Melchett, Here on Business Trip, Upholds Report of Mandates Commission and Criticizes Reply of the B

Fully upholding the report of the Mandates Commission of the League of Nations, which criticized the British government for its failure to carry out all the provisions of the Palestine Mandate, Lord Melchett, prominent British industrialist, and president of the English Zionist Federation and vice-chairman of the Council of the Jewish Agency, who arrived here Tuesday on the S.S. Majestic, criticizes the reply of the British government to the Mandates Commission’s report which attempted to shift the blame for the results of its Palestine policy.

“There could have been no other report of the Mandates Commission,” Lord Melchett told the Jewish Teleraphic Agency on his arrival here for a business trip of two weeks. “The report,” Lord Melchett said, “fully repudiates the report of the Shaw Commission whose conclusions sharply contradicted the testimony of impartial observers on the Palestine disturbances.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE

“There is no getting away from the fact that the Palestine government is responsible for the Palestine outbreaks of last Summer,” Lord Melchett unequivocally stated. “The fact that when military reinforcements reached Palestine, the disturbances were suppressed, proves that the riots could have been prevented if sufficient military forces and police had been available,” he said.

The reply of Arthur Henderson, British foreign secretary, to the Mandates Commission’s report, that the outbreaks in Palestine came suddenly and were a surprise to the Palestine government, Lord Melchett characterized as “illogical. It was the business of the government to know what was going on in Palestine and it is not logical for Mr. Henderson to claim that the Mandates Commission had not previously found any danger in the situation,” Lord Melchett said, adding that: “It is not the business of the Mandates Commission to watch the situation in Palestine. Moreover, the report of the Shaw Commission admitted that there had been a lack of adequate protection in Palestine.”

DISCUSSES MANDATE

Turning from a discussion of the Mandates Commission’s report to a comment on the Mandate itself, Lord Melchett pointed out that of the two main objects of the Mandate, the establishment of the Jewish National Home, and the creation of self-governing institutions and the protection of the civil and religious rights of all inhabitants, the first was a positive object and the chief aim of the Mandate while the protection of the rights of all inhabitants he termed a negative object. As for the creation of self-governing institutions, Lord Melchett said that the Mandate says nothing about it being done simultaneously with the creation of the Jewish National Home, but only when the conditions of the country permit it. Replying to Henderson’s explanation that Britain was obliged only to create the conditions that would lead to the establishment of a Jewish National Home and not the Home itself, Lord Melchett declared that the British government had not even created these conditions.

Speaking of the relations between Jews and Arabs in Palestine, Lord Melchett, who himself has large investments in Palestine, said; “The Palestine government could create such condition there as would help to promote mutual good-will between Jews and Arabs. If the government had interested itself more in the economic development of the country, both the Jews and the Arabs would have profited by it and it would have served as a means of cementing good-will. There is plenty of land and there are enough opportunities for both races to make controversies unnecessary.”

NO ANIMOSITY

Lord Melchett denied that there was any animosity between the Arabs and the Jews, adding that the anti-Jewish riots were only the result of the agitation of a group of self-seeking Arab politicians who did not have the interests of the Arab masses at heart.

The Jews ought to be satisfied that they have the Mandates Commission with them, Lord Melchett stated, but: “They should not rely on this alone. They must utilize the present favorable atmosphere to make greater efforts for the upbuilding of Palestine. On the other hand, they must also put a stop to the extremist demands on both sides.”

Referring to the stoppage of imigration, the noted British Zionist and industrialist said that if American Jewry had kept its promise with regard to subscription of funds for Palestine, a greater immigration would be possible for “it is only a matter of finances, and the more money that is available, the larger the immigration can be. The American Jews ought to be encouraged to make more private investments in Palestine which are profitable After the report of Sir John Simpson is made public, I am sure the immigration stoppage will be rescinded.”