Mr. LIPSKY. I beg your pardon. It all depends on what you consider an official act. After this letter was sent, there were negotiations carried on.

The CHAIRMAN. With whom?

Mr. LIPSKY. Between the representatives of King Hussein, Prince Feisel, the British Government, and the Zionist organization.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not think they would be material in this matter.

Mr. LIPSKY. Why not?

The CHAIRMAN. What is the date of the Balfour declaration?
Mr. LIPSKY. 1917.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it is October, 1917. Then, followed the meeting of the council of the League of Nations at San Remo; that was sometime last year. Mr. LIPSKY. Mr. Chairman, in order to get the record straight you would have to take notice of a number of acts of the British Government with regard to the establishment of Arab dominance in Hedjaz, Mesopotamia, etc. The CHAIRMAN. Personally, I do not regard that as material.

to put that in, however, we would have no objection.

If you want

Mr. LIPSKY. No; I am not interested in that myself at all at this time. The CHAIRMAN. The council of the League of Nations met in San Remo in 1920. This is the point I want to have cleared up. That council asked England to accept the mandate over Palestine, did it not, or do you know?

Mr. LIPSKY. No. The San Remo conference put together a treaty which it proposed to submit to the representatives of the Turkish Government. In that treaty certain disposition was proposed to be made of the territories formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire.

The CHAIRMAN. And the disposition of Palestine?

Mr. LIPSKY. And Syria. Inasmuch as you are entering into a question of obligation arising out of a letter sent by the British Government to a representative of the Arabs

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). It is only as a matter of history, I am putting that in there.

Mr. LIPSKY. This also is a matter of history.

Mr. COOPER. It ought all to be complete.

Mr. LIPSKY. If there is a claim made here of promises made to the Arabs, which have not been performed, it is not sufficient merely to state action with regard to promises made to the Jewish people, and infer that the promise made to the Jewish people precluded the possibility that other promises made to the Arabs had not been kept.

The CHAIRMAN. You are permitted to put them into the record. What I want to get is the status of the situation in so far as the League of Nations is concerned. England is apparently operating under a mandate; and, so far, I have been unable to find out whether or not that mandate has been ratified and approved. You talked about a meeting on May 10 to ratify something. That is the situation I want to get cleared up.

Mr. LIPSKY. As far as the mandate is concerned, there are two facts necessary to be stated: First, there was the decision of the allied conference at San Remo

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). You say the "allied conference." Was not that the council of the League of Nations?

Mr. LIPSKY. No; it was the allied conference. The allied conference decided with regard to the disposition of certain territories formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire. It said that Palestine should be taken over under a mandate by the British Government; that Syria should be taken over by the French under a mandate, and that the terms of the mandates shall be decided by the League of Nations, which would establish equity and justice in the relations of the mandatory power to the inhabitants of the land.

The CHAIRMAN. Does not the mandate of Great Britain itself say how Palestine is to be governed?

Mr. LIPSKY. If you remember, Professor Reed entered into very intimate and detailed discussion of the terms of the mandate, showing how this was right and that was wrong; how they were going to go about it; that the Balfour declaration should not set up the legislation that is necessary for carrying on the government of Palestine or of Syria.

The CHAIRMAN. I am not talking about the Balfour declaration; I am talking about this mandate, which, as I read it, is the fundamental law for the government of Palestine by Great Britain. What further has the conference of the allied powers or the Council of the League of Nations to do in the matter? That is what I am driving at, merely for the record.

Mr. LIPSKY. It is the duty of the British Government, to which has been assigned the mandate for Palestine, to draw up, in consultation with the peoples or the nationalities in Palestine, or their representatives, the form of the government of Palestine and submit that to the League of Nations, and if, in the opinion of the League of Nations that mandate satisfies their sense of justice, etc., the League of Nations will approve of it.

There is a provision made with regard to the rights of the nationalities in the mandated territory to appeal to the League of Nations in case of injustice or wrong.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, then, by what authority is England acting in Palestine at the present time?

Mr. LIPSKY. England is in Palestine at present by right of conquest. It was the English who cleared Palestine of the Turkish army; it was England that took possession of Palestine and occupied it with military force. When the allied governments came to an understanding at San Remo, then England believed it to be necessary to introduce a civil administration, and it then appointed Sir Herbert Samuel high commissioner of Palestine. Sir Herbert Samuel has been governing Palestine, with the advice of his advisory council, which represents Moslems, Christians, and Jews.

Mr. LIPSKY. A provisional form of government

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). England at the present time is there by right of conquest, with a provisional form of government in effect?

Mr. LIPSKY. Exactly.

The CHAIRMAN. And everything awaits the action of the Council of the League of Nations at San Remo in May?

Mr. LIPSKY. Exactly. I want to present a statement made by Mr. Winston Churchill, secretary of state for the colonies, to the Arab delegation, which shows clearly that in his opinion as well as in the opinion of the British Government the form of the mandate and all things in the mandate, except the basic principle of the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine, are subject to revision according to the adjustments that may be made necessary under the circumstances.

"Mr. Winston Church 11, secretary of state for the colonies, has issued a reply to the Arab delegation now in London," quoting from the New Palestine of March 10, 1922, "stating that the future of Palestine can not be discussed on any basis other than the Balfour declaration, since there can be no question of the British Government repudiating its obligations toward the Jewish people.

"The covenant of the League of Nations, in interpreting the treaty of Sevres, refers to Syria and Iraq as previously recognized independent States. No such reference is made to Palestine, however, because Great Britain, as the mandatory, is responsible for effecting the Government declaration of November 2, 1917, known as the Balfour declaration, adopted by the allied powers, providing for the establishment of the Jewish national home.

"The Government, said Mr. Churchill, is bound to the pledge antecedent to the Balfour declaration, and can not allow a constitutional position to develop which would render impracticable the carrying out of the solemn undertaking of Great Britain and the Allies with regard to the Jewish position in Palestine. "The Jewish national home will not prejudice the rights of the Arabs. While in the mandate the Zionist organization is recognized as the public body to advise and cooperate with the administration of the established national home, the Government is ready, if necessary, to insert in the draft a provision that no action shall be taken in Palestine upon the advice of the Zionists or otherwise, except through channels prescribed in the final constitution."

In other words, Churchill did not regard the former mandate which was presented by Professor Reed as settled as being in any sense of the word final. The CHAIRMAN. That tends to confirm your statement.

Mr. LIPSKY. I also want to read another statement made by him as to the question of immigration into Palestine. Mr. Churchill said [reading]:

"As to the question of immigration into Palestine, Mr. Churchill says he favors that the policy of immigration be reserved by the high commissioner after reference to the Government. Immigration is of such vital importance to all sections that there are strong grounds for dealing specially with it and for setting up a special machinery representing the interests of the Palestine population without the infusion of the official element. One method would be the formation of an immigration board representative of all classes of Palestine which would advise the high commissioner on questions of immigration,

The opinion of the Zionist organization should be laid before the high commissioner by a representative of the Zionist organization in Palestine, irreconcilable differences being referred to the general Government for decision. "Mr. Churchill expressed the hope that his suggestions will bring about a solution of the problems. He is prepared, he said, to consider the desirability of modifying the proposition regarding the nominated members of the legislative council so that the elected representatives would be able to carry a measure against the Government."

The CHAIRMAN. Is that the letter in which he emphasized the word "the"? Mr. LIPSKY. No; that is another statement.

As a matter of fact, conditions in Palestine-the relations of the British Government to Palestine, the relations of the Palestine Government to the Arabs and the Jews have been in constant flux ever since the arrival of the high commissioner, and there have been various attempts made on the part of the Zionists, on the part of the Arabs, and on the part of the high commissioner to arrive at a just rule with regard to the relationships that are to be established there. I think Rabbi Lazaron said this morning there are differences of opinion. Some of the Arabs think that Sir Herbert Samuel is not favoring them; some of the Jews think that he is not favoring them. He is trying to do the best he can under the circumstances that are created by this unusual stiuation in Palestine.

Sir Herbert Samuel formulated a constitution for Palestine. It would be just as sensible to discuss here the justice or the injustice of certain provisions of this constitution as it would be to discuss certain provisions in the mandate. Those are mataters that are in flux. In order to ascertain what will work in Palestine, it is the business of the high commissioner to consult with Arabs and Jews and the foreign office and to adjust differences.

Exactly the same procedure was adopted with regard to the Palestine mandate. The Palestine mandate was formulated in the foreign office, submitted to the Zionist organization, submitted to the representatives of the Palestine Government to see what they had to say. The Palestine Government and the Zionist organization consulted with the advisory council, on which were representatives of the Arabs, the Christians, and of Jews. It goes back and forth. One suggests this, another suggests that; the matter is in flux.

Basic to the whole situation, however, is the Balfour declaration, and it is on that declaration-upon the right of the Jewish people to establish a national home in Palestine and the protection of that national home-it is for that that we are contending here and elsewhere. The whole Jewish people are contending for the right to establish there a center of Jewish life--whether Doctor Philipson wants to call it a center or community, it makes no difference with regard to what it is to be. There will be Jews there living their own life in their own way, under conditions that they themselves will create. That is the purpose of the Balfour declaration, and that is what we are asking for.

As I say, the Palestine constitution submitted by Sir Herbert Samuel makes certain suggestions as to how the administration should be conducted. He wants to be assured that nothing is regarded as settled until it is finally settled right. There has been introduced into the record the testimony of many people with regard to what Palestine is, and some things have been put into the record that are purely hearsay, flying observations made by visitors or personal impressions. I have here a statement of the high commissioner, an official report dated July 30, 1921, and I want to put that in.

The CHAIRMAN. The British high commissioner?

I would like to hear it.

Mr. LIPSKY. The British high commissioner for Palestine. Mr. COOPER. I would like to have him read that. The CHAIRMAN. Do you want to take the time to read it? Mr. LIPSKY. It will not take long [reading]: "It is obvious to every passing traveler, and well known to every European resident, that the country was before the war, and is now, underdeveloped and underpopulated. The methods of agriculture are, for the most part, primitive; the area of land now cultivated could yield a far greater product. There are in addition large cultivable areas that are left untilled. The summits and slopes of the hills are admirably suited to the growth of trees, but there are no forests. Miles of sand dunes that could be redeemed are untouched, a danger, by their encroachment, to the neighboring tillage. The Jordan and the Yarmuk offer an abundance of water power, but it is unused. Some industries,

106932-22-9

fishing and the culture and manufacture of tobacco are examples, have been killed by Turkish laws; none have been encouraged; the markets of Palestine and of the neighboring countries are supplied almost wholly from Europe. The sea-borne commerce, such as it is, is loaded and discharged in the open roadsteads of Jaffa and Haifa-there are no harbors. The religious and historic associations offer most powerful attractions to the whole of the western, and to a large part of the eastern world, have hitherto brought to Palestine but a fraction of the pilgrims and travelers who, under better conditions, would flock to her sacred shrines and famous sites.

"The country is underpopulated because of this lack of development. There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people ❞—

You remember an estimate was made here that there were over 900,000, and on the basis of that the relative proportion of Jews was based 10 to 1. The population is 700,000, according to this official report, 6 to 1.

"There are now in all Palestine hardly 700.000 people, a population much less than that of the Province of Galilee alone in the time of Christ. Of these 235.000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the orthodox church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or a small number-are Protestants.

"The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. After the persecutions in Russia 40 years ago, the movement of the Jews to Palestine assumed larger proportions. Jewish agricultural colonies were founded. They developed the culture of oranges, and gave importance to the Jaffa orange trade. They cultivated the vine, and manufactured and exported wine. They drained swamps. They planted eucalyptus trees. They practiced, with modern methods, all the processes of agriculture. There are at the present time 64 of these settlements, large and small, with a population of some 15,000. Every traveler in Palestine who visits them is impressed by the contrast between these pleasant villages, with the beautiful stretches of prosperous cultivation about them, and the primitive conditions of life and work by which they are surrounded.

"The success of the agricultural colonies attracted the eager interest of the masses of the Jewish people scattered throughout the world. In many countries they were living under the pressure of laws or customs which cramped their capacities and thwarted their energies; they saw in Palestine the prospect of a home in which they might live at ease. Profoundly discontented, as numbers of them were, with a life of petty trade in crowded cities, they listened with ready ears to the call of a healthier and finer life as producers on the land. Some among them, agriculturists already, saw in Palestine the prospect of a soil not less fertile and an environment far more free than those to which they were accustomed. Everywhere great numbers of Jews, whose religion causes them to live, spiritually, largely in the past, began to take an active interest in those passages in their ritual that dwelt, with constant emphasis, upon the connection of their race with Palestine; passages which they had hitherto read day by day and week by week with the lax attention that is given to a contingency that is possible but remote."

Mr. SMITH. Who wrote that?

Mr. LIPSKY. That was written by the high commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel. Mr. SMITH. What is his nationality?

Mr. LIPSKY. He is an Englishman and a Jew.

Mr. COOPER. He was the man who was sent there by the British Government? Mr. LIPSKY. He was the man who was sent there by the British to govern Palestine.

There have been figures introduced here in regard to the density of the population of Palestine. I have here figures based upon accurate, scientific observation; they have been compiled by statisticians who are known to be expert in that line of work. Palestine, according to their report, which was printed in the Jewish Chronicle, March 10, 1922, from which I read the following:

"Palestine laterally between the sea and the desert, longitudinally between the Hermon Mountains and the Akabah Gulf, comprises an area of 23,000 square miles, and has an inhabitant population of some 950,000, including 59,000 wandering Bedouins. This figures out to about 50 per square mile of population, whereas in the Lebanon Province, adjoining, where the land is much less cultivated because much more hilly, the populatiaon is 170 to the square mile.

"Italy, which has a climate like Palestine, supports 300 to the square mile. In England the population is over 600 in average per square mile. Sicily, which is very comparable to Palestine in size, has a population of 3,500,000; while Holland, on an area of 14,000 square miles, supports a population of 6,000,000. Palestine has a cultivated area of some 12,000 square miles, which could be increased by irrigation, but even of this less than one-third is at present under cultivation, while the other two-thirds remain unutilized."

I must refer again to the remarks made by Professor Reed with regard to the attitude of the Zionists and of the Jewish people in general toward the Arabs, and I want to put into the record an address delivered by Mr. Nahum Sokolow, the chairman of the World Zionist executive committee at the World Zionist Congress, where he was elected the presiding officer of the congress in the summer of last year.

(The address referred to and submitted by Mr. Lipsky is here printed in full, as follows:)

[Reprint of speech of Nahum Sokolow, chairman executive committee, World Zionist Organization, made September 1, 1921, at opening World Zionist Congress, Carlsbad, Czechoslovakia, and reprinted in the London Jewish Chronicle September 2, 1921.]

66 OUR RELATIONS WITH THE ARAB NATION.

"These relations do not rest on traditions and moral considerations only. The sympathies of nations are based finally and chiefly upon their interests. When the interests of the Arabs and the Jews are in agreement in the field of practical politics, sympathy between them will not be lacking. We have the greatest interest in living in cordial understanding with the Arabs, and the closer these relations can be drawn the more welcome will it be to us. The interests of the Arabian people point in the direction of cultivating a friendly understanding with the Jewish nation; it has far more to lose through an embittering of the mutual relations than it can hope to gain through any restriction of Jewish intiative. In this policy of peace and cooperation we will not allow ourselves to be led astray by the murderous attacks upon the Jewish population in Jaffa and upon the Jewish colonies. We regret most deeply that the Arab name has been stained by deeds of violence and injustice and by the barbarities of a misguided and brutalized mob. This mob has disgraced the Arab nation, and though their action has left a deep and painful wound in our hearts, we shall not be deceived by it. We pride ourselves upon the fact that Eretz Yisrael will be a guiding light to all other countries in the world as a land of brotherly love and freedom. We are not going there to tread down another people in a spirit of mastery. By being modest and careful, never aggressive and offensive, and always clear and firm in purpose, our peaceloving, industrious, repatriated people will open up new sources of production through their means and their sacrifices, which will prove a blessing both to themselves and to the whole East. If individual Arabs attack our honest endeavors in a spirit of malice, these are only temporary phases that ought not to be taken too seriously in politics. It is, to be sure, to be hoped that they will give up such a misguided opinion, and that they will replace the impracticable attempt to get repealed the Balfour declaration which has already been accepted by the supreme council, by a desire to harmonize their interests as much as possible with those of the Jewish people. It would be ground for great satisfaction were the Arabs to regard their task in this light, and it would signify great progress in eastern affairs. So long as political phrases hold the field, an understanding will prove difficult, but as soon as the parties really get to work then statesmanlike, practical, and businesslike opinions will gain the day, and these will urge understanding and cooperation. Greater Arabia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine offer a rich choice of fields for the energies and enterprise of their peoples. There the watchword shall be with one another, not against one another. All in cooperation against misery, neglect, laziness, disease, ignorance, and nomad life-and for agriculture, industry, technical progress, commerce, law, public security, reform of the