Digest of Public Opinion on Jewish Matters

[The purpose of the Digest is informative: Preference is given to papers not generally accessible to our readers. Quotation does not indicate approval.-Editor.]

The belief that the controversy between the leaders of the Joint Distribution Committee and the Zionists, which resulted from the resolution adopted by the Zionists at their Buffalo convention regarding the Russian colonization plan, has not closed the door to the reestablishment of good relations between the two groups, is voiced by the “Jewish Morning Journal” in its issue of July 7.

“It was hoped,” the paper says, “that Dr. Weizmann’s desire for cooperation, which was to have served as a preliminary to the extension of the Jewish Agency, would contro the situation. But there was too much bad blood and too many super-enthusiasts for whom a relief movement is more of a conflict than a duty, to make possible the peace which we all hoped for.

“The resolution adopted in Buffalo against Russian colonization was a declaration of war, and the great relief organization, which, rightly or wrongly, felt itself offended, could not remain altogether silent. The pin pricks from both campaigns led to the outbreak, and under such circumstances diplomacy is forgotten and gives place to outbursts of temper, so that certain things are said in a way that relieves the anger but does not clarify the situation. But the storm itself, especially when it occurs in a farnily quarrel, clears up the atmosphere and the eventual reestablishment of good relations is not impossible.”

SEES CHANGE IN PALESTINE JEWRY’S ATTITUDE TO MANDATORY

The assertion that a change has taken place in the attitude of Palestine Jewry to England, in consequence of the Mandatory’s failure to actively cooperate in the creation of the Jewish National Home, is contained in an article in the “Berliner Tageblatt” from its Jerusalem correspondent, Ernst Davis.

Referring to the memorandum of the Vaad Leumi to the Permanent Mandates Commission, Ernst Davis declares: “In the attitude of Palestine Jewry toward England a great change has taken place. When Herbert Samuel came to Palestine he could not have wished for better confidence than that shown him by the Jews, who believed that England had the earnest intention of realizing the Balfour Declaration. In the course of the five years that Sir Herbert was in Palestine, this invaluable sum total of confidence had been greatly reduced. Since Lord Plumer has been High Commissioner, the disappointment has increased still further. The Zionist Organization has until now held fast to its belief in England’s desire to fulfill the Balfour Declaration. More than that: During five long years the Zionist Organization exerted its whole influence to keep the Palestine Jews from voicing their disappointment with the Mandatory and from presenting their grievances before the League of Nations, to which they were justified as a part of the population of a mandated territory.”

The correspondent concludes with the opinion that “the method of friendly conversation employed by the Zionist Executive in its dealings with the Mandatory has so far hardly brought about any positive results.”

NEXT STORY