and the British colonies. Barely ten years later, Baron Maurice de Hirsch,
frustrated in attempts to improve Jewish life in Russia, underwrote the
creation of the ICA, whose objectives included the colonization of Jews “in
various parts of North and South America and other countries” and the
purchase of lands for colonization “in any part of the world.” The ICA pro-
ceeded to settle Jews in Argentina, and it also lent its aid to colonies in Pal-
estine, Brazil, and Canada. Zionists and territorialists, bent on Jewish po-
litical autonomy, broadened the geographic horizons still further with
plans for Jewish settlement in Palestine or other parts of Asia Minor or Af-
rica. Shortly before his death, Theodor Herzl negotiated seriously, albeit
unsuccessfully, on behalf of the Zionists for the northern half of the Sinai
peninsula in Egypt.^38
Schiff too acknowledged the importance of outlets other than the
United States. He fought on two fronts, working to keep American doors
open and searching for other safety zones, as if for purposes of insurance.
The banker was a territorialist but not a Territorialist. Stoutly opposed to
aspirations of both the Zionists and ITO for Jewish autonomy, he was,
however, open to suggestions for settlement in countries that offered ad-
vantages to Jewish immigrants. If the areas in question coincided with his
business interests and if they promised to reduce the skyrocketing philan-
thropic expenses of the American Jewish community, so much the better.
Not philanthropy alone but philanthropy plus investments assuring a 4
percent or 5 percent return, he once said, would bring about land develop-
ment, irrigation, and railways.^39
The banker’s direct involvement in the search for havens testified again
to his wealth and influence. Although the magnitude of the tasks involved
in developing any new land exceeded his private capacities, he could be
counted on for substantial financial assistance. More important were his
personal contacts with bankers on both sides of the Atlantic who looked for
investment opportunities. Their cooperation would be essential for the
fruition of any ambitious plan. The question of whether the stewards had
the right to pressure eastern Europeans to some underdeveloped region in
a backward country was never an issue. They, the self-appointed guardians
of their unfortunate brethren, assumed that right, even as Schiff had in the
Galveston movement.
Schiff watched the formative stages of Hirsch’s Argentinian plans with
keen interest. (He even suggested sending a rabbi to serve the Jewish set-
tlers.) At the same time, respectful of the immense monetary and human
sacrifices expended, he questioned the wisdom of building settlements in a
country whose people and government were apt to regard the immigrants
unfavorably. He warned the baron of the opposition of American Jews to
In Search of a Refuge 169