« PreviousContinue »
erty by purchase and work shall be maintained and they be guarded and protected in the enjoyment of whatever they produce, regardless of whether they have a majority or not?
Doctor LANDMAN. Certainly. The only thing that we are opposed to is, for instance, that a man should stand up here and plead with the Representatives of America in Congress for certain things to be given or to be done for the Jewish nationality when there is no such thing.
Mr. COCKRAN. You do not deny it is a race?
(Thereupon, at 1.30 o'clock p. m., tủe committee recessed until 3 o'clock p. m., Thursday, April 20, 1922.)
The committee reconvened, pursuant to the taking of the recess, at 3 o'clock p. m., Hon. Stephen G. Porter (chairman) presiding.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN C. ANSORGE, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
Mr. ANSORGE. Mr. Chairman, I only want to take a few moments of the committee's valuable time.
In the first place, I want to second the statement made yesterday by the gentleman from New York, Mr. Fish, that there are a great many Hebrews who are not actively affiliated with the Zionist movement who are in thorough sympathy and accord with the heartbeats and yearnings of the Zionists for a restoration of a homeland in Palestine.
I also want to say that I had the pleasure and the honor of attending at the British Embassy several months ago when Mr. Balfour-now Lord Balfour-addressed the Zionists, and although the Balfour declaration was proclaimed in 1917, during the heat of the war, Mr. Balfour on that occasion voiced the same sentiments as are contained in the Balfour declaration. In other words, in 1922 Mr. Balfour feels as he did in 1917.
I have here a small booklet, Mr. Chairman, which is published by the Palestine foundation fund in New York. It is addressed to the workers of the Zionist fund, and I just want to read a very short paragraph from this booklet.
“Forty centuries of history close with this question. Will you, Jews of America, redeem the Holy Land ?
“The promise that was made 4,000 years ago is to be fulfilled through you, or is to remain unfulfilled.
“You are the guardians of Jewish history to-day. With you Jewish history ends, or through you it begins a new and glorious chapter.
“Forty centuries of history are watching you to-day. The far-off generations look to you out of the twilight of the past. The warriors and prophets and teachers of ancient Judea are watching you. The martyrs of Spain and Poland and Russia, they who died that our people might live, are watching you. The young heroes who fell on a hundred fields in the great war are watching you. The victims of a hundred pogroms, men and women and children, are watching you.
“In the eyes of all of them there is the single question : 'Will the land of our fathers be restored to our people, or have we lived and died in vain?'"
It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that this Fish resolution, which is merely a word of encouragement to this movement, should be fostered by the Congress of the United States, and I want to join with the others who have appeared before this committee in respectfully recommending that on behalf of the numerous Hebrews in my district and in the city of New York who are thoroughly in sympathy with this resolution the committee report it favorably.
Mr. LINTHICUM. Could we hear Professor Reed now, Mr. Chairman? We asked him to remain over that we might hear him.
The CHAIRMAN. I want to finish with our last witness before we hear anyone else. Does anybody desire to ask the Reverend any questions. If not, that will end it.
Now, you want to hear Mr. Reed, do you?
Mr. LINTHICUM. Mr. Reed had said that he would remain over so that I could hear him on the mandate. I am interested to know what connection this would have with the mandate of Great Britain over Palestine.
Mr. MOORES. It strikes me that is very important.
STATEMENT OF PROF. EDWARD BLISS REED, OF NEW HAVEN,
Professor REED. Gentlemen, I wish to say that if you pass this Fish resolution you indorse the Balfour declaration, because that is what this resolution virtually is. It is stated a little more plainly, or absolutely plainly, in the Senate concurrent resolution. If you indorse the Balfour declaration, you are caught absolutely in the inandate. That is what I want to show to-day.
In the twelfth of his fourteen points President Wilson stated as follows:
“Nationalities which are under Turkish rule should be assured of continued security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous decelopment."
Now, gentlemen, if language can convey any meaning whatever, the inhabitants of Palestine and Syria were led to believe that America proposed for them freedom and some degree at least of self-determination.
Now we come from what the President wishes to what the league says. The mandate is given by the League of Nations, and what I want to warn you against is getting' caught by the mandate in what I consider an impasse. It will bring disaster on this country of Palestine. That is why I am here, Mr. Goldberg. If you want to know what I am getting out of it, I will show you my mail. I am getting some extraordinary things out of it. I am here because I want to prevent my country from doing something that will bring it untold trouble. That is why I am here; let us have that understood.
Now I want to go ahead and show you what you are going to get in for if you pass this Fish resolution. The text of article 22 of the League of Nations is in part as follows:
“To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilization and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this covenant."
In other words, that is very nice on the face of it.
The mandate is given for the well-being and development of certain peoples. If a mandate is given for Palestine, it is given for the well-being of Palestine. [Continuing reading :)
“The best method of giving practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be intrusted to advanced nations, who, by reason of their resources, their experience, or their geographical position, can best undertake this responsibility, and that tutelage should be exercised by them as mandatories on behalf of the league.
“ The character of the mandate must differ according to the stage of the development of the people, the geographical situation of the territory, its economic conditions, and other circumstances.”
Now, here comes this point:
“ Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as individual nations can be provisionally recognized, subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a mandatory power until such time as they are able to stand alone.”
That applies, as it states, to communities under the Turkish Empire. It shows that they are to be helped :
* The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the mandatory power.”
These communities include the Hedjaz, Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Syria. And their wishes must be a principal consideration in the mandatory power.
A mandatory for a community previously under the Turks must do two things : It must guide them, it must not submerge them until they have enough power to
so on, and it must consult their wishes. You can not possibly get anything else out of that but those two points. The Hedjaz, Mesopotamia, Syria, with Palestine, were the four communities involved under that. I need not ask you which were the better advanced in civilization, the Hedjaz and Mesopotamia or Palestine and Syria. There is no question; there is no comparison between Beyrut and Mecca. There is no comparison between Jerusalem and Bagdad. If there were any two of the four territories under the Turks that ought to have some voice in their government, it was Syria and Palestine; and the most backward were the Hedjaz and Mesopotamia.
You know what happened. The two that are not having one single word to say about their government are the two advanced nations—I will not say nations; I should say the two advanced communities—Syria and Palestine, while the Hedjaz and Mesopotamia have been allowed to state what they want. They are practically standing on their own feet and the two more healthful ones are not.
Gentlemen, that is an absolute violation of the mandate; and if you go into the mandate, through this resolution, the first thing you do is to break the mandate, because you take up the plan of the Zionist organization.
Now, I want to show you a curious thing. While the peace conference was going on there was a very strong Zionist delegation at Paris, which consisted of some of their very ablest men, including Professor Frankfurter and Professor Weizmann.
Mr. LIPSKY. Professor Frankfurter was not there.
Professor REED. He was not? Well, I withdraw that; but Doctor Weizmann was there; and it is a correct statement that there was a very strong Zionist delegation at Paris and Palestinians got a little bit frightened, and so they asked to be heard. They said, Can we not be heard before you decide the matter?” and President Wilson, who had promised so much in that twelfth point I quoted, said, “ Yes; you will be heard.” So he selected two menhis own men. Those men were, as has been said, Charles R. Crane and Henry Churchill King. They were sent to Palestine on an American boat. They landed at Jaffa, and the Zionists had the first chance at them; they took them all around and showed them everything they had to show, and the commission went to the various towns, they went all about the country, and the people believed that they were to have a chance to be heard.
Mr. COOPER. May I ask you about Charles R. Crane?
Mr. COOPER. And stopped at San Francisco, and his mission was taken away from him?
Professor REED. Yes. •
Professor REED. These men were appointed, and the Palestinians, when that American mission came, were distinctly told from Paris that they were to be heard. I was there engaged in relief work, and it was not my business to mix into politics, and I did not. I have a letter here from the head of the Red Cross saying that my attitude was irreproachable and, if anything, I leaned over backwards to give the Zionists a chance, because I believed in Zionism when I went there; and it is only because I saw what they were doing that I am fighting it as hard as I can now. They went up and down that country, and what has happened to their report? That report has absolutely disappeared. I wrote down to the State Department, asking them if I could not get that report. That was before Mr. Wilson went out. I was told that there was no chance of seeing that report, and that it probably never would come out. I am very sorry that I have not that letter here to show you ; but that is an absolute fact. I applied for that report and was told that there was no probability or possibility of the Government publishing it. Now, it is very strange that President Weizmann, of this great international organization which you are asked to indorse, can see what I can not see. He can see that report. I, an American citizen and taxpayer, can not know what is going on there, but President Weizmann can. That, Mr. Chairman, is only one of many, many episodes which make me think we want to keep absolutely clear of this international organization.
Now, let me read you, please, what President Weizmann said about that report. I have not been able to get one iota of information about it. This is from a pamphlet entitled “ Zionist Policy,” an address by Dr. Charles Weizmann, Sunday, September 21, 1919. Published by the English Zionist Federation. It is a document that anybody can buy, and I have scores of similar ones. Here is what he says. I read from page 12. (Reading :)
The American Commission has passed through Palestine. Many of you have worried about this." I would not be worried if Mr. Crane and Mr. King were looking up anything I was doing. (Continuing reading):
“ So was I; not that they would not find colonies in Palestine, but that they would not find enough.” Here is the point:
They gave a report which is divided into two parts: What the Arabs said about closing the doors against the Jews coming into Palestine, and what they themselves saw of the achievement of the Jews, which has opened the door to
They could not have found words enough to express their admiration of what the Jews have done in Palestine."
Here is President Weizmann explaining to a group of London Zionists what the Crane-King report contained, and I, Mr. Chairman, have never been able to find out. I was very much irritated at that, because I pay taxes and I consider that I have a right to know what is going on. I consider that I have just as good a right as he has, although Doctor Weizmann is president of this great international organization which you are asked to ratify. I think I have just as good a right to know what is going on as he has.
Now, I will ask the stenographer to take this statement very carefully, and I am going to be very sure about it: I asked a very prominent American why I could not see that report. He replied that this commission was sent out by President Wilson purely to give President Wilson information concerning the situation in the Near East; that it was not designed to publish this report. The commission was simply to gather information for the President.
Now, gentlemen, that was a very great wrong. Those poor people believed they were going to be heard. They thought they would have the ear of the American public. And I ask you, before you do anything, before you indorse the Zionist organization, before you get into this mandate business, that you find out what those two Americans of standing think about the situation in Palestine. Do not take my word for it; do not take the words of my friends over there. But if President Weizmann can find out, I do not see why a committee from the American Congress can not find out. There you have your report. Find out what they say. Now, I can not find that report. Let us come down to the mandate.
I have shown that the mandate is to guide the subject communities and to fit them to stand on their feet. Who made that mandate, and what is that mandate. Why, Mr. Chairman, that mandate, of course, is the constitution for Palestine. That mandate is the rule under which that country is going to be governed ; and, as I said before, this Zionist organization simply overrules every idea of American liberty. I said I thought as an American citizen a man should have something to say about his own constitution. If you are going to lay down a fundamental constitution of the land, you want more than one-tenth of the population to be heard.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. May I interrupt you right there?
Professor REED. Yes; please do. I want to get my points clear, because I want you to follow me.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. I understand that your objection is, to that constitution, that they had no voice in making it?
Professor REED. Yes.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. You are aware, of course, that the Congress of the United States issued a mandate for the government of the whole of the Louisiana Territory?
Professor REED. Yes.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. And intrusted its government to five men and did not make any of the constitutional guaranties applicable, practically?
Professor REED. Yes.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. And you are aware that we have governed the Philippine Islands without making the constitution applicable, and there is practically none of the Constitution of the United States there, except that the
United States Supreme Court in one case implied that possibly the guaranties cf constitutional liberty may be there?
Professor REED. Yes.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. And yet when the Congress of the United States imposed those governments upon those people—those constitutions—they had not a word to say about it. So there is nothing extraordinary in that respect about this mandate.
Professor REED. May I contradict you, if you will permit me, Mr. Cooper? Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. Yes, sir. Professor REED. There is something very extraordinary about it. The United States Government in that instance did not consult only one-tenth of the population of those territories. It would be fair if they never consulted anybody, but they allowed the Zionists to write the mandate. There is no comparison between the two cases.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. What is the application of what you are stating? Come to the mandate.
Professor REED. All right, sir; I am coming right to the mandate.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. When two men undertake to make a contract they sometimes talk and discuss it for a month or six weeks or two months, and then they finally make a written contract, and then the law says that everything is merged in the written contract, and all their talk goes for nothing.
Professor REED. Yes, sir.
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. These people talked back and forth and made suggestions and discussed policies and made propositions for some two years. Finally it was all merged in the mandate, and there is nothing in those conversations that can in anywise affect it.
Professor REED. If you will give me leave, I would like to contradict you again, if I may, sir?
Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. Yes; that is my view only.
Professor REED. I am not presenting to you, now, my views. Fortunately we have Doctor Weizmann's own statement about their writing a part of that contract. It was not suggesting it, but the actual writing of it. I say the objection is that in this case they did consult those of this organization and did not consult others.
Now, who wrote this? I will ask you take this, if you please, Mr. Stenographer. This is from Palestine for March 26, 1921. This is not the same as The New Palestine; it is a British biweekly. This is from the issue of March 26, 1921. (Reading :)
“ It had not been an easy thing for the English Government to make this appointment (of Samuel). They had 100 other candidates who might have been sent more easily. The Government might have treated Palestine as they were treating Mesopotamia and other areas.”
That is, they might have given Palestine a little chance; but they did not. Why did they not? Because they had someone write that mandate.
Now, I come right to the point. It was not conversation. I will read another extract from the same biweekly, Palestine, for March 26, 1921. This is from the publication of a speech made that same week at Great Assembly Hall, London, by Doctor Weizmann. (Reading :)
Speaking of the mandate, Doctor Weizmann said that it was difficult for one who had participated and collaborated in the construction of the mandate to defend it before them."
The president of this international Zionist organization, on his own word, participated and collaborated in the construction of the mandate, and therefore it was difficult, he said, for him to defend it before them. I want to show you how the mandate changes the Balfour declaration. It is one step after the other. In a sense, it is very easy. If you take the first step, you go down, down, down. I will read this again. (Reading :)
Speaking of the mandate, Doctor Weizmann said that it was difficult for one who had participated and collaborated in the construction of the mandate to defend it before them. He could not say everything in the mandate was satisfactory.
However weak in its text, it was morally the greatest victory which any people could achieve. There were not a million Jews in Palestine, but the British Government had negotiated with the Jews in Warsaw and the Ukraine, in London and New York."