Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Rogers. Mr. ROGERS. I just wanted to say I thought the point Mr. Shulman was making here was a very good one, about the Commonwealth and the reason why this whole resolution hangs together. I agree with Mr. Vorys; this is not a restatement. It is a clarification and it is a much needed clarification, because the word "homeland" has now been distorted out of all previous meaning by the white paper, and it is needed at this time because the white paper has distorted this past definition of the homeland. That is why I feel that it all hangs together and that it is essential that it be passed or not passed as a unit. Chairman BLOOM. Is that all, Mr. Rogers? Mr. ROGERS. I would like to have one more word. It would strengthen the hands and hopes of many good people in England who are disturbed over the present British policy in Palestine. I know that, because I was there and spoke with many members of the House of Commons, and I do know that if we should make such an expression, purely unofficially but just an expression, it would bring great heart and hope to them. Chairman BLOOм. Mr. Jonkman? Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Wadsworth? Mr. WADSWORTH. Are you of the opinion that the passage of this resolution would have its principal effect in England? Mr. SHULMAN. Well, I think that since we are dealing with the mandatory power, it would definitely have its principal effect there. Mr. WADSWORTH. Then it is directed more to the British than it is to our President? Mr. SHULMAN. Well, I think it would definitely have an effect on the British policy. I think it may also have an effect, and in all probably will have the effect, of indicating to the President where the House of Representatives stands on the question. My own feeling is that it would serve a useful purpose, both in this country and in Great Britain. Mr. WADSWORTH. That is all. Chairman BLOOм. Mr. Mansfield? Mr. SHIFFLER. I have one question. Have these questions ever been presented to the International Court of Justice, so far as you know, since the issuance of the white paper? Mr. SHULMAN. The 1939 white paper was submitted to the Mandates Commission of the League of Nations and I think, as has been testified to, it was considered by the Mandates Commission as clearly in violation of the terms of the mandate. We will put in evidence the decision of the Mandate Commission to that effect. Chairman BLOOM. You mean you will put in evidence? Chairman BLOOM. Without objection it is so ordered. (Notes submitted for the record, by Mr. Herman Shulman: (1) Testimony submitted to Royal Commission by Arab leaders. (2) On the 95149-44- -24 observations of the Permanent Mandates Commission relative to the 1939 White Paper:) TESTIMONY SUBMITTED TO ROYAL COMMISSION BY ARAB LEADERS EVIDENCE OF HAJ AMIN AL-HUSSEIN, MUFTI OF JERUSALEM Question. If the Arabs had this treaty (proposed treaty between Palestine Arab State and Britain) they would be prepared to welcome the Jews already in the country? MUFTI. That will be left to the discretion of the Government which will be set up under the treaty and will be decided by the Government on considerations most equitable and most beneficial to the country. Question. Does His Eminence think that this country can assimilate and digest the 400,000 Jews now in the country? MUFTI. No. Question. Some of them would have to be removed, by a process kindly or painful, as the case may be? MUFTI. We must leave all this to the future. EVIDENCE OF AUNI BEY ABDUL-HADI, LEADER OF THE ARAB INDEPENDENCE PARTY (ISTIQLAL) ABDUL-HADI. Frankly speaking, we object to the existence of 400,000 Jews in the country. Question. They are not to be driven out and yet there are too many of them. What happens then? ABDUL-HADI. A large number of them are not Palestinians. Question. Auni Bey says that he does not want to drive them out, but he says there are too many and I want to know how he would reduce them. ABDUL-HADI. That is not a question which can be decided here. (Palestine Royal Commission, Minutes of Evidence Heard at Public Sessions, London 1939, Col. No. 134, p. 298 and p. 314.) SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE ON THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE PERMANENT MANDATES COMMISSION ON THE 1939 WHITE PAPER In its Report to the Council of the League of Nations, the Permanent Mandates Commission at the Thirty-Sixth Session held at Geneva, June 1939, unanimously declared: "The policy set out in the White Paper was not in accordance with the interpretation which, in agreement with the Mandatory Power and the Council, the_Commission had placed upon the Palestine Mandate.” (Permanent Mandates Commission, Minutes of the Thirty-Sixth Session, Geneva 1939, p. 206.) THE COMMON PURPOSE OF CIVILIZED MANKIND A Declaration by 68 Members of the Senate and 194 Members of the House of Representatives of the Seventy-seventh Congress on the Occasion of the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, November 2d, 1942 A TRADITIONAL AMERICAN POLICY REAFFIRMED (American Palestine Committee, New York) THE BALFOUR DECLARATION Issued by the British War Cabinet November 2, 1917, and signed by His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prej- Twenty-five years ago the British Government issued the Balfour Declaration pledging itself to facilitate the establishment of a National Home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The Declaration was published to the world with the approval of the other Powers allied with Great Britain in the World War, and with the encouragement and support of the Government of the United States. It was written into the Peace Treaty with the aid and approval of President Wilson who publicly expressed his confidence that the purposes of the Declaration would be fulfilled. A few years later, the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States, by unanimous vote, adopted a joint resolution favoring the establishing of the Jewish National Home, and on September 21, 1922, the resolution was duly signed by President Harding. Since then, this policy has been reaffirmed by every succeeding Administration, including the present. It has thus become the declared and traditional policy of the United States to favor the restoration of the Jewish National Home. The Balfour Declaration was justly hailed throughout the world as an act of historic reparation and as a charter of freedom for the Jewish people. It was designed to open the gates of Palestine to homeless and harassed multitudes and to pave the way for the establishment of a Jewish Commonwealth. The reasons which, twenty-five years ago, led the American people and the Government of the United States to favor the cause of Jewish national restoration in Palestine are still valid today. In fact, the case for a Jewish Homeland is overwhelmingly stronger and the need more urgent now than ever before. In Palestine the resettlement has advanced from the status of a hopeful experiment to that of a heartening reality, while in Europe the position of the Jews has deteriorated to an appalling degree. Millions of uprooted and homeless Jews will strive to reconstruct their lives anew in their ancestral home when the hour of deliverance will come. We, therefore, take this occasion, the twenty-fifth anniversary of the issuance of the Balfour Declaration, to record our continued interest in and support of the purposes and principles which it embodies. We wish to send a message of hope and cheer to those in Palestine who are confronting the common enemy with courage and fortitude and are contributing unstintingly of their manpower and effort to the democratic cause. Faced as we are by the fact that the Nazi government, in its Jewish policy,"is attempting to exterminate a whole people, we declare that, when the war is over, it shall be the common purpose of civilized mankind to right this cruel wrong insofar as may lie in our power, and, above all, to enable large numbers of the survivors to reconstruct their lives in Palestine where the Jewish people may once more assume a position of dignity and equality among the peoples of the earth. Our Government may be assured that in continuing the traditional American policy in favor of so just a cause, it can rely upon our individual support and the approbation of the American people. THE SIGNATORIES The subjoined list of signatories includes Senator Alben W. Barkley,'of Kentucky, Majority Leader of the Senate, Senator Charles L. McNary, of Oregon, Minority Leader of the Senate, John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, and Joseph W. Martin, Jr., of Massachusetts, Minority Leader of the House of Representatives. The list contains also 18 members of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate, including Senator Tom Connally of Texas, Chairman of the Committee. MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE Joseph H. Ball of Minnesota. James J. Davis of Pennsylvania. Carter Glass of Virginia. Kenneth McKellar of Tennessee. James E. Murray of Montana. Joseph C. O'Mahoney of Wyoming. George L. Radcliffe of Maryland. Robert R. Reynolds of North Carolina. William H. Smathers of New Jersey. Theodore Francis Green of Rhode Is- Tom Stewart of Tennessee. land. Joseph F. Guffey of Pennsylvania. Carl A. Hatch of New Mexico. Rufus C. Holman of Oregon. James H. Hughes of Delaware. Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. of Massa- Robert A. Taft of Ohio. Elbert D. Thomas of Utah. Charles W. Tobey of New Hampshire. MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Leo E. Allen of Illinois. Joseph Clark Baldwin of New York. George H. Bender of Ohio. Philip A. Bennett of Missouri. Hale Boggs of Louisiana. Frances P. Bolton of Ohio. Frank W. Boykin of Albama. Michael J. Bradley of Pennsylvania. Alfred L. Bulwinkle of North Carolina. Louis J. Capozzoli of New York. Virgil Chapman of Kentucky. Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. of Maryland. John J. Delaney of New York. Albert J. Engel of Michigan. Charles I. Faddis of Pennsylvania. Ivor D. Fenton of Pennsylvania. James M. Fitzpatrick of New York. Joseph A. Gavagan of New York. Fred A. Hartley, Jr., of New Jersey. Elmer J. Holland of Pennsylvania. John W. McCormack of Massachusetts. John A. Meyer of Maryland. Joseph L. Pfeifer of New York. Hugh D. Scott, Jr., of Pennsylvania. William H. Stevenson of Wisconsin. Rudolph G. Tenerowicz of Michigan. 1 |