Jewish Board of Deputies Decides Against Jewish World Conference: Motion Withdrawn Asking Board to S

The Board of Deputies of British Jews decided at its meeting here this afternoon against a motion calling on the Board to take “immediate steps to summon an International Congress of delegates from the Jewries of the world with a view to receiving reports upon the conditions prevailing in the districts which such delegates will represent; and subsequently for the Congress to take such action as will result in securing justice for our brothers and sisters in the affected areas”.

Mr. J. Bolloten, the mover of the resolution, said that the Jewish position in Eastern and Central Europe was getting more serious. He was afraid that they were growing so used to the trials and the tribulations of their foreign brethren that they were becoming stultified and led to believe themselves helpless. Everywhere there was reason for apprehension. In Roumania there was boycott, persecution and massacre. In Hungary the Jews were being driven out. In Austria they were illtreated. Everywhere they were persecuted. Should they sit still and do nothing as they had been doing? They came to the Board meetings and debated a question. Occasionally they expressed their just indignation, and then they agreed with the Joint Foreign Committee to send mild letters to representatives of foreign Governments, and there the matter ended. They went away with the belief that they had done something for their stricken brethren when really nothing had been done. I feel strongly, he said, that definite and concrete action should at last be taken by way of a world congress for alleviation of antisemitism.

Mr. Gaventa, who seconded, said that if the scheme was workable it would be of undoubted value, because it would result in unified action.

JOINT FOREIGN COMMITTEE CONSIDERS UNDER PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES ANY SUCH ACTION BY BOARD WOULD BE INEXPEDIENT

The Joint Foreign Committee in its report to the meeting stated that it had considered the motion, and it was of the opinion that “under present circumstances any such action by the Board would be inexpedient”.

What Mr. Bolloten wants us to do, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, a member of the Joint Foreign Committee, said, has been done by the American Jewish Congress. His resolution is superfluous because we shall, of course, be asked to participate in the World Congress to be convened by that body. We should wait for the invitation.

Mr. Morris Myer, editor of the “Jewish Times” and a member of the Joint Foreign Committee, said that he had attended the Jewish conferences convened by the Americans at Zurich and Basel. They did nothing except talk, and talk to-day was dangerous.

Mr. L. G. Montefiore, President of the Anglo-Jewish Association and Joint Chairman of the Joint Foreign Committee, said: We all appreciate the motives that led Mr. Bolloten to move his resolution. If I thought that a World Congress such as is suggested would diminish the distress that the Jewries are suffering, or reduce by one iota the antisemitism that is prevalent, I would not be against the scheme. I believe, however, he went on, that the proposed World Conference would do no good, but only harm. The causes of antisemitism lie very much deeper than a Congress could help. Antisemitism is the ugly phenomenon of a diseased and unhealthy political life. I would remind you that there has been no period when the exaggerated and bitter nationalism that exists in Europe has been so strong. Every country is sitting tight behind tariff walls hoping to sell and not to buy. If such a Congress were to assemble, it would have to be fully representative. We would have to have representatives from all the various Jewish parties in the various countries. From Roumania we might possibly have half a dozen parties represented. From Poland perhaps twenty. Then when the Conference had assembled what would it do but to pass resolutions? And each of the Governments in turn would be criticised. Does anybody really believe that there is a single Government which would take the slightest notice of those resolutions or implement them by legislative or executive action?

To the unprejudiced observer, Mr. Montefiore said, the Conference would show that Jews is divided from Jew in the way that non-Jew is divided from non-Jew on certain major questions. But what of the prejudiced observer? To him it would be another weapon, the weapon of the “International Jew”, for further antisemitism. It would be another shot in the armoury of the Hitlerites.

I am certain that it is necessary at times to take risks and damn the consequences, Mr. Montefiore said. But on this occasion, the Conference would do no good, and as I have said, would possibly do harm.

Mr. Montefiore added that he wanted the Board or anyone to be under no delusion that any invitation that was received would meet, as far as he was concerned, the same views as he had expressed.

Mr. Wimborne protested, claiming that Mr. Montefiore’s view was that of a small, but of course important minority, but if the Deputies consulted their constituents, he thought that they would find that they were opposed to such opinions.

Mr. Bolloten, in withdrawing his motion, said that he felt the Deputies had not been convinced of the essential soundness of his views, and the necessity for the Conference. In withdrawing the motion, he would urge that serious consideration should be given to the invitation from America.

Serious consideration will certainly be given to any invitation, Mr. d’Avigdor Goldsmid, President of the Board and Joint Chairman of the Joint Foreign Committee, thereupon assured him.

HEATED DISCUSSION ON POSITION OF POLISH JEWRY

A heated discussion took place on the report of the Joint Foreign Committee on the position of the Jews in Poland. After declaring that the allegation of the Vilna Court which had sentenced the Jewish student Wulfin, charging the Jews with being animated by a great and profound enmity against Christians in general and the Poles in particular, has been received with amazement in Jewish circles, the Joint Foreign Committee went on to state that “the economic situation of the Jews in Poland continues to be deplorable, and is hardly likely to be improved until the world-wide depression in trade shows signs of lifting. A ray of hope appears in a report that the Commission, which was recently appointed by the Ministry of Trade to recommend measures for improving Polish trade, is considering a recommendation to amend the Sunday Closing Law so as to enable Jews who keep their shops closed on Saturday to open for a few hours on Sunday. A further indication that the Government is adopting a more sympathetic attitude towards the Jews is the recent recognition of the status of the Jewish ‘Gymnasium’ at Brest-Litovsk. Similar action is shortly expected in connection with the Vilna ‘Gymnasium’. The High School at Bialystock has already received Government recognition”.

Mr. Aliman objected that great distress was prevalent in Poland, with three million Jews on the verge of starvation. It is a case of boycott by private persons and the Government, he contended, and we ought to make a general appeal to the Jewish public on behalf of the Jews of Poland. We ought to ask the Alliance Israelite to join with us, because France is an ally of Poland, to do something for the Jewish people there. There are suicides daily and whole towns are starving.

Mr. Gaventa said that in his opinion representations ought to be made to the Government and perhaps the League of Nations because of the Polish Government’s restriction of monopolies, particularly tobacco.

Mr. Bolloten argued that the question had nothing to do with minorities. Three million Jews, he said, are being boycotted by the Government, but their rights as minorities are not being infringed. The Government is guilty of something worse. It is guilty of a system which deliberately tries to starve out its own nationals, simply because they are Jews. This is an offence committed by the Polish Government and something much stronger than a polite letter to the Government representative should be done.

Give us a suggestion without making a long speech, Mr. Nathan Laski interjected.

Mr. H. A. Goodman, Political Secretary of the Agudath Israel World Organisation, said that irresponsible persons were indiscriminately attacking the Polish Government without any knowledge of the true facts. From personal visits to Poland and from information that was authoritative and reached him daily, the Polish Government was doing what it could in most difficult circumstances to alleviate the Jewish position. The repeated attacks on the Polish Government were unjustified, and thoroughly unwarranted, and they must lead to dangerous repercussions in the situation of Polish Jewry.

THE SOROCA FLOOD VICTIMS

The Joint Foreign Committee, in the course of its report said that an appeal had been received on behalf of the Jews of Soroca, whose homes had been devastated by the redent floods. 600 Jewish families were said to be without shelter or means of livelihood, and the appeal had been referred to the Foreign Appeals Committee.

Mr. L. G. Montefiore added that the Federation of Jewish Relief Organisations had sent £50 and the Appeals Committee would be sending a further £50. The Anglo-Jewish Association (of which he is President) would donate £25. The Board of Deputies would be glad to transmit any further subscriptions received.

Mr. H. M. Davis, the President of the Federation of Synagogues wanted to know whether the Foreign Appeals Committee intended making a general appeal to the Community.

Mr. Morris Myer, the Chairman of the Foreign Appeals Committee, replied that the Appeals Committee only made general appeals to cover circumstances of great magnitude. I appreciate the misfortune of the families of Soroca, he said, but comparatively this is a small case.

600 Jewish families, and yet you think it is sufficient to send £125, Mr. Barnett, a member of the Board objected. It is better to send nothing.

This was an appeal to the Jews of the world, Mr. Myer said, and it was a question of our share in the world contribution. We thought that the money sent would meet the case.

Do I understand that an appeal will not be made to the community? Mr. Davis persisted.

As far as I know, Mr. d’Avigdor Goldsmid, the President of the Board, answered, no appeal will be made, but it will be of assistance if further contributions are received or transmitted by the Board.

THE TARIFF QUESTION AND PALESTINE

When the Board came to consider the report of the Palestine Committee, which said, in part, that “the position of Palestine under the Import Duties is still actively under consideration”, Mr. Silverman, a member of the Board, said that after two months of operation of the Import Duties he would have thought that the Committee could have said more than this vague paragraph. Palestine is an excellent customer of this country, he went on. 40 per cent. of her exports come to Britain. Of all countries trading with the United Kingdom Palestine is one of the very few that can show a balance of trade that is favourable to this country. It has been suggested that the difficulty in this question is legal and constitutional. Is that so?

Yes, of course, Dr. Israel Feldman, the Chairman of the Committee, replied.

There is going to be a lot of tariff bargaining within the next month or so, Mr. Silverman went on, and I hope that Palestine will be there and her interests adequately safeguarded.

Dr. Israel Feldman, the Chairman of the Palestine Committee, said that the Palestine Committee and the Jewish Agency and all organisations associated directly and indirectly had had this matter under consideration. The Palestine Committee were informed as soon as the duties came out that it would be against the interests of Palestine if any public or semi-public discussion took place on this topic. On all sides, he said, there is the utmost goodwill in furthering the economic interests of Palestine, so that as far as we as a Board are concerned, it is not a question of adopting a resolution in the

face of a hostile attitude. The difficulties are technical and legal, as is known by everybody. We have been advised that we can only do harm by having the suspicion of a public discussion.

Mr. H. Newman asked whether any arrangements had been made to safeguard the interests of Palestine at the Ottawa Conference.

The matter has been dealt with in Dr. Feldman’s answer, Mr. d’Avigdor Goldsmid, the President of the Board, who was in the chair, said.

The Palestine Committee also reported that in regard to the creditors of the Russian Zionist centre, the Committee was of the opinion that there was no immediate prospect of an agreement being arrived at between the parties upon the basis of which arbitration proceedings could be initiated. The Committee therefore felt that no useful purpose would be served by pursuing the matter further.

The Board agreed to this course after considerable discussion, in which Mr. d’Avigdor Goldsmid said that the passing of the paragraph would not preclude the reopening of the matter de novo if representations were made to the Board.

The Aliens Committee reported that a fully representative committee, under the chairmanship of Mr. Otto Schiff, has been set up to deal with applications for the employment of foreign Rabbanim and Chazanim and has already dealt with a considerable number of cases.