in 1911 he distributed one hundred thousand copies of an address by Eliot
on immigration.^10
For every Finley and Eliot there were those, including liberals and pro-
gressives, who defended restriction. Since Schiff always retained a paterna-
listic interest in the major causes he endowed, he was especially irritated by
the anti-immigration views of Edward T. Devine, the man he had nomi-
nated to be Schiff Professor of Social Economy at Columbia University. In
1911, Devine wrote an editorial for Survey, a journal devoted to social work
subjects, in which he supported the literacy test. He contended that unre-
stricted immigration, which beyond certain limits produced a “degenera-
tive race,” endangered American standards and the national heritage.
Schiff, who maintained that it was his duty to those “who look to me—and
have a right to look to me—for the defense of the right of migration,” fired
off an impassioned reply:
Are you aware that you are putting forward precisely the same arguments
that were advanced by the so-called “Know Nothing” party against German
and Irish immigration some five or six decades ago—an immigration which
has made the United States what they are now? Have you further considered
who would today build our subways, our highways, who would do manual
labor in general if the Italian laborer were shut out; who would mine our coal
and iron, work in our steel mills and industrial plants, if the Hungarian and
Slavonic inflow were atopped; who would produce our clothing and under-
wear, would go into our textile mills and become the middlemen so impor-
tant to the promotion of trade and commerce, if the Russo-Jewish immigrant
were no longer permitted to come to our shores?... You would draw a cor-
don around this country, in order to preserve the comfort and self-indulgence
of its people and shut your eyes to the woes of those who suffer either from
persecution or oppression, or from unfortunate economic conditions.In Schiff’s eyes the right of Devine to air his opinions privately was abso-
lute, but his indoctrination of students via the Schiff chair was intolerable.
For a while, Schiff thought of demanding the professor’s dismissal, but
consultation with others and respect for academic freedom constrained
him. Since Devine stood firm, all the banker could do was remove his name
from the professorship.^11
Endorsed by the report of the Immigration Commission, the literacy
test found its way into a new congressional bill. Exemption was made for
refugees of religious persecution, and because of Jewish agitation the re-
quirement for certificates of character was dropped. Friends of liberal im-
migration now looked to the executive branch. They prevailed upon Taft
to veto the measure shortly before he left office; and although Woodrow
Wilson had pledged his opposition to restrictionism during the campaign
158 Jacob H. Schiff