London Press Approves British Statement; Telegraph Only Paper to Protest Policy

Every London paper with the exception of the Daily Telegraph agrees to a greater or lesser extent with the British government’s statement on its Palestine policy which is based on Sir John Simpson’s report on land settlement, immigration and development. Both the government statement and the report were issued yesterday. All of the papers devote a good part of their front pages to a report of Dr. Chaim Weizmann’s resignation and copious extracts from the government statement.

The Daily Herald, the government organ, advises the Zionists to recognize the facts and work out their ideals within the limitation of the facts. “If the Zionists insist,” the Herald continues, “on doing otherwise they will be quarreling not with Lord Passfield but with rigid realities which exist and will continue to exist, and to quarrel with realities is to invite certain disaster.”

POST PRAISES STATEMENT

The anti-Zionist Morning Post is delighted over the government’s statement and says that Dr. Weizmann’s letter to Lord Passfield announcing his resignation contains a hint of menace and “we know that powerful propaganda is already on foot to force the British government into a surrender to Zionist claims.” Because no one accuses the present British government of anti-Semitism the Post arrives at the conclusion that the steps the government intends to take “are in accordance with the facts and in justice to the case,” adding that the government’s conclusions are in accord with the “unprejudiced views of British officials.”

TIMES REGRETS WEIZMANN’S MOVE

The Times rather vaguely takes an attitude favorable to the government although regretting Dr. Weizmann’s immediate resignation. At the same time the Times arrives at the conclusion that his step signifies that his interpretation of the Mandate differs and has always differed from that of the British government. The Times is skeptical as to where the money will come from for carrying out Sir John Hope Simpson’s recommendations regarding agricultural development. In theory, however, the Times finds his findings unimpeachable and “the premonitory symptoms of agitation among both Jews and Arabs suggest that they will not be found unfair to either race in practice.”

TELEGRAPH TAKES ADVERSE VIEW

Not only does the Telegraph depart from the line taken by all the other papers but it points out that if the Jews are not entitled to preserve and develop the Jewish character of their own settlements “their wonderful work in Palestine during the past decade has been done on the security of a worthless promise.”