Chapter XLIXD (3)

“From all corners of our great Russia come to us, together with cheers of joy over the emancipation, assurances of unshattered faith in the eternal ideal――the renaissance of our native Palestine. Old and young, rich and poor, from the front and from the rear, orthodox and free-thinkers, declare in one voice: ‘Now, even now, freed from the chains of slavery, shall we be able zealously and gladly to give ourselves to the service of our ideals?’

“I cannot refrain here from underscoring, with the feeling of deepest recognition, the invaluable services which the Government of the United States has so nobly and warmly shown to our pioneers. The noble President of the United States has acted from motives of humanity and brotherly relation of peoples, but at the same time, also, from deep sympathy in our regeneration. The noble impulses of America have found a worthy instrument in the person of the former Ambassador Morgenthau, that faithful son of the Jewish people, whose services in these hard years Jewry will not forget.

“But all this time, while working and building, we have not lost sight of the basic point inscribed upon our banner――the public, legal character of the hearth which we are creating. We are convinced that the moment has come for reiterating our programme.

“We deem it necessary that the nations called upon to establish the standard of the future national political life should reckon with the definitely expressed will of the Jewish people, to populate and regenerate Palestine as its national hearth. We deem it further necessary that all obstacles should be removed from our path, and that guarantees and conditions should be created which will ensure the unobstructed and speedy development of our work in the land.”

The Conference was attended by five hundred and fifty-two delegates from six hundred and forty towns. There were delegates from Turkestan, Bokhara, and the Crimea. In addition, there were present five hundred visitors from provincial towns and over one thousand one hundred visitors from Petrograd.

A unique historic document was placed before the Convention when the Chairman read the full text of the Military Order of the Day, issued and signed by General Alexeieff, Commander-in-Chief of the Western Front, permitting the Jewish soldiers to elect from their number delegates to the Convention, and furnishing passes and transportation to the delegates to facilitate their presence at the gathering.

The spokesman of the soldier-delegates read the following resolution, which had been adopted by his colleagues:――

“We――Jewish soldier-delegates from the Army――who participate
in this Convention, avow to the Convention, and to the Jewish
people:

“Hundreds and thousands of Jews are in battle in the Russian
Army. In a time of outlawry and terrible persecution, under
the burden of false accusations, the Jewish soldiers fulfilled
their full military duty. In the ocean of blood poured out by
the heroic Russian Army, there is no little of Jewish blood.

“Now, having become free citizens of Russia, and fully
privileged members of the Army, the Jewish soldiers will
continue their efforts in a new spirit of enthusiasm.
Believing that the strengthening of the revolution, and the
strengthening of the peoples in Russia can be accomplished
only through the union of all the peoples and by a strong
discipline in the free army, the Jewish soldiers declare
triumphantly that they are prepared to follow the call of the
revolutionary democracy to defend Russia against her enemies.

“We believe that the Russian democracy, which has assumed the
task of freeing all the peoples of the world, will understand
the strivings of our people, and will support Jewry in its
efforts to create a national centre for the Jewish people, on
its historic soil, Palestine.”

The Conference carried the following resolutions:――

“Considering first that the Jewish people, in view of its
disposition and dispersion all over the world, can recreate
for itself conditions for the normal development of its
national, cultural, and economic life, only through the
restoration of a national autonomous centre in its historic
home, Palestine,

“Secondly, that the Jewish nation has never severed its ties
with its ancient home, and has always longed for it, and that
its moral and historic right to Palestine is incontestable and
irremovable,

“Thirdly, that the aspirations of the Jewish nation, so
manifested, fully coincide with the great principle of
self-definition, of freedom and independence for the
development of all nations proclaimed by the democracies
and governments of all countries:

“The Zionist Conference in Russia unanimously expresses its
firm belief that when establishing the basis of the future
national and political life, the nations will recognize and
count with the clearly-stated will of the Jewish nation for
the resettlement and rebirth of Palestine as its national
centre, and will consequently create conditions guaranteeing
the free and successful development of the concentrated Jewish
forces and of the restoration of Palestine.

“To ensure the concrete and full manifestation of the will
of the Jewish nation, the Conference considers it necessary
first to organize among the Jews a referendum on the question;
secondly, to lay before the All-Russian Jewish Congress the
question of Jewish claims in Palestine; and thirdly, to claim
the admission of a representative of the Jewish nation at
the future peace conference, to be held upon the closing of
hostilities, for the expression of the wishes of the Jewish
nation, and for the defence of its historic and national
rights and interests.”

The same spirit was revealed also by the Jews of Poland. In May, 1917, a Zionist Conference was held in Warsaw, attended by nearly four hundred delegates representing a large number of committees, synagogues, societies and groups consisting of all classes of the Jewish population. A sort of plebiscite was arranged among the Jews of Poland, with a view to ascertaining their attitude towards Zionism. The plebiscite resulted in the acceptance of a resolution in favour of Zionism.

All these and many other facts prove that the Zionist idea has made great progress among the Jewish masses. But under the new circumstances Zionism required more than the usual propaganda: it required work, political work.

POLITICAL ACTIVITIES IN ENGLAND AND THE ALLIED COUNTRIES

The introduction into this book of a comprehensive account of the various _démarches_ on behalf of the Zionist cause recently undertaken in English political circles, and also in allied countries, is rendered difficult by the following considerations. In the first place, the publication of pourparlers which have taken place, and of schemes which have been, or are to be, submitted, is impossible, because they are still in progress, and their final issue is dependent on further developments. In the second place, the author feels great embarrassment, being compelled to break the rule hitherto observed of avoiding any reference to his own share in the work of the movement. In this section, however, he has participated so directly in the _démarches_ referred to that it was quite impossible to speak of them at all without referring occasionally to his share in the political activities.

A glance, however, at recent political efforts appeared indispensable, in order to bring the history of Zionism up to date. But there is no claim that the following account is more than an outline of the most important events. With these provisos we pass to the facts themselves.

It was at once clear that England was destined to play a most important part in Zionist politics. London from the beginning was the financial centre of the Zionist Organization and the Mecca of political Zionism. Even at the time of the _Chovevé Zion_ Movement England was regarded, as it were, as the country that stands between the “_Galuth_” and “Salvation.” When the idea of Palestine had begun to be popularized among the Jews of Russia and Poland――long before the name “Zionism” had become current――Disraeli’s _Tancred_ and George Eliot’s _Daniel Deronda_ were translated into _Hebrew_. The name of Sir Moses Montefiore was in the mouth of all Jews in Eastern Europe, and his journeys to Palestine, in connection with his great plans, had long since grown legendary. English Jews were valued because of this famous individual; they were considered simply as national Jews, whether they really were so or not. From a distance the observer did not recognize the mediocrity, the parochialism and dissensions; he saw the summits only, and they appeared splendid. A man like Albert Goldsmid, who was an English colonel and also a national Jew, appeared to be a type such as could hardly be found in any other country. That was rich material for the Jewish imagination, which fed upon it and made it much greater than the truth. It was, however, not imagination, pure and simple; a sound political instinct was also at work here. The Jewish _Ghetto_ had for long prophesied that it is England’s destiny to decide the fate of Palestine, and however much one may smile at the speculations of _Ghetto_ politicians, these had, nevertheless, in their quick-wittedness understood much that is sometimes hidden from professional politicians. Moreover, this was not the politics of the _Ghetto_ only. Herzl did not know the _Ghetto_, and received no information from it; notwithstanding this, all roads led him to London. It was in London that he for the first time in his life publicly took part in Jewish life. At a later period again, the offer of a territory in East Africa was made by the English Government; the El-Arish Expedition was organized by England. Zionist finance was English, and English was the Zionist political outlook.

In the pre-war period the Zionist Organization had everywhere sought connections. True to its programme, desiring a charter from the Ottoman Government, with the approval of the great Powers, it worked without intrigue and adventure, honestly anxious to get this charter with the approval of all nations. In this matter, England always took the first place. Herzl and his followers had worked zealously in England. This work was continued after Herzl’s death. The author also, in his capacity as member of the Zionist Executive, visited this country several times. The impressions gained here were always stimulating and interesting, but the Zionist question was not prominent.

The question became prominent with the outbreak of the war. The thought lay uppermost, that the work must be carried on here in England, that, if possible, it must be concentrated here. If this thought was evident to the Zionists of other countries, was it any wonder that it deeply stirred the English Zionists? Thus it happened that this thought found an excellent champion and representative in the person of Dr. Chaim Weizmann. He took counsel with his colleagues in England, and together with them began to consider the question of what was to be done in England, in order to make the political problem of Zionism a problem of the day. The idea that England was the most important centre, and offered the most promising prospect of success, was neither new nor the opinion of a single party; it had become rather the property of the whole Zionist Organization. But it was now something entirely different from what it used to be formerly. Formerly Zionism was an abstract idea; in spite of all Herzl’s great achievements, the problem remained merely a project. It is the political problem we are talking about, because the intellectual and practical labour of Zionists for Palestine had been a reality during the whole time of the _Chovevé Zion_ and the Zionist movements. Now, however, political Zionism has also become a reality. If the war has taught us anything at all it surely is this, that nothing is more fatal than an attitude of indifference towards problems of international politics. The practical and intellectual members of the Zionist Organization, too, who used to look down upon politics, have changed their attitude towards them. Formerly, they may have been entirely or partially right――the intellectual were undoubtedly right in proclaiming that the spiritual in Zionism must be the soul of the whole movement, and the practical ones also were right in establishing the early colonies, and it is only a pity that more considerable progress was not made――but now all were agreed that, in consideration of the new possibilities, the movement must come into relation with the political forces, and the establishment of actual relations constituted a great many-sided and responsible work, which had to be carried out, at first in England, but also partly in other countries of the _Entente_.

One of the most distinguished representatives of the Zionist idea in this country is the Very Rev. Dr. Moses Gaster, the late _Haham_ of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews’ congregations in England, who from early youth occupied a respected and influential position, in the time of _Chovevé Zion_ as well as in Zionism, and devoted himself also with great zeal to the political question of Zionism. He also represented the view that a wide field for political efforts lay open here, and he freely gave his time and his eloquence in the service of the cause. In this direction he was very active, especially in the earlier stages.

The Very Rev. Dr. Joseph Herman Hertz, Chief _Rabbi_ of the United Congregations of the British Empire, has evinced a sympathy with the Zionist Movement which at certain pregnant moments was equivalent to declaring himself at one with Zionism. His affiliation with the Zionist idea goes back to _Chovevé-Zion_ days, and subsequently he became one of the founders of the “South African Zionist Federation.” The Spiritual Leader of British Jewry has ever been a sincere friend of the movement, and on various decisive occasions has championed the idea, defending it, explaining it, and encouraging it. In the new development, especially in the months preceding the “Declaration,” his help in connection therewith has been of far-reaching and lasting importance.

The inspiring spirit and the driving force, he who most successfully had made many distinguished non-Jewish personalities familiar with Zionism and who championed with all his energy and enthusiasm a Zionist political programme in England, was Dr. Chaim Weizmann. In the very earliest months of the war he began to collect the threads for the political work, to rouse the Zionist circles with which he was in touch, to revive old connections in non-Jewish circles and to form new ones, to prepare for negotiations――in a word, to open up the work that was destined later on to become a properly-organized programme. Herein he had the support of a group of enthusiastic and deeply sympathetic Zionists, and was strengthened and stimulated in his initiative by them. The first attempts to confer with the Government representatives about Zionism were made: the impressions were satisfactory. One foresaw that this contained the germs of promising possibilities. These impressions led to the conclusion that mere discussions alone were not sufficient, but rather that it was necessary to formulate plans. In order to formulate plans and in order to obtain authority from the Zionist Organization to submit these plans (for such appeared to be the next step) it would be necessary to establish a centre in London, and to obtain the necessary representative powers. It would also be necessary to write more about Zionism: to publish books, to undertake propagandist work――in another and more direct manner. The means were also considered to win over the non-Zionist, perhaps even the anti-Zionist, Jewish elements. All these aims were discussed, weighed, and elaborated by a small circle. It was not the whole of English Jewry, it was not even the then existing English Zionist Federation; it was really a circle of a few Zionists, mostly intellectuals who corresponded with Dr. Weizmann, and met and took counsel with him.

From that time forward the Zionist idea began to occupy the attention of the English Press. The question became topical, the old English traditions found new expression. Most people had no conception that they were speaking in the spirit of old traditions――for few knew of this remote chapter in ♦English history――but they did it unconsciously, which makes their action perhaps even more valuable. Many a journalist among the élite of the intellectuals not only gave assistance to the cause of Zionism in the Press, but went a step further, and helped vigorously in the political work. In connection with this matter the name of the doyen of English journalism, Mr. C. P. Scott, Editor of the _Manchester Guardian_, may be especially mentioned. Since the very beginning Mr. C. P. Scott has given the whole problem a very careful and sympathetic attention, and was an influential mediator between Zionists and leaders of British politics. He and Dr. Weizmann had conversations with some personalities, who strengthened them in their hopes that the ground was favourable for Zionism. Other Zionist workers in England also shared their view, and Dr. Gaster, too, in conjunction with Dr. Weizmann, had some important conversations with English leaders. The impressions which both had formed confirmed the hope that Zionism has a great future in England.

♦ “Engish” replaced with “English”

We can by this time, without committing any indiscretion, take this opportunity of mentioning one of the influential personalities who had given great and never-to-be forgotten services in the cause of the Zionist idea, that is the Rt. Hon. Herbert Samuel, late Home Secretary, who unites in himself the brilliant qualities of an English statesman with an enthusiastic attachment to Judaism, but had never yet taken an active part in essentially Jewish affairs. His wonderful energy, his distinguished talents and his patriotic zeal had for long been devoted to the services of the country, and both in the Asquith ministry and in Parliament he formed one of the most distinctive figures. Although he directed his activities exclusively to questions of Home administration, he turned his mind also from the commencement of the war to the great political problems of foreign politics, and when the opportunity was offered to become more acquainted with the Zionist idea, this idea won his sympathy, and he championed it with the full force of his convictions. It is sufficient to mention the words contained in his speech at the Demonstration of December 2nd at the London Opera House: “that he has stood for Zionism not only in the Cabinet, but also outside it.” These were modest words. As a matter of fact, he has not only stood for Zionism, but he has also done much to elucidate Zionist questions. He merits truly a page of honour in the history of Zionism.

For the sake of historical accuracy, other distinguished persons must be mentioned as well. We refer to some members of the famous House of Rothschild. Volumes could be written concerning what Baron Edmond _de_ Rothschild has done for colonization in Palestine. Far removed from political activity and unwilling to play any official part in the Zionist Organization, devoted with love and attachment to his country, France, and at the same time inspired with the loftiest sentiments for Judaism, this Nestor of true philanthropy cherishes a love for the idea of regenerating Palestine that cannot be too highly valued. That he has made this ideal one of the most beautiful traditions of his family is shown by the fact that his son, James, has followed the example of his father. This stimulating and instructive example could not fail to influence the other branches of this great family also. The late Lord Rothschild of London, who stood at the head of organized English Jewry, was long regarded as an opponent of Zionism. But this opposition was not a matter of principle, it was simply determined by circumstances: the obstacles appeared to him insurmountable, and that was the only reason for his opposition. In view of the different circumstances caused by the war, he revised his former opinions, and shortly before his death he began to take an interest in Zionism. Following this lead, other members of this family also have taken up a favourable view towards Zionism, and this view grew to a complete alliance with the Zionist Organization on the part of the present Lord Rothschild.

In connection with this development, the very great services of Dr. Weizmann in this same direction must be mentioned. Shortly before the outbreak of war Dr. Weizmann had given much attention to the project of founding a University in Jerusalem. This project, which met with great approval, not only in Zionist circles but also elsewhere, brought him into closer relations with the House of Rothschild, and this did much to make the members of this family more closely acquainted with Zionism.

This was the position at the beginning of the war. The outlook was promising, and a sound start had been made. But all this was waiting for development, for deepening, for actualization. The English Zionist Federation, being a local organization, could neither speak in the name of the great masses of Zionists of the Entente countries nor could it undertake the great political labour of propaganda organization. Thus it happened that on the part of Dr. Weizmann, Dr. Gaster, and others, the invitation was sent forth to the main organization to delegate two of its representatives to London.

There was, however, still another matter which caused the coming of the delegates of the general Zionist Organization in London to appear necessary. Although the Organization remained uniform in its principles and aims, an actual collaboration of Zionists throughout the world in the pre-existing form had to be set aside for the time being. The greatest numbers of Zionists live in Russia: there exist the persons who are especially called to make Palestine their home, and there also the majority of the most distinguished Jewish nationalists and the leading spirits of a _Hebrew_ culture are most strongly represented. The great Jewish community in America, which unites the intensity of national consciousness of Russian Jews with the fresh spirit of liberty of the New World, constitutes even more and more a reservoir, not only of powerful material resources, but also of great organizing motive-power, of influential initiative and endeavour, which are doubtless destined to play a decisive part in the solution of the Zionist problem. When, in addition to these facts, it is realized that the great resources for the colonization of Palestine have been contributed from Paris, by Baron Edmond _de_ Rothschild, where also the headquarters of the Jewish Colonization Association are situated, which has the disposal of the millions of the late Baron _de_ Hirsch, and which, if the issues in Palestine are favourable, is destined to develop its colonizing activities in this direction: when finally the fact is remembered that London is the centre of all financial institutions, then it will be easily understood that the whole situation has brought England to a place of first importance in the matter of Zionist activities, that it seemed a logical necessity that certain representatives of the Organization had to move their residence and their work hither, so as not only to maintain what already existed, but also to prepare systematically the conditions for the new and rich possibilities, together with the distinguished personal factors already at work here.

In conclusion, one more circumstance must be mentioned, the importance of which is also not to be under-rated. Though for a long time the Zionist Organization had endeavoured to make Zionism the cause of the entire Jewish people, the consciousness of the need for unity grew as the war progressed. It was very desirable that those Jews who did not consider themselves organized Zionists, should co-operate in the realization of many practical plans. All the peoples involved in the war had managed to create among their parties a so-called “_Union Sacrée_,” and to form a united front. Why should this be impossible to the Jews?

Soon after the outbreak of the war, the Zionist leaders in England had attempted to come to an understanding with those indifferent to their cause and with the so-called anti-Zionists, in order to render possible, without renouncing the principles of Zionism, collaboration in working out a practical scheme in Palestine.

All these motives led the leaders of English Zionism to request the general organization to delegate here two of their representatives ――namely, Dr. Tschlenow of Moscow and the author, for the purpose of assisting in the important work to be done in this country. They arrived in London shortly before the end of the year 1914.

Space does not allow us to describe the work of these three years in detail; we must therefore confine our attention to the chief features. In the course of the first few months the work consisted in a searching test of the attempts in hand: this test yielded a perfect agreement and a verification of all reports made. In the early months of 1915 there were new conferences with many leading personalities, with favourable results. In March, 1915, Dr. Tschlenow, Dr. Weizmann, and the author went to Paris, after Dr. Weizmann had previously visited Paris again and again on Zionist business. Attention was then confined to Jewish circles, and so far as non-Jewish circles were concerned a certain general enquiry appeared to be necessary. At the same time, attempts were made through conferences with a group of leading Jewish personalities in London who stood aloof from Zionism, to bring about an understanding. The Zionist delegation which was in charge of these negotiations and this correspondence was composed of Dr. E. W. Tschlenow, Dr. Moses Gaster, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, and the author. As an understanding just then appeared impossible, the negotiations were postponed until further notice. Dr. Tschlenow shortly afterwards left England, after a stay of five to six months, and returned to Russia. At the meeting of the Zionist Committee in Copenhagen and at the Zionist meetings that took place in Russia, Dr. Tschlenow was able to report that the political efforts in England had filled him with the best hopes. The Author remained in England and devoted himself, in addition to propaganda, to the political task in which Weizmann’s unwearied efforts became more and more important. The period 1915‒1916 was more one of preparation than one of execution: Zionism had to be strengthened from within, the societies in London and the Provinces had to be maintained, new societies had to be created, pamphlets and books had to be written and published; externally, the work consisted in finding new sympathisers, and in an enlightening propaganda wherever a proper opportunity offered itself. The correspondence with the Zionist leaders and organizations in Russia and America became more active and the relations ever closer. In London a number of talented young Zionist writers and workers had grouped themselves round the leaders; many books and many pamphlets which were published during this period had won great popularity for the Zionist writers and publicists who had already proved their worthiness, such as Major Norman Bentwich, who subsequently became the first Procureur-General of Palestine under the British occupation, and Messrs. Paul Goodman, Albert M. Hyamson, Samuel Landman, Harry Sacher, Leon Simon; new personalities joined them, as, for instance, Semmi Tolkowsky and others. The temporary stay in London of many prominent Zionists of Russia and Palestine, such as Boris Goldberg of Wilna, and recently the agriculturist, Jacob Ettinger, and the manager of the Anglo-Palestine Company, David Levontin, who both came over from Palestine, and the great intellectual influence exercised by _Achad Haam_, who freely gave his invaluable advice in every important question――all these have done very much to make London the real centre of Zionist work.

Towards the end of the year 1916 several months were spent in drafting outlines and projects for the purpose of drawing up a Zionist programme which should be as clear as possible and correspond with the present conditions, in which efforts Dr. Weizmann and the author were supported by a number of notable colleagues. Already in 1915 the work had commenced on the projects and memoranda, the drafting of which received many contributions from several members; and the work was continued from that time onwards. A committee, consisting of Dr. Gaster, Dr. Weizmann, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Mr. Joseph Cowen, and the author, had towards the end of 1916 outlined a preliminary sketch of a programme which was afterwards discussed in a further committee. This programme was intended to serve as a foundation for the official representations which were then in view. At the same time, Dr. Weizmann was constantly occupied independently in preparing the ground for the coming official proposals, by conferences and propaganda; this he was able to do, thanks mostly to his personal connections, though he always acted in conjunction with the author.

The 7th of February, 1917, constitutes a turning-point in the history. Shortly before this date Lieut.-Colonel Sir Mark Sykes, Bart., M.P., had communicated with Dr. Weizmann and the author on the question of the treatment of the Zionist problem. Sir Mark Sykes, who is a distinguished authority on oriental matters and who had earlier given attention to the Arab question, was entrusted with the study of the Zionist problem. In conjunction with a representative of the French Government, M. Georges Picot, he had devoted great attention to the question, and both had had first conversations with Dr. Moses Gaster. At the commencement of the year 1917 Sir Mark Sykes entered into closer relations with Dr. Weizmann and the author, and the discussions held with the latter led to the meeting of February 7th, 1917, which marks the commencement of official negotiations. Besides Sir Mark Sykes, the following took part in this meeting: Lord Rothschild, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, Mr. Joseph Cowen, Dr. M. Gaster (at whose house the meeting took place), Mr. James _de_ Rothschild, Mr. Harry Sacher, Right Hon. Herbert Samuel, M.P., Dr. Chaim Weizmann, and the author. The deliberations yielded a favourable result, and it was resolved to continue the work. For further regular consultations with Sir Mark Sykes and M. Georges Picot, the author was chosen. Discussions on questions connected with the Zionist programme took place. In consequence of these negotiations and of the great importance of the Zionist question to all the Governments of the Entente Powers, the author was called to Paris in March, 1917, by the French Government. On the 22nd of March he was received at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Paris, where he outlined the principles of the Zionist programme. He received the assurance that the French Government regarded the programme very favourably, and was authorized to inform the Zionist Organizations of Russia and America of this result by telegraph.

After a stay of one month in Paris, during which the author got into touch with the leading Jewish circles, he went to Rome, where he devoted himself to the same task. The conferences which he had with the leading Italian Jews led to the happy result that the programme laid before them by the author was accepted. With regard to the question of the Holy Places, it was considered advisable to enter into negotiations with the Vatican. The Author had conferences with the Cardinals (especially with Cardinal Gasparri), and on the 10th of May he was received in an audience by the Pope. These conferences led to a most satisfactory attitude on the part of the Vatican towards Zionism. Between the 12th and the 18th of May, the author, together with the President of the Jewish Community in Rome, Commendatore Sereni, was received several times at the Italian Consultà, and by the then Prime Minister Boselli, and he was assured that the Italian Government, in conjunction with the Allied Powers, would support the Zionist programme. He was authorized, just as in Paris, to telegraph this result to the Russian and American Zionist organizations.

Having returned to Paris, the author was received on May 28th by the then Prime Minister Ribot, and after that remained another month, during which various negotiations were conducted. He then received a document addressed to him, a statement from the French Government, the text of which, translated from the French original, runs as follows:――

“PARIS, _June 4, 1917_.

“SIR,

“You were good enough to present the project to which you
are devoting your efforts, which has for its object the
development of Jewish colonization in Palestine. You consider
that, circumstances permitting, and the independence of the
Holy Places being safeguarded on the other hand, it would be a
deed of justice and of reparation to assist, by the protection
of the Allied Powers, in the renaissance of the Jewish
nationality in that Land from which the people of _Israel_
were exiled so many centuries ago.

“The French Government, which entered this present war to
defend a people wrongfully attacked, and which continues the
struggle to assure the victory of right over might, can but
feel sympathy for your cause, the triumph of which is bound up
with that of the Allies.

“I am happy to give you herewith such assurance.

“Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my most distinguished
consideration.

“(_Signed_) JULES CAMBON.

“M. N. SOKOLOW,
_Hôtel Meurice, Paris_.”

From this statement it is clearly seen:――

(1) that hereby the question of Zionism is recognized as one
of those concerning small and persecuted nations;

(2) that the principle of the recognition of Jewish
nationality and its historical right to Palestine is here
accepted; and

(3) that the French Government is prepared to support this
movement.

In the meantime, the Zionists in England――and especially their political leader, Dr. Weizmann――had continued the work with great zeal in this country. After his return, the author again took a share in this work. The great development which the political and propagandist work had in the interval made in England, led to the establishment of a larger consultative committee and to the opening of new offices,¹ and a year earlier Dr. Weizmann had been elected President of the English Zionist Federation, and this did much to bring new life into the Federation. Two periodicals were founded, the monthly _Zionist Review_, in London, and the weekly _Palestine_, published by the British Palestine Committee, Manchester, and Zionism reached a popularity such as it never previously had in this country.

¹ Zionist Organization, London Bureau, Empire House, 175
Piccadilly, W.

CONFERENCE OF ENGLISH ZIONIST FEDERATION IN 1917

A Special Conference of Delegates from the Constituent Societies was held in London on the 20th of May, 1917, with the President, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, in the chair. The Conference was called partly in consequence of the disturbing news that had been received from Palestine and partly in order that a communication on the political situation, as it affected the Jewish National Movement, might be made to the societies through their delegates. The Conference occupied the whole of the day and was very largely attended. It was opened by the Chairman with an address, in which he reviewed the situation. He said:――

“Grave and great events have taken place since we met last――events which will affect deeply the fate of Jewry all over the world. The first event of colossal magnitude was the Russian Revolution. By a miracle, in one night the chains and fetters which have enslaved a great nation of 150 to 160 millions for centuries have been broken, and a free Russia has emerged. It has become almost a current phrase in the Press that it was a ‘bloodless’ revolution, but those who know Russia, those who have lived in Russia, know very well that although the last act of the drama was comparatively bloodless, much blood has been poured out during many years, and it was this outpouring of blood which has prepared the dramatic developments which we witnessed two months ago. And we Jews know that in this stream of blood there was a considerable fraction――a very considerable fraction――of Jewish blood. It was common knowledge in the years 1905 and 1906 that there was not a single Jewish family in Russia which had not paid the toll in the form of a son or a daughter or a relative to the Moloch of Russian Tsardom. All those Jews who have bought so dearly freedom for themselves and for the rest of Jewry, will go down in history as heroes, as saints, and our hearty congratulations and wishes go out to all those who have fought for the Russian Revolution, and to those who are going to carry on the work under the new régime. It is clear that an event like this cannot pass without convulsions. It is marvellous that things should go in Russia as they do now, but it is equally clear that the fate of Jewry, the fate of the Zionist Movement, largely depends upon stable conditions in that part of the world, and it will be, I am sure, an honourable task for the Zionist Organization all over the world, and especially for our friends in Russia, to contribute as much as it is in their power to the stabilization of conditions in Russia. Some of us――some of our friends even, and especially some of our opponents――are very quick in drawing conclusions as to what will happen to the Zionist Movement after the Russian Revolution. Now, they say, the greatest stimulus for the Zionist Movement has been removed. Russian Jewry is free. They do not need any places of refuge somewhere outside Russia――somewhere in Palestine. Nothing can be more superficial, and nothing can be more wrong, than that. We have never built our Zionist Movement on the sufferings of our people in Russia or elsewhere. Those sufferings were never the cause of Zionism. The fundamental cause of Zionism was, and is, the ineradicable national striving of Jewry to have a home of its own――a national centre, a national home with a national Jewish life. And this remains now stronger than ever. A strong and free Russian Jewry will appreciate more than ever the strivings of the Zionist Organization. And truly we see it even now. Russian Jewry is formulating its national demands in a proud, open, free way, which may well serve as an example and an encouragement to the free Western communities of Jewry. You have all read of meetings which have taken place all over Russia――of a meeting which took place only recently in Moscow, and was attended by seven thousand Jews. Many Western Jews could learn from these meetings how a free and proud Jew ought to speak. We therefore look forward with confidence to the future of Zionism in Russia.

“Now what are our hopes? How do we think they will be realized? Of course, I do not propose to prophesy in this assembly, but I shall try to outline, as much as it is possible to do so, what are our plans, and how we think we shall be able to carry them out. And before I do so let me do away with one or two what I may perhaps call misunderstandings, or what may be called wrong phrases. One reads constantly in the Press and one hears from our friends, both Jewish and non-Jewish, that it is the endeavour of the Zionist Movement immediately to create a Jewish State in Palestine. Our American friends went further than that, and they have even determined the form of this State, by advocating a Jewish Republic. While heartily welcoming all these demonstrations as a genuine manifestation of the Jewish national will, we cannot consider them as safe statesmanship. Strong as the Zionist Movement may be, full of enthusiasm as the Zionists may be, at the present time, it must be obvious to everybody who stands in the midst of the work of the Zionist Organization, and it must be admitted honestly and truly, that the conditions are not yet ripe for the setting up of a State _ad hoc_. States must be built up slowly, gradually, systematically and patiently. We, therefore, say that while a creation of a Jewish Commonwealth in Palestine is our final ideal――an ideal for which the whole of the Zionist Organization is working――the way to achieve it lies through a series of intermediary stages. And one of those intermediary stages which I hope is going to come about as a result of this war, is that the fair country of Palestine will be protected by such a mighty and a just Power as Great Britain. Under the wing of this Power Jews will be able to develop, and to set up the administrative machinery which, while not interfering with the legitimate interests of the non-Jewish population, would enable us to carry out the Zionist scheme. I am entitled to state in this assembly that His Majesty’s Government is ready to support our plans.

“I would further like to add that the support of the British Government, when given, will be in conjunction and agreement with the Allied Powers. Our friend, chief, and leader, Mr. Sokolow, who, owing to important Zionist duties, is prevented from attending this meeting, has been both in France and in Italy, and from both these Governments he has received assurances of full sympathy and full support. One of the important problems to be considered in connection with the future settlement of Palestine is the delicate question of the Holy Places. I need hardly say, in this Jewish assembly, that we Jews will be meticulously and scrupulously careful to respect the sentiments of any religious group or sect in Palestine. It is not for us to discuss how this complicated question, which forms an important point in international relations, is going to be settled. We trust to the fairness and justice of the nations which are going to build up a better world after this catastrophe, that they will see to it that the arrangements made are fair and satisfactory to everyone. We have assurances from the highest Catholic circles that they will view with favour the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, and from their religious point of view they see no objection to it, and no reason why we should not be good neighbours. And good neighbours I hope we shall be.

“Let us now turn our attention for a few minutes to the internal situation. Confident as we are of our final success, we cannot help feeling some disappointment at the fact that the whole of Jewry does not stand united at this present critical moment. Ladies and Gentlemen, it is not only a matter of regret, but it is a matter of deep humiliation to every Jew that we cannot stand united in this great hour. But it is not the fault of the Zionist Organization. It is, perhaps, not the fault of our opponents. It must be attributed to the conditions of our life in the Dispersion, which has caused in Jewry a cleavage difficult to bridge over even at a time like this. It is unfortunate that there still exists a small minority which disputes the very existence of the Jews as a nation. But there need be no misgivings on that account; for I have no hesitation in saying that if it comes to a plebiscite and a test, there can be no doubt on which side the majority of Jews will be found. And, ladies and gentlemen, I warn you that this test is bound to come――and come sooner, perhaps, than we think. You will have to show, and in this solemn hour I call upon you to prepare for it, that with all your heart and mind you stand united behind those leaders whom you have chosen to carry out, at this critical hour of the world’s history, this work. We do not want to give the world the spectacle of a war of brothers. We are surrounded by too many enemies to give ourselves this luxury. But we warn those who will force an open breach that they will find us prepared to stand up united in the defence of the cause which is sacred to us. We shall not allow anybody to interfere with the hard work that we are doing, and we say to all our opponents, ‘Hands off the Zionist Movement!’”

The statement was received with repeated applause, and aroused great enthusiasm among the delegates, both immediately after its delivery and also in the course of the discussion which ensued.

ZIONISM AND PUBLIC OPINION IN ENGLAND

All these signs of Zionist activity naturally could not avoid creating a certain opposition. The attempts to bring about agreement, made at the beginning of 1915, had led to nothing, and the Zionists, from their point of view, could not have thought ill of their opponents, if they had limited themselves to a discussion within Jewish circles. But the opposition went so far as to publish a document which reads as follows:――¹

¹ The Times, May 24, 1917.

“In view of the statements and discussions lately published in the newspapers relative to a projected Jewish resettlement in Palestine on a national basis, the Conjoint Foreign Committee of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Anglo-Jewish Association deem it necessary to place on record the views they hold on this important question.

“The Holy Land has necessarily a profound and undying interest for all Jews, as the cradle of their religion, the main theatre of Bible history, and the site of its sacred memorials. It is not, however, as a mere shrine or place of pilgrimage that they regard the country. Since the dawn of their political emancipation in Europe, the Jews have made the rehabilitation of the Jewish community in the Holy Land one of their chief cares, and they have always cherished the hope that the result of their labours would be the regeneration on Palestinian soil of a Jewish community, worthy of the great memories of their environment, and a source of spiritual inspiration to the whole of Jewry. Accordingly, the Conjoint Committee have welcomed with deep satisfaction the prospect of a rich fruition of this work, opened to them by the victorious progress of the British Army in Palestine.

“Anxious that on this question all sections and parties in Jewry should be united in a common effort, the committee intimated to the Zionist organizations as far back as the winter of 1914 their readiness to co-operate with them on the basis of the so-called ‘cultural’ policy which had been adopted at the last two Zionist Congresses in 1911 and 1913. This policy aimed primarily at making Palestine a Jewish spiritual centre by securing for the local Jews, and the colonists who might join them, such conditions of life as would best enable them to develop the Jewish genius on lines of its own. Larger political questions, not directly affecting the main purpose, were left to be solved as need and opportunity might render possible. Unfortunately, an agreement on these lines has not proved practicable, and the conjoint committee are consequently compelled to pursue their work alone. They are doing so on the basis of a formula adopted by them in March, 1916, in which they proposed to recommend to his Majesty’s Government the formal recognition of the high historic interest Palestine possesses for the Jewish community, and a public declaration that at the close of the war ‘the Jewish population will be secured in the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, equal political rights with the rest of the population, reasonable facilities for immigration and colonization, and such municipal privileges in the towns and colonies inhabited by them as may be shown to be necessary.’

“That is still the policy of the conjoint committee.

“Meanwhile, the committee have learnt from the published statements of the Zionist leaders in this country that they now favour a much larger scheme of an essentially political character. Two points in this scheme appear to the committee to be open to grave objections on public grounds.

“The first is a claim that the Jewish settlements in Palestine shall be recognized as possessing a national character in a political sense. Were this claim of purely local import, it might well be left to settle itself in accordance with the general political exigencies of the reorganization of the country under a new sovereign power. The conjoint committee, indeed, would have no objections to urge against a local Jewish nationality establishing itself under such conditions. But the present claim is not of this limited scope. It is part and parcel of a wider Zionist theory, which regards all the Jewish communities of the world as constituting one homeless nationality, incapable of complete social and political identification with the nations among whom they dwell, and it is argued that for this homeless nationality a political centre and an always available homeland in Palestine are necessary. Against this theory the conjoint committee strongly and earnestly protest. Emancipated Jews in this country regard themselves primarily as a religious community, and they have always based their claims to political equality with their fellow-citizens of other creeds on this assumption and on its corollary――that they have no separate national aspirations in a political sense. They hold Judaism to be a religious system, with which their political status has no concern, and they maintain that, as citizens of the countries in which they live, they are fully and sincerely identified with the national spirit and interests of those countries. It follows that the establishment of a Jewish nationality in Palestine, founded on this theory of Jewish homelessness, must have the effect throughout the world of stamping the Jews as strangers in their native lands, and of undermining their hard-won position as citizens and nationals of those lands. Moreover, a Jewish political nationality, carried to its logical conclusion, must, in the present circumstances of the world, be an anachronism. The Jewish religion being the only certain test of a Jew, a Jewish nationality must be founded on, and limited by, the religion. It cannot be supposed for a moment that any section of Jews would aim at a commonwealth governed by religious tests, and limited in the matter of freedom of conscience; but can a religious nationality express itself politically in any other way? The only alternative would be a secular Jewish nationality, recruited on some loose and obscure principle of race and ethnographic peculiarity; but this would not be Jewish in any spiritual sense, and its establishment in Palestine would be a denial of all the ideals and hopes by which the revival of Jewish life in that country commends itself to the Jewish consciousness and Jewish sympathy. On these grounds the conjoint committee deprecate most earnestly the national proposals of the Zionists.

“The second point in the Zionist programme which has aroused the misgivings of the conjoint committee is the proposal to invest the Jewish settlers in Palestine with certain special rights in excess of those enjoyed by the rest of the population, these rights to be embodied in a Charter and administered by a Jewish Chartered Company. Whether it is desirable or not to confide any portion of the administration of Palestine to a Chartered Company need not be discussed, but it is certainly very undesirable that Jews should solicit or accept such a concession, on a basis of political privileges and economic preferences. Any such action would prove a veritable calamity for the whole Jewish people. In all the countries in which they live the principle of equal rights for all religious denominations is vital for them. Were they to set an example in Palestine of disregarding this principle they would convict themselves of having appealed to it for purely selfish motives. In the countries in which they are still struggling for equal rights they would find themselves hopelessly compromised, while in other countries, where those rights have been secured, they would have great difficulty in defending them. The proposal is the more inadmissible because the Jews are, and will probably long remain, a minority of the population of Palestine, and because it might involve them in the bitterest feuds with their neighbours of other races and religions, which would seriously retard their progress, and would find deplorable echoes throughout the Orient. Nor is the scheme necessary for the Zionists themselves. If the Jews prevail in a competition based on perfect equality of rights and opportunity they will establish their eventual preponderance in the land on a far sounder foundation than any that can be secured by privileges and monopolies.

“If the conjoint committee can be satisfied with regard to these points they will be prepared to co-operate in securing for the Zionist organization the united support of Jewry.

“(Signed) DAVID L. ALEXANDER,
_President, Board of Deputies of British Jews_.

“(Signed) CLAUDE G. MONTEFIORE,
_President, Anglo-Jewish Association_.

“LONDON, _May 17, 1917_.”

On the day after the appearance of this Manifesto, _The Times_ received more letters than it could make room to print from Jewish correspondents, “taking strong exception” to the statement of the Presidents. Mr. Elkan N. Adler at once resigned from the Conjoint Committee, and described the publication of the Manifesto as “inopportune, if not harmful, but he afterwards withdrew his resignation.” Mr. B. A. Fersht and Mr. S. Gilbert also resigned.

Mr. Gilbert did not resign from the Conjoint Committee, of which he was not a member. He resigned his membership of the Board of Deputies in order that the prospective president, Sir Stuart Samuel, might be elected in his place.

The Chief _Rabbi_, Dr. J. H. Hertz, wrote to _The Times_, expressing the following opinion:――