The Hearst newspapers took a vigorous stand against the suggestion made in the London newspaper chain controlled by Lord Rothermere to the effect that England restore order in Palestine and repudiate the Palestine Mandate later.
Quoting from the New Testament, the “New York American” editorial in its Wednesday morning issue declared:
“And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the Kingdom of God.”-Luke 9, 62.
“It is not possible to exaggerate the horror of recent events in Jerusalem and throughout Palestine.
“Peaceable Jewish settlers, agriculturists and business men that have enormously increased the prosperity of the whole country, multiplying by five the wages paid to their Arab neighbors, taken by surprise, have been massacred in great numbers.
“It is the old story of bitter, brutal, unreasoning race and religious hatred.
“The Mosque of Omar, sacred to Mohammedans is, unfortunately, located close to what is left of the ancient temple of Jerusalem, including the Wailing Wall’. The more ignorant, and therefore most fanatical, among the Arabs are as ruthless today as they were in the days of Mohammed, fourteen hundred years ago.
“And today, as in his day, their cure for ‘unbelief’ is murder.
“Cable dispatches have told the horrible story of men, women and children, surprised by overwhelming numbers, stabbed and clubbed to death.
“Fortunately, the British Government, accused of negligence and neglect of a mandate solemnly undertaken, is now acting with energy.
“Lord Rothermere’s newspapers suggest that Britain should suppress this particular uprising and then repudiate the Palestine mandate, solemnly undertaken under the Balfour Declaration, and wash its hands of all responsibility in the Holy Land.
“Lord Rothermere and the British Government should read again the text published at the beginning of this editorial.
“When you undertake a task solemnly, encouraging tens of thousands of men and women from all over the world to take shelter under your protection and under your solemn promise, you cannot repudiate that promise so lightly.
“What is more important, and hopeful for the Jews, is the fact that to take Lord Rothermere’s advice would be dangerous to the standing and safety of the British Empire.
“To abandon Palestine to its fate, which is, of course, unthinkable, would be for the British to say to the Arabs:
“‘We fear you, and retire before you.’
“The British Empire cannot afford to do that.
“The British have little commercial or selfish financial interest in Palestine, it is true.
“But Palestine is inhabited chiefly by Arabs, fanatical Mohammedans.
“And the trail of Mohammedanism extends all the way from Jerusalem to Singapore.
“The British have been earnest in accusing Russia’s government of spreading discontent, and in fighting rebellion all along that ‘red trail’.
“Let the Mohammedans become convinced that the British fear them, or will not fight them and promptly suppress any outbreak, and there would be such massacres in India and other British possessions as would endanger the Empire’s safety.
“It is not in jest that the savage Afghan chiefs of the mountains have said:
“If it were not for the British we would murder two-thirds of the Hindus and make slaves of the rest.”
“But now, as in old days, the British have ‘got the men, got the ships (including airships), and got the money, too.’
“And however little they may relish being involved in a mandate, which suited them well after the war, they will find it prudent to live up to that mandate and give Jews in Palestine the protection that they have solemnly promised. Only thus can the British protect themselves from a Moslem outbreak that would cost them in men and money a thousand times what it would cost to make good the solemn promise made to the people of Palestine.”
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
