Histadruth Would Balk Free Press

even of impartiality.

Jacob Landau, managing director of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, when he was in Palestine a few weeks ago, made a most earnest effort to reach an understanding with the Executive, and if the Executive were not controlled by the Histadruth and would have wanted an impartial service, there can be no doubt that an agreement could have been reached.

TERMS OF AGREEMENT OFFERED BY J. T. A.

Mr. Landau attended a meeting of the Executive of the Jewish Agency to which he submitted written proposals, expressing regret that the Executive should have launched a news service without making any attempt whatever first to communicate with the J.T.A. and explore ways and means to reach an understanding with that organization. He suggested that as long as the Executive seemed determined to continue Palcor, at least a clash with regard to the distribution of the news should be avoided. He suggested.

1. That the Palcor news be distributed by the J.T.A.

2. That the J.T.A. continue its own news service from Palestine but conduct it in the friendliest possible spirit of collaboration with the Executive.

These proposals, which certainly indicated a desire on the part of the J.T.A. to make a maximum of concessions in order to avoid the spectacle of two rival systems, ### turned down, as Mr. Landau ### subsequently informed by Mr. ### Gurion and Mr. Shertok. It ### obvious that this decision ### be taken in view of the ### influence of the Histadruth ######thin the Executive.

HISTADRUTH CONTROL OF THE AGENCY EXECUTIVE

The Executive is presided over by Dr. Ruppin who, as he himself said, takes no interest in political questions, but devotes himself to his department (colonization). Dr. Berkson has resigned. Dr. Hexter happens to be absent. Dr. Senator, who represents the non-Zionists, is affiliated with the Histadruth. Mr. Ben Gurion, Mr. Shertok, Mr. Kaplan and Dr. Senator, therefore, form one solid bloc, determining the policy of the Executive, and Mr. Gruenbaum is a lone figure. The situation in London is this: Mr. Locker, a member of the Histadruth, exercises the determining influence, while the non-Zionists are not represented at all in the London Executive.

It was pointed out by Mr. Landau to Mr. Ben Gurion and to Mr. Shertok that it was not in the province of the Executive to enter the business of selling news. It could supply news to all newspapers and agencies, but to launch a news service and to ask for subscription fees was certainly contrary to its functions. If the Administration in Washington were to start a news service, it certainly would antagonize the Associated Press, United Press and all other news services.

HOSTILE ACTING OF THE HISTADRUTH LEADERS

A number of steps were taken by the Histadruth leaders in order to weaken or discredit the J.T.A.:

1. The Executive of the Histadruth cabled to the Histadruth in South Africa to boycott the J.T.A. because it was a “Revisionist” enterprise. A circular of defamatory nature was widely circulated by the Histadruth in South Africa.

2. The Executive under the influence of the Histadruth leaders has withheld important news from the J.T.A. or handed it to the J.T.A. after it had already been made public by the Palcor.

3. Palcor has published attacks on the J.T.A. unworthy of the Executive in tone and content.

4. Histadruth members of the Executive, while promoting a rival system, has endeavored through the use of threats to intimidate the J.T.A..

5. At a sub-committee meeting of the South African Zionist Executive, allegations against the J.T.A. were disproved. It was decided, by a considerable majority, to publish an editorial favorable to the J.T.A. in the Zionist Record, official Zionist organ. Thereupon, a member of the Zionist Executive in London caused a telegram to be sent to South Africa advising against publication of this editorial.

CRITICIZED CORRESPONDENT HIRED BY EXECUTIVE

Characteristic of the attitude of the Executive is the following incident. Mr. Melzer, the Jerusalem correspondent of the J.T.A., was frequently criticized by the Executive. According to them he was irresponsible and biased. The Executive exercised pressure on the J.T.A. to dismiss Mr. Melzer when in one of his reports he charged the Histadruth with having vowed revenge in a proclamation following the Stavsky acquittal. Mr. Melzer has been recently retained by Palcor, although when he served the J.T.A., he was continually criticized by the Histadruth members of the Executive.

The J.T.A. does not possess a monopoly for the dissemination of news. A number of newspapers and news agencies maintain correspondents in Palestine and news by mail and cable reaches newspapers in Europe and in the United States from their own sources. The J.T.A. certainly does not object to the Executive’s supplying the press with an information service. The situation is different when the Executive sponsors a news service which asks newspapers for subscription fees, actually endeavoring to establish a rival system.

The recent Jewish Agency statement emphasizes that Jacob Landau is the owner of the J. T. A. This is incorrect. Mr. Landau does not own a majority of the shares in the J. T. A. The other shareholders are prominent leaders in the Jewish community. The J.T.A. can hardly be termed a strictly private enterprise. Its Committee of Sponsors comprises the most prominent Jewish leaders.

Serious objections were entertained by the most eminent Jewish leaders against control of the J.T.A. by a communal board which might open the door to political influences on the J.T.A. If this viewpoint, however, is to be abandoned, the control should not be exercised by one party, but by a board in which a variety of representative Jews should sit. When this suggestion was made by Mr. Landau to Mr. Ben Gurion and Mr. Shertok, their reply was that the J.T.A. in that case might change from a private enterprise to a public institution but that would not affect their position. According to their opinion, the control was to be exercised by the Executive.

When Mr. Landau expressed a desire to consult prominent non-Zionist leaders in the United States, who for many years had backed the J.T.A., complete disregard of their possible attitude was indicated—Mr. Ben Gurion stating, “We are responsible to the Zionist Congress.” As a matter of fact, one of the points on which the most severe criticism of the J.T.A. was based is the fact that the J.T.A. reported extensively on the Jewish colonization work in Russia.

It is obvious that a service is desired which should propagate Zionist viewpoint, with particular emphasis on the Histadruth interests, and disregard all other aspects of the Jewish situation. It should also be pointed out that the question of subsidy was not one of the main points in the discussion with the Executive. The request was only made that if the J.T.A. was to distribute the Palcor service, additional expenditure attached to this work should be taken care of by the Executive. The Histadruth leaders in Palestine have adopted an arrogant, dietatorial attitude, ruthlessly dealing with any one who is not subservient to their policies and interests.

LOUIS MARSHALL’S VIEWS ON J.T.A.

Louis Marshall at the meeting at which the Committee of Sponsors of the J. T. A. was formed, emphatically expressed the opinion that the J. T. A. should not serve any party, but should be free and independent. He even doubted the advisability of establishing the Committee of Sponsors. He expressed the fear that it might interfere with the management of the editorial work or the J. T. A. Mr. Marshall introduced a resolution that such a committee be established, but that it should not interfere with the management or editorial work of the Agency.

The present Zionist Executive is dominated by the Labor element. To be controlled by the Executive would be tantamount to subjecting the J. T. A. to one specific party within the Zionist movement.

The course on which the Executive is about to embark is extremely dangerous. It would eventually lead to the establishment of a Revisionist, Paole-Zion, Mizrachi, etc., small press services, none of them commanding the whole sphere of influence, the numerous contacts with leading agencies, newspapers, governments, statesmen, institutions, organizations, etc., which the J. T. A. has succeeded in establishing. It is the curse of Jewish partisan strife that in the heat of the battle none of our parties has any use for a cool, objective non-partisan recorder, but clamor for a news service they can control.

Petty party sentiment and strife should not be permitted to undermine the J. T. A. During the last two years party passions have been inflamed to an unprecedented degree.

J. T. A. WILL REMAIN STRICTLY IMPARTIAL

It is needless to emphasize that the J. T. A. has not changed and has no intention of changing its policy of strict impartiality. The complaints which have been made against the J. T. A. are without any foundation whatever.

To be fair in the presentation of news, to be scrupulous and to guard against misrepresentation, is its policy which it follows with almost religious fervor. The J. T. A. is only too well aware of its responsibility and realizes the untold havoc one careless word may inflict. Never has a personal animus been injected into our work. It is truly impersonal. It has never tried to “get even” with its worst enemies by ignoring their public activities or dressing up reports which might hurt them.

In its seventeen years of work, the J. T. A. has built up a powerful Agency. Its connection with newspapers, news agencies and institutions of every type, Jewish and non-Jewish, are a real asset to the Jewish people and should not be trifled with. The J. T. A. deserves to be treated with such regard as the position it has obtained in the course of years merits. The J. T. A. has a great and earnest ambition to make the Agency as powerful and useful an institution as possible in the interests of our people and in this endeavor it should have the sympathy and cooperation of the Executive.

MUTUAL DISREGARD IS BASIS OF TROUBLE

At the root of the trouble is that attitude of mutual disrespect and disregard which only too frequently Jewish leaders and Jewish organizations are wont to adopt towards each other. Thus we succeed in weakening the Jewish position and frequently destroy even very meritorious undertakings. Particularly at this moment when the Jewish position throughout the world has assumed so grave a character, when not only in Germany but also in Poland and other countries we have to cope with a situation fraught with unprecedented dangers for the fate of our people, and where with regard to Palestine we are engaged in working out vital problems. It is most apparent that we should rather try to work and pull together instead of adding to the disunity and dissension which unfortunately are too rife.

The J. T. A. has no intention of permitting itself to give up its policy of impartiality. Despite all the unheard of provocation to which it is being subjected, despite the bullying attitude of intimidation which is readily adopted against it not only by the Histadruth but also by the Revisionists, it intends to do its duty.