The question of action by Congress on the Palestine resolution, which has been shelved by the House Foreign Affairs Committee and by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, came up for discussion today in the House, when Rep. Samuel Dickstein of New York announced that he intends to file a petition to bring the resolution before the House, unless the Foreign Affairs Committee acts on the measure by the end of next week. The signatures of 218 Congressmen are required to discharge a committee from consideration of a bill.
Discussion on the Palestine resolution started when Rep. Martin J. Kennedy, of New York, raised the question of whether it would be parliamentary procedure to file a discharge petition. Explaining that such a procedure was permissible, Rep. Dickstein said:
“All members of the House were hoping and waiting for an opportunity to support the resolution which would persuade the British Government – just the guardian for Palestine – to open its doors to the many thousands who could easily get there. But we hear today around the capitol and other places that the Wagner and Wright Resolutions have been tabled in committee.”
CONGRESSMEN SUGGEST OMISSION OF “COMMONWEALTH” FROM RESOLUTION
A suggestion that the word “Commonwealth” be omitted from the Palestine resolution was voiced during today’s discussion by Rep. Hamilton Fish, and supported by Rep. Emanuel Celler.
“Are the congressmen just going to make speeches and let it go at that, or are we going to strive to get action from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, even if it is necessary to amend the original proposal?” Rep. Fish asked. “I have an idea that if this thing were put in proper form, that is, in a form which we could come out and repudiate the White Paper and uphold the Balfour Resolution upon which Congress has voted unanimously, we could get action. What I am interested in is action to permit those hounded and persecuted Jews to find a haven, a refuge, a homeland in Palestine.”
Rep. Emanuel Celler, in supporting the suggestion to amend the resolution by striking out all references to the establishment of a commonwealth, said: “If we can get that resolution past the House Foreign Affairs Committee without the use of the word ‘Commonwealth,’ I certainly would be for that proposal. If we get that resolution through and thereby needle and spur England into withdrawing the White Paper and allowing the entrance of Jews into Palestine, even for temporary purposes, we will be going a great long way.”
Rep. Ed Rowe, of Ohio, opposed such an amendment saying that it was impossible to “modify” the correction of a wrong. He said that the complaints from Arab governments seemed to be the complaints of “some international politicians, particularly those interested in Empire rights.”
In answer to questions from Rep. Walter F. Brehm, of Ohio, and James F. O’Connor, of Montana, Celler charged that England was afraid of the competition that would be offered by a Palestine industrialized by the Jews.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
