Palestine Government Accused and Defended in House of Commons on Its Attitude Toward Jewish National

Zionism and its realization, as it is manifested in the work in Palestine, and the policy of the Palestine government toward the Jewish National Home there had their lay in the House of Commons on Tuesday, when a debate developed on the subject during the vote on the Colonial Office estimates.

Lieut.-Com. Kenworthy and Col. Josiah Wedgwood, Labor M. P.s. and staunch friends of the Zionist movement, made direct charges against the Palestine administration for its attitude toward the Palestine Jewish work. Under Secretary for the Colonies Ormsby-Gore defended the British administration in Palestine against these charges. British opinion is unanimous, without regard as to party, on the Zionist policy which is “enshrined in the Mandate,” was the view of all the speakers. The Under Secretary, in refuting the charges of the Labor members, sought refuge in the conception formulated by the late Hebrew writer and philosopher, Achad Ha’am., that Palestine is to be a spiritual center for the Jewish people and that the quality and not the quantity of settlers matters. He offered his own view of the aims of the Zionist movement.

Lieut-Commander Kenworthy, in attacking the Palestine administration, declared that while the leaders of the Conservative Party maintain a clear and correct attitude about Palestine, the “back benchers,” the rank and file, lost no opportunity of pinpricking. It is necessary, he stated, that they drop the outcry “clear out of Palestine,” because the Balfour Declaration is accepted by the Conservative as well as by the Opposition parties. It is therefore necessary that the government show a friendlier attitude toward the Jewish settlers in Palestine, who invested almost twenty million pounds in the country, a sum collected from the Jews in the British dominions, the United States of America and even

(Continued on Page 7)

(Continued from Page 1)

from among the poverty stricken Jews of Eastern Europe.

The speaker reminded the Colonial Minister that Palestine is not only paying the cost of the British garrison and of the air force, but even a share of the Ottoman debt. The country is enjoying complete tranquility and a growing trade. This is the result of the Jewish efforts, the people who wish to restore their ancient national home. They are, however, compeild to buy land at the market value and to pay taxes when Crown lands were available. Since the Beisan land has definitely gone to the Bedouins, let at least the Galilee swampy region be reserved on reasonable terms for the Zionist settlements, Kenworthy demanded.

It is also necessary, he added, that the Jews of Palestine receive fair play in the Wailing Wall Wall issue, stating that he suspects a smouldering anti-Semitism in Palestinian officialdom. He had hesitated to raise the matter, but he thought it necessary to inform the Palestine officials who apparently still don’t understand that all parties in the House of Commons are committed to a fulfillment of the spirit and the letter of the Palestine Mandate and the Balfour pledge, and that Great Britain is responsible for the Mandate and is honor bound to carry out the pledge of Lord Balfour.

Col. Wedgwood, joining Kenworthy, declared that the friendship between England and the United States cannot be better cemented than by cementing it with the Jewish people throughout the world. Throughout England and Palestine one notices an atmosphere of hostility toward the Jews, he said, based upon an old religious prejudice. It is necessary to change the attitude of the Palestine administration where there is more anti-Semitism found than in England or America.

The speaker referred to the taxation system now in force in Palestine and particularly to the Werko tax and declared that this system was “monstrously unjust.” He asked whether the Colonial Office will permit the Jewish population of Palestine to gradually grow into a feeling of antagonism and dissatisfaction with the British administration, similar to the one held by the Arab intelligentzia. Is the government endeavoring to unite the Jews and the Arabs and to create a situation similar to the one prevalent in India and Egypt, putting the entire population of the country against them, instead of maintaining the friendship of the great and growing Jewish people? he asked.

The Labor leader, who is the sponsor of the Seventh Dominion League, referred to the question of a loan to facilitate the settlement of Jews in Palestine and declared that it is the duty of the British Government to facilitate the floating of such a loan.If Great Britain has lent money to the Greek Orthodox Church in Jerusalem on the security of its land possessions in Palestine, why not lend on the same basis to the Jews? he asked. Jewish immigration to Palestine was not contrary to the interests of the Arabs. Indeed, it was the Arabs’ salvation, he declared. The speaker further criticized the administration of justice in Palestine and the lack of English educational facilities in the country, declaring that Palestine will be incapable of self-government unless the inhabitants understand English.

Major Ormsby Gore, Under Secretary of the Colonial Office, who replied in behalf of the government, declared that the Zionist policy is enshrined in the Palestine Mandate and is the settled policy of all three parties. The same applies to the Balfour Declaration. He feels certain that any government that may be in power in England will do everything to facilitate the realization of the Zionist spirit, policy and ideal. He was himself a strong and keen Zionist, but for reasons different than those held by Col. Wedgwood, who sees Zionism more in the terms of Dr. Weizmann, who wanted a Palestine “as Jewish as England is English.” This term, Ormsby-Gore stated, was perhaps unfortunate and certainly misconstrued in a political sense. However, the Jews strive for a Jewish Palestine, not an English, not a French, nor an American Palestine.

The Under Secretary for the Colonies then gave what might be considered his conception of Zionism. He believes he stated, in Zionism which aims to recreate in Palestine such physical and economic conditions which will enable the Jews, generation after generation, to create in their fatherland a type of poet, thinker who made the Jews once a world contributor to literature thought and religion. Therefore he stated, Zionism is not dependent on vast numbers but on the quality of the Jews who go there. Therefore, he added, Col. Wedgwood’s argument for English education in Palestine was unfounded. The best method to carry out the Zionist idea, he said, is to let the Jews deal with Jewish education and with the Jewish schools. On the other hand, to allow the Arabs to remain absolutely uneducated would be fatal to Jewish interests.

Major Ormsby-Gore took exception to Lieut. Commander Kenworthy’s charges against the Palestine administration. Kenworthy’s description of the Palestine administration, he said was unjustified.

The land question is not so simple, because the Syrian Effendis possess Turkish concessions on the Crown lands which Britain is bound to recognize. However, it looks as though a greater opportunity will offer itself this year to increase the Jewish land settlement.

“While the paramount duty of the Palestine administration is to maintain law and order and to prevent out-

(Continued on Page 8)

(Continued from Page 7)

breaks between the various conflicting elements of the population, it is also our duty, pleasure and desire to facilitate the realization of the highest ideals, to facilitate the Jewish settlement of Palestine,” Major Ormsby-Gore declared. He made an absolute denial of the charge that the spirit of the Palestine administration was hostile to the policy of the British government or to the Mandate. The government is sending to Palestine experts who offer their best assistance, he said.

Commenting on this debate the London “Daily Telegraph’ ‘ states that Zionism never had a better friend than Major Ormsby-Gore who “is one of the few ministers who is not only sympathizing with the ideals of the Jewish national home in Palestine, but who openly avows his sympathies, giving his reasons.”