Digest of Public Opinion on Jewish Matters

[The purpose of the Digest is informative. Preference is given to papers not generally accessible to our readers. Quotation does not indicate approval.-Editor.]

A controversy between Louis Lipsky, president of the Zionist Organization of America, and the London “Near East” semi-official organ of the British Government, has arisen as a result of a statement made by Mr. Lipsky recently upon his arrival in London to attend the meeting of the World Zionist Executive. Mr. Lipsky, in his statement criticized the British government in regard to its Palestinian policy. Discussing this subject, the “New Palestine,” official organ of the Zionist Organization of America, in its issue of April 29 observes:

“Shortly after his arrival in London Mr. Lipsky, in an interview published the following day in a prominent London daily, ventured some criticism of the British Government in regard to its Palestinian policy. It was the opinion of Mr. Lipsky that the Government had not done all that it might have done, or should have done, to help in the rebuilding of Palestine.

“The rebuttal which was published shortly afterwards by ‘The Near East’ is of an astonishing character, and raises a second issue which, as we have observed, is perhaps of even greater importance. ‘The Near East’ acknowledges that the criticism of Mr. Lipsky is more important than that voiced by a Member of Parliament. But while it challenges the right of Mr. Lipsky to make any criticism at all. it opines that such criticism will, in any case, do more harm than good.

“Obviously, if the first is granted, the second follows. If the President of the Zionist Organization ot America may not, even in the friendliest spirit, criticize the action of the British Government in Palestine, his criticism is a mere provocation. ‘The Near East’ puts it a little tartiy: The British Empire, it says, is not to be moved by the observations of American Jews. To some extent it invalidates its own contention by remarking that had the American Jews made greater progress with the Agency, the criticism would have more point.

“It is our opinion that ‘The Near East’ has done the British Government no service in evading one issue to create another. If the sole defence that can be made against a friendly challenge is the retort ‘It is not your business’, others, besides the Jews of America, will be adversely affected in their estimate of the role of Britain in Palestine. It is manifestly unfair to attribute the attitude of ‘The Near East’ to the British Government itself, and it is to “The Near East’ that we address the following observations. It does appear that though the British Government is not the business of the Jews of America, there was a time when the opinion of the Jews of America was very much the business of the British Government. The issuance of the Balfour Declaration did evoke among American Jews an out-pouring of genuine feeling which the British Government considered an asset worth obtaining. Does ‘The Near East’ believe that the value of this asset has so deteriorated as to be worth no further effort?

“The sly remarks of ‘The Near East’ that the delay in the extension of the Jewish Agency takes away the point of Mr. Lipsky’s criticism ignores the legal fact that the Jewish Agency has been recognized in the Zionist Organization : it remains there as long as the constitution of the Zionist Organization remains satisfactory to the British Government. And just so long, again, has the Zionist Organization the right to utter its opinion with regard to the role which the British Government is playing in Palestine.

“But there is something deeper than mere argument to be considered. The Jews of America are the greatest material contributors to the upbuilding of Palestine. They will have to remain so for many years to come. It is unthinkable that any intelligent person shall expect a body of men and women to carry an onerous burden without ever being permitted to venture an opinion of its own. It is unnatural to expect people merely to labor, merely to give, merely to acquiesce. The very degree of cooperation depends upon the ability to suggest, to criticize, to demur-in the friendliest spirit, but none the less unmistakably. At no time has even the extremist Zionist been actuated, in his criticism of the British Government, by anything but the friendliest spirit. Jews cannot, and will not, forget that Great Britain has been the chief mover in the chain of events which has given us the opportunity to redeem our national liberty. But is there anything ungrateful in pointing to errors of policy when the sole motive is to further the very purpose which Great Britain had in mind when it issued the Balfour Declaration ?”

GERMAN HAKENKREUZLER CONTINUE DEMAND FOR EXTERMINATION OF JEWS

The manner in which the anti-Semitic press in Germany pursues its war against the Jews, brazenly calling for the extermination of the Jewish people, is to be seen from a copy of “Der Stuermer,” Hakenkreuzler organ of Nuernberg. On the first page appears a call under the caption, “Golgotha,” with two illustrations, one showing a Jew gloating over the crucified Jesus, the other showing a Jew gloating over a crucified figure of Germany. The call to all Jew-haters reads:

“The Christ-murderers still live. They live in the midst of the German people. And they are planning its destruction. The Jewish hand lies heavily on Germany. Germany has been subjected to usury, abused and violated in body and soul. The German nation is on the way to Golgotha. The Jews are seeking its death. Because their Father was a murderer from the beginning. Germany is to be annihilated in the race-chaos of mankind. Germany awaken! The twelfth hour has arrived!”