The Man Who 'Desired Life'

The Jewish Spectator, September 1933.

Death wrote finis to the life of a sage and a saint in Jewry. The Chofetz Chaim, who became a legendary figure during his lifetime, passed away.

When Poland lost her last tragic struggle for independence, in 1863, he was already in the prime of his life.

When the first Jewish pioneers left imperial Russia in 1882, to lay what has since become the cornerstone of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, he was no longer a young man.

When Nicholas II ascended the throne of the Romanoffs, he had already become a saintly and venerable figure, revered and looked at with awe by Jews of all shades of opinion.

On Friday, September 15th, a brief news dispatch, originating in an obscure Polish village, announced his death. Few people knew his real name, yet his fame was so widespread and that respect and veneration for him was so deep-seated, that the parenthetic explanation ("Chofetz Chaim") following in the obituary notice the proper and family name of the deceased, that of Rabbi Israel Meri Ha'Cohen, was sufficient to cause deep consternation and genuine mourning.

In no "Who's Who" would his name be found. In no lexicon of writers, essayists, poets or philosophers would you find any biographical data concerning him. If one were to be guided by the strict rules of accuracy, even the title "Rabbi" in the brief news dispatch must be regarded as slightly inaccurate, for the Chofetz Chaim did not occupy the position of Rabbi either at the time of his death or long before. It would be a safe guess to assume that were Rabbi Israel Meir Ha'Cohen to leave his place of residence, Radyn, near Wilno, and travel, not incognito, but under his own name, that name, when announced to the average Jew in Europe or in America, would not have evoked any particular interest. What a profound change, however, would have occurred in the attitude of that average Jew were someone to whisper into his ear, "That is the 'Chofetz Chaim.'"

A mere recital of the life story of Rabbi Israel Meir Ha'Cohen of Raydn would hardly suffice to convey to the Western reader the greatness to that unique figure which dominated the scene of traditional Jewish life and learning for nearly a century. Particularly must a pen-picture prove inadequate in depicting the background of majestic simplicity and peculiarly Jewish moral strength that was embodied in that intellectual and moral giant who became known to Jew and non-Jew alike by the unpronounceable description of Chofetz Chaim. Perhaps one sentence may provide the canvas upon which the lineaments may be sketched: He made a book on ethics a bestseller.

For the name and the fame of the Chofetz Chaim have had their origin in the title of a book he wrote and published in 1873. In Psalm 34:13, there is a passage running as follows: "Who is the man that desireth life (He'Chofetz Chaim)? Guard your tongue from evil and your lips from guile." This passage, familiar to many, served him as the text for three volumes on human behavior and on character-building methods.

"Gossip is the spice of life" is a popular dictum in many climes and languages. Lawsuits involving slander and libel are most difficult to win in the best-regulated courts. But gossip is a factor most destructive of ethical and moral life, and slander a most damaging engagement before the court of conscience. It is a high tribute to the Jewish life that was [in the past] that the three volumes of the Chofetz Chaim, first in Rabbinic Hebrew and later in Yiddish, without the benefit of high-pressure salesmanship and without the stimulus of modern press agentry had a distribution of more than 400,000 copies. It is an indication of the moral strength of authentic Jewish life that these books, even today, have a reading public which is larger than some of the latest bestsellers could ever hope to reach.

But the influence of the man was even greater than that of this particular book or of his other books in the field of Halachah. Great as he undoubtedly was as a Talmudic scholar and commentator, he never aspired to dazzling brilliance in this domain. In the latter part of the 19th century and the first decades of the 20th, over which his long and useful life has extended, there appeared in Jewish life in Eastern Europe and elsewhere Talmudic scholars who were equally as great, if not greater, than he. As a moralist and champion of loyalty to Jewish tradition, he was never aggressive or a belligerent reformer. His strength lay rather in the integral simplicity and inviting directness of the example that he has furnished by his own life.

From January 11, 1839, when he was born in the village of Zhetil near Slonim, Government of Grodno, to September 15, 1933, there stretches a span of nearly a century's length. During this eventful period the whole order and outlook of life have changed many a time. Attitude, behavior, views, habits, fashions and modes have come and gone; science has undergone a most radical change; philosophy has taken on new and newer aspects and garbs; inventions have transformed the face of the earth; mighty Empires, at the peak of their glory on the day when the unknown Polish-Lithuanian was born, have crumbled into oblivion; peoples that have been suppressed and oppressed during the major part of his lifetime have gained new strength and life. Even in Jewish life itself the whole scene had radically changed. The Haskalah movement has come and gone. Zionism has emerged on the road to realization. Trends of thought, viewpoints, parties and groups of which no one dreamed during his boyhood and manhood have come to the fore. The Chofetz Chaim remained unshaken in his faith and exacting loyalty. In an age of storm and stress, of transition, of adjustment, of many compromises, he stood out as a rock. He steadfastly held high the ethical standard of Jewish life and the banner of loyalty to Jewish principle, thought and the Orthodox way of life.

In the stormy seas through which Jewish life has drifted during the past 50 years, the Chofetz Chaim has been looked up to by Jews of all shades of opinion as a tower of light and strength. The ship could not have drifted too far out of the course of historic continuity as long as he was there. The stream of Jewish life in the capitals of the world could not have traveled too far from its source as long as the sage of the obscure village of Raydn, modestly, passively but powerfully, continued to weave the traditions of Rabbi Akiba, Maimondides, the Ramo and the Gaono of Wilno.

The saga of the Chofetz Chaim is quite extensive. The many legends that have grown up about this unique figure deal principally with his uniform reactions to his constantly changing environment. The dominant note in these stories is a command: conform. The simple facts, however, are that, after marrying at the age of 18 into a well-to-do family in Radyn, his father-in-law had intended him to become the Rabbi of the town. He preferred, however, to instruct little children rather than to assume the duties of a Rabbi. When he had saved up 50 rubles, from the tuition fees he had been receiving, he established a grocery in the village, leaving the business in charge of his wife and devoting most of his time to his studies. A misfortune then beset him: his business was too successful. He became aware of the fact that the community patronized his store more than anyone else's. The Chofetz Chaim rapidly liquidated the establishment, declaring that he did not wish to have an advantage over his competitors. Around that time his book had become very popular and he thought that he could derive his livelihood from its sale.

One day a delegation of Baale Batim called upon him, insisting that he become the Rabbi of the community. He flatly refused this offer. When they persisted, he finally agreed to accept the post on the condition that no salary be attached to it. He further stipulated that he would remain in office as long as his decision would be obeyed. Shortly afterwards, two local businessmen came to him for a decision in a business dispute. The Chofetz Chaim rendered his decision, but one of the parties hesitated to abide. Immediately Rabbi Israel Meir Ha'Cohen resigned from the Rabbinate to remain "just a member" of the community until his last day.

Ephraim Caplan, the well-known Yiddish essayist and champion of traditional Judaism, related to the writer an interesting dialogue he had with the Chofetz Chaim several years ago in Radyn. The American visitor had asked the Chofetz Chaim for his definition of a Jew's duties in daily life. The aged saint expostulated at length, demanding complete and constant observation of all Shulchan Aruch regulations in minutest detail.

"Rabbi," said the American visitor, "judging by this standard many millions of Jews living today would have to be declared as non-observant."

"My dear friend," replied the Chofetz Chaim, "when one asks for spirits of 93 degrees in strength, the vendor must give you the genuine article. Dilution, if the purchaser should desire it, is his own concern."

Jewish Men in the Public Eye: Nathan Straus

The Sentinel: A Weekly Newspaper Devoted to Jewish Interests, date unknown (1926?).

A small house with no furniture except a broken table, one baby chair, three straw-filled sacks lying on the floor, four children between the ages of three and eight -- half starved, more undressed than dressed, sitting on the floor, not playing, but on the verge of crying, as if something very unpleasant were going to happen. A woman not over thirty-five, holding in her arms a dying baby of three. Her features could tell the story: A life wrecked, through no fault of hers. The care and worries of a helpless, lonesome mother, destroyed all semblance of what was once great feminine beauty. Her husband taken to the army, left in a small city overshadowed by the depressing skies of the Pina Plains through which armies were marching; without supplies, no chicken to be procured, not even a glass of milk to be obtained.

"The little one dies because I could not nourish it," she cried in despair.

All the horrors of the war, the misery and the suffering of the adults, the struggle for freedom, democracy, independence and the idea of the future ideal state, appeared to me as things worthless, were there only something which could save the life of this little innocent baby.

It was during the summer of 1917 when the great struggle went on, spreading on one hand, death, misery and suffering, and on the other, strengthened faith and renewed hope for some kind of a better future, which is, after all, to be the result.

The result? For whom?

Under the brightest of circumstances and the most consoling and quieting beauty of the ever-changing landscapes which travel affords, I could never forget that apparently insignificant dying baby.

The physician who was, after many hours, brought with great difficult from a distant city on a wagon drawn by oxen, diagnosed, too late, the case in the words, "Death resulted from under-nourishment and contracted tuberculosis."

* * *

On a Sunday noon, several years later, I found myself in a crowded train bound for Mamaronick -- the residence of Nathan Straus.

In the colorful and overwhelming pyramid of American life, there is hardly a feature that carries a greater appeal to the human heart and mind of all humanity than the picture of that grand old man who spent his life and his energy for the sake of the world's babies. How I did regret that the influence of his work did not reach out in time to prevent the death of the little one under the Pina skies.

In 1891, out of every thousand babies born in New York City, 241 died before they were a year old. This means that one-fourth of all the newly born babies did not have even a chance to live. It was in this year that Nathan Straus set out on the mission of his life. Not a scientist, merely a successful and wealthy businessman, a devoted father, he made it his ambition to call the world's attention to the fundamental principle of life-saving.

"The future of the nation and of humanity lies in the cradle." It is as simple and obvious that one really must have great courage to proclaim it as the Shibboleth. This, one would think, plain, self-explanatory and obvious sentence required the fortune, energy, foresight, determination and good-heartedness of a man of the caliber of Nathan Straus to translate it into the economic system and bring it into the realm of questions which deserve attention. Millions of babies were born, fed with the unclean and disease-carrying milk of tubercular cows, died in the best of cases; in the majority of cases continued to live as crippled, tubercular beings, filing the hospitals, jails and institutions -- a burden to themselves and a burden to the community.

Nathan Straus conceived, one might say, the inspiration to remedy the evil at its root. How was it to be done? Simply. Not to give the babies unclean milk.

Since modern society in the great cities has been organized on principles of a commercial regime, leaders have awakened to the existence of various problems. There is a meat problem, a fish problem, an unemployment problem, an employment problem, and many other problems. Nathan Straus has added to this multitude of problems one fundamental one -- the milk problem.

Out of every 1,000 babies born in the City of New York now, instead of 241, only 75 die. Out of 54 larger cities in the United States, 48 now follow the advice and system of Nathan Straus, in supervising or encouraging the supply of pasteurized milk.

Since the time of the great Greek philosophers, the discussion has never ceased as to what is the motive and nature of philanthropy. The word in itself, which would seemingly give the best definition -- love of mankind -- has acquired, in the course of the dispute, a particular meaning.

Love of mankind? Love for beauty, youth, happiness and perfection is natural. Philanthropy -- the love for imperfect humanity, for victims of nature or social regimes -- is a state of mind which is not easily understood and appreciated. What is the motive of the giver? Is it pity? The moral injury imposed upon the beneficiary is equal or perhaps greater than the amount of temporary relief. Is it egotism? Is it prompted by the feeling which accentuates at the moment the gap between the giver and the receiver? So or otherwise, philanthropy in the old-fashioned style, under the influence of modern tendencies, still leaves room for a heated difference of opinion.

Yet the world is far from perfection; the human race is to a large extent handicapped; the social evils are still numerous. True, present-day philanthropy remedied the situation by introducing the system of organization, removing thus the personal contact between those who give and those who are compelled to take. Here, again, the sharpened points of "organized" charity are ofttimes not less painful.

The life work of Nathan Straus, although the dictionary has not provided another term, is more than philanthropy. Nathan Straus has the distinction of having enriched the English language with an expression which could easily be translated into many other languages and transplanted into many other spheres of human endeavor. It is the word "preventorium." What he really has accomplished or, better, given an indication of what can be accomplished, is how to prevent philanthropy. But to prevent philanthropy, it takes a philanthropist, a great fortune, a big heart, an open purse, an open mind and boundless energy.

* * *

There has not been a single idea of principle worthy of its name, destined to become a utilizing power, that has not met with resistance and struggle. But it always took the personality of its originator to being it to victory. What did Nathan Straus have which enabled him to carry on his fight for the babies' sake? His army, the number of which is legion -- the world's babies -- were mere infants. All he has was the most resourceful when it is in existence: his personality, desire and determination to help. The elemental opposition to every innovation, the resistance of organized interests, was the great obstacle.

Pasteurization, the precept suggested, demonstrated and advocated by Nathan Straus, is a process named after one of the greatest scientists, Louis Pasteur. It was he who suggested heating below the boiling point as a means for destroying bacterial organisms in fluids. However, his experiments had nothing at all to do with milk. Said Nathan Straus, "Pasteurization destroys all the germs of disease that may be in the milk, but does not impair the taste, digestibility or nutritive qualities of the milk. Cow's milk, pasteurized, is then a perfect food for adults; but cow's milk needs something further to make it an ideal food for infants. Their immature organs are capable only of digesting the ingredients in such proportions as they are found in mother's milk. A process called 'modification' makes cow's milk all that the baby's system and condition require.

"Milk, then, in order to be suited to a baby's needs, must meet with these three requirements: It must be as pure as possible; it must be pasteurized; and it must be properly modified. The Nathan Straus Pasteurized Milk Laboratory solves these problems."

His famous milk stations, maintained at an enormous expense for a quarter of a century, in spite of opposition and, not seldom, even of ridicule, demonstrated in an unmistakable way how easily human lives can be saved, how much disease and misery can be prevented, if the proper care is given and the right method is applied. The health departments of American cities have already learned to value and apply the precept of Nathan Straus. Other large cities and other governments still have to be convinced and this great American Jew does not, at the age of 76, shrink from the task. The Straus enlightenment work concerning pasteurization is now being extensively carried on in England, France and other countries. There is no record available as to the amount of money spent by Mr. Straus in his charitable work, but it can be safely said that to every day of his useful life, many thousands of babies owe their life and health.

* * *

How does a father of so many babies feel at his advanced age? A man whose main care was not only his own and his family's welfare, but also the welfare of his race and the happiness of mankind?

In his palatial home, the grand old man with so many recollections of work and deeds that could justify an air of self-satisfaction and pride, simplicity is the striking note; the oneness of the individual life, no matter to what imaginary height it may have reached, is the conception here.

With understanding and forgiveness Nathan Straus tells the story of the conceited successful lawyer who reached the goal of his am- [rest of article missing]

Our New York Letter

The Australian Jewish Herald, February 26, 1925.

The fact that the crossword puzzle, which requires at least a fair knowledge of spelling and something approaching an average intelligence, became so popular is in itself a great puzzle which could be explained only by the wizards of American newspaperdom. This puzzle is particularly difficult of solution when one remembers the result of the intelligence tests during the War.

Those who look at every matter for its Jewish angle were not disappointed also in the crossword puzzle problem, which, thanks to the epidemic nature of the puzzle, crossed the ocean, where it was discovered that the crossword puzzle was originally a Jewish invention made by none other than our old acquaintance, Abraham Ibn Ezra, poet, astrologist, world trotter and epigramist.

However, here there is another puzzle which awaits solution. Why it was necessary for the crossword puzzle to travel across the ocean to find its Hebrew origin is really difficult to explain. Why America, with its great number of rabbis, Jewish journalists, scholars, having among its treasures the best Jewish libraries and manuscripts, could not find the Hebrew origin of the [crossword] puzzle is to be wondered at.

A superficial knowledge of medieval Hebrew literature, nay, even a knowledge only of the prayer book for the High Holidays, would indicate that the form of crossword puzzling was quite familiar in Hebrew literature and liturgy.

As a matter of fact, the majority of the special hymns and songs for the principal holidays have a crossword puzzle, at least one way down. The first letter of every line is always to be connected with the following letter from the beginning to the end of the song or hymn, and preserves a complete record of the name, surname and city of the author. The main evidence for the existence of the first Hebrew Paiton, Eliezer Ha-Kalir, was preserved chiefly through this cross-wording of his few and beautiful hymns.

In fact, most of the Hebrew poetry written in Spain during the Hispano-Jewish Golden Epoch was based, similarly to the Arabic poetry of that time, not so much on rhythm as on the number of letters contained in the verse, coupled with cross-wording at the beginning of the line. The Cabalistic literature developed subsequently had a particular fondness for the playing with words, and it claimed that the entire universe was merely the result of a combination of certain letters. The playing with letters went so far that the belief was held that with certain new combination of letters, [whole] worlds – spiritual and material – could be made and destroyed. Many a letter-enthusiast, it is reported, fasted for years in order to be privileged to learn some mysterious combination of 72 letters expressing the name of the Omnipotent Power.

The Notarikon (the Hebrew development of the Latin “Notaricum”) and the Gematrioth were another, much earlier and much more serious manifestation of the crossword fad.

It does not, however, seem too safe to go into the history of cross-wording and letter puzzles, as is evidenced by the fact that the brilliant crossword puzzles of the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries were not altogether appreciated even in the prayer books, and it took some scholar from overseas to bring to the attention of American Jews the Hebrew origin of the almighty Crossword Puzzle.

* * * 

Lord Robert Cecil, British statesman, champion of the League of Nations idea, winner of the Wilson Peace Prize of 25,000 dollars, in an address at the Hotel Astor, relating the achievements of the League of Nations, credited it with the securing of rights for national minorities in Eastern Europe. That the protection of the rights of minorities should be taken into consideration and cared for after the conclusion of a war is not a new international practice. The latest precedent which existed before the War in this regard was Article 44 of the Treaty with Romania signed at the Berlin Congress. In this Article, Romania had pledged itself to secure citizenship rights to its Jewish population, but it never fulfilled its pledge.

The commonly called “national minority treaties,” in the actual text of the supplement to the Versailles Peace Treaty, speaking of the national minorities in the various countries, resorted rather to a long term. In the treaties, the national minorities are described as “religious, language, and cultural minorities,” [which is] rather a vague and diplomatic term for such a burning question as the national-minorities-question represents in the various countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

In this regard, the League of Nations has really an achievement to its credit. As to the execution of rights, it seems that it has not gone any further than the Berlin Congress. The situation of the Ruthenian-Lithuanian minority in Poland, and the discrimination “enjoyed” by the Jewish minorities in Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Romania is, just because of this achievement, a constant challenge to the League of Nations.

Our New York Letter

Jewish Transcript, August 22, 1924.

What has been an engaging problem to the authorities in the various embarkation ports, to government officials and to relief organizations – the problem of the stranded refugees who were granted visa to be admitted to America but were detained not of their own fault – found no expression, so far, in any official record of the State Department or even the Labor Department. The authorities upon whom the refugees have placed their trust and as a result of that trust have disposed of their property, left their homes and started journeying with the encouraging hope of finally reaching their opportunity in the land of opportunities, lost track of these originally hopeful emigrants in the moment of their despair. Commissioner General of Immigration Husband has made the statement of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that outside of newspaper reports, the immigration authorities of the United States have no official record as to the number of American visa holders classified as “stranded refugees.” Will the lack of record, however, solve the problem and remove the responsibility?

That the authorities who have issued these visas and encouraged the hopes of these refugees have to some extent a responsibility towards them is indicated by the fact that the State Department has issued instructions through the Consuls abroad to give preference in the issuing of new visas to those stranded refugees who hold previous visas. There is, however, very little salvation in this instruction of the State Department. The quotas according to the new law for the eastern European countries, from where the majority of the refugees come are, as known, very limited. Out of this meager quota only a half of each quota can be allotted for preference to the stranded refugees, in as much as the other half of these quotas are to be reserved for a certain class of near relatives of American citizens and agricultural laborers which has gained by preference by the provisions of the very same immigration law. Besides, according to the same law only 10% of the annual quota could be admitted monthly. Even those refugees who would prove to belong to the “preferred stock” would have to continue in their trying and exhausting position of anticipation. What is then to happen to these eleven thousand stranded immigrants toward whom a certain measure of responsibility has already been admitted?

Congress at its very last session, before adjourning, passed the resolution which will remain in the immigration annals as an act of human mercy, to admit those who have already embarked for the United States and would become victims of the new law when they would see land again. Will Congress take up and deliberate in the same spirit on the question of these stranded refugees when it convenes?

* * *

General Plutarco Elias Calles, President-elect of Mexico, leader of the Mexican working classes, influenced by an organization which would correspond more to the tendencies of a labor party than to an extremely socialistic party, left a cheerful message during his stay in new York before his departure for Europe.

When he assumes the reins of the government in Mexico, he stated he would be prepared to ask his government to grant a large tract of arable land to Jewish settlers, with proper facilities and concessions. The Mexican solution of the Jewish immigration problem is not a new proposal. It has been taken up, discussed and even abandoned already two years ago. However, Mexico is the typical land of changes and the sudden arrival in power of what is termed to be a Mexican Labor Party may offer some new aspect to the problem. General Plutarco Elias Calles is not only interested in Jewish colonization work in Mexico, he has also a “good eye for business.” According to the interviewer of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the Mexican President-elect stated that Mexico under a labor regime, where a system of cooperative guilds could provide employment for tens of thousands of Jews in various branches of industry offers a great possibility.

“It would be at the same time,” the President stated, “a distinct benefit to Mexico to manufacture within its own boundaries many articles and products which it is compelled today to import from other countries. A sum in the neighborhood of $2,000,000 could give a start to this movement and furnish employment possibilities for Jewish immigrants, a start which is similar to the beginning of the large Jewish industries in the United States.”

An invitation to Jewish industrial workers with an allowance for a possible drifting of a certain percentage into individual enterprises is a new and sensible proposition. It ought to be taken up and first of all thoroughly investigated. The nearness of Mexico to the large American Jewish community, with its possible connections and credit facilities, would no doubt present an incentive to the home-seeking class of Jewish workers and artisans in the devastated regions of at-present economic barrenness.

Here I think the work of the Independent Order of B’nai B’rith carried on in Mexico in recent years could offer good material for the forming of a sound judgment on the matter. Just recently this benevolent Order appropriated a sum of $20,000 for the purpose of establishing a branch office in Mexico City and the enlargement of the activities [there]. Those who have experience in that country will have to be consulted first.

* * *

Hans Herzl, the little son of his great father, after a week’s search in the populous metropolitan city of London, came out from his hiding place. In a letter to the London Daily Telegraph he confirms the sad news which was reported about him.

“It is true that I was baptized into the Christian Church on July 20 in Vienna,” Hans writes.

But Hans is resentful. He denies the correctness of all the other particulars reported by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. What could be incorrect, since his principal incorrectness was unfortunately correctly reported?

It is incorrect that his action was a result of a mental depression? But was it ever recorded that anyone else under similar circumstances admitted his mental depression? You certainly would not expect Hans to admit that! Necessarily this must be left to the judgment of those who know more about it.

If you will search through the pages of the histories of all peoples, you will not find the names of great men’s sons being as brilliant as their fathers. We do not know anything of the sons Moses, Maimonides, Plato, Aristotle, Caesar, Luther, Spinoza, Copernicus or Newton. The majority of great men had no sons. Those who were born did not live up to their names. It seems as if nature takes a rest for a few generations after it has exerted itself at the heights of genius.

How painful it is, however, to recollect the [following] entry in Herzl’s diary: “June 10, 1904, was the 7th birthday of my Hans. I make a date out of the birthday of my good Hans. May he, healthy and happy, grow to be a strong Man and continue my work!”

Peter Wiernik: Scholar, Historian, and Editor

The New Palestine, December 18, 1925.

“Peter Wiernik, editor and historian, celebrates his 60th anniversary.” This short notice slipped through the columns of the American Jewish press this week.

With the modesty characteristic of scholars, the fact of this holiday was withheld from the public large. The occasion was celebrated by only a small group of friends and those initiated – the Yodei Chein.

It is not surprising that this celebration was limited to a charmed circle. A peculiar charm of reserve, the result of profound knowledge, has always accompanied the life and work of Peter Wiernik.

The birth of the Yiddish press in this country was simultaneous with the birth of the Jewish labor movement and the school of radical thought under which it developed. This fact resulted in the impression prevalent in certain influential quarters even today, that the Jewish press in this country is devoted mainly to the advocating of more or less radical doctrines. Jews as a rule are considered, if not precisely sponsors of radical ideas, at least sponsors of liberalism. Due to these developments conservative Jewish thought unfolded with greater strength and found expression in the publication of a conservative Jewish press. In this press, the Jewish Morning Journal played a leading role.

The moving force of thoughtful conservatism, a combination of modern knowledge coupled with the wisdom of ancient sources, was and is Peter Wiernik. Readers of the Jewish press, when looking for the specifically Jewish view of any event which happens to occupy the minds of men, look to the editorial comments of Peter Wiernik. His pen finds interest not only in matters of purely religious or Jewish national character; his pen is devoted to matters pertaining to politics, social reform and science. Any complicated situation in any country finds his mind attentive. His comments, while based on the latest information, always possess a Jewish “punch,” which can be explained only by his being steeped in Jewish philosophic thought and in traditional Jewish expression.

Peter Wiernik thinks in terms of tradition. Nothing that has any material, moral or aesthetic value can spring from a vacuum; all matter has a beginning and an origin; its duty lies in its continuity. The new must have its roots in the ancient. For these reasons history is not only Wiernik’s hobby but, one might say, his viewpoint.

Peter Wiernik represents an entirely new type in Jewish literature and journalism. Although born in the midst of the heated fight that went on in the middle of the 19th century between the two dominant tendencies in Jewish life, the “Haskalah” and “Hassidism,” he was never caught in the whirlwind of this conflict. In fact, the course of his life marks a distinct departure from the then-prevailing routine.

He did not spend his youth in study alone; he did not fight the “darkness,” did not cherish high ambitions to save the world from its ancient troubles. He simply settled down to work from his early youth.

The son of a traveling Maggid, having the privilege of seeing his father only at rare intervals – perhaps only once a year – he did not have to resist paternal education and go through the usual conflict between “fathers and sons.” He was also spared the luxury of indulging in theorizing on account of too great material abundance. Harnessed to hard work, at the age of 13, in Riga, he found, unlike all his contemporaries, great relief in the joyful and enthusiastic attitude of the Hassidim on Saturdays and holidays.

Though not a Socialist, Peter Wiernik, on his arrival in America, plunged into the field of productive labor immediately; he worked as a compositor for many years in various newspaper plants. However, the work in the composing room did not keep him from studying and from taking an interest in the intellectual problems of life.

Setting up the articles of others, in the course of many years he grew and developed into one of America’s most prominent and widely educated Jewish editors. Before his eyes the great wave of Jewish immigration from Slavic countries unfolded in the new environment. Observing it closely and dispassionately, he was, logically, destined to become the historian of this important, many-sided and restless period in the life of American Jews. His History of the Jews in America, the only one of its kind so far, is naturally, in its greater part, devoted to the history of the recent past. It contains an invaluable amount of information and documents embracing the Jewish history of America which could be preserved only by a man of Wiernik’s intellect and serene attitude towards the problem. Despite his personal bias toward tradition, he devoted his attention not only to the moving chapter of what may be termed “Congregational development” in the life of the first Jewish immigrants from Slavic countries, but also to the numberless attempts to organize the Jewish labor union movement, that movement which was rightly characterized as the “constantly changing army under unchanging leaders.”

There is something strengthening and refreshing in the views which form the background of the work which Mr. Wiernik has performed. They can be formulated as follows.

The basis of development of all races and peoples is, as no one can deny, the economic motive. No advancement of any race or of any people would be accomplished were not the natural needs of the individuals and their collective effort as a group striving towards expansion and conquest. This is true of all races and of all peoples. It is equally true of our people. To put the purpose of mankind in a nutshell, one might call it an elemental longing for the salvation of the world. It is the slow process of development, the first step of which was necessarily the establishing of a reign of justice of one individual towards the other, and one group of individuals, call them peoples or nations, towards another. In this respect our people has made the greatest of all contributions. This tendency made itself evident from the period of the Prophets and till the latest attempts to solve social problems. There are principally two tendencies in history. The one described above, represented by us; the other represented by those who oppose it. When the struggle for the dominance of one of these tendencies is to be ended there is no way of knowing. All we can do is record the things that have already occurred.

Parallel with the advance of this tendency for justice and equality, aiming at the salvation of the world, the fight for the emancipation of the Jewish people has been going on. It was not until the French Revolution and the German Revolution of 1848 that the Jews were, in principle, given equal rights. The existence of the American Jewish community in its present form and numbers is the first fact of this kind which was ever recorded in the history of the Jewish people and the history of the world. America represents a unique experiment in this respect. For the first time a great number of Jews are incorporated into the body of a great and free nation under the protection of a democratic and liberal government and given the possibility of enjoying full citizenship rights and religious liberty. This state of affairs certainly has its advantages but it also has its dangers. Here again Jewish history can furnish us with a good reason for optimism. It was not earlier than the date when the Jewish settlements began to grow and the development of the Slavic countries that the type of Jew that we are now accustomed to look upon as the only representative of traditional Judaism, characterizing his as Orthodox Jew, began to make his appearance. We are always inclined to think of this type of Jew as one whose Jewishness is expressed by his differences in language, dress and external custom from the other inhabitants of the land. But let us take a lesson from history. The Jewish community in Arabic Spain was highly cultured, highly developed and certainly highly Jewish since it could produce such a basically Jewish literature as the one which inspired our historians to name that period “The Golden Epoch.” Nevertheless, a leader and intellectual genius like Maimonides was not different from his countrymen in his language, external custom and culture. The essentials of Judaism do not depend upon such external appearances. There is no ground for pessimism in the prediction of the approach of a similar type of American Jew who, enjoying to the full measure his political rights, cultural and economic opportunities, will remain true to his specific Jewish culture, line of thought and religion. The time is not far off when America, the youngest of Jewish communities, will be in a position to supply with intellectual and religious leaders all the other older and now seemingly decadent Jewish communities of the world. In this respect, Orthodox Judaism is a valuable protection and a veritable armor, as has been proven in the course of our long and varied historical development.

Jewish life is safe in America.

The fate of the Jewish communities in the Anglo-Saxon countries which we can rightly call biblical countries, is sufficient proof that anti-Semitism, at least so far as its sharp and violent forms are concerned, never can root itself very deeply in these countries.

These, briefly summarized, are the dominant features of Peter Wiernik’s philosophy. These are the views which shaped his policy and made him one of the leading figures in contemporary Jewish journalism and Jewish thought.

Our New York Letter

The Chicago Chronicle, August 8, 1924.

Metropolitan newspapers told American readers of an importance piece of work that was finished in Jewish life. The announcement was made that the American Jewish Relief Committee, under the leadership of Louis Marshall, Cyrus L. Sulzberger and Felix M. Warburg, would close its activities on Thursday, July 31st, 4 o’clock in the afternoon, with a record of hundreds of thousands of lives saved, more than 4,000,000 children fed and clothed and the distribution of close to 1,000,000 tons of food in Central Europe – and a total of $63,137,562 raised for that purpose.

This event was given wide publicity in the press. As usual, publicity writers are inclined to exaggerate, so it was claimed that the sum of $63,137,562 was raised by the American Relief Committee, and that the credit for this tremendous achievement of American Jewry, in the work of reconstructing Jewish life in the war-stricken countries, was due to Henry H. Rosenfelt, now affiliated with the La Follette campaign.

Mr. Rosenfelt, in a communication to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, wished to make the following corrections:

1. That he did not personally raise the tremendous sum as stated in the press report; that he having been the National Director of the American Jewish Relief Committee for four years, is in a position to know that it is Mr. Jacob Billikopf to whom credit is due for organizing the great work.

2. That the American Jewish Relief Committee has not finally closed; that only its campaign for money had closed, but that the collection of unpaid pledges will still go on at the offices of the Joint Distribution Committee, 64 Water Street.

These corrections are certainly well taken. There is, however, another correction which ought to be made and which, then overlooked, lessens the significance of the great period in American Jewish life that is apparently coming to an end.

The closing of the campaign for funds for the American Jewish Relief Committee, as officially announced, and the final liquidation of the activities of the Joint Distribution Committee, in Europe, mark the quiet end of an heroic demonstration of self-sacrificing generosity and big-hearted giving on the part of the American Jewish community. It is a romantic chapter that will gloriously be inscribed in the annals, not only of American Jewry, but of America as a whole. It is since the day when a group of immigrant Jews, by their social status and adherence to tradition, belonging to none other than the orthodox group, assembled in an East Side meeting room, a few months after the outbreak of the World War, that this romance was been woven.

The longer the war continued – and at first it was expected that it would not last more than three months – and the greater the misery among the Jews in the war-stricken countries of Europe, the greater grew the spirit of generosity and the ranks of those who felt the responsibility of coming to the aid of the suffering. It was originally the orthodox Central Relief Committee which was organized. There was then organized the American Jewish Relief Committee. These two were followed by the People’s Relief Committee, composed of such Jewish elements as were usually in principle opposed to any benevolent or philanthropic action. It was through the cooperation of all these three committees – and due recognition must be given to the dominant role of the American Jewish Relief Committee – that the sum of over $63,000,000 was raised and disbursed by their Joint Distribution Committee.

When the epoch-making donation of $1,000,000 of Julius Rosenwald to that fund was under touching circumstances announced, it was President Wilson who stated, “Your donation, while it furnishes inspiration, puts on us an obligation.”

The $1,000,000 donation of Rosenwald certainly introduced a new style, not only in Jewish America, but in American war-relief activities. This inspiration, no doubt, served as a constant reminder to American Jews of their obligation to their brethren in war-stricken Europe. The obligation was honorably fulfilled. Over $63,000,000 was raised and efficiently spent. The prestige of American Jewry, and with it of America, was elevated to an incomparable height.

But this effort did more than raise millions of dollars. It awakened a feeling of responsibility, created Jewish communal leadership in the remote hamlets of America, brought the Jewish social service, in the person of Jacob Billikopf, to its present prominent place in Jewish communal life, generated enthusiasm and laid a basis for a real united American Jewish community.

It is announced that the work of collecting money for war-relief activities will stop. Will the enthusiasm and communal responsibility created in the course of this work end?

* * *

The wheel of Jewish history is turning with its hub seemingly placed in Palestine. In addition to the Bedouin tribe, which has made an application for permission to return to Judaism, there has appeared another group, which has made a similar application to the Chief Rabbinate of Palestine. This application is reminiscent of a tragic period and gives food for thought to those who are accustomed to thinking in historical terms.

A group of Maranos, the descendents of Jews in Portugal and Spain who were compelled by the Inquisition of Torquemada, Ferdinand and Isabella to embrace Christianity, desire now to return to Judaism. A number of these Maranos are experienced farmers in Portugal, and there is an intention to help their settlements in the land of Palestine. It seems as though the Biblical prediction of the return of the “scattered of Israel” is beginning to be realized. However, the Chief Rabbinate has decided not to take any definite steps concerning the application of the Bedouins and the Maranos before consulting the national Jewish organizations, and before a thorough investigation is made from the standpoint of Jewish law.

In a conversation with the writer of these lines, Rabbi A. J. Kook, Chief Rabbi of Palestine, who is now visiting the United States – [and] the one who is to decide the matter – had many doubts on the matter. With regard to the Bedouins, who are considered by reason of their language as Arabs, it is a very delicate political question. Unless sufficient historical proof is found establishing the Hebrew origin of this wandering tribe, the incorporation of the tribe as a group, with deeply rooted beliefs and modes of life of its own, into the growing Jewish body of Palestine is hardly to be recommended. It is different with the Maranos, who are, undoubtedly, of Jewish origin. But here again there are obstacles from the standpoint of Jewish law. Jewish law, particularly concerning marriages and divorces, represents a highly accentuated tendency towards legalism. Any shortcoming in the observance of the marriage and divorce laws are a grave transgression on the principles of traditional Judaism. In some cases the offspring of such marriages are under a question mark, which makes their incorporation into the Jewish religious community an impossibility. And these Maranos, though they clung tragically to the faith of their fathers, inwardly could not obviously be very particular.

Bastions of Jewish Strength and Hope

Bastions of Jewish Strength and Hope: Brief Sketches of the Jewish Agricultural Settlements in Palestine: When They Were Founded, Where They Are Located and How They Have Progressed, written by William Z. Spiegelman and published by the Jewish National Fund, November 1940.

Introduction

Of the more than 500,000 Jews now living in Palestine, 125,000 persons are engaged in farming and incognate agricultural pursuits. The Jewish farming population is settled in 250 agricultural colonies of varying types and sizes.

Three distinct categories, each of which is described and known by a different Hebrew name, are discernible in the development that has taken place between 1878 and 1940. A Jewish agricultural settlement in Palestine may have the character of (a) Moshava, (b) Moshav Ovdim, or (c) Kvutza or Kibbutz.

A Moshava is a settlement of freeholders: independent farmers who own their land as their private property.

A Moshav Ovdim is a settlement of smallholders who do not own the land as their private property but who hold it under a hereditary lease. Th eland, belonging to the Jewish National Fund, is national property leased to the settler for a 49-year period. Each settler in a Moshav Ovdim has the land tilled by him and his family clearly delimited. He enjoys full property rights in regard to the plantation, livestock, buildings and farm equipment. The settlers practice cooperation in all matters affecting the colony as a whole such as the purchase of livestock, seed and necessities, and in the sale of the produce, as well as in the maintenance of the necessary institutions.

A Kvutza is a communal settlement established on nationally owned land (belonging to the Jewish National Fund). The land is granted to the settlers as a group under the terms of the Jewish national Fund lease. The estate is worked in common. All property is owned by the community. A Kvutza comprises the land under cultivation, the living quarters, the buildings and the public institutions.

The principle of the Kvutza also apply to a communal settlement of a similar name: Kibbutz. The Kibbutz differs from the Kvutza only in its size or scale of operations. A Kibbutz is a settlement that has a larger land area and a greater number of members.

The term Kibbutzim is also applied in describing groups of agricultural workers which cultivate nationally owned land but have not yet been permanently settled on a definite piece of land. The Kibbutz lives in temporary quarters and is largely dependent for its maintenance on the wages earned by its members outside of their settlement. Nearly all Kvutzoth (plural for Kvutza) existing in Palestine today began as Kibbutzim (plural for Kibbutz).

The history of the Jewish agricultural resettlement of Palestine may be conveniently divided into time periods.

(a) Preliminary Period. In 1859 the Alliance Israelite Universelle of Paris, France, founded Mikveh Israel as the first Jewish agricultural training school in Palestine on an area of 2,600 dunams situated four kilometers southeast of Jaffa. Charles Netter, general secretary of the Alliance Israelite Universelle is credited with the initiative of establishing the first Jewish agricultural settlement in Palestine in modern times. The Alliance obtained the land from the Turkish government on the basis of a lease of 49 years, renewable thereafter. In 1878 a group of Jerusalem Jews made the first attempt to establish the first agricultural settlement which they named Potach Tikvah (Gate of Hope). This attempt was not successful.

(b) The Hovevei Zion Period, which began in the years 1880-1883, when he first wave of immigration from Russia brought a number of settlers, including the idealistic pioneers who went under the name of BILU (initials for the Hebrew sciences: Beth Iaacov Loohu U'Nolchah -- "House of Jacob, Come, Let Us Go," Isaiah II.5). Aided by the Hovevei Zion, these settlers laid the foundations for the colonies Petach Tikvah, Rishon le Zion, Zichron Yaakov, and Rosh Pinah.

(c) The Rothschild Period, which covers the span between 1883 and 1899. Baron Edmond de Rothschild of Paris, France, known in the annals of Palestinian colonization as the Nadiv Hayadua (famous philanthropist), reorganized the Hovevei Zion villages, converted them into vine-growing settlements and established at Rishon Le Zion the famous wine cellars bearing his name.

(d) The Jewish Colonization Association (JCA) Period, which covers the span between 1899 and 1907. In 1899 the administration of the Rothschild colonies was taken over by the JCA under whose auspices new settlements, on a cereal-growing basis, were founded in lower Galilee.

(e) The Zionist Period, which covers the span between 1905 to 1940.

The difference in the type and character of the various agricultural settlements may largely be traced to the dates and characteristics surrounding their establishment. Those colonies which were founded in the first three periods in the history of Palestine colonization were in most cases founded on the private ownership principle. Those establishments in the subsequent development both prior to the issuance of the Balfour Declaration on November 22, 1917 and after, were in most cases founded, with the funds supplied by the Zionist movement and with the land provided by the Jewish National Fund, on the collective principle.

The Fifth Zionist Congress held in Basel, Switzerland, in December, 1901, established the Keren Kayemeth Leisrael (Jewish National Fund) as the instrument of the Zionist movement for the acquisition of land in Palestine as national and inalienable property. The first settlement established on Jewish National Fund land was that of Degania on the Trans-Jordan side of Lake Kinnereth. Degania was founded in 1909. It is known as the "Mother" or as the first of the Kvutzoth. The Kvutza system was subsequently found to be the most effective and suitable for the settlement of larger numbers of agricultural workers. The system was evolved largely in accordance with a plan recommended in 1910 by Dr. Franz Oppenheimer, a German-Jewish agricultural expert who made the first experiment at the colony Merhavya in the valley of Jezreel.

All Kvutzoth are organized as cooperative societies functioning under the Cooperative Societies' Ordinance promulgated by the Palestine administration in 1933. All Kvutzoth function on the basis of a written constitution, common to all. The constitution lays down, broadly, the following principles: (a) the government of the Kvutza is vested in the general meeting of all members of the Kvutza; (b) general meetings must be held annually and whenever required by not less than one-third of the members of the Kvutza; (c) members have one vote each which is  expressed by show of hands [rest of sentence illegible]; (d) a simple majority of votes at a general meeting binds all members of the Kvutza; and (e) a committee of management is elected by the general meeting for one year.

The committee of management, commonly known as the Secretariat, is composed of three or more members and usually meets once a week. No official status is accorded to the chairman of the committee.

Each member of the committee of management has different duties. One member is usually secretary-treasurer; one is the labor organizer and a third is the Mukhtar, who deals with external affairs relating to the government and the neighboring Arab villages. In the larger Kvutzoth there are other Secretariat members who deal with the purchase and distribution of supplies. The committee of management is usually assisted by a number of small standing committees elected by the general meeting of household management, farm management, labor, education and culture. Although any working member can be elected to the Secretariat, it is usually the more experienced men and women who are elected and reelected to these posts.

Of the approximately 250 colonies and settlements that exist in Palestine at the present time, 150 have been established on the land belonging to the Jewish National Fund under a leasehold which aims at attaining the following objectives: (a) the settler who has little or no money obtains land for a farm without incurring heavy debts. The ground rent is fixed for a period of many years, so that he is protected against arbitrary increases. (b) The system assures that farms will be kept at a normal size, because the holdings can be neither enlarged nor broken up into smaller units. The soil is protected against undue exploitation. A limit is set to the farmer's indebtedness. (c) The land remains Jewish in perpetuity since it cannot be transferred to non-Jews. (d) The national interests are safeguarded in connection with the settlement project. One of the main advantages is that the fundamental principle of Jewish labor is safeguarded. (e) It provides for a just division of the increase on the value of the land. The settler receiver that part of the increase which has been created through his efforts, while the balance goes to the Jewish people as the owner of the land. (f) It is a means of combating land speculation and usury.

As the site for a new settlement is chosen or when the colony is established, an appropriate Hebrew name is selected. The national settlements, built by the Keren Hayesod on the land of the Keren Kayemeth have been given their names by a Place Names Committee which functions as the headquarters of the Jewish National Fund in Jerusalem and is comprised of representatives of the Keren Kayemeth Lesisrael, the Zionist Executive and the Keren Hayseod, the [illegible] Le'Umi, the Federation of Agricultural Workers, Hebrew University and the Jewish Society for the Exploration of Palestine and its Antiquities. he names are derived either from names known in the ancient history of Palestine or from local place names. In some cases they embody allusions to the topographical conditions of the environment. In other cases the settlements bear the names of generous donors who made possible the acquisition of the land or [the names] of the men and women who gained distinction in the leadership of the Zionist movement.


(Note: re-typed from a printout of a microfilm copy of the original mimeograph.)

Mary Fels (aka Mrs. Joseph Fels)

William Z. Spiegelman began, but never finished, a biography of Mary Fels entitled A Study in Jewish Womanhood. He wrote three introductory chapters, and a conclusion. Undated, the manuscript seems to have been written circa 1927.

In going through the boxes of materials by and about William Z. Spiegelman that recently came into our possession, we came upon three letters to Mrs. Fels. Since none of them mention WZS, we are left with a puzzle. How did they come into his possession?

Well, we know the following. Each of the three letters were sent from or mention England (London or Sussex). Two of the three letters are accompanied by their respective carbon copies, which suggests that these letters were never sent. WZS lived in London and did so during the period in question (1920-1923).

We see two possibilities. Either WZS was the secretary to whom the letters were dictated by their respective authors, or WZS borrowed them from Mary Fels herself when he was writing his biography of her. Perhaps the first hypothesis is applicable to the two letters that are accompanied by their carbons, while the second hypothesis is applicable to the third letter. In any event, each of three letter-writers were accomplished, even famous people in their respective fields: an actor on stage and film; a writer and humorist; and a concert violinist.

To "Our very dear Mrs. Fels," from Maurice Moscovitz (who later spelled his name Maurice Moscovich) London, Jan. 13, 1923.

"Dear Mollie," from Israel Zangwill, Far End, East Preston, Sussex, July 18, 1920. (How do we know "Mollie" is Mary Fels? She once used it as a pen name, and, in her biography of her husband, she has him refer to her as Mollie.)

"Dear Mrs. Fels," from Jascha Heifetz, no date.

Israel's Land Provider: The Tasks of the JNF in 1950 (1949)

 

Front cover.

Inner flap 1.

Inner flap 2.

Inner flap 3.

Page 1.

Page 2.

Page 3.

Page 4.

Page 5.

Page 6.

Page 7.

Page 8.

Page 9.

Page 10.

Page 11.

Page 12.

Page 13.

Page 14.

Page 15.

Page 16.

Page 17.

Page 18.

Page 19.

Page 20.

Inner flap 1.

Inner flap 2.

Inner flap 3.

Back cover.

The Chair for Jewish History and Philosophy at Harvard University

The Jewish Tribune, February 5, 1926.



"The Nathan Littauer professorship of Jewish literature and philosophy has been established, thanks to a gift from Lucius N. Littauer, Harvard '78, of New York, in honor of his father, who died in 1891. The gift of Mr. Littauer will be completed in 1928, on the fiftieth anniversary of his graduation from Harvard University. It is the confident hope of the donor that the establishment of this chair will be a force of far-reaching service in the cause of higher education, of scholarly research, of enlightenment, appreciation of Jewish ideals, and a contribution throughout the ages by the Jews to the humanities."

In these few words, the Information Secretary of Harvard University announced to the reading public the establishment of the first chair for Jewish literature, history and philosophy at Harvard, the oldest institution of higher learning in America. This announcement, although properly regarded by the American press, is more than a record of the establishment of a chair. It is, one might say, an epic of Jewish life in general, American Jewish life in particular, and the culmination of a long and deeply rooted desire which found expression in so modest a fashion. Those who are familiar with the growth of the university as an institution for disseminating knowledge, and more so for scientific theory, know that it originated with the study of Jewish theses. The first university, established in Prague, included in its program, outside of the study of the astrology and astronomy, the humanities, which meant the study of the historical Bible records. The university has grown, and has outgrown its original basis. It is still growing and will continue to grow, every student hopes, toward the unbiased search for the truth.

Hebrew and the Bible

However, the Bible has fared well in comparison with post-Biblical literature, medieval Jewish history and poetry. How much of the Midrashic beauty, Mishanic precision, is known to Jews and non-Jews? How many of the gems of thought contained in the Jewish philosophic literature, in both its antitheses, the philosophy and Kabbala, are accessible to the student and the public at large?

Hebrew and the Bible are being studied at every university, but as a small part of the humanities. The modern languages have in recent years acquired a vast literature and Bible criticism. Most of these publications were carried on with a purpose. Their appearance coincided with the coming forth of the racial theories in France and Germany, culminating in the Nordicism of America. The study of Jewish literature, both antique and post-Biblical, remained a pending problem, a hoped-for accomplishment.

Harvard is to make the start, through the generosity, vision and idealism of Lucius N. Littauer.

* * *

The simplicity of Amos, the mysteries of Daniel, the chronology of Nehemiah, the vision of Isaiah II, are to be unraveled and presented again to the young mind in their proper historic light; the lyricism of Jehudah Halvey, the speculative sarcasm of Ibn Ezra, the poetic thoughts of Ibn Gabirul, the moralizing of Bachya, the guiding principles of the "Moreh Nebuchim" (the Guide for the Perplexed) and the winning argumentation of the "Kuzari," are to be opened to Harvard students, though the vision and generosity of Lucius N. Littauer.

How did it come to pass?

Littauer is Temple-Goer

Lucius N. Littauer -- in his youth a friend of Theodore Roosevelt -- industrialist, banker, and member of Congress for ten years, is a man of iron principles and steadfast habits who, in his early youth, formed the habit of going to temple. Born in Gloversville, N.Y., in the period of Jewish immigration to America, he received no special Hebrew education except what he was offered in the religious Sunday school. However, the lessons which were impressed upon his youthful mind in those early days remained vividly alive. In the busy life of the Harvard student of 1878, in the hustle of industry and the bustle of politics during fifty years, he went to temple.

On a Saturday last May, he listened to a discourse by Dr. H. G. Enelow, Rabbi of Temple Emanu-El, New York, on the needs of higher Jewish education. The discourse of the learned minister impressed the man of affairs sufficiently for him to give the matter his earnest attention. This was in May. In October, A. Laurence Lowell, President of Harvard University, had accepted the offer for the founding of a chair for Jewish literature and philosophy. With the beginning of the new academic year, Profess Harry A. Wolfson was appointed to fill the chair.

The name of Lucius N. Littauer, although he has been active for many years, has not been mentioned frequently in the annals of specific Jewish affairs. Those who studied the recent past know the role that Mr. Littauer, when [a] Congressman, played in the dispatch of John Hay’s note to Romania protesting against the persecution of Jews in that country, an act which stands alone in the history of the protection of the minorities. Mr. Littauer, regent of New York University, deeply interested in the humanities, caused no little surprise to his wide circle of friends by his establishment of a special chair for Jewish history, literature and philosophy.

Study of Humanities Essential

“The study of the humanities has no doubt been the prime force in the broadening of the human mind, the removing of prejudices and the creation of social conditions which are in truth humane. I observe that the Jewish part in the humanities has been undeveloped. It is my contention that inasmuch as intelligence can remove prejudices, the establishment of a chair for Jewish studies will accomplish something in that direction. The span of a man’s active life ranges from thirty to fifty years. If one student gains this knowledge, it can be multiplied by that number and also by the number of those who are under his influence or his instruction,” Mr. Littauer modestly explains.

The foundation is to carry the name of Nathan Littauer. He was one of the early Jewish immigrants from Germany, and was born in Breslau in 1829. Lucius’ mother came from a family which moved to Breslau from Lithuania, a family which had a lineage of rabbis in its tradition. One of the pioneers of the glove industry, Nathan Littauer left a name that is held in memory by his fellow citizens. A hospital in Gloversville was dedicated to him.

The grandson of the family of Lithuanian rabbis, when leaving the House of Congress and insisting upon retiring from public life, was given the following testimonial by the House.

“Your service has been notable for untiring industry, for conspicuous ability, for integrity of purpose, for accuracy of judgment, for wondrous quickness of perception and for volume of accomplishment. That you possess in large measure the most admirable traits of mind and heart, each day’s intercourse with you has made more apparent. Your service has been of great value to your country. The going out of no man from our ‘inner circle’ could produce a more poignant pant of regret. We admire you, we respect you, we have for you a strong affection and we wish you to take with you to private life this assurance of our esteem and our regret that you have voluntarily severed the ties of an association which will ever abide with us as among the most pleasurable memories of Congressional life.”

A year before the lapse of 50 years since he graduated from Harvard, Lucius N. Littauer establishes a chair for Jewish history, philosophy and literature in the perpetual memory of his father.

The epic does not end. It begins.