Conclusions

Despite its failure, its remoteness, its impermanence and its long submergence in undocumented oblivion, the Cotopaxi Colony did have significance in the shaping of American-Jewish agricultural history. In the immigrant Jew’s attempt to return to the soil, to return to his ancient national character of the agrarian, the colony experiment played a definite and important role. This colony at Cotopaxi happened to be the first of more than sixteen similar Jewish colonies, located in Louisiana, Arkansas, the Dakotas, Kansas, Nebraska, Oregon and Michigan.1 Although individually Jews had long been active and successful in American agriculture, the colony plan, as demonstrated by successful groups during the 1870's, such as the Union and Chicago colonies in Colorado, seemed better suited for the conquest of the arid high plains and the distant Mountain and Pacific Coast regions, especially for newly-arrived Jews. Other national and religious groups had chosen the collective method as the best way to achieve security and a comfortable social milieu in unfriendly or desolate areas.

Analyses of the histories of these other Jewish Colonies, many of which experienced even worse hardships and exploitation schemes than the one at Cotopaxi, show the same underlying causes for failure. Most of them were conceived in haste, under great pressure, emotional and political, without adequate consideration of those factors upon which successful colonization or even profitable private farming, depend. Geographical location, with relationship to markets, national and local economy, transportation, the character of the land, type of ownership, lease or title, the capital needs, availability of equipment and seed, the existence of any special problems such as the necessity for irrigation, drainage, erosion control, the economic and social condition of the neighboring farmers in comparison with the prospective colonists, the nature of work involved, the personality and integrity of sponsorship and leadership, and last, but not least, the homogeneity of purpose and temperament and physical fitness of the colony members themselves--none of these vital requirements had received sufficient consideration in the hectic and unhappy 1880's.

It has never been charged that the Cotopaxi Colony failed because of the members' inability, or lack of inclination for hard, manual, menial labor, or weakness under privation and hardship. It was dissolved when the foolhardiness of persevering on land which was definitely not adapted for agricultural purposes, an arid, stony valley almost 7,000 feet above sea-level, was realized. Similar natural or environmental causes were found in the other Jewish colonies begun in the 1880's; flood destroyed the Louisiana colony, malaria was the villain in Arkansas, hail, drought and prairie fires combined to foil the Dakotas, Nebraska and Kansas attempts, while poor, swampy land, combined with a severe local depression, was the nemesis of the Michigan colony at Bad Axe.2 Though ill-fated and short-lived, these agricultural experiments were not bare of results, for these very failures focused attention on the great need for better guidance, more careful organization, thorough investigation of the site before settlement, and other factors attainable only by means of a definite, well-financed, well-staffed Jewish farm movement. This awareness led to the foundation, in 1884, of first, the Montefiore Agricultural Aid Society, followed by the establishment of the famous Baron de Hirsch Fund, which set up the Jewish Colonization Association and the Industrial Removal Office.3 These last two merged in 1900 to become the Jewish Agricultural Society whose function it has been to encourage, counsel, educate, train, and settle groups of agriculturally-minded Jews on the land. It has also been responsible for aiding in the adjustment of these groups to their new environment.

That the return of the Jew to the land is a good thing for America as a whole is undisputed, for, looking beyond such factors as relieving congestion in urban centers, redistributing population and skills, combatting anti-semitism, or even demonstrating Jewish ability to farm, there is a deeper and broader significance, historically and sociologically. The gain, since 1890, in numbers of Jews on American farms, during a period when the trend of population was to further urbanization, is an important indication, not to be measured in quantity alone.4 These numbers represent a positive gain in normalization, and the Jewish farmers found for themselves and their descendants a precious lode of self-satisfaction and self-respect in rediscovering the advantages of life on the soil.

Of the effect of the Cotopaxi Colony on Colorado, it will be noted that nearly all of the members remained in the State, or nearby, in farming, stock-raising and allied fields, or quickly became independent and prosperous in business and commerce. They were not discouraged by their failure in Fremont County, but tried again, on an individual or family-group basis, in widely-scattered areas, on homestead land or purchased farms. These 'pioneers' became the nucleus of small Jewish communities in such cities as Longmont, Pueblo, Rocky Ford, Montrose and Grand Junction and helped attract later Jewish immigration to these places. Those who settled in Denver and nearby towns were quickly Americanized and assimilated in the business and political life and were in a position, a decade later, to help in adjusting and advising the vast numbers of Jews who flocked to Denver for their health.

Too much blame for the Cotopaxi Colony's failure has been attributed to the Hebrew Emigrant Aid Society's lack of foresight and careful investigation, but it must be remembered that the plans were undertaken just at the moment when Russian pogroms caused thousands of destitute refugees to crowd into New York, completely absorbing the time and funds available. Too little attention has been paid to the unfortunate role played by the Society's erstwhile investigator, Julius Schwartz, whose complicity with the motives of Emanuel H. Saltiel prevented an adequate forewarning of the problems ahead. More emphasis should be placed on the labor-procurement aspect of Saltiel's offer, for the nature and composition of a large part of Colorado's social development. Lastly, the significance of their experience at Cotopaxi affected the colonists themselves, their children and grandchildren, in that it gave them a share, however small and unusual, in the history of their State and their nation.