Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 2 September 1920, Page 2

Replying to questions in the House of Lords, Earl Curzon (Foreign Secretary) , made a statement with regard to British policy in Palestine and the manner in which it was proposed to carry out our mandate. It must be remembered, he said, that Palestine was technically a military country, and it was only with the arrival of Sir Herbert Samuel that we were ‘in process of setting up a form of civil administration. Our interest in Palestine never had been, and never ought to have been measured in terms of £.s.d. It was historic, traditional, religious, and perhaps, to some extent sentimental.- In reply to a question asked by Lord Islington, as to what voice the* Dominions would have in the control of the country, and whether they would provide troops to hold Palestine in the future,. Lord Curzon said he would not dream of asking them to do so, but r>o men were more insistent that the duty remained on-us to accept the mandate than were the Dominion representatives. That view was almost universally shared, and it was owing to the practically unanimous request of all parties that the Government reluctantly accepted the mandate for Palestine. As regards the Jewish colonies, he believed they had lived in perfect amity with their neighbours, and by reason of the wealth they brought into the country they bad been extremely popular. ' The situation was not to be regarded as one involving any natural or necessary antagonism between the Jews and the Arabs. In the Turkish Treaty it was stipulated that, in connection with the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities, or in rights and political status of Jews in any othei country. The mandatory was also, under -the Treaty, to ajppoint a (Special Commission to regulate questions affecting the different religious communities. Steps were being taken to ensure that this Commission should secure that the Holy Places appertaining to one partieular religion were entrusted to the permanent possession and control of suitable bodies representing the religion concerned. As to whether >he term “National Home” implied the exercise of governmental authority over the whole or part of the population of Palestine, Lord Curzon would say yes, if the exercise of governmental authority referred to governmental authority by the mandatory—that was to say, the British. He would say no, if, it was meant that authority .should he exeicised by the Jewish minority over the non-Jewisli majority. As* regards immigration, the Government’s general policy was that no man or woman should be admitted to the country whom the country was incapable of supnortinc and discriminate mass

- immigration would certainly not be permitted. Non-Jewish land owners would not be expropriated or compelled to give tlieir property for the benfefit of the Jews. The Administration would reserve to itself the right to develop the natural resources of the country on such terms and conditions as it might think best. They now had at. the head of the Administration a judicially-minded and sensible apd experienced man, and the Government thought that no n jre competent person could be found than Sir Herbert Samuel. If ther.e was a part of the world where our case should be extremely staid, he would name Palestine. Owing tp the conditions resulting from all those centures of Turkish misrule there was a terrible lot of hack way to be made up. We wanted a policy of steady progress in building, in irrigation, in the scientific combating of malaria. We wanted a cadastral survey of the country; we wanted facili-' ties for banking; in fact, we wanted all machines of administration. We must trust Sir Herbert Samuel to carry out the brpad principles of policy which he (Lord Curzoji) had laid down, and Which lie believed would be broadly endorsed by the House.