Joint Committee, to Seek Peace in the Zionist Controversy, Appointed by Judges

A joint committee of nine, representing the opposition, the Zionist administration and the Citizens Committee on Peace and Reconstruction, was the temporary result of the hearings conducted by a committee of five judges appointed by Dr. Chaim Weizmann before his departure for London to inquire into the charges of the opposition against the administration of the Zionist Organization of America.

The announcement of the appointment of the committee and its personnel was made by Judge Harry Fisher of Chicago. Tuesday after midnight following two public sessions held in the late afternoon and evening at the Unity Club, Brooklyn. The committee appointed for the purpose of reporting to the judges committee, pending the completion of an audit and the drafting of the judges’ report, is, it was understood, charged with the task of bringing about an amicable solution of the controversy. The members representing the administration are Morris Rothenberg, Dr. J. Kalisky. and Herman G. Robbins: the opposition. Judge Julian W. Mack. Abraham Tulin and Mrs. Zin F. Szold: the Committee on Peace and Reconstruction. Dr. Mordecai M. Kaplan, Health Commissioner Louis I. Harris and Dr. David de Sola Pool.

Much speculation was current in the lobby of the Unity Club as to the possible platform for an amicable solution of the controversy. Rumor had it that an agreement on a suggested plan for an administration slate including the three parties to the controversy, some of the present administration, some of the opposition and some Hadassah representatives, would bring the controversy to an end result in a peaceful convention in Pittsburgh and make the intervention of the judges committee unnecessary.

This situation came about following the two public sessions Tuesday, after the elimination of charges of dishonesty for private pecuniary gain had been agreed upon by the oppositon spokesmen at the opening session on Sunday.

At the late afternoon session on Tuesday. Judge Edward Lazansky, presiding over the hearing, read the minutes of the private session held by the judges committee on Sunday. The publication of these minutes was in accordance with the expressed desire of the administration representatives. In these minutes, it was disclosed that the opposition spokesmen charged that Louis Lipsky had, as president of the Zionist Organization of America, endorsed in December 1926, a note in the amount of $2,000 for Mrs. Dorothy E. Lefkowitz, treasurer of the Hadassah. This note was discounted with the Commodore Trading Corporation, a lending company, in favor of the Springdale Rubber Corporation of Springdale, Conn, of which Mrs. Lefkowitz was treasurer. The opposition charged that the endorsement of this note by Mr. Lipsky as president was an abuse of power, involving the credit of the Zionist Organization of America.

At the open session court procedure was followed in the examination of Israel Maltin, auditor of the Zionist Organiatzion of America, and Mrs. Lefkowitz, as witnesses. A statement was also made by Louis Lipsky.

Mr. Maltin testified that Mrs. Leikowitz had told him of her urgent need of money. Upon hearing this, believing that it was essential that she be helped out when in distress. Mr. Maltin persuaded Mr. Lipsky to endorse the note Mr. Lipsky testified that he had known Mrs. Lefkowitz for twenty-five years, that he believed it to be for the good of the organization that the Hadassah treasurer be accommodated in her need. Mrs. Lefkowitz denied that she knew that the note was endorsed by Mr. Lipsky until she had received it when the full amount had been paid to the Commodore Trading corporation by her. Mr. Maltin testified that the original check of the Commodore Trading Corporation was made out to the Zionist Organization of America, which Mrs. Lefkowitz refused to accept, asking that a new check be made out to the order of the Springfield Rubber Corporation.

Contradictory statements were made by the two witnesses with regard to Mrs. Lefkowitz’s knowledge of the Lipsky endorsement. Mr. Maltin declared that he had spoken to Mrs. Lefkowitz about this endorsement, while Mrs. Lefkowitz said that Lipsky’s name was not mentioned. She also testified that the original offer to secure a loan for her was made on Mr. Maltin’s initiative.

It was brought out during the cross examination that Mrs. Lefkowitz is a sister-in-law of Jacob de Haas.

Considerable time was spent by the judges’ committee on the charges of irregular procedure in the election of delegates to the forthcoming Pittsburgh convention.Mr. Tulin, in presenting the charges referred to the telegram to the Zionist districts, explained in a subsequent letter to the districts, asking that the lists of enrolled members who have not paid be submitted and that the districts will be charged for unpaid dues. Mr. Tulin also asserted that the election of delegates by Zionist district members and U.P.A. contributors, where joint drives were not held, beside constituting improper elections of delegates, is an unauthorized diversion of U.P.A. funds to the Z.O.A. treasury.

Mr. Rothenberg, representing the administration, contended that such diversion has not taken place, since the board of elections and the cedentials committee have not recognized the delegates and that no membership dues were deducted from U.P.A. funds.

Upon the demands of the opposition spokesman, the administration presented its books for examination by an auditor employed by the opposition of the items classified in the 1926-7 report as “non-organization items.” The report for that year showed the existence of liabilities of $31,000, nonorganization items,” with only $4,000 in cash on hand. The opposition spokesman declared that he intends to prove that these items were trust funds in the hands of the organization for specific, earmarked purposes in Palestine or monies sent in by private persons for transmission to private persons abroad, in Palestine and elsewhere. Mr. Tulin charged that this constituted commingling of funds, a practice which he asserted was current for several years under the present regime.

The admnistration spokesmen, Mr. Rothenberg and Mr. Maltin. contended that these items were not considered as trust funds, but as fluctuating liabilities, that the full amount of the $31,000 appearing in the 1926-7 report had been remitted and that since the Atlantic City convention, no such funds were received. The administration also contended that if an inquiry is to be made into this phase, it should not be limited to the period of the present regime, but extend also to the former Mack regime, when, it asserted, the Palestine Restoration Fund was used not merely for the work in Palestine, but also for all items in the Z.O.A. budget in America.

The judges committee, upon consent of the administration spokesmen, declared that an auditor will be employed to go over the books and ascertain when and to what extent such practice existed.

The public hearing was adjourned.