British Foreign Office States Views on Important Palestine Questions

(Jewish Telegraphic Agency)

An important document, throwing light upon the attitude of the British Government as the Mandatory power over Palestine, towards the questions of state and waste lands for Jewish colonization, government allotments for the Hebrew educational system and the status of the Zionist Organization in its relation to the League and the Mandatory Government, is contained in the minutes of the seventh session of the Permanent Mandates Commission, published by the Secretariat of the League of Nations.

The questions were raised in the memorandum addressed by Chaim Weizmann, president of the Zionist World Organization, through the High Commissioner of Palestine, to the Secretariat of the League. The document is a letter from the British Foreign Office signed by Lancelot Oliphant, accompanying the Zionist memorandum to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations.

The letter, which was dated October 19, 1925, read:

“I am directed by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain to transmit to you herewith fourteen copies of a letter addressed by the Zionist Organization to His Majesty’s High Commissioner for Palestine, with the request that they may be communicated to the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League as soon as possible.

“2. His Majesty’s Government desire to offer the following observations on the points raised in that letter.

“3. In the first place, as regards the question of the amount of funds provided by the Palestine Government for Jewish education, they feel bound to state that they are unable to accept the contention that the Palestine Government are under any obligation to ensure that in any head of expenditure of the Palestine estimates the amount of money devoted to the needs of service of a particular part of the people of Palestine should be proportionate to the size of that part.

FOREIGN OFFICE VIEW OF SCHOOL ALLOCATIONS IN PALESTINE

“4. The only proper criteria in determining expenditure are the amount of funds available and the need of the proposed service. Under the education head of estimates, the Palestine Government provides from the funds at its disposal for the cost, wholly or partially, of a number of schools which are completely under its control. It also pays grantsin-aid of a modest amount to a number of schools which are not under its control, but are prepared to submit to a certain amount of Government supervision and inspection. There is no discrimination between the various communities in providing these facilities; grants-in-aid, for instance, are paid under exactly the same conditions to Jewish and other non-governmental schools, and ever sixty per cent of grants-in-aid to non-governmental schools are paid to Jewish schools. It is, however, the fact that the students at those schools which are supported entirely or almost entirely by the Government are, with a few exceptions, Arab. This is principally due to the fact that hitherto the Jewish community have shown little desire to enter the Government schools, since they prefer to make use of the schools under private control.

“5. There is little prospect, in the present state of Palestine finances, of the Government being able in the near future to provide a larger amount for educational purposes. If any change, therefore, were to be made in the allocation of the sums provided between the Jewish community and the rest of the population, this could only be affected by closing existing schools in order to provide more funds for the Jewish schools.

“6. As regards the question of implementing the provisions of Article 6 of the Mandate regarding close settlement by Jews on the land, His Majesty’s Government desire to offer the following observations:

“They regret that, as explained by Sir Herbert Samuel on page 32 of his report on the Administration of Palestine, 1920-1925, serious difficulties have been experienced in this matter. Most of the State lands in Palestine are already occupied by tenants under various conditions which, while not amounting to full ownership or even, in most cases, a right to perpetual tenancy, have nevertheless a certain moral and, in many cases, actual legal validity. In these circumstances, they could not be dispossessed for the purpose of making the land available for Jewish settlement without infringing that part of Article 6 of the Mandate which lays down that the rights and position of other sections of the population shall not be prejudiced.

QUESTION OF INITIATIVE ON ARTICLE 6 OF MANDATE

“7. Moreover, this is a matter in which the Palestine Government might reasonably expect that the Zionist Organization would take the initiative. So far, few concrete suggestions have been put forward by the Organization for carrying this provision into effect. One is mentioned in the passage of Sir Herbert Samuel’s report referred to above. Again, quite recently, the Organization approached the Palestine Government with the request that a large area in the southern part of Palestine, stated to be Government land, might be made available for this purpose, and the matter is now under consideration by the High Commissioner. His Majesty’s Government therefore submit that they have done all that has been so far in their power to give effect to the terms of this Article of the Mandate.

THE PROCEDURE OF FILING ZIONIST MEMORANDA

“8. As regards the question of the manner in which the Zionist Organization should submit its communications to the League of Nations, it appears that under existing rules of procedure, two methods are open to it. The first is to adopt the method employed on the present occasion of forwarding them through the High Commissioner, in which case they will necessarily receive the attention of the Council of the League of Nations; the second method is to submit them direct to the Secretariat of the League of Nations, in which case the rules of procedure in regard to petitions received by the Secretariat from a source other than the inhabitants of mandated territories appear to be applicable, and it will, under the decision of the Council taken on January 29, 1923, be for the Chairman of the Permanent Mandates Commission to decide whether or not the communication should be regarded as meriting attention. If this decision is in the affirmative, it would be communicated to His Majesty’s Government for their comments. With regard to the suggestion now made by the Zionist Organization-namely, that the more appropriate channel for the submission of memoranda is the Government of the Mandatory Power, i.e., His Britannic Majesty’s Government in London-I am to point out that the question whether such memoranda should be addressed in the first place to His Majesty’s Government (in which case they will clearly have to be referred to Palestine for comments before being submitted to the League of Nations) or should, as in the present case, be addressed in the first place to the representative of the Mandatory in Palestine, appears to be one of convenience rather than of principle. His Majesty’s Government would prefer to retain the procedure adopted in the present case, as being both easier and more expeditious.”