Refuting yesterday’s statement by Nathan Gordon, secretary of the Jewish School Commission, in which he defended the Commission from attacks on it by those leaders who favored a separate Jewish school system, H. M. Caiserman, chairman of the Separate School Committee, today made a number of allegations against the members of the Jewish School Commission and against the agreement they concluded with the Protestant School Board.
Referring to that part of the contract that gives the Jewish children the same rights they enjoyed under the 1903 agreement, Mr. Caiserman says that means the right “to receive a Protestant education on the same basis as Protestant children” and charges that the Jewish Commission has “entirely failed to provide for any element of Jewish education in its unfortunate settlement.”
As to Mr. Gordon’s statement that the Separate School Committee knew of the Jewish Commission’s meetings six months before, Mr. Caiserman terms it “untrue and misleading in every sense. Commissioner Garber reported confidentially to our Committee about four weeks ago about a certain state of the negotiations but counselled against calling any public meetings until he informed us. And when he did so the agreement was already concluded. When a deputation of the Separate School Committee desired a conference on the matter it was informed by the chairman that the contract was in the hands of the notary and that no changes could be made.”
AGREEMENT TO HASTY
Mr. Caiserman also points out that the Jewish school law “gave the Jewish School Commission two alternatives, to negotiate for an understanding with the Protestants, and failing to reach an understanding until July 1, 1931 to establish separate Jewish schools. If a majority of the committee were not assimilationists and if they were not ready to liquidate any Jewish rights why did it hurry to sign an agreement without consulting any Jewish representative body when the law gave it time until July 1, 1931?”
“At that time the provincial elections would have been over and with them the anti-Semitic outburst on the part of the Conservative party. Why have Liberal politicians made statements to the press months ahead that an understanding with the Protestants was under way? Why has the Commission signed the contract without security for Jewish representation on the school board, the engagement of Jewish teachers in proportion to the number of Jewish children in the Protestant schools and at least one hour of Jewish subjects in the curriculum?
ARGUMENTS UNJUST
“Other so-called rights are merely pulling the wool over the eyes of the Jewish community. The argument that such demands would be unconstitutional does not hold because the provision in the present contract that Jewish children can attend any and all Protestant schools is also unconstitutional and can be challenged by the Protestants in the courts of the country.
“The concluding statement that 95 per cent of the population is against Jewish schools is ridiculous. Why does the Jewish School Commission refuse to have a referendum on the question?”
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.
