Philip Slomovitz South End collection 1969-1974

Contains 1969 and 1971-73 issues of The South End, Wayne State University student paper, as well as correspondence, public statements, petitions and a tape-recording relating to controversies generated by the printing of alleged anti-Zionist/anti-Semitic articles in the newspaper. The correspondence consists for the most part of an exchange of letters between university officials, Jewish community leaders and Leonard N. Simons, a Detroit advertising executive, during the 1969 controversy, and correspondence with Philip Slomovitz, editor of the Detroit Jewish news, in 1972-73. The tape recording is of a February 2, 1969 interview with John Watson, editor of the South end.

American Jewish Committee. Office of Jewish War Records, undated, 1918-1921, 1962.

The records consist of documentation of the American Jewish Committee's project to describe Jewish participation in the United States Armed Forces during World War I. The bulk of the material consists of questionnaires that the AJC sent to servicemen to determine Jewish identity, which contain information on personal identification and details of military service. Responses to the questionnaire come from both Jews and non-Jews. In addition, the collection contains office papers concerning the project and a ledger of manuscripts. The manuscripts document the distribution of records the Office of Jewish War Records collected, as well as list Jews who died or were given military honors.

Jacobi-Schlossberg family papers, undated, 1870-2000.

The collection documents the lives Sarah Simon Jacobi (1857-1943), Freda Moritz Jacobi (1886-1939), Alice Jacobi Schlossberg (1912-1987) and Deda Schlossberg Miller (1940- ), through diaries, baby books, photographs, and correspondence. Also included in the collection are a silver card case, a silver coffee pot and creamer, and an etching of the Jacobi family home. For further information on these objects see the museum curator.

Myer S. Isaacs collection undated, 1844, 1851-1925

Contains correspondence and newspaper clippings relating to the centennial birthday celebration of and memorial services for Sir Moses Montefiore; correspondence consists primarily of replies to a circular advocating the holding of memorial services issued by the Board of Delegates on Civil and Religious Rights from congregations in Buffalo, Charleston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Detroit. Contains also correspondence relating to the activities of the Alliance Israelite Universelle on behalf of Palestine and the Jews in the Balkan States and Morocco and to the establishment of United States committees for the Alliance and the raising of funds, including correspondence with H. Pereira Mendes, Henry S. Jacobs, John Hay, and Adolphe Cremieux as well as letters from Baltimore, Cleveland, Detroit, Galveston, Minneapolis, Mobile, Rochester, St. Louis, and San Francisco. Also contains extensive correspondence concerning anti-semitism in Russia, aid to Jewish immigrants, and Jewish agricultural colonies in the United States, with letters from James G. Blaine, Manuel Augustus Kursheedt, Sabato Morais, Charles Nathan, Hirsch Leib Sabsovich, (Isaac N.?) Seligman and Judah Wechsler, among others. Also contains newspaper clippings and other items relating to Jewish life during the late 19th century and articles and memorabilia about various members of the Isaacs family.

Lewis Lichtenstein Strauss papers 1908-1973

Consists of correspondence, documents, speeches, reports and other writings, photographs, film and other records of Admiral Strauss' involvement with Jewish organizations and causes, as well as miscellaneous personal items.

Raphael Lemkin collection undated, 1763, 1915-1919, [c.1921], 1933, 1941-1952, 1983, 1989.

Lemkin is the individual primarily responsible for adoption of the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. The collection is arranged according to the following subject areas: personal material, material on the Genocide Convention, material on genocide.

Isadore Breslau papers undated, 1938-1975

This collection consists primarily of correspondence, notes and memoranda relating to his work with the American Zionist Bureau (1939-40) and the Zionist Organization of America (1941). Also includes correspondence as U.S. Army Chaplain (1943) stationed in Daytona Beach, Florida. Among the more important correspondents are Louis D. Brandeis, Stephen S. Wise, Solomon Goldman and Robert Szold.

Louis Kraft papers undated, 1914-1975.

Correspondence, memoranda, minutes, reports, official documents and other similar materials pertaining to Kraft's long career in Jewish Social Service at the JWB, the JDC and related organizations.

Myer Starr, memoirs undated

Myer Starr was born in Dmitrovka in the Ukraine, which was then part of Russia. As a child he was apprenticed to a tailor and later a bakery before he began work at a dry goods store at the age of 11. After his mother died, Starr and his younger brother crossed the border into Germany and then immigrated to the United States. Starr and his brother sailed on the "Kleist" into New York in February 1913. From there, they traveled to a sister's house in Malden, Massachusetts. Myer later married and had two sons, graduates of Harvard College and Tufts University.

Juden, Juden, Juden : juedische Chronik zu Juden, Judentum, juedischer Geschichte und Geschichte des Heiligen Landes, der Heiligen Schrift(en) sowie zur Geschichte Israels, des Antijudaismus, Antisemitismus, der Shoah und des Zionismus von den Anfaengen bis in die Gegenwart, vermehrt um allerlei Wissenswertes und Kurioses aus der juedischen (und nichtjuedischen) Welt - teilweise ergaenzt um Angaben zu geschichtlichen Ereignissen von allgemeiner Bedeutung /

Bd. 1. Bis 7. November 1862. - 2008. - 556 p. -- Bd. 2. 26. November 1862-11. Februar 1909. - 2008. - 560 p. -- Bd. 3. Ab 5. Maerz 1909 [until November 20, 2006]. - 2008. - 560 p.

A study of professional advisers in Australia

Since 2002, ACPNS has been surveying professional advisers to affluent Australians intermittently to seek their views and experiences around client and personal philanthropy. Why?: because professional advisers on finance, wealth management, law, accounting, taxation, estate management and beyond are an important nexus with people who have the capacity to channel significant funding into community need. Overall, this study suggests a slight shift away from advising affluent clients on philanthropic matters. It also highlights some perceived lack of organisational and professional association support and the feeling of many advisers that they do not have the expertise yet to advise in this area. These results provide thought fodder for advisers, their organisations and sector bodies.

Conrad Summenhart's theory of individual rights and its medieval background

This study focuses on the theory of individual rights that the German theologian Conrad Summenhart (1455-1502) explicated in his massive work Opus septipartitum de contractibus pro foro conscientiae et theologico. The central question to be studied is: How does Summenhart understand the concept of an individual right and its immediate implications? The basic premiss of this study is that in Opus septipartitum Summenhart composed a comprehensive theory of individual rights as a contribution to the on-going medieval discourse on rights. With this rationale, the first part of the study concentrates on earlier discussions on rights as the background for Summenhart s theory. Special attention is paid to language in which right was defined in terms of power . In the fourteenth century writers like Hervaeus Natalis and William Ockham maintained that right signifies power by which the right-holder can to use material things licitly. It will also be shown how the attempts to describe what is meant by the term right became more specified and cultivated. Gerson followed the implications that the term power had in natural philosophy and attributed rights to animals and other creatures. To secure right as a normative concept, Gerson utilized the ancient ius suum cuique-principle of justice and introduced a definition in which right was seen as derived from justice. The latter part of this study makes effort to reconstructing Summenhart s theory of individual rights in three sections. The first section clarifies Summenhart s discussion of the right of the individual or the concept of an individual right. Summenhart specified Gerson s description of right as power, taking further use of the language of natural philosophy. In this respect, Summenhart s theory managed to bring an end to a particular continuity of thought that was centered upon a view in which right was understood to signify power to licit action. Perhaps the most significant feature of Summenhart s discussion was the way he explicated the implication of liberty that was present in Gerson s language of rights. Summenhart assimilated libertas with the self-mastery or dominion that in the economic context of discussion took the form of (a moderate) self-ownership. Summenhart discussion also introduced two apparent extensions to Gerson s terminology. First, Summenhart classified right as relation, and second, he equated right with dominion. It is distinctive of Summenhart s view that he took action as the primary determinant of right: Everyone has as much rights or dominion in regard to a thing, as much actions it is licit for him to exercise in regard to the thing. The second section elaborates Summenhart s discussion of the species dominion, which delivered an answer to the question of what kind of rights exist, and clarified thereby the implications of the concept of an individual right. The central feature in Summenhart s discussion was his conscious effort to systematize Gerson s language by combining classifications of dominion into a coherent whole. In this respect, his treatement of the natural dominion is emblematic. Summenhart constructed the concept of natural dominion by making use of the concepts of foundation (founded on a natural gift) and law (according to the natural law). In defining natural dominion as dominion founded on a natural gift, Summenhart attributed natural dominion to animals and even to heavenly bodies. In discussing man s natural dominion, Summenhart pointed out that the natural dominion is not sufficiently identified by its foundation, but requires further specification, which Summenhart finds in the idea that natural dominion is appropriate to the subject according to the natural law. This characterization lead him to treat God s dominion as natural dominion. Partly, this was due to Summenhart s specific understanding of the natural law, which made reasonableness as the primary criterion for the natural dominion at the expense of any metaphysical considerations. The third section clarifies Summenhart s discussion of the property rights defined by the positive human law. By delivering an account on juridical property rights Summenhart connected his philosophical and theological theory on rights to the juridical language of his times, and demonstrated that his own language of rights was compatible with current juridical terminology. Summenhart prepared his discussion of property rights with an account of the justification for private property, which gave private property a direct and strong natural law-based justification. Summenhart s discussion of the four property rights usus, usufructus, proprietas, and possession aimed at delivering a detailed report of the usage of these concepts in juridical discourse. His discussion was characterized by extensive use of the juridical source texts, which was more direct and verbal the more his discussion became entangled with the details of juridical doctrine. At the same time he promoted his own language on rights, especially by applying the idea of right as relation. He also showed recognizable effort towards systematizing juridical language related to property rights.

Should tax incentives for charitable giving stop at Australia's borders?

Around the world, philanthropic gifts are increasingly crossing borders, driven by globalisation and facilitated by liberalised cross-border tax incentives. Australia is considered to have one of the strictest regimes for the tax treatment of cross-border donations. With bipartisan political support for a significant reduction in the amount and scope of Australian foreign aid, the nation’s international presence through the ‘soft power’ of aid will fall increasingly upon private philanthropy. Are the current tax incentives for Australian cross-border philanthropy and the supervision of those incentives appropriate to both facilitate and regulate international giving? To address this question, this article analyses the amount of Australian cross-border philanthropy and explains the current legislative architecture affecting the tax deductibility of cross-border gifts. It then examines the Australian Government’s proposed ‘in Australia’ reform agenda against the underlying fiscal and regulatory policy imperatives, and makes recommendations for the future tax treatment of Australian cross-border philanthropy.

Altruism, Trade Policy, and the Optimality of Foreign Aid

There are many studies in the literature that deal with the welfare effects of income transfers between nations in a general equilibrium setting. An important impetus for this extensive literature was the demonstration of the transfer paradox; that the donor country could actually gain from a transfer of income to another, and that the recipient could lose as a result of the gift. The reason for this paradoxical result is that the transfer gives rise to a terms-of-trade effect that may be especially beneficial to the donor and detrimental to the recipient. Subsequently, many papers have established conditions under which this paradox will or will not occur. Early work by Samuelson (1954) was followed by demonstrations of paradoxes by Gale (1974), Ohyama (1974), Brecher and Bhagwati (1982) and Bhagwati, Brecher and Hatta 1983, 1985, and Dixit (1983)) among others.1 More recently, many studies have examined whether or not foreign aid — tied and untied — can be welfare improving for both the donor and the recipient (see, for example, Turunen-Red and Woodland (1988), Kemp and Wong (1993), Schweinberger (1990), Hatzipanayotou and Michael (1995), Lahiri and Raimondos-Moller 1995, 1997, Djajić, Lahiri and Raimondos-Møller 1996a, 1996b, and Lahiri, Raimondos-Møller, Wong and Woodland 1997.2