Although Schiff believed he had proved his point, the Lee Frankel epi-
sode, which followed shortly thereafter, compounded his uneasiness. Fran-
kel, an expert on social welfare, had been named by the Red Cross to a re-
lief commission designed to aid the new Kerensky government. Almost
immediately, however, doubts on the part of the organization (and/or the
State Department) about the wisdom of a Jewish appointee to Russia
forced him to withdraw. Since the Russian envoy to the United States de-
nied that his country would disapprove of a Jew, Schiff concluded: “I am
getting more and more the impression that somewhere, be it in the Admin-
istration or in the Red Cross, the love for our people is not as great as we
are... led to believe.”
The banker turned directly to Henry Davison, a member of the Morgan
firm who now served as chairman of the Red Cross War Council, charging
that the Frankel affair had confirmed Jewish suspicions of discrimination.
He spoke bluntly: since Davison didn’t want Jews to believe that their coop-
eration was unwelcome, he had to decide whether amends were in order.
Davison understood the message, and several Jews were appointed to exec-
utive posts. Schiff commended him for his stand against prejudice, but ever
careful not to publicize matters that could boomerang against the Jews,
arousing perhaps the notion that they had “bought” their way in, he denied
that his intervention accounted for the change. His faith in the Red Cross
at least temporarily restored,^46 the banker kept up an active involvement in
its affairs. While he urged support from his fellow Jews, he cautioned
against separate Jewish relief drives under the organization’s auspices. If, as
Schiff now said, the Red Cross was the “greatest American society” that
bound together all groups in the United States, separate campaigns could
well arouse charges of Jewish self-segregation or nonconformity.^47
When, also in 1917, a ruling of the State Department announced that
no naturalized Germans and Austrians nor their children would be sent to
Europe to work in Red Cross hospitals, both Schiff and Marshall worked
determinedly for its rescission. The order was taken as a personal insult.
Not only did it come at the same time that the Red Cross discriminated
against Jewish appointments, but it hit the established Jews as well as the
immigrant community. One of Schiff’s friends argued that logically the
same people mentioned in the order should be excused from the armed
services. Although the word Jewwas not used, other associates suspected
deep-seated discrimination; as usual, “Der Jude wird verbrennt.” Accord-
ing to Schiff, the order, a manifestation of “chauvinism,” violated the fun-
damental principles of the nation. He protested to Secretary Robert Lan-
sing that his loyalty to the United States and that of his children was well
proved by his life of over fifty years in the country. It was “mortifying” (one
of Schiff’s favorite words) that the government thus distinguished among
its citizens. In an unsigned letter to the New York Times, Marshall, who
204 Jacob H. Schiff