who were seemingly incapable of self-direction. One communal worker
candidly explained how the philanthropists regarded the immigrant: “The
immigrant was a child who must be carefully kept in his place. His benefac-
tors knew better than he what was good for him. These benefactors had
made substantial business successes and, therefore, felt they were the com-
petent guardians of the newcomers,... distant relatives whom one must
look after carefully lest they do things that might bring the family to
shame.” Schiff may have been more sympathetic and accepting, but he too
found nothing wrong in deciding for the immigrants where they should
settle: “We have not only the right, but the duty to properly direct this im-
migration, and we canproperly and justly say to the Russian Jew, who
wants to leave his own inhospitable country and come to the United States
‘you must settle there where we think it best and proper for you to found
your new home.’”^99
Distribution was neither a new nor an exclusively Jewish idea. Broached
by urban reformers in the 1850s, it was endorsed after 1880 by Italians as
well as Jews who were confronted with the arrival of vast numbers of fellow
ethnics. Both sides of the distribution idea, removal from the ghetto and
resettlement in the hinterland, became increasingly popular with Ameri-
can charitable and civic organizations and with state and federal officials.
The Baron de Hirsch Fund experimented with several forms of distri-
bution in addition to agricultural settlement—suburbanization, removal of
industries to outlying districts, and job placements for immigrants in
smaller cities around the country. The last was handled by the Industrial
Removal Office (IRO), an agency that matched immigrants with job list-
ings garnered from committees in outlying cities. More in tune with immi-
grant tastes than rural ventures were, the operation also illustrated a way of
effectively channeling workers to meet the specific labor needs of different
geographical regions. As part of a vigorous campaign, the IRO even sta-
tioned representatives at Ellis Island to persuade new arrivals to set their
sights on places outside New York. Although some feared that the IRO
could be seen as a strike-breaking agency, Schiff remained a staunch sup-
porter. He used his railroad contacts in attempts to secure lower rates for
transporting immigrants, and he gave his personal attention to individual
cases handled by the organization. IRO in turn became the model for the
short-lived Division of Information (1907) in the Department of Com-
merce and Labor. Here again, innovative philanthropy on the part of the
private sector directly influenced public policy.^100
Distribution became a favorite topic of the Anglo-Jewish press. At con-
ventions of Jewish organizations prominent established Jews and their in-
vited speakers dwelt on the advantages of removal from New York and
other large cities. Conducting a vigorous propaganda campaign, the IRO
won the endorsement of national Jewish organizations like the UAHC,
The New Immigrants 121