Digest of World Press Opinion

The negative attitude of B’nai B’rith toward the projected World Jewish Congress is expressed by Alfred M. Cohen, president, in an article under his name in the B’nai B’rith Magazine. Senator Cohen writes.

It is my belief, in which the executive committee of B’nai B’rith coincides, that the welfare of the Jewish people will be best served by a retraction of the intention to hold such an election and by rescinding the decision to hold a congress, which cannot by the wildest and widest stretch of imagination assume the proportions of a World Jewish Congress.

Such a congress as is proposed is fraught with danger. It cannot be of advantage.

If the election of delegates takes place, only a mere fraction of the Jewish people will vote because they as a whole are afraid of a Congress; are out of sympathy with a congress; will have nothing to do with a congress, and do not want to be responsible for a Jewish congress.

If held, such a congress will be nothing more than a forum for the outburst of pent-up emotions.

CROLL COMMENDED FOR HIS STAND

The Detroit Jewish Chronicle comments editorially upon the attitude of the Ontarian government in the Croll incident. The paper says:

David A. Croll, Minister of Welfare of Ontario, taught a lesson in calmness to much older Jewish leaders.

When Dr. George A. Little, Christian minister and editor of Sunday school publications, referred to him as a "Border Cities Russian Jews," and made a Jewish issue of a case responsibility for which was taken by the entire cabinet of the government of Ontario, he refused to become unduly excited. He bided his time, and others—Christian leaders—fought the battle which was not his but theirs because a Christian committed the indiscretion and attempted to raise a racial and religious issue.

"Some of these pious so-called Christians have souls that would just fit in a peanut shell," was the comment made by Premier Mitchell F. Hepburn, who took upon himself the entire responsibility for the discharge of an official, which was the direct cause of the issue raised. Other non-Jews were similarly as outspoken in their condemnation of Dr. Little’s action.

And because David A. Croll refused to lose his head and let the case take the course it took, he has emerged a leader with sane judgment.

JEWISH PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY

Dr. I. M. Rubinow, in an interesting article in the December issue of the B’nai B’rith Magazine, discusses whether there is a Jewish problem in America. He writes:

There is a Jewish problem in the United States. Until comparatively recently this assertion would have been resented with considerable bitterness by a substantial proportion of Jewish leadership in the United States. It was contrary to the American Constitution. It was contrary to the spirit of American institutions which knows—so the daily papers insisted, year in and year out—no distinction between race, nationality and creed. The last eighteen months have at least had this positive result: they have opened our eyes to the situation which now is generally admitted with a great deal of concern and worry. It is admitted not only by the Jewish community but by the country at large.

Undoubtedly, the awareness of the problem to a large extent coincides with the Nazi "revolution" in Germany. There has been and continues to be a tremendous amount of vicious anti-Semitic propaganda directly traceable to German influences. Most if not all of the twenty-five organizations under various fanciful names, with or without shirts, have sprung up since March 1, 1933. Many of them can only thinly disguise their direct contact with their German origins. Nevertheless it would be idle to describe the entire movement as merely an imported German movement. There was a smoldering going on in the United States for many years. It broke out into an open flame during the last eighteen months.

SEES KHALDI FAVORED AS JERUSALEM MAYOR

Near East and India semi-official organ of the Colonial Ministry, speaking about the mayoralty problem in Jerusalem, states:

The Jewish community, backed by its national institutions, is going to make a determined bid to secure that office for one of its elected municipal representatives. The issue is naturally one of policy, and, if the truth were told, some of the responsible Jewish leaders are themselves chary of venturing into that position at the present time.

If the Jewish claim is not met, and that is, of course, a strong likelihood, the choice of a Mayor will be made from among the Muslim members; and the chances of Dr. Hussein Khaldi are mostly favored. There is a great deal of sympathy, among both Arabs and Jews, for Dr. Khaldi’s appointment. He is known to be a sound and honest administrator, and in his many years of government service has won an excellent reputation for fairness.

LONDON PAPER ASSAILS JEWISH BOYCOTT MOVE

The London Daily Herald, speaking of formation of a Labor Conference in London to organize the boycott of German goods, comments as follows:

This is a mistaken move. Jews in this country are citizens on precisely the same footing as Scotsmen, Cockneys, Welshmen or the men of Dorset. There is no good reason for setting themselves apart in special trade union or political organizations based on race distinctions.

History of Continental countries should warn them that racial segregation is an incentive to racial strife.

Many Jews are taking an active part in the British trade union and labor movements alongside other Britishers. This is the sound policy for all Jewish workers.