Page images
PDF
EPUB

times as a land of milk and honey If the Jewish people are permitted to settle in that country, and if the mandate is accepted by Great Britain a feeling of security will be given to them, and if America will but give this expression of opinion, it will have much to do with influencing the final settlement of this question in England. If England accepts the mandate, which provides for security of settlement there, it will only a little while before Palestine, or ancient Judea, will become modern Judea, and be fully restored.

Mr. LINTHICUM. I saw the statement sometime ago that it was once proposed to allow the Mediterranean to flow into the Valley of the Jordan, thus making that a very fertile section, but that Christian sentiment would probably be against it.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you irrigate with salt water?

Mr. LINTHICUM. I was not speaking of irrigating land, but tois is an arid section, and if they were to turn the Mediterranean Sea into that valley, it would form an inland sea which would very much improve that whole country.

Mr. ROSSDALE. I read an article about that in a Sunday magazine, I think it was the New York American Sunday magazine. I know the writer very well for he lives in my congressional district, and while he is an able writer and a very able man, I do not think that he was ever in Judea or knows anything about engineering. I think it was simply a Sunday magazine story. Besides I think the article read that the River Jordan would flow into the Dead Sea through a tunnel and freshen the Dead Sea waters. I do not be lieve, however, that the Jewish people want to do anything that would either change, destroy, or wipe out any of the ancient monuments relating to the wonderful, and beautiful history of the people there. Jewish history is, of course, coincident with that of Christian history for Christianity came to birth in the land of the Jews and all that history is sacred to both Christian and Jew.

The land we now know as Palestine was peopled by the Jews from the dawn of history until the Roman era. Ancient Jewish history in this corner of old Asia gave to the world the highest and noblest inspiration for civilization. The Jewish people did not willingly leave their own country. They were driven out by the conquering Romans in the storm and stress of war and gradually dispersed throughout the world.

Although various alien people succeeded them at different periods, the Jews left an indelible impress upon the land. Even unto the present it is yet a Jewish country. Every landmark, every monument, every name, and every trace of whatever civ lization is there is still Jewish.

Notwithstanding their dispersal and scattering throughout the world this remarkable people have never abandoned Judea. All through the centuries Jewish men and women have kept a vigil at the “Wall of Wailing” in Jerusalem. Age after age they cont nued on in their devotion to this ideal, reverently kissing the moss-covered stones of the remaining wall of the crumbled ruin of their ancient temple there; mingling with their tears fervent prayers for the day of restoration of their people to this land. Through all the long years devout Jews, all over the world, in their daily prayers have piously turned to the East and prayed for the return to Judea. It is a tremendous urge of a great people, this intense age-long desire of the Jews for their ancient homeland. For nineteen hundred years it has been their fervent hope, their longing, and their aspiration. Through all the'r wanderings and migrations, through all their sufferings, they have never abandonded this resolve. Nor have they ever wavered in their steadfast resolution to again return home. It was their sustaining hope in the Dark Ages. It enabled them to survive persecution and oppression. It gave them the courage to defy the Spanish Inquisition, to withstand medieval tortures of the thumbscrew, the rack, and to struggle against the Russian pogroms. It was the dream vision of Jewish youths and maidens as they bravely went into the fire chanting songs as they were burned at the stake.

Oh, the Jewish people have paid for this devotion with the blood and tears of countless martyrs. Palestine, this ancient Judea, belongs to them, and I hope that generous, l'beral-minded America will give this expression of favorable opinion by passing this resolution in favor of the British mandate to hold Palestine for Jewish settlement. The establishment of the Jewish colonists in Palestine has been of great benefit not only to those Jews who have been there a long time and to those who have recently arrived, but also to the Arabs and other inhabitants there. Zionist or anizations in America have contributed considerably to relief work n Palestine luring the troublesome period of

the late World War. I cite an instance, the sending of the steamship Vulcan, laden with foodstuffs and the establishing of relief stations for distributing food rations to Arab and Jew al.ke. This same organization during the past five years has maintained there its American medical unit at an annual expenditure of $400,000, giving medical aid to all in need of same without regard to race, creed, or color. The Arabs and the other inhabitants-comprising the bulk of the population there have led a beggarly existence until the coining of the Jewish colonists commenced to change things for the better. The country has been under Turkish domination from about the time Mahomet first spread his religion of the sword, and there has been no civilization there that is worth the mention. Indeed the rule of the unspeakable Turk is seen in the general desolation, poverty, and ruin everywhere.

The reestablishment of a Jewish Palestine is not without its difficulties and recently there has been some opposition by Arabs against the Jewish colonists. Th's trouble between Arabs and Jews resulted in various local disturbances and in several cases even riots. This friction between the colonists and the other inhabitants who are mostly Moslem Arabs steeped in ignorance and extreme poverty, has been fomented by the small number of Arab intellectuals, the Effendis, chiefs of tribes and large landowners who ruled the country during the Turkish régime. These near-Turks naturally object to the newer Western civilization which the colonist Jew is bringing to Palestine.

The numerous Jewish agricultural colonies are changing the entire complexion of the country and naturally these conditions threaten the destruction of the old Turk absentee land-owning class for whom the beggarly peasant Arabs tilled the stony soil for a pittance wh'le their masters, these Effendis and chiefs, dwelt in Paris and London, Constantinople, Alexandria, Bagdad and Mecca. Opposition to the Jewish settler is engendered by this small minority who excite the ignorant Moslem Arab by appeals to religious prejudices against the Jewish colonist.

The resettling of Palestine has created a situation somewhat akin to that of the American colon'st in his struggle with the American Indian. For like the early American settler on th's continent, the Jewish colonist frequently has to till the soil with a rifle in one hand and a hoe in the other. The Nomadic Arab raiders, on a smaller scale are fighting the civilization of the Jewish settler as the Indian fought the American settler on this continent in the early days.

I have not been to Palestine to witness the romance of the return of the Jewish people to their homeland but I have read much of the details of this movement. I have heard the recitals of the story from men who have been to Palestine recently and witnessed the remarkable work of these Jewish "Chalutzin" pioneers who labor under the torrid Judean sun, removing from the fields on the hills des and in the valleys, the numerous stones which the erosion of soils from centuries of rains have left bare. I have listened to the story of these splendid refugees from European oppression who drain marshes, build roads and houses, plant trees and vineyards, whose splendid elemental labors are making habitable, a land long neglected and lain waste by Turk and Arab and I hope it may be permitted to go on that Palestine may become the safe haven and refuge for the long-oppressed and presecuted Jewish people.

Mr. Fish. Congressman Ansorge is present, and I think would like to say a few words on the subject of the resolution. Before he is introduced, however, I would like to go back to the question of the procedure. The proponents of the measure are here, and they are in a vast majority. There is very little opposition to the resolution throughout the country, and I think the committee is entitled to know what the opposition is. We would like to hear the grounds of the opposition, so that we will be able to answer them. This is not like a disputed question, where there are two sides, or where there are two evenly divided sides. We know there is some opposition somewhere, and we would like to know what the opposition is. We do not know what they base their objections upon, and I hope the committee will hear some statement from the opposition at this time.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the wish of the committee in regard to that? I really thought that we should hear one side, and after they had concluded that we should hear the other side. We will make a rather awkward record otherwise, but if there is no objection to hearing somebody in opposition to the resolution, we will be glad to hear from them.

Mr. LINTHICUM. I would like to hear what they have to say in opposition, and their statements could be inserted in the record at the proper place.

Mr. MOORES. Is there anybody here among the proponents who has been to Palestine since the war?. If there is, I want to hear from him. We have not heard from anybody who apparently knows anything about the conditions there during or since the war. Have you anybody here who has been over there during or since the war? If so, I would like to hear him.

Mr. Fish. Yes; we have a gentleman present who has been there. He is one of our main witnesses for to-day, but we want to reserve some of our statements until we can hear from the opposition. This gentleman wants to hear the opposition. These gentlemen who are in favor of the resolution do not know where the opposition comes from or what it is.

Mr. MOORES. The great argument has been that there are a great many Jewish voters in some of the congressional districts. So far, that has been about the only argument.

Mr. Fish. The Jewish people of America are in favor of this proposition, and I want all Congressmen who have large numbers of Jewish voters in their districts and who know their sentiment, to come here and make it known. It appears to me that, not only the Zionists, but the Jewish people generally in America favor this proposition. They do, not favor it because they want to go there themselves, but they want to afford this opportunity to members of their race all over the world to go to Palestine as soon as they can establish a national home there.

Mr. LINTHICUM. I would like to say that I have a gentleman in my district who has just returned from Palestine, and if the committee would like to hear from him, I am sure he would appear.

Mr. MOORES. I certainly would like to hear from him. It is not such an important thing that certain individuals shall come to Congress, but it is very important that the country should act rightly on a question iike this.

Mr. LINTHICUM. This gentleman who has just returned from Palestine is Rabbi Lazaron, of Baltimore, and Doctor Birckhead, a rector of the Protestant Episcopal Church, would probably appear. They traveled through Palestine together.

Mr. MOORES. I move that those gentlemen be invited to appear before the committee and make statments on the subject of this resolution.

(The motion of Mr. Moores was unanimously carried.)

The CHAIRMAN, If there is no objection on the part of the committee, we will now hear Mr. Reed.

STATEMENT OF MR. EDWARD BLISS REED, NEW HAVEN, CONN.

Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, I hope to be able to present to you some facts pertaining to this matter, and I wish to say that I am here only for that purpose. Before I begin, may I have an understanding that, in closing, I shall have an opportunity to answer what may be said by the proponents of this measure?

Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, on that proposition, as I understand it, in lawsuits the proponents have the opening and the closing of the argument, and on the floor of the House the friends of a measure have the opening and the closing of the debate. The opponents of a measure do not close the debate, and, therefore, I do not think it should be understood that this gentleman should have the closing of this debate.

The CHAIRMAN. He did not mean it in that sense, I am sure.
Mr. COOPER. I understood him to say that he wanted to close the debate.
Mr. MOORES. We want to hear both sides of the question.

Mr. COOPER: Of course, we want to hear both sides, but that does not answer my objection at all, and it has no relevancy whatever to it. Here is a bill, and the proponents of it have appeared in its behalf. They do not know what the objections to the measure are, and Mr. Fish has asked that the opponents be heard so that the proponents may be able to reply to their objections. Now, this gentleman who makes the objection asks the opportunity to close the proceedings.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think he intended that.
Mr. COOPER. That is what he asked.

The CHAIRMAN. He may have used the word “close," but I am sure he did not intend it in that way.

Mr. COOPER. The question is how we will close this discussion, or whether that is to be the understanding.

The CHAIRMAN. By introducing witnesses against the resolution at this time, before the other side has finished its case, the record will be more or less of a jumble. That is my reason for wanting to have one side heard and then the other side heard.

Mr. CONNALLY. Should we not consult the convenience of the witnesses, or those who have come from a distance?

The CHAIRMAN. That question does not enter into this.
Mr. CONNALLY. Did you say it should not enter into it?'
The CHAIRMAN. It does not enter into it in this particular matter.

Mr. MOORES. We have already invited a Jewish rabbi from Baltimore and an Episcopal clergyman from Baltimore to be here to-morrow, so that if this witness said he wanted to close the discussion, it was just a slip.

Mr. COOPER. It is a slip that I noticed, and I do not want it adopted as the committee's purpose.

Mr. REED. May I have 50 minutes, as the other gentlemen had all the morning yesterday?

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I rise to oppose this resolution for the following reasons

Mr. COOPER (interposing). The gentleman will pardon me for interrupting him, but I think these questions should be settled as we go along. I understood the gentleman to say that the gentleman who has just sat down had 50 minutes.

Mr. REED. I asked for 50 minutes.

Mr. COOPER. But you said you asked for 50 minutes because the other side had had 50 minutes.

Mr. REED. They had all yesterday morning. That is what I said.

The CHAIRMAN. It is the rule of the committee to be liberal in the matter of time.

Mr. REED. I thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. Please state your name in full.

Mr. REED. Edward Bliss Reed, of New Haven, Conn. I am a professor; residing in New Haven.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your present occupation?

Mr. REED. My present occupation is assistant professor of English literature at Yale University.

The CHAIRMAN. How long have you held that position ?

Mr. REED. I joined the Yale faculty as instructor in the year 1897. I began teaching in 1897.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you been teaching ever since then?

Mr. REED. I have been teaching continuously since then, except for the time when I was studying abroad.

Mr. Fish. You do not represent Yale University here, do you?

Mr. REED. I do not represent Yale University. I am appearing here in my private capacity, just as all the members of the Yale faculty have a right to do. I am representing no Yale sentiment.

Mr. Fish. You are not representing any organization ?

Mr. REED. No, sir. I am speaking as an American citizen, trying to do all I can to keep my country from making what I think would be a bad blunder.

Mr. MOORES. Have you been to Palestine?
Mr. REED. Yes, sir.
Mr. COLE. Have you been there since the war?

Mr. REED. Yes, sir; between the signing of the armistice and the signing of the peace treaty.

Mr. COOPER. You said you were there between the time of the signing of the armistice and the signing of the peace treaty. How long were you there?

Mr. REED. I was there three and one-half months.

This resolution is in effect an indorsement of the Balfour declaration, and, if adopted, it will so 'understood. It will also be understood as an indorsement of the Zionist organization, because this resolution is recommended strongly by them. I believe that the Balfour declaration is un-American, and I believe political Zionism to be un-American in principle. I am here simply to present facts; I shall not make any argument, but I shall present simply facts, and I shall ask you to judge on the basis of the facts. In order to make my case so clear that there should be no dispute about it, I shall take every fact I present from Zionists' documents.

If I took my facts from my own personal experience you might say I was prejudiced; if I took my facts from letters from travelers in Palestine, you might say they were prejudiced, or if I took them from letters of Americans living over there, you might say they were prejudiced. I am taking every one

of my facts from Zionist documents. I have my statements here, and if there is any question about them, I have lugged down from New Haven this very heavy portfolio full of the original documents. Therefore I have everything perfectly straight here.

In the first place, may I take one moment to show the geography of the situation? You go east from the Suez Canal, and the Syrian coast line extends something like that [indicating). Now, suppose you run 400 miles, north and south, along the coast, and the north line will be up here [indicating). There is a natural boundary, formed by the Taurus Mountains, along the north This whole country, extending here over 400 miles. for centuries has been recognized as Syria. The lower part of this country, extending 170 miles north, and south, is called Palestine, and the rest of this country is now called Syria.

Mr. COLE. How wide a country is Palestine?

Mr. REED. It is from 75 to 100 miles in width, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Syrian Desert.

Mr. COLE. What is its width from the. seacoast to the eastern boundary?

Mr. REED. It is from 75 to 100 miles from the seacoast to the Syrian Desert. This country is inhabited by a race of people that are generally called Arabs. I shall not take up your time with a discussion of that term ; but let me say that they are not Arabs. It is customary to speak of the people in Palestine as “Arabs," and some of them are Bedouins, but the Bedouins are only a small part of that population. These people were faithful to the cause of the Allies, and the way in which the Turks and Germans robbed them, starved them, and oppressed them was terrible. They claim that their country was stripped and devastated by the Turks and Germans, and there can be no doubt about that. They did not know that England and France had made a secret treaty, and that the secret treaty involved the partition of this Syrian country-170 miles of it, north and south-Palestine, separated from the northern part of it, Syria. According to that treaty they have now partitioned Syria, and it is done by a very peculiar line like this sindicating). The north line runs like this (indicating), and extends in this way down through the Sea of Galilee; then it goes east toward the desert.

One side of this line of partition they said was to be English and the other side French. On one side of the line they have Egyptian coinage and on the other side French coinage ; and on one side they have the English language and on the other side the French language. They have one language here [indicating], and another language there [indicating]; one coinage here [indicating), and another coinage there (indicating]; one set of laws here, and another set there. You can well imagine what the people of that country feel about it., This partition of Syria is a very unfortunate thing. The French now have 29.000 troops holding Syria, and in Palestine, a country about the size of Vermont, of 10,000 square miles, they have now 7,000 nglish troops, and they are sending in black and tans. It is a most unfortunate thing to partition a country that way. It is exactly like running an arbitrary boundary line through the center of the State of Maryland. The Zionist. Organization in its publications has objected to one thing: That the line has not been drawn far enough north for them to get all the water they want for the irrigation of Palestine lands. It is purely an arbitrary line, which can not be sustained upon any historical grounds. Upon historical grounds it must be obliterated some day. In the land of Palestine before the war there were Jewish colonies.

Mr. Lipsky, I think, gave the number as about 70 at present; but before the war there were not so many.

There were about 50 of those Jewish colonies before the war, comprising some 12,000 souls. They were not, therefore, a decisive factor in a population of 700,000 people. They employed to a very large extent, to a surprisingly large extent, native labor. In fact, I might say that without this native labor it is extremely problematical whether some of those colonies could have been established. The colonies were never competitive colonies; and they had very generous support from Zionists, and they deserved it. For instance, the present Lord Rothschild contributed about £120,000 to one of the colonies where they make very excellent wines. They have good streets and roads, and they were a blessing to the country. Nobody would deny that at all. They have opened up many villages, and what they have done has been a good thing for Palestine. More than that, the Zionists had very good schools, and they had good hospitals. There was no outcry whatever against them, and even in the days of the ascend

« PreviousContinue »