The question of partition was discussed for the first time before the Anglo-American Inquiry Committee today, as it resumed hearings here.
Bartley Crum, one of the American members asked Nat Jackson, general secretary of the Poale Zion Organization, whether his group had considered the question of partition. Jackson replied that they were opposed to partition, but said that it might be a possible solution “if we were given the parts of Palestine we wish, and were given sufficient opportunity to develop them.”
Jackson presented a three-point program for reconciling Arab-Jewish differences in Palestine, providing: 1. Agrarian taxation reform, which would force cultivation of large Arab holdings which are not being worked. 2. Equalization of minimum wage levels for both Jews and Arabs. 3. Economic development providing for the integration of Arab and Jewish labor.
Replying to a question, Jackson said that he believed that Arab-Jewish amity was possible. “Arab opposition to the concept of a Jewish national home,” he said, “has been encouraged by every surrender by the Mandatory Power to Arab intransigeance. If Britain made up its mind on the major issues now, there would be no more trouble.”
American co-chairman Judge Joseph C. Hutcheson, who has indicated great interest, both at Friday’s hearings here and at those held in Washington, as to what witnesses meant by a Jewish State, asked Jackson. “Is it your idea that Palestine is a Jewish State in formation, and Jews who are citizens of America and Britain can go there?”
When the witness replied “Yes,” Hutcheson said ” I am surprised to hear that. Why should Jews be afforded double nationality not afforded other people? Having two loyalties is inconsistent with the laws of the United States.” Jackson answered that a Jew’s first loyalty is to his country and his second to his-people ” called Jews.”
Other witnesses at today’s session included Rabbi J. L. Unterman, chairman of the British Mizrachi Federation and Rabbi Kopul Rosen of the British Federation of Synagogues, H.A.Goodman of the Agudas Israel, and Sir Simon Marks of the Zionist federation.
Questioned by Judge Hutcheson as to whether American and British Jews “would go to this millennium of brotherly love and fellowship you expect to build in Palestine,” Rabbi Rosen said that the majority of U.S. and British Jews would remain in their homelands, but, he added, “you must ask them how many wish their grandchildren to grow up in a free, democratic Jewish homeland,” He cited the reports of growing anti-Semitism in the United States.
ZIONIST LEADER ASKS JEWISH STATE WITHIN BRITISH COMMONWEALTH
Sir Simon told the committee that a firm policy in Palestine would exclude the possibility of trouble there, and urged the establishment of a Jewish State with-in the framework of the British Commonwealth.
A Jewish religious state was advocated by Goodman, who charged that the Jewish Agency had excluded the Agudas Israel from an opportunity to help in developing the Jewish national home in Palestine by allocating only four percent of the available immigration certificates to Agudah members. He admitted, however, that the Agency had not discriminated against orthodox Jews, and replied negatively when asked if he thought that there would be less terrorism in Palestine if more members of his organization had been allowed to immigrate.
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.