particular persons who caught his attention—an art student, a physician, a
barber, the family of a murdered peddler—he operated outside channels.
On behalf of individual cases he tapped friends for favors, he contributed
anonymously, and he kept a confidential pension roll. Once, when an un-
known correspondent invited him to a bar-mitzvah celebration with the
promise of a $100 donation to a charity designated by Schiff, the banker
considered it his personal duty to attend.^57
As a rule, Schiff preferred constructive philanthropy and social reform
to narrow charity. The many exceptions that he made with respect to indi-
vidual beneficiaries showed, however, that he still retained features of the
old philanthropic approach. In 1904, Schiff, usually the forceful individu-
alist, came out in favor of the federation of charities. A union of Jewish
agencies had been tried with the United Hebrew Charities, but federated
fund-raising was something new. A Jewish first, it had been instituted in cit-
ies like Boston, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia, but it was not implemented in
New York until 1916. His favorite institutions notwithstanding, Schiff
argued persuasively that united fund-raising would net higher contribu-
tions from the Jewish community. But although he admitted the need for
separate agencies to relinquish an essential independent function, he con-
tinued to insist that the individuality of institutions not be overlooked.^58
Mayer Sulzberger once wrote about his friend Schiff: “In perfect inno-
cence and good faith” the banker “opposes all suggestions but his own,
then ponders over them, and finally produces a new thing indistinguishable
from that which has been suggested to him.” Sulzberger exaggerated, but
Schiff was in fact an administrator more than an idea man. Impatient with
unsolicited advice on how to spend his money,^59 he willingly entertained
ideas on the desirability of various charitable, educational, and cultural
schemes from friends and social welfare experts. He responded with hours
of meetings and consultation, subventions, and frequently advice on how
to invest the institution’s funds. Since he disapproved of having an agency
dependent solely on one donor and since he tried to prod other wealthy in-
dividuals to a recognition of their proper responsibilities, he often qualified
large donations with the condition that the agency obtain matching gifts.
Unabashedly, he used his contacts in the business world and with govern-
ment officials on behalf of his pet charities.
As in business, Schiff preferred not to be identified with institutions
where he had no say on policy making. Implicit in all his ventures was a
growing awareness of philanthropy as social control and a preference for
undertakings that gave free rein to his views. Often he was attracted to the
innovative and experimental: a place for the chronically and incurably ill
(Montefiore Home), agencies for distributing Jewish immigrants from the
eastern seaboard to the interior of the country (Industrial Removal Office,
Galveston project), settlement houses in ghetto neighborhoods (Lillian
62 Jacob H. Schiff