See Inherent Race Prejudice of British Colonial Officials to Blame for Contempt of Court Sentence on

The recent contempt of court sentence imposed by a Palestine court upon the Hebrew labor daily, “Davar”, for criticizing the court with regard to the Hinkis case, and upon the “Palestine Bulletin”, English daily, for reprinting the “Davar” editorial, is regarded by the “Juedische Rundschau”, German Zionist organ, as due to the inherent prejudice of the average British colonial official towards those people whom he regards as “natives” or “colored.”

The court in sentencing the “Davar” for contempt cited as a precedent a case in the British island of St. Vincent, West Indies, where the court of that time was of the opinion that “in small colonies, consisting principally of a colored population, the enforcement in proper cases of committal for contempt of court for attacks on the Court may be absolutely necessary to preserve in such a community the dignity of, and respect for, the Court.”

In sentencing the “Palestine Bulletin” the court said:

“At the same time we must express our disapproval of the fact that the publisher of an English newspaper could commit the error of giving these things wider diffusion.”

Commenting on the above two paragraphs, the “Juedische Rundschau” says:

“First there is a comparison with a ‘colored colony’. We know how this notion sounds in the mouth of an English colonial official. We know this attitude from every part of the inhabited world, where the ruling Englishman considers himself to be sky-high above the native population whom he governs and upon whom he looks down. We have heard this attitude and its consequences condemned by the best Englishmen of our time and we know exactly what it means. Therefore we get that naive wonder that an ‘English’ newspaper should print an article which appeared in one of the ‘native papers’ and which criticized the English rulers. This sentence shows how alien the government feels in the country, when it finds it necessary to base such sentences—to which it is no doubt entitled—upon such examples. Such an expression characterizes the ruling spirit and sets an example for all the minor officials. Presumptuousness, a feeling of being a stranger to the country, race prejudice here find their expression and their official encouragement.”

Two other paragraphs in the Palestine court’s sentence upon which the “Rundschau” comments read as follows:

“The ‘Davar’ describes itself as a Palestine labor daily. The clientele to which it appeals is a cosmopolitan proletariat coming, it may be, from countries where the confidence in the impartiality and probity of the tribunals is not what it is in territories under British rule.”

“It is not to salve the wounded amour propre of individual judges—if it can be wounded by attacks in sheets such as these—that proceedings of this nature are taken, but it is to prevent the authorities of the law from being weakened in the eyes of the public at large.”

One asks in amazement: “Why?” Says the “Rundschau” in commenting on these paragraphs, “Is it in line with the object of maintaining respect for the courts that the Chief Justice of the country should also express his contemptuous attitude towards the Hebrew press, which he by the way cannot even read? What do these remarks mean? One is forced to the conclusion that here for once the attitude of the English officials, or at least part of them, has found unconscious expression. And the same is even more true of the attitude towards the labor element. How can a government, which today is regarded as the recognized protectress of the Jews returning to Palestine, which controls the emigration from all the countries, which prided itself before the Mandates Commission on this emigration—how can it today regard an important part of this immigration, and therefore all the Palestine Jews, who feel themselves to be at one with them, as a “cosmopolitan proletariat’ which can not understand impartial justice? And this while the Labor Party governs in London! In short, we have in both of these paragraphs not only the typical colonial attitude toward the natives, as it expressed itself in the above-mentioned paragraph about the ‘colored population,’ but also specific anti-Jewish signs. There is little sense in protesting, showing, arguing. But it is necessary to know that such a situation exists, so that we should be under no illusions.”