The British Government. has scored a tactical success in carrying the House of Commons almost unani. mously with it in referring its declaration of policy on Palestine to the League before presenting the House with a definite scheme, In a sense the procedure will deprive the House of much scope for modifying that scheme, for when it comes, if it does so come, with the authority of the League behind it, radical changes can hardly be made without involving a further reference to the League—a delay which could not be reasonably entertained. The debate showed that Arab opinion is becoming more reconciled to the proposed partition. Whether Jewish critics are likely to be equally open to conviction remains to be'seen. Jewish disappointment is understandute for at this time, when that nation is undergoing so tragic a trial in other parts of the world, the prospect of creating a Jewish territorial domain without partition of Palestine became specially alluring and consoling, The compromise proposed by the Peel Commission- must therefore be viewed as adding yet another tribulation to an already full store. If the proposals be studied with strict attention to the actualities of recent events in Palestine, the Jews have cause to reconsider their dismay. They are safeguarded in the possession of valuable territory. They have in their own hands the opportunity of creating the Jewish state, without fear of Arab intrusion. Mr. Ormesby-Gore did well once again te emphasize two points: The promise to the Arabs of which so much għas been made by critics of the Britisn Government did not include in the prospective independent Arab state Palestine west of the Jordan. The Balfour Declaration did not pledge the establishment of Palestine 2s a home for the Jews, but rather a Jewish national home in Palestine. The differences are important. They clearly form the basis of the partition proposed,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.