The Jewish Trail of Tears The Evian Conference of ... - Haruth.com

to pass on the burden to the other. The United States represented the “chief motive
power” while the “chief brake” was provided by the United Kingdom. Consequently, an
“air of inhospitality” pervaded the conference. The Conference was a call for democratic
societies to stand up for and protect “the individual against being punished for his
opinions or [the Jewish blood of] his parents.” It was obvious early on that the delegates
“lost sight” of this purpose from the “start. These poor people and these great principles
seem so far away from the Hotel Royal tonight.” 104
The New York Herald Tribune
commented that the Conference was “not exactly a pretty spectacle” that got “nowhere
with great dignity but a high rate of speed.” 105
The New Republic observed that the
delegates were annoyed with the Nazis not only because of the humanitarian concerns but
because their respective countries were faced with an “awkward problem of
absorption.” 106 The Richmond News Leader predicted that the American response to the
refugee crisis would be muted with the Government content to issue “friendly gestures
and kind words.” 107
Deborah Lipstadt noted that while many American papers criticized
the lack of an adequate response during the Conference (both from the U.S. and other
nations) they favored the “idea of a conference because it guaranteed no increase in
immigration.” Thus, the “failure of Evian was the failure of the rest of the world to
104 Clarence K. Streit, “32 Nations Gather to Help Refugees,” New York Times, July 6, 1938, 1; Montreal
Gazette, July 6, 1938, 1, 9.
105 New York Herald Tribune, July 12, 1938 cited in Deborah E. Lipstadt, Beyond Belief: The American
Press & the Coming of the Holocaust 1933-1945 (NY: The Free Press, 1986), 95.
106 New Republic, July 20, 1938, 291-292. Ibid., 95.
107 Richmond News Leader, July 13, 1938. Ibid., 96.
283