Letter to the Working Committee of the Hebrew University

Jabotinsky, Vladimir Yevgenyevich
To the [Hebrew] University working committee in St. Petersburg
July 7, 1914¹

Dear Sirs,

1. J. C. T. transferred 500 Rubles to me on your behalf, the receipt of which I gratefully acknowledge.

2. This week my work is coming to a complete stop. All of the men who might be considered [for donations] have left for the vacation week. Still, I have the impression that the first collection can be taken up in St. Petersburg in April. I will discuss this with Dr. [Yeḥiel] Chlenov in the next few days.

3. I studied Prof. Weizmann’s letters and I am sorry to say that I am not at all satisfied with the result of the Paris meetings. I object vehemently to accepting the matter in this form.

It does not leave a trace of a connection to the university. It was decided in Berlin to accept research institutes only as elements of a future university; it was also emphasized that this fact must be expressed both in the character of these institutes and in their names. Prof. Weizmann put it this way: “University of Paris—Medical School” and similarly for us: “Hebrew University in Jerusalem—Institute of Physical Chemistry.” No trace remains of that thinking. The idea of the university is concealed underneath an empty phrase, such as “we hope to realize this project in its entirety.” Such phrases leave the Baron [de Rothschild] still free to disavow us at the first opportunity; and I am afraid that in his current mood, as Prof. Weizmann describes it, he will do so—a few alarming articles in the antisemitic press in Palestine or Paris will be reason enough. But as long as a disavowal by the baron is conceivable, it is clear that outside France, too, we cannot use his name on behalf of the university; it is a matter of course that not even in Baku, not even in a private conversation, can we make a claim regarding the baron that we cannot confirm in Paris. And that means the entire story is worthless. After all, the baron is not giving millions and is not promising millions—we had only hoped that he would lend his name to the cause. But that too he does not want to give—neither do Baron Edmond nor Baron James. So I am asking, why do we need this schiddech [match]?

If we accept the proposal in this form, it will be immensely damaging. It will immediately be said that we are collecting money for a university but are using it for a purpose that has nothing to do with a university. That is impossible; it must not happen. A teaching institution is a teaching institution; a scholarly institute is an altogether different thing. The Jews need the former and will not give a penny for the latter—at least not the Jews in Russia. Yes, one can preach to the people that institutes naturally develop into universities, even against the will of a baron. But here in Russia such words will be received with only a smile. “Natural development” implies decades. You must not forget that if the idea of the university is to be successful in the broadest and in wealthy non-Zionist circles in Russia, it is due to the expectation that the university will be standing in the very near future, open for my or your growing children. Do not postpone this idea, for if you do, you will never see the money. A Rothschild [!] can afford to wait for “natural development”; we need clear purposes and means that are tailored to these. Research institutes are excellent, but only under conditions that must be articulated succinctly and clearly: (a) the institutes come under the name of the university; (b) they are adapted in all details to serve a future teaching function; (c) they have two primary tasks: to prepare terminology and the Hebrew-speaking docents.—A compromise that makes concessions in the areas of these principles mean giving up the idea of a university.

On one point the baron is entirely right: the Ehrlich-Weizmann project is too expensive. It calls for 2,200,000 francs for interior installations and furnishing, and 600,000 francs annually! Those are nearly the costs of a modest but standard university! How can one possibly conceive of a merely transitional phase that costs as much as the final goal—and is a thousand times harder to finance because enthusiasm will be lacking? And all of that to get two names, Rothschild [!] and [Dr. Paul] Ehrlich—two names that we will be forbidden to use in the context of floating the idea of the university. In addition, one must not forget that for the annual expenses of the institutes the baron is donating not 350,000, but only 150,000 francs. From where will we take the missing 450,000 annually? From the donations for the university, that is for a teaching institution. That would be monstrous.

Permit me to say that I don’t comprehend at all why and for what purpose we consider the baron’s participation so necessary; what is it for? It would be desirable and advantageous, but I don’t really see it as necessary. For some of our best comrades this prejudice may have its source in the idea, which in my opinion is misguided, that we must absolutely create something “first rate.” I don’t believe that at all. In this particular area I am in favor of trusting in “natural development.” I am completely convinced that our university will be in every respect only a modest institution—of course only at the beginning. Just like the high school, like the colonies, like everything. To speak well you first have to speak badly. And that will not impede the development at all. A small and deficient Hebrew university in Jerusalem will attract masses of youths, a great deal of sympathy, and a lot of money, and will soon become the center of the Jewish world—ten first-rate research institutes will never command a comparable amount of funding. But if we want to count on this modest perspective, we can’t set dates that are far off and make the whole enterprise seem to be a dream about the future. In that case it will not be ten years, but a much shorter time, perhaps shorter than the time needed for the Technikum [Technion] in Haifa.

These are all important questions and therefore I am agreeing with Prof. Weizmann.

4. We need a meeting of the working committee very soon.

I will inform Prof. Weizmann about the content of this letter and ask you to copy and distribute it to other members of the committee—in matters of this sort this seems to me a better strategy than to correspond with them directly.

Respectfully—with Zionist greetings, V. Jabotinsky.