"3. The right given to the Jewish agency to be consulted in regard to the granting of concessions which it does not take up itself. "4. The recognition of the establishment of the Jewish national home as the guiding principle in the execution of the mandate. "5. The intrusting of Jewish education to the Jewish agency. "6. Mention of Jewish Sabbath and holidays. "The Zionists objected strenuously to these proposed changes and entered into negotiations with prominent British officials and with groups in the House of Commons. Finally in December, 1920, the cabinet decided to reincorporate into the mandate the statement regarding the historical connections of the Jews with Palestine." (Summary of the Political Report of the Twelfth Zionist Congress, which began at Carlsbad on September 1, 1919. Printed in The New Palestine, September 9, 1921, p. 13.) Now, these are little things that the British Government had nerve enough to throw out. Perhaps you would like to know how an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court had a hand in this mandate; and if I had a little time I would like to give you an interesting 10 minutes' talk on the Supreme Court of the United States and Zionism. It would make a very interesting story. I will read a quotation from page 10 of The New Palestine of September 9, 1921. This is from the report of the speech of Mr. Julius Simon, who speaks of this mandate. [Reading:] "Brandeis, he said, who has been accepted as a tried and true Zionist and follower of Herzl, was suddenly denounced as a bad Zionist, notwithstanding the fact that the only favorable point in the Palestine mandate, the point as to the creation of a Jewish agency in Palestine, is ascribable to the work of Brandeis," Now, Mr. Brandeis may draw up very excellent constitutions. My only point is, Why in the world have not these people, who were promised a hearing, a single thing to say about the constitution of their land; and why does Mr. Brandeis write one one thing and Mr. Frankfurter or somebody else write another thing; and, in fact, who knows who wrote this and who wrote that? And now they come in here and ask you to pass the resolution, and one of them said if you passed this it would help to pass the mandate. Mr. FISH, What are your exceptions to the view of Mr. Frankfurter? Professor REED. Not the slightest thing, except that I think it is peculiar that the Zionists alone are consulted. Mr. Pisit. You think it was wrong to consult Mr. Brande's and Mr. Frankfurter? Professor REED, Absolutely, if you do not consult anybody on the ground. It is all right to consult them, if you give the other nine-tenths of the population a chance to be heard. Mr. Fish. Of course Mr. Frankfurter and Mr. Brandeis are not inhabitants of Palestine, They are authorities on constitutional law. Professor Rub. Yes, Mr. Fish, And very eminent Americans. Amerion is going to govern Palestine? Then do you mean to say that Mr. Fish, I think when Europe sees fit to come to this country Professor REED. It is the Zionist organization. I want America to keep out of the Zionist organization. Mr. Fis, I thought you said just now that the British Government consulted these men? Professor REED. I beg your pardon. Mr. COOPER of Wiscons'n. None of these things you have been reading are in the mandate. Professor REED. Yes, Mr. Brandeis is. I will read it to you [reading]: "The only favorable point in the Palestine mandate, the point as to the creation of a Jewish Agency in Palestine, is ascribable to the work of Brandeis." Now, there is no doubt about that, and I will read it to you. I think you would like to see this book, used for this drive that is now going on in New York and I will say, gentlemen, in my opinion one reason you are asked to hurry through this resolution is to help this drive. The British Government has already passed such a resolution in the Balfour declaration. Doctor Weizmann said that he made 1,000 personal calls before the British Government adopted the Balfour resolution. They took all that time, but you are asked to pass this resolution in two or three hours. Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. What is it there in that mandate to which you object? Professor REED. I am going to reach that. There are one or two other things before the mandate. I am going to read the mandate. Give me time and I shall come right out with it. Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. I do not want to interfere with your course, but I wish you would come to the question that it seems to me is germane. You read what Mr. Justice Brandeis suggested. Professor REED. What he wrote? Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. What he wrote, yes. Professor REED. Yes, sir. Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. He wrote to suggest what would later appear in the mandate; so that it was a written suggestion. Professor REED. No; we have that here. He said that he wrote it. I will read it again [reading]: 66 'Notwithstanding the fact that the only favorable point in the Palestine mandate, the point as to the creation of a Jewish Agency in Palestine, is ascribable to the work of Brandeis." Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. That was my recollection; the statement was that he wrote this suggestion for the mandate and they incorporated it. Professor REED. Will the reporter put that in, then? Now, this is Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. Wait just a minute. I asked what that was which he proposes-what was in the mandate to which you object? What was it? Let us see if the language itself is such as that we, as Americans, could indorse it. You have criticized it. Professor REED. I wish very much you would let me continue my argument. I will come right down to it and show you what I mean. Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. All right. Professor REED. I have it right here, and "Brandeis" written right over it. Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. Only anybody reading your argument and seeing your criticism of the Brandeis provision ought to be able to see the provision, then, right there. Professor REED. Yes; may I make myself clear? I am not criticizing Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin (continuing). So that, reading it, they would understand what it was. Professor REED. My point is that Mr. Brandeis may be one of the very greatest of lawyers-I am not a lawyer-but it is rather peculiar that Americans are making this mandate. Let me come down to the description of the mandate in this little book, the Keren Ha-Yesod book. I refer to page 27 [reading]: "With all its defects, from our point of view, this document actually raises Zionism to a political height from which under normal conditions it can no more be deposed. The historic rights of Israel in Palestine are confirmed; the Jewish national home policy proclaimed as the main guiding principle in the administration of the country; the Zionist organization recognized as the legal adviser of the Government, and perhaps, by implication, as a subject of certain rights vis-à-vis the League of Nations; Hebrew adopted as one of the official languages of the country." Now, then, I want to be very fair in my quotation. Mr. Lipsky, shall I read all of this? [Continuing reading:] "We may regret the vagueness of all this; we may and must struggle for fuller guarantees "-they are not at all satisfied with the mandate as it is now-" but it can not be denied that, given a sufficient amount of alertness and energy on our own part, the mandate is a powerful political weapon." Of course, according to the League of Nations, the people concerned in a mandate should be guided. This is going to be a very powerful political weapon in the hands of the Zionists. Mr. MOORE. Would it interfere with you for me to ask you a question? Mr. MOORE. Leaving aside the question as to the authorship and the evolution of the mandate, and assuming, as I suppose we must assume, that if there had not been such provision of that sort, conditions in Palestine would have been intolerable Professor REED. Yes. Mr. MOORE (continuing). What are your practical objections to the mandate? Professor REED. My practical objection is that it changes the Balfour declaration; or, put it another way, the Balfour declaration follows the mandate. I am perfectly correct about that. Mr. Moaz. Take the mandate itself. Profess? Rom. Now, I am wming to that, and I want to show you how the Balfour dedaration is changed here. I do not know whether you want me to read the first lanse - Whereas" etc. Mr. Moaz. No Professor REED. This is beaded the "Mandate for Palestine as submitted by Mr. Balfour te December 7, 1920, to the Secretariat Geceral of the League of Nations for the approval of the Council of the League of Nations." nothing relevant to this in the first two paragraphs, and then we come to this. Belding: There is Whereas by the same article the high contracting parties further agreed that the mandatory should be responsible for patting into effect the declaration origirally made of November 2, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty Mr. Fish. Do you take any exception to the Balfour declaration? Mr. Fish. I thought yon said that it did not carry out the Balfour declara tix? Professor REED. I think the Balfour declaration is very bad, but I think the mandate is worse. Mr. Fish. I thought you took exceptions to the mandate because it————— Professor REE. Í take exception to the mandate, because it is worse than the Balfour declaration. That makes my position perfectly plain. This is added which is not in the declaration: - Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their pational bome in that country.” That is. I think, a very bad elanse: part of it was intended for the Balfour declaration, as I said yesterday; and the British refused it, because they said, *If you put in reconstituting their national home," it means that you have granted a right to make Palestine a Jewish national home without regard to the einsent of its inhabitants. That is my previous testimony. They put that right in here in the man late. Mr. COOPER of Wisconsin. You are not now reading from the mandate? Mr. CoCPER of Wisconsin. I thought you said this was Balfour's letter suggesting something for the mandate. Professor REED. No: this is the mandate that I am reading now. Now, article 2 Reading:) “ART. 2. The mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative, and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion." That sounds very well, and that includes again the idea that all the civil rights will be preserved; but I tried to show you yesterday what, under the Balfour declaration, the Zionists have asked for. Continuing reading:) "ABT. 3. The mandatory shall encourage the widest measure of self-government for localities consistent with the prevailing conditions.” And here is what Mr. Brandeis suggested Mr. Fish. Of course. I do not assume for a minute that you do not think that Brandeis and others have a right to make suggestions, or to make even requests for what they believe. You do not question their right on that. Professor REED. Yes: I question that right if no one else is heard. Mr. Fish. Does it not show considerable ability on their part if they are able to perscade the British Government? Professor REED. No; it represents a considerable diplomsey on their part. Mr. FISH. They can not exercise any pressure on the British cabinet. Professor REED. No; they have not exercised pressure; but I can show you where Zionists say Mr. Balfour was their great friend. The CHAIRMAN. Is it not true that if they had consulted both sides in drafting this mandate, you would not object to it; but you do object to the consulting of 10 per cent of the population and ignoring everyone else! Professor REED. Yes, sir: and I object to that, as absolutely foreign to the idea of article 22 of the covenant of the League of Nations, which I read to F. That is not a sacred trust." If you did not let others in here, and let 66 only the Zionists come in, I would say that there was not much "sacred trust' about that American liberty. Now, here is Mr. Brandeis's suggestion [reading]: Article 4. An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognized as a public body for the purpose of advising and cooperating with the administration of Palestine in such economic, social, and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the administration, to assist and take part in the development of the country. "The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the mandatory appropriate, shall be recognized as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the cooperation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home." Now, here you see is written into the mandate the fact that they must recognize a body which is an international body, a body in which all Zionists take part; it must be recognized. It has a legal status with the government. They can come in and talk to that government; and as Dr. Weizmann said elsewhere, according to their power, the more they can talk. That is written into the constitution of the country. Now, I want to show you into what an impasse the British Secretary of State was forced. I think it is a very, very humiliating thing for Mr. Winston Churchill. Mr. Winston Churchill is the British Secretary of State, and he spoke at Jerusalem March 31, 1921, for he went Palestine to look up matters. He made a very careful survey of the state of the country. He met various delegations, Zionists and others, and he spoke to the non-Jewish Palestinians. I want to show you what he said to them. [Reading:] "I consider your address partly partisan and incorrect. You ask me to repudiate the Balfour declaration and stop immigration." Mr. FISH. What was that; stop immigration? Professor REED. Yes. Mr. FISH. That means all immigration? Professor REED. No; the most they have ever said was they wanted immigration stopped for 10 years. Mr. FISH. How generous; only for 10 years? Professor REED. Yes. Mr. FISH. Of all Jews? Professor REED. Of all Jews, for 10 years. And on the other side, let me say that the Zionist organization has asked for absolutely free immigration; and that is an interesting point, as I can prove to you. The Jaffa riots as the official report shows, began with an attack by Bolshevik Jews and communists on other Jews; and several of those Bolsheviks were expelled from Palestine. The great Zionist assembly at Carlsbad said that they could not approve of anyone being expelled, and every Jew should always be free to enter this land. Mr. FISH. They are supposed now to select immigrants? Professor REED. They are supposed to select the immigration. I am trying to keep out of this mandate. Mr. Churchill then spoke at Jerusalem as follows [reading]: 'Moreover, it is manifestly right that the scattered Jews should have a national center and a national home in which they might be reunited, and where else but in Palestine, with which the Jews for 3,000 years have been immediately and profoundly associated? We think it is good for the world, good for the Jews, and good for the British Empire, and it is also good for the Arabs dwelling in Palestine, and we intend it to be so. They shall not be supplanted or suffer, but they shall share in the benefits and the progress of Zionism." This is what I want you to notice: "I draw your attention to the second part of the Balfour declaration emphasizing the sacredness of your civil and religious rights. I am sorry you regard it as valueless. It is vital to you, and you should hold and claim it firmly. If one promise stands, so does the other. We shall faithfully fulfill both. Examine Mr. Balfour's careful words, Palestine to be a national home,' not 'the national home,' a great difference in meaning. * * * "The establishment of a national home does not mean a Jewish Government to dominate the Arabs. Great Britain is the greatest Moslem state in the world, and is well disposed to the Arabs and cherishes their friendship. * * * You need not be alarmed for the future. Great Britain has promised 106932-22-6 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. Mr. LINTHICUM. I think so. That is an important feature to me. The CHAIRMAN. We will hear Professor Reed now. STATEMENT OF PROF. EDWARD BLISS REED, OF NEW HAVEN, CONN.-Resumed. 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 mandate. 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 de<elopment." 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 |