Dr. Morgenstern Says “morgenstern-richards Correspondence” Was Not for Publication; Asks Statesmansh

The now famous “Morgenstern-Richards correspondence,” which grew out of the publication in the Jewish Daily Bulletin of letters exchanged between Bernard G. Richards, executive secretary of the American Jewish Congress and Dr. Julian Morgenstern, president of the Hebrew Union College, regarding the situation of the Jews in Soviet Russia have again come into the limelight as the result of a statement on the subject made by Dr. Morgenstern, in which he declares he was not aware that his correspondence with Mr. Richards was intended for publication, and deprecating petty politics, points out that what the Jewish community in the United States needs is constructive statesmanship.

The text of Dr. Morgenstern’s statement, in the form of a letter to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency and the Jewish Daily Bulletin follows:

March 4, 1930

Jewish Telegraphic Agency,

New York City.

Gentlemen:

Your telegram of yesterday, inviting me to state my position in the so-called “Morgenstern – Richards Controversy,” was welcome indeed. It suggests to me that you feel that the matter has other and deeper aspects than have appeared thus far, and that I may well have something to say on my side of the case. It has interested me to note too how many people have said, in personal letters to me, that they sense something beneath the surface, and that in some way I have been made the victim of a clever political trick. In fact a few of the newspaper discussions of the “Controversy,” and particularly those by writers who have some knowledge of me and of my views and sympathies, have intimated this same thing, and that my true beliefs have not been correctly nor fairly presented. All this is true, as the following full account of what actually happened will show.

On Dec. 16, 1929, I received this letter:

AMERICAN JEWISH CONGRESS

33 West 42nd Street

New York

December 12, 1929.

Dr. Julius Morgenstern,

c/o Hebrew Union College,

Cincinnati, O.

Dear Dr. Morgenstern:

I am sending you herewith one of the addresses relating to the suppression of Judaism in Russia, delivered at our Conference of last Sunday. I am forwarding, also, three articles translated from the German, from the “Neue Welt” of Vienna.

“We believe that this material describes a situation of an alarming character. I venture to think that all Jews, and particularly those who stress the religious phase of our common life, should now be especially moved to give very earnest consideration to the plight of our people in Russia.

I should be very pleased indeed to receive from you a word of opinion on the situation which is here described.

Sincerely yours,

BERNARD G. RICHARDS.

The paper in question was one by Leo N. Glassman, entitled “The Jewish Religion, Culture and Zionism in Soviet Russia,” and carried the sub-heading, “Paper read at Conference of Jewish Organizations convened by the American Jewish Congress, December 8, 1929, Hotel Pennsylvania, N. Y.” I found the paper interesting and informing. But I was somewhat at a loss to reply to Mr. Richards’ request that he ‘would be very pleased indeed to receive from me a word of opinion’ on the situation described in this paper, for a request for an opinion is a vague thing indeed. Little did I imagine that I was expected to react with extreme indignation against the Soviet government in general and the Yevseks in particular, for I assumed that the world would credit me with natural and proper sentiments in this regard. Nor did I imagine that I was expected to respond, in the fire of my indignation, with the proposal of a joint, public, scathing protest, nor even with an offer to join with Mr. Richards, or with the organization of which he is the very efficient Executive Director, in such a protest. In fact the word “protest” was not used either in this letter nor in Mr. Richards’ second letter to me. Still less did I suspect that I should have been on guard, and that prudence should have suggested either no reply at all or else one evasive and non-committal. I was probably “naive,” as one of my more kindly critics called me. Up to that time I had had practically no experience in politics (I hesitate to call it Jewish politics).

At a loss just what to reply to Mr. Richards’ request, yet not wishing to seem discourteous by not replying, I suddenly remembered that I had met him personally, so far as I can remember, only once, at the close of the memorable Philadelphia convention of the J.D.C. some four years ago, when he and his group had vigorously, and with no little display of passion, opposed the project of Russian colonization. It occurred to me that perhaps he had sent me this paper primarily to point out that the agricultural colonization scheme was apparently not the complete success its supporters had hoped for. Accordingly I replied to his letter as follows:

December 24, 1929

Bernard G. Richards,

Executive Director,

American Jewish Congress,

33 West 42nd St.,

New York City.

Dear Mr. Richards:

I have read with much interest the address of Mr. Glassman which you so kindly sent me. It certainly offers food for urgent and responsible thought.

The truth has been becoming steadily clearer to us all that conditions affecting Jews and Jewish colonization in Russia are by no means as happy as we might wish them to be. Unfortunately, the same is true of conditions in Palestine. The entire problem of Jewish colonization, whether in Russia, in Palestine, or in other lands, is extremely difficult and complex. It forces upon us the inescapable truth that no matter how colonization schemes may succeed, whether in Russia, Palestine, Argentine, or elsewhere, they will never, at the very best, solve the Jewish problem. This can be solved only, if it can be solved at all, in the lands in which Jews are actually living at present, and in the face of conditions, economic, social and religious, which confront them there. Despite the unfavorable report of conditions in Russia, I still feel that the effort being made in Russia to meet the Jewish problem, both through the colonization plan and through programs of economic rehabilitation, come the nearest of any of the projects at present before us to dealing directly with the problem of the Jews resident in that particular country. This does not mean, of course, that the project in Palestine likewise does not command my whole-hearted interest and sympathy. It means though that I feel that even though conditions in Russia may not be as favorable as we certainly wish them to be, nonetheless we have no alternative but to continue in the program of helpfulness and upbuilding there which we have begun.

Very truly yours,

JULIAN MORGENSTERN,

President.

Obviously this letter did not satisfy Mr. Richards nor serve his purpose. Accordingly he replied, and evidently immediately upon the receipt of my letter, as follows:

December 27, 1929.

Dr. Julian Morgenstern, President,

The Hebrew Union College,

Cincinnati, O.

My dear Dr. Morgenstern:

Acknowledging your letter of the 24th instant, with reference to the paper of Leo M. Glassman on “The Jewish Religion, Culture, and Zionism in Soviet Russia,” which I had the privilege of forwarding to you the week before, I am taking the liberty of troubling you again in order to make clear that I sent you this paper as being mainly an exposition of serious and alarming conditions in Russia relating to the suppression of Judaism, Jewish religious practices and forms, Jewish culture, etc. It was on this attempt of the Soviets to uproot everything pertaining to the spiritual life of our people in that land and the possible reaction to these repressions on the part of American Jews that I was anxious to secure a word of opinion from you.

Mr. Glassman only refers incidentally to the Jewish colonization in Russia and neither the subject of colonization nor the general economic conditions in that land, deplorable as they are, are