J. D. B. News Letter

(By Our Philadelphia Correspondent)

To sue or not to sue in order to collect unpaid pledges? For months leaders of the Jewish community have been grappling with this problem. Of late it became so acute only one alternative was left–frankly to admit the inability to meet the communal obligations assumed on the strength of these pledges. Concretely and immediately three agencies were affected–the United Palestine Appeal, the Building Fund of the Federation of Jewish Charities and the United Jewish Campaign.

In the course of the past three or four years there were quite a number of campaigns in this city. First there was the Building Fund campaign of the Federation for four millions of dollars payable over a period of three years. Then there was the United Jewish Campaign for $1,500,000, again payable over three years. In addition there were the regular annual campaigns of the Federation (maintainance) for $1,500,000; the U. P. A. for approximately $300,000, and six or eight independent institutions, national and local in character, claiming an additional $200,000 to $250,000.

All went well until about a year ago when the business depression began to manifest itself. Men of means, particularly those active in the realty field, suddenly found themselves in embarrassment. For every one that was honestly affected there were four or five who were either frightened into it or who simply utilized the general spirit of depression for financial retrenchment. The philanthropies were the very first to suffer.

When the first symptoms manifested themselves the leaders of the community were quite optimistic. They were satisfied that it was a purely temporary affair; that the number of those affected would be negligible, and that the general item of depreciation, for which, allowance is made in all well regulated institutions, would take care of this situation. It did not take long for them to realize that their optimism was not well founded.

While the Building Fund of the Federation was the first to feel it most keenly it was the U. P. A. that was the first to adopt a policy.

The reason why the Building Fund felt it so keenly is not difficult to understand. Based on these pledges building contracts were awarded amounting to upwards of three millions of dollars. Some of these building–the Eagleville Sanatorium, the Maternity wing of the Jewish Hospital, two educational centers–are either completed or are nearing completion. How to meet the bills became a serious problem, and Justin P. Allman, president of the Federation, made no secret of the fact that the condition is grave. With all that the leaders of the Federation were reluctant to take drastic action, satisfying themselves with appeals to the contributors through the mail and through the local press.

At the U. P. A. office the condition, though not as acute, was much more chronic. A careful audit of the books, after the various Palestine activities were amalgamated into the Central Zionist Bureau, disclosed the fact that there were hundreds of names on the books that had pledged annually but paid only occasionally. The sum represented was considerable. William B. Leaf, chairman of the Central Zionist Committee, was determined to bring the matter to a head. Several months before the annual U. P. A. campaign was to be launched he called his executive committee together and told them he was in favor of instituting suit to collect these delinquent accounts, it being definitely understood that nothing should be done where there is justification for the delinquency. There was hesitancy. However, when the vote was finally taken it was unanimous. The question was submitted to a referendum of all the contributors and the overwhelming majority ratified the action of the executive committee.

The delinquents were notified of the date set for action. Immediately there followed a period of settlements, each delinquent anxious to meet a member of the committee to adjust his claim. A considerable sum was obtained in this way. A truce was declared covering the period of the annual campaign which was brought to a close a week ago. Those with whom no adjustment was reached will be brought to account in the near future.

The U.J.C. followed the U.P.A. Instead of a referendum the delinquents were notified they must pay their pledges or suit would follow. In his letter Morris Wolf, chairman of the local U.J.C. committee, who is one of the leading attorneys in the city, made it clear that the pledges were collectable and advised prompt payment. This letter brought the desired results.

The Federation was the last to take action. Several weeks ago the question was submitted to a referendum with the result that nineteen out of every twenty favored instituting suit. “If we sue.” Mr. Allman declared, “we will do it most reluctantly. We will do it because of the urgency of the need and because that seems to be the will of the vast majority of contributors. Every case to be handed over for collection will be studied most carefully and weighed on its own merits. We will not resort to any drastic action before every other human effort is exhausted.”

Before the U.P.A. took the first step there were those who feared it may react unfavorably on the annual campaign. This fear was not justified. In the campaign brought to a close last week the amount of cash collected was greater than ever before, and the pledges were by common consent, signed with more serious intent to pay than in the past.

It is perhaps, too early to reach definite conclusions as to the wisdom of this policy. Thus far the odds are in its favor.