Arab Executive Repeats Its Opposition to Government Policy in Palestine

(Jewish Telegraphic Agency Mail Service)

The full text of the memorandum submitted by the Palestine Arab Executive, through Lord Plumer, to the Pennanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations, was made public here.

“In the report of your Commission submitted to the Council of the League of Nations and approved by it in 1924, you state that in Palestine immigration had not always been in proportion to the capacity of the economic absorption of the country,’ and insisted on the adoption of the fundamental principle that the Government immigration policy ought to be dictated primarily by considerations of the economic needs of the country,” the memorandum states.

“Moreover, article 6 of the Palestine Mandate reads as follows: ‘The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions.’ The Palestine Administration, notwith-standing the economic crisis prevalent ever since the gates of the country were opened wide and allowed a flow of about 50,000 Jewish immigrants to swarm into the country during the succeeding two years.

“This indiscriminate policy, diamertrically opposed to both the recommendation of the Permanent Mandates Commission in their above-mentioned report and to article 6 of the Mandate, has necessarily entailed a disastrous economic consequence that encompassed both Arab and Jew.

“As Jewish immigrants could go back to their respective countries, as they are doing at present, and thus evade the grave consequences of their rash immigration, the Arabs who are tied to Palestine, their own country, have to stand and face the calamities for which others are responsible.

“In practically every one of their meetings the Permanent Mandates Commission have recommended to and urged the Mandatory on the ‘development of self-governing institutions’ on pursuance of article 2, and to ‘encourage local autonomy’ in pursuance or article 3 of the Mandate. But in direct opposition to that, the country is now devoid of any single self-governing in stitution; besides those of religious character, and we are further away from local autonomy than the inhabitants of the degraded colonies of Great Britain,” the memorandum continues.

“The inhabitants, who under the Turkish regime elected their Municipalities, the Administrative Councils of their Districts and the Common Councils of their vilayets, not to mention their fair representation in the Parliament, find in the present system of Government a retrogression they never anticipated to befall them, when they are known to be morally and legally under the protection of the League of Nations.

“It is further understood from the Mandatory System of Government that the Mandatory stands as the trainer of the people under its Mandate and as such it is supposed to open the way for them as the time approaches for the occupation of higher posts in which they may train their capacities under its guidance. Under the Mandate of Great Britain in Palestine we find the reverse of that in progress. For not only the directors of the different departments of the Government and their assistants, and in many cases their senior clerks, are now British, but while the number of junior grade Palestinian seats are being abolished for economic purposes, the much more lucrative seats, held by British are increasing to encumber the overburdened budget of the Government, with their huge salaries.

“Moreover, by a new system of promotions recently introduced by the Government, the higher grades in Government Service are being practically closed in the face of Palestinians.

“Thus we find the Mandatory of Palestine proceeding headlong in the management of the most vital concerns of the country without paying heed to the views of its inhabitants. Such schemes of supreme importance as the floating of a Palestine loan and the introduction of a new Palestine currency have been exclusively dealt with and decided upon by the Mandatory in direct opposition to the repeatedly expressed wishes and ideas of the inhabitants concerned. Again, such great undertakings, which are most vital to the economic welfare of the country as the Dead Sea salts production schemes, are considered and are now liable to be granted to concessionaires without even the knowledge of the inhabitants of the country.

“In general, it is found that as time passes the Mandatory, whose existence as such was due to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and which is supposed to apply article 3 of the Mandate for Palestine, is diverging from these two articles in such dimensions that the inhabitants concerned feel they are dragged at its heels in the fashion of the lowest grade colonies of the British Empire.

“Article 22 of the Mandate reads as follows: ‘English, Arab and Hebrew shall be the official languages of Palestine. Any statement or inscription in Arabic on stamps or money in Palestine shall be repeated in Hebrew…and vice versa,” the memorandum continues. “Notwithstanding the severity of this article which puts on one level the language of the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants with that of the minority, and the great expenses incurred by the use of the Hebrew language spoken only by a minority among the Jews, the Mandatory has even sur passed and thus contradicted this article by adding to “Palestina” the Hebrew name for Palestine, the initials of E. Y. (Eretz Yisroel–Land of Israel) on all official forms and inscription of the Palestine Government.

“Besides, most of the important affairs of the Administration are put down in English. The Government has gone so far in that direction that reports, for instance, as those relating to the alteration of the title system, meant to be read and criticized by the inhabitants directly affected, are couched in the English language.

‘It is therefore, the urgent request of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine to know how they could benefit their country by their being officially and legally under the protection of the League of Nations if the terms of the Mandate and recommendations of the League are not being applied to the Mandatory Power.”

With the memorandum there is also a statement on the case of Kabbara by the agent of the Arab owners of the land concerned “from which your Commission may calculate how far they are being misled by statements of the Mandatory.”

“These misleading statements,” it is declared. “may be taken as a typical example of the horrors that are entailed by a one-sided enquiry such as your Commission is now adopting and by the Commission’s inability to visit Palestine and study the question on the spot,” the memorandum of the Arab Executive declares.