“Article 10
“Educational Committees appointed locally by the Jewish Committees of Poland will, subject to the general control of the State, provide for the distribution of the proportional share of the public funds allocated to the Jewish schools in accordance with Article 9, and for the organization and management of these schools.
“The provisions of Article 9 concerning the use of languages in schools shall apply to these schools.”
In some central European countries the Jews took prompt advantage of the favorable feeling created in Paris by the Jewish leaders towards the Jewish national demands. Thus, for instance, in Ukrainia a special ministry for Jewish affairs was established, headed by Krasny Pinhoos, a Jew. According to information contained in an editorial article in the New Witness of April 11, 1919, the new minister of the Jews “told a press representative that the Jews take part in the spiritual and social life of the Ukraine under conditions of equality with those of the rest of the population, but that in affairs appertaining to the Jewish community they would govern themselves.”
The New Witness made a rather peculiar deduction from the above statement of Mr. Pinhoos:
“But it is anyhow a good thing that in one country at least the Jewish race should be regarded and should consent to be regarded as something different and separate. We presume that as soon as the Jewish State in Palestine is established, Mr. Pinhoos will change his title to that of Jewish Ambassador. Mr. Pinhoos hopes that before long there will be many other such ministries established, but while Isaacs and Mond can govern England and dictate to the Peace Conference, there is not much hope that they will desire to rule the affairs of Whitechapel.”
Mr. Israel Zangwill, in a recent address at the Poale Zion Conference in London, went a step further when he stated that the race which produced “a Beaconsfield, a Reading, a Montagu, a Klotz, a Kurt Eisner, a Trotzky” should be represented as an independent member of the League of Nations. (See Mr. Zangwill’s statement in The Jewish Chronicle, February 27, 1920, No. 2656, p. 28.)
In view of the adoption of this policy by the Jews in Paris, Americans are justified in ascertaining just what is the position of the American Jewry with respect to enforcing such a program here. Our Constitution knows no such thing as foreign national rights enjoyed by persons who at the same time enjoy the privileges of American citizens. A subject of a foreign nationality when he becomes an American citizen renounces his former allegiance, and it is upon this condition only that he becomes a member of our body politic.
Nevertheless in the United States itself, where the Jews enjoy an absolute equality of rights with all other citizens, they have recently endeavored to build up an institution which is entirely opposed to the spirit of the American Constitution, namely, a special Jewish court which tries cases pertaining only to the Jews. This institution is known as “The Jewish Court of Arbitration” and holds its sessions in one of the Municipal Court rooms in New York City. This fact was briefly recorded by the New York Times in its issue of February 19, 1920, in an article under the title, “Jews Here Start Modern Sanhedrin.” While this significant fact may have passed almost unnoticed by the American public, nevertheless it has already attracted attention in France.
It is unthinkable to any American brought up under a system of government which has provided a check against the oppression of minorities by the majority, that special rights should be granted to any of the ethnic elements of our population, such as the Jews, the Chinese, the Negroes, or any other racial group, or that any of these groups should by virtue of such special rights diminish our sovereignty by a treaty provision similar to Article XII of the special treaty with Poland. By this article Poland agreed that any member of the Council of the League of Nations should have the right to bring to the attention of the Council any infraction or any danger of infraction of any of these obligations (the national rights of the Jews), and that the Council may thereupon take such action and give such directions as it may deem proper and effective in the circumstances.[28]