infer from the new bylaws that a new organi- 

zation was being founded. 

The beginnings of the Newport, Rhode Island, synagogue are set 

at 1658, the traditional date accepted by many historians. I do not 

believe, however, that there is any contemporary evidence, Jewish or 

non-Jewish, now available, to support the contention that a commun- 

ity was then established. Individual Jews and families may have come 

then to that town. 

If the author is inclined to set too early a date for the rise of the 

Newport congregation, he errs in the other direction when he turns 

to Philadelphia, by post-dating that community. He accepts 1782 as 

the year in which the Sephardic community was formed. Philadelphia 

Jewry, however, was organized a generation before that time. As early 

as 1760 Jews there spoke of building a synagogue (W. V. Byars, B. and 

M. Gratz, p. 52); and minutes of a congregational meeting in 1773 are 

cited by H. P. Rosenbach in The Jews in Philadelphia, Prior to 1800, 

pp. 16-17. Hyamson, however, is probably correct in his belief that the 

name Mikveh Israel was not adopted before 1782. 

In writing of the Jewish community of Canada he informs us that 

it "was from the first (1768) mixed in origin-Ashkenazi as well as

128 AIMERICAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

Sephardi." This statement requires clarification. Spanish-Portuguese 

Jews did come to Canada, as army purveyors, during the period of the 

Conquest, but by the time the community was organized, there was 

not, apparently, an Iberian Jew left-certainly not in the religious 

community. The ~ongre~gation was Sephardic in ritual, but not a single 

name in the extant minutes (1778) reflects Spanish or Portuguese 

background. All members, to judge by surnames, were of German or. 

Ashkenazic origin. 

When he tims to Georgia, the author quotes an interesting minute 

from the Bevis Marks records. We read, under the date of 1732, 

that the Sephardic leaders "should interest themselves with those who 

have permission to arrange settlements in the English colony north of 

Carolina, etc." (my italics.) Mr. Hyamson identifies this statement with 

the Oglethorpe venture in Georgia. If the minute is to be taken literally, 

it cannot refer to Oglethorpe's Georgia, but may well refer to the 

"Georgia" settlement contemplated in 1730 in the western part of 

Virginia, which is north of Carolina (see Jacob R. Marcus, Early 

American Jewry, 11, 167). 

The first ~ewish settlers of Georgia, we are informed, were forty 

poor Ashkenazic families sent over by the Bevis Marks officers. About 

the same time a group of Sephardim of some means arrived. These 

latter "paid for their own passages" and devoted "themselves largely 

to wine and silk cultivation." In 1740, the author continues, as Oglethorpe's 

settlement began to disintegrate, many of the Jews also "left 

the colony and settled in the neighboring South Carolina." "Most of 

the Jews," he goes on, "ultimately returned to Georgia." 

Here, too, Hyamson follows the other historians, but the available 

evidence does not support this traditional presentation. The Jewish 

immigration to Georgia will have to be re-evaluated in the light of a 

careful study of the Sheftall "List of Israelites Arriving at Savannah" 

in the Division of Manuscripts of the Library of Congress (compare, 

also, The Occident, I [1843], 248) and, more important, of the newly 

published Egmont lists in E. M. Coulter and A. B. Saye, A List of the 

Early settlers of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, 1949. It is true that there 

were probably two immigrations to Georgia in 1733. Both, I believe, 

included Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews. The Egmont records point 

out that these men did come in "on their own account," not at the 

expense of the Georgia trustees, Christians, but it is veiy probable 

that they were subsidized by the Sephardic religious leaders who had 

collected money for this very purpose. There were not forty Ashkenazic 

families, for the total Jewish migration the first year or two probably 

did not equal that number. We know that the Sephardic element 

dominated in the first shipload, but we know also that there were a 

number of German families present (Sheftall list). The only member

REVIEWS OF BOOKS 129 

of this group to engage in the cultivation of vines was Abraham De- 

Lyon. There is no record of a Jew employed in the silk industry until 

the arrival of the convert to Christianity, Joseph Ottolenghe, in 1751. 

By that time most of the original Jewish Georgia settlers had left the 

colony. The available records in A. D. Candler, The Colonial Reco7ds 

of the State of Geo~gia, the Jewish records of South Carolina and of 

New York, and other sources indicate that when the Jews left the dy- 

ing colony a number went to New York (PAJHS, XXI, Index) and to 

other northern colonies, but that only two or three families at the 

most went to Charlestown in South Carolina. In all probability, most 

of the departing Jewish colonists went back to the Islands or to Lon- 

don-back to civilization. One or two families, or their children, did 

return to Georgia. 

* * * 

It needs to be repeated that the above comments are intended ratli- 

er to amplify a minor chapter in Mr. Hyamson's book than to find 

fault either with his method or with his general conclusions. He has 

worked with primary sources and with the best secondary materials 

at his disposal. His chapter can be regarded as a worthy prolegomenon 

to more intensive work in this area. Future researchers will want to 

dig more deeply into the available colonial records of all types. We 

are grateful to Mr. Hyamson both for this fine chapter and especially 

for setting this material into the larger context of Sephardic Jewry. 

JACOB R. MARCUS 

THE CHICAGO PINKAS. Edited by Simon Rawidowicz. Clzicago: 

The College of Jewish Studies. 195% 319 pp. 35.00 

As the American Jewish community undertakes the celebration of i~s 

tercentenary, it will go through a process of self-education. Fortunate- 

ly, it will be able to satisfy some of the curiosity about itself. Ten 

years ago the search for self-knowledge would have been fruitless. At 

that time information about the origin and development of Jewry in 

the New World was meager, unreliable, and unworthy of serious cori- 

sideration. Today the data have been greatly amplified and, although 

we are merely at the threshold of reconstructing the story of American 

Jewish life, we have a much clearer image before us. 

A volume representative of the maturing historical interest of 

American Jewry is The Chicago Pinkas, published by the College of 

Jewish Studies on the occasion of its twenty-fifth anniversary. 

Eight contributions of vaning proportions are assembled in the 

book. These are as follows: "The Jewish Population of Chicago, Ill.," 

Erich Rosenthal; "Aspects of Chicago Russian- Jewish Life, 1893-1 g 15,"

13U 

AMERlCAN JEWISH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

Seymour Jacob Pomrenzc; "I. L. Chronik and His 'Zeichen der Zeit', " 

Esther Eugenie Rawidowicz; "European Bibliographical Items on 

Chicago," Jacob R. Marcus. 

A Hebrew section includes: "Beginnings of the East-European 

Jewish Settlement in Chicago," Judah Rosentllal; "Chicago Hebrew 

Press," Chayim M. Rothblatt; "Chicago Yiddish Press," Moses Starkman; 

and "Hebrew and Yiddish Publications in Chicago," Leah Mishkin. 

Erich Rosenthal's article takes ur, one-third of the volume. It is an 

examination of the methods of establishing Jewish population estimates. 

It is the author's view that voters' lists can be used successfully 

as an instrument of population research. Employing this approach, 

Rosenthal concludes that the Jewish population in 1946 in fifteen 

areas surveyed was nGg,ooo. It is unfortunate that the method illustrated 

by ~osenthal is~limited in its application. It requires a system 

of permanent voter registration to achieve accurate results. New York 

does not have such a system and cannot be studied in this fashion. At 

the end of Rosenthal's study, a number of statistical tables are appended 

without commentary and reference to the body of the text. 

Their relationship to the central problem is not always apparent. 

Pomrenze offers a brief but interesting chapter on Russian Jewish 

life in Chicago. It is good to see that the author has gathered facts 

from diversified sources and has utilized the Chicago general and Jewish 

press. l'he neglect of periodical material has been all too prevalent 

in American Jewish historiography. The major defect in Pomrenze's 

study is overextended coverage. No one aspect is dealt with 

adequately. The canvas is too broad and the detail too sparing. 

A fascinating portrait of Isaac Low Chronik is submitted by Estller 

Eugenie Rawidowicz. This Posen-born rabbi was called to the Chicago 

Sinai Congregation in 1866. He was a rabbi in Chicago for six years, 

during which time he founded the Zeichen der Zeit. On the basis of 

the Zeichen der Zeit, Esther Rawidowicz has formulated Chronik's religious 

and philosophical views. She thus illuminates an important 

personality in a significant period. Much more of this particular kind 

of research ought to be done. 

The contribution of Jacob R. Marcus is taken from his larger index 

to references to the United States in the foreign periodicals in the 

possession of the Hebrew Union College Library. For the Pinkas, Dr. 

Marcus assernbled the bibliographical items relating to Chicago. The 

references begin with 1851 and suggest many avenues of exploration. 

l'he references are important not merely to ascertain the European 

slant on American affairs; in a number of cases the European articles 

contain information no longer extant in American periodicals. 

The Hebrew section of the Pinkas is by and large a discussion of


Hebrew and Yiddish publications of Chicago. Rothblatt offers an 

evaluation of the Hebrew press and shows its influence upon the development 

of Chicago Jewry. Moses Starkman gives a short account 

of the first Yiddish periodical in Chicago, Die Zsraelitische Presse 

(1877), and follows it with a bibliography of all Yiddish newspapers 

and periodicals which appeared in Chicago from 1877 to 1951. Leah 

Mishkin contributes an extensive listing of publications in Hebrew 

and Yiddish from 1877 through 1950. Her bibliography includes 492 

items. Judah Rosenthal's essay on the religious, social, and cultural 

life of Eastern European Jews in Chicago from 1860 to 1880 completes 

the Hebrew section of the Pinkas. 

The College of Jewish Studies of Chicago is to be congratulated on 

its anniversary volume. It will help American Jews celebrate their tercentenary 

with knowledge and with truth. 

Chicago, Zllinois LEONARD J. MERVIS 

SIDNEY HILLMAN: STATESMAN OF AMERICAN LABOR. By 

Matthew Josephson. New York: Doubleday Q Company, Znc. 1952. 

701 pp. $5.00 

There will be few to dispute the subtitle which Mr. Josephson has 

chosen for his biography of Sidney Hillman, for even among the ene- 

mies whom Hillman made during the course of a career that cast him 

in the role of a secessionist (the unpardonable sin among trade union- 

ists), he was generally regarded as a leader of exceptional skill and 

ability. Impartial students of the labor movement rank him among 

the great labor leaders of- the world. 

Many labor unions bear the marks of a f-orceful leader, but none 

more than the Amalgamated Clothing Workers. Hillman was one of 

its founders and its chief executive officer from its inception in 1914 

until his death in 1946. It is, perhaps more than any other labor or- 

ganization, the handiwork of one man. Despite the fact that its entire 

staff of officers, most of whom were co-founders with Hillman and still 

hold office, are without exception able men, his influence predomi- 

nated in every act and every policy of the union. He was a man of un- 

usual ability, an innovator and a planner. These talents were com- 

bined with a passion to see wage earners improve their standards of 

life. He worked with great energy and without thought of self to make 

his union an exemplary one. And being "always conscious that he was 

a Jew," Hillman felt that "he must play his part with all the more 

honor." 

Just as Sidney Hillman ranks high among the great leaders ok 

labor, so does the union he fashioned rank high among the great labor

REVIEWS OF BOOKS '33 

organizations of the world. It has brought great benefits to the work- 

ing people it represents. It has transformed an industry in which 

working conditions were once notoriously bad into one of good wages 

and working conditions and exemplary relations between the union 

and management. 

Hillman was impatient with the pure and simple brand of trade 

unionism which characterized much of the labor movement during the 

early years of this century. His introduction to the movement was 

through a union that was notoriously ineffective, and he attributed 

much of its weakness to the craft form of organization. Even after he 

had won considerable recognition he said that he was "tired of being 

applauded for every $5.00 raise that the union won . . . ." "The world 

is in the midst of a new social era, the establishment in industry of the 

principle of social democracy," he told a group of manufacturers in 

January, 1918 . . . . Without democracy, he urged, "even under the 

most efficient autocracy that would provide everyone with all the ne- 

cessities of life . . . . life would be meaningless if one could not find a 

mode of self-expression . . . ." 

Under his leadership the bargaining power of the organized cloth- 

ing workers was put to uses that were new and untried in the trade 

union movement. Refinements were introduced into the processes of 

collective bargaining which made it unique among unions. Hillman 

was a pioneer in what has recently come to be known as "fringe" bene- 

fits, a description which tends to disparage the value and importance 

of such benefits as supplementary retirement benefits, insurance, hos- 

pitalization, etc. Funds contributed by employers and employes were 

set up under Amalgamated agreements for the payment of unemploy- 

ment benefits, at a time when doubt was still being expressed by con- 

servative leaders of labor about the wisdom of "doles" for jobless 

workers. Provision was made to compensate workers displaced by 

labor-saving machinery. The union promoted, financed, and managed 

co-operative housing for its members with notable success. It de- 

veloped and brought to a high degree of efficiency a device for the ad- 

justment of complaints and grievances growing out of the interpreta- 

tion and application of rules governing wages and working conditions 

-a system of continuous arbitration with a permanent impartial 

chairman making decisions when the partisan representatives were 

unable to agree. 

The use of the impartial chairman, or neutral referee, was an im- 

portant contribution to the problem of settling labor disputes. It was 

not the device alone, however, which resulted in such notable success 

in the men's clothing industry. The type of men selected as neutral 

referees had much to do with it. They were not judges and lawyers 

and educators distinguished alone by their impartiality and integrity.

'34 


They were men who thoroughly believed in unionism, who appre- 

ciated the value of good employe relationships and realized that the 

latter could be achieved only by fair dealing on the part of the em- 

ployer. How were such men obtained? Not without a good deal of 

"education" of employers by the Amalgamated leader. But Hillman 

had a way of winning the confidence of employers. He was a tireless 

and persuasive negotiator. Professor Earl Dean Howard, manager of 

the labor department of the Hart, Schaffner, and Marx factories, 

where the plan was first introduced, said that Hillman had one dis- 

arming approach: "Isn't there some way we could work things out so 

that it would be good for both parties?" 

This "disarming" approach, his belief that at least most labor-man- 

agement problems could be worked out to the benefit of both parties, 

was a key to Hillman's great success as a negotiator. It is, of course, 

an approach used by labor representatives generally. But, as in the 

case of many other techniques of bargaining, Hillman employed it 

with great skill. It resulted, for example, in cases in which the union 

accepted responsibility for keeping down rising labor costs to secure 

some betterment in working conditions. The late Arthur "Golden 

Rule" Nash told this writer that he could not have remained in busi- 

ness after his plants were organized by the Amalgamated had it not 

been for the assistance he received from the union's production team 

in increasing production. 

Experts both in production and in industrial relations were also 

used effectively in healing the wounds caused by strikes, and at times 

the union's credit as well. Mr. Josephson cites several instances in 

which the union, after winning strikes against recalcitrant employers 

to establish bargaining rights, rescued them from financial difficulties. 

No union could continue very long to improve the standards of 

its members if its demands were formulated without regard to the 

ability of the industry to meet them. It is quite common to find among 

labor representatives an active and intelligent regard for the interests 

of the employers with whom they negotiate. It is a common saying in 

labor circles that workers can not prosper in a poor industry. But in 

no other union has interest in industry problems developed to the 

point it has in the Amalgamated. In fact, it resulted in the anomalous 

(and to Hillman amusing) position he held throughout his career, ol 

being classified as a conseivative, a capitalist collaborator, on the one 

hand, and, on the other, as a dangerous radical. He was neither. He 

had as little sympathy with conservatism, as that term is usually ap- 

plied to trade union practices, as he had for left-wingers whose only 

interest in the labor movement is to use it to make it a tail to their 

political kite. 

"Conservative or radical. what is vour creed?-how often one hears

REVIEWS OF BOOKS ' 3.5 

the question, and it is surprising how many people (attach) import- 

ance to the answer," he wrote in a paper published in a book survey- 

ing the labor situation in this country. "There is a very radical labor 

union around the corner, so radical indeed, that it recognizes no God 

or master, no common sense, either. Yet it wields no power in its in- 

dustry, and its standards and working conditions have gone all the 

way down. And then you have another union, notoriously conserva- 

tive, opposed to all things modern and progressive. But that union is 

in full control of the conditions under which its people are employed, 

and high wages and protection of the worker on his job are there." 

Hillman used this tale of two unions to point up his argument 

that organized labor could prepare to assume leadership in society 

only by its efficiency, its discipline, its intelligence. 

After distinguishing himself as the leader of the Amalgamated 

Clothing Workers, Hillman went on to win new laurels for his woik 

during NRA days, as National Defense Commissioner and finally as 

head of CIO's Political Action Committee. But he met with some bit- 

ter disappointments, too. 

It was natural that he should be drawn into active participation in 

the New Deal. Always an advocate of political action by the labor 

movement, he knew the limitations of collective bargaining in im- 

proving the conditions of wage earners. While the Amalgamated had 

succeeded in organizing the men's clothing industry, Hillman knew 

that millions of wage earners were denied the right to organize by 

their employers, who were often aided by public authorities. While 

his union had made a start in protecting its members against the haz- 

ards of industrial life, he knew that unemployment and poverty in old 

age were social problems. Time and again he had seen benefits won 

by workers through their unions destroyed by acts of Congress. 

He was quick to sense the opportunities for economic and social 

reforms in the changed attitude of the people following the economic 

crack-up, and he took a leading part in putting through Congress a 

program of legislation which greatly strengthened the labor movement 

and improved the status of wage earners. He saw the labor movement 

grow from a little over three million members to fifteen million under 

the protection afforded workers to organize by the Wagner Act. He 

saw the United States, so long negligent of people impoverished by 

unemployment and old age, forge ahead with the Social Security Act. 

He witnessed the doubling of the wages of literally millions of un- 

skilled and underprivileged workers by the Fair Labor Standards Act. 

But his happiness over the great gains made by labor was marred 

by bitter clashes with the representations of labor while he served as 

co-chairman with William S. Knudsen of General Motors on the Na- 

tional Defense Advisory Commission and later as associate director-

136 


general of the Office of Production Management. Difficulties en- 

countered in protecting the rights and interests of labor engaged in 

the defense effort, and later in war work, brought widespread criti- 

cism of Hillman, who found it very hard to do anything against the 

powerful pro-industrial set-up in the defense organization. Long the 

most controversial figure in the American labor movement, he seemed 

to thrive on criticism while he remained in active charge of his union. 

His success as a union leader was sufficient answer to his critics. But 

it was a different story in Washington. Hamstrung in his efforts to 

protect labor, damned by the press for even trying to do so and by the 

unions for failing, Hillman fell ill. Then came the severest blow of 

all: his elimination, after the United States entered the war, from the 

War Production Board when that agency took the place of the OPM. 

Although President Roosevelt asked him to become his special assist- 

ant on labor matters, Hillman declined, telling friends he felt that he 

had lost the confidence of his "Chief." 

Despite these disappointments and continued ill health which re- 

quired long rests, he came back and did notable work in the Political 

Action Committee. And it must have been balm to his disappoint- 

ments when his "Chief" gave him veto power over his running mate 

in the 1944 presidential campaign. 

With it all, successes and failures, happiness and disappointments, 

Sidney Hillman would agree with a statement made by Adlai Steven- 

son at a memorial service for another great labor leader, Phil Murray: 

"I know of no purpose more sustaining than that of helping peo- 

ple live fuller lives." 

PHIL E. ZIEGLER 

Grand Secretary-Treasurer 

The Brotherhood of Railway Clerks 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

COMMENTARY ON THE AMERICAN SCENE. Ed. by Elliot E. 

Cohen. Introduction by David Riesman. New York: Alfred A. 

Knopf, Inc. 1953. xxvi, 337 pp. $3.75 

For the sake of this publication, it would be well to consider Com- 

mentary on the American Scene, already the object of several glowing 

reviews, from the archivist's point of view. The subtitle, "Portraits of 

Jewish Life in America," promises rich diggings for the social histor- 

ian; so does the Table of Contents, which includes profiles of Jewish 

communities in various cities or neighborhoods, and studies of occu- 

pations in which Jews especially have participated. The penetrating 

evaluative introduction by David Riesinan (which sheds even more

REVIEWS OF BOOKS '37 

light when read again as a conclusion with the contents themselves as 

points of reference) describes the beneficent conditions within Ameri- 

can history which have made these frankly outspoken articles possible: 

Jews have moved far enough along in America to be able to afford the 

same problems of work, of consumption, and of community life as 

their neighbors; Jews need no longer be buoyed up by an apocalyptic 

future, a menacing present, or a chauvinistic past. Elliot E. Cohen, in 

his Foreword, puts particular stress upon the American quality of these 

Jewish vignettes, and insists that the human beings here portrayed are 

written of not simply as human beings, with no authors' axe to grind, 

but are written of con amore. 

One is prepared, then, to expect vivid and informative illustratioils 

of our people in our time, the uncolored yet richly detailed reporting 

so valuable to the historian. 

In a sense, this is to be abundantly found in the Commentaries. A 

remarkable genre picture, like a personal letter or a family snapshot 

taken in a clear light, is presented by the collection as a whole. From 

such articles as "I Cash Clothes" (a warm but unembroidered presenta- 

tion of an old-clothes peddler), "Grandmother had Yichus" (which 

stands out in the collection for craftsmanship and style), and "The 

Jewish College Student, Modern Style," one derives the sensation of 

confronting history as it runs, beCore the present picture changes or 

the vestiges of the remembered past disappear. Indeed, much of the 

great wealth of this book may be found in its concern with the im- 

mediate past no less than the immediate present. Past and present 

may be combined in illuminating or at least thought-provoking con- 

trast, as in "The Jewish College Student" just mentioned, or the past 

may be found described simply for its own sake, as in "I Remember 

Tulsa." In any case, the scope of history in this book is greatly in- 

creased by constant attention to the sources of the contemporary scene. 

But it is in this very area of dealing with the relationship of present 

and past that the book deviates most widely from the historical ob- 

jectivity which we would hope for it. Mr. Riesman writes that Jews are 

an especial prey to the extremes of either a vindictive or a sentimental 

attitude toward tradition, and for the historian either of these pen- 

chants would serve somewhat to distort the validity of any account. 

However, it is the peculiar nature of this book that neither tradition 

nor modernism as a modus uivendi seems to meet with real approval, 

but both are held in a kind of scornful though shadowy disfavor, the 

atmosphere of which pervades many of the articles. 

"When Zaydeh died, the old life he represented died with him. His 

picture first hung in the parlor, but after a few years we found it didn't 

look nice with the new furniture so Zaydeh was relegated to the bed- 

room; a Van Gogh print was put in his place." This situation, de-

138 

AMERlCAN JEWlSH ARCHIVES, JUNE, 1953 

scribed in "The Trojans of Brighton Beach," is paralleled in many of 

the other studies, and inevitably so, for it represents a dilemma com- 

mon to our time; but one is repeatedly made to feel that the Zaydehs 

and the Van Gogh fanciers hold equally untenable positions, disquali- 

fied from integrity by the superior moral and intellectual standards 

held but never clearly stated by the authors. Disturbing to this reader 

was the impression that most of the articles, however acute or thought- 

ful or humorous, were written with a sense of either being outside of 

the situation or having been emancipated from it, and that the spirit 

of warmth and affection (which other reviews have praised) was instead 

often a combination of gusto and distaste. Thus the articles written by 

at least geographical outsiders-such as those describing the Jewish 

communities of San Francisco and Swruceton and Park Forest-seem to 

hold an advantage of reliability over others which are something un- 

comfortably more than clear, workmanlike reporting. 

A shining exception to this is the opening essay, "Heritage." Writ- 

ten out of the deepest kind of personal involvement, it presents the 

case of the parents' generation and the "younger" generation with calm 

and compassion, and analyzes, with delicate yet brilliant understand- 

ing, the chasm between. But beyond this, for the most part, there are 

articles, such as "Kochalein," "West Bronx," and "By the Waters of 

Grand Concourse," that range from the unsympathetic, through the 

caustic, to the downright censorious. The Prefaces insist that Jews 

need no longer resort to apologetics, yet many of these authors appear 

to perform an inverse apology in the lengths to which they go to re- 

veal that they know just how crassly materialistic, how slavishly con- 

formist to the American externals, how religiously hypocritical the 

segments of Jewish life they are describing happen to be. 

Yet it is not the facts themselves, but the miasma that rises from 

them, that constitutes the wry note, and it is this pervading wryness 

that removes the articles from the category of straightforward historical 

comment. This overall commentary, instead, reflects a culture in which 

the "modern" Jew is an "anachronism," the traditional Jew embraces 

a tacitly lost cause, and the Jew whose honest integration into the 

American scene has been tested by time is never mentioned. In these 

articles the Jew is either an outsider, self-excluded by his own culture, 

or he is a pretender, a climber, trying to look like, live like, pray like 

someone else so that he will not have to be like himself. Admittedly, 

this is one conception of the American Jewish situation rather widely 

held as truth among us today. Its manifestation in this book is in itself 

of value to the records. One must go further, nevertheless, for the rest 

of the truth. Perhaps the authors of Commentary will do this in a sub- 

sequent colIection. 

Cincinnati.

The Land of Israel in 1985 

The Chicago Herald has issued an extra number, dated September 

26th, 1985, which purports to give the news of a hundred yea& hence. 

Every line, including the advertisements, is supposed to be written in 

1985. 

We select the following extraordinary editorial article: 

An experiment tiow making in Palestine attracts the attention of 

the civilised world. Three years ago Mr. Moses Solomon, the million- 

aire who acquired his fortune in the clothing business at Chicago, 

purchased the whole of Palestine, embracing Judea, Samaria, Galilee 

and Perea. His possessions reach from Tyre on the north to Jenyrus- 

sion on the south, giving a coast line of nearly zoo miles. Of course 

Nazareth, Bethlehem, Jerusalem, Capernaum, Mount 'Tabor, Gilead 

and Beersheba, and hundreds of other historic places are in his do- 

minions, which consist of 8,000 square miles of territory. Immediately 

after his purchase Mr. Solomon began gigantic improvements. A ship 

canal has been cut from the Mediterranean to Lake Gennesaret, thus 

opening to navigation that lake, the Jordan, and the Dead Sea. Irri- 

gating canals run everywhere, and all over his little empire King Solo- 

mon, as he is called, pumps fresh water from beneath the rocks and 

pours it lavishly upon the parching soil. This is done by means of Al- 

len sunpower machines, imported from Chicago. The Dead Sea itself 

has begun to show signs of life, as the great sun-driven engines pump 

out the salt water and force in the fresh. Many railways are building, 

and, in short, under Mr. Solomon's direction the desert is blossoming 

as a rose. 

The above is taken from a newspaper clipping, undated and unmarked. It probably 

appeared in a Jewish newspaper in 1885.

American Jewish Archives

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?