WSJIAKT [Distributed to the Council C. 144. M. 58. 1926. V. a n d /Ae Members of the League.]

G e n e v a , March 8th, 1926.

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

PERMANENT MANDATES COMMISSION

r epo r t t o t h e c o u n c il o f t h e l e a g u e o f n a t io n s ON THE WORK OF THE EIGHTH (EXTRAORDINARY) SESSION OF THE COMMISSION

Held in Borne, February 16th-March 6th, 1926.

During the course of its extraordinary session held in Rome from February 16th to March 6th, 1926, to consider the situation in , the Permanent Mandates Commission examined the annual report of the mandatory Power for the year 1924 and a provisional report for 1925 (“Rapport provisoire à la Société des Nations sur la situation de la Syrie et du Liban (Année 1925)”), as well as certain petitions, in the presence of the accredited representative of the French Government, M. Robert de Caix, former Secretary-General of the French High Commissariat for Syria and the Lebanon. All the members of the Commission, as well as Mr. H. A. Grimshaw, representative of the International Labour Organisation, were present except M. Beau. At its meeting on the 18th, the Commission heard with great regret of his death on February 16th and desires to pay a tribute to his competence and great ability, expressing at the same time their sorrow and regret at the loss of a dear friend and a valuable collaborator. As the Members of the Council are aware, at M. Beau’s request, M. Roume, (French) Honorary Governor-General of the Colonies, had been authorised by the Aeting-President of the Council to act as a substitute for M. Beau during this extraordinary session, and the Commission desires to record its appreciation of his efficient collaboration.

I, — Observations of t h e Co m m ission r e s u l t in g from th e E x a m in a t io n of th e R epo rt from t h e M a n d a t o r y P ow er on t h e A dministration of S y r ia a n d th e Lebanon in 1924. As the Commission, at its fifth session, had already considered a report for the period July 1st, 1923-June 30th, 1924, the report for the year 1924 covers a new period of six months only. Certain technical points which arose out of the examination of the provisional report for 1925 are also included in the following observations. On the other hand, no reference is made to some questions of a general political character which have been considered fully in the Commission’s observations on the provisional report on the situation in Syria and the Lebanon in 1925. The following observations are drawn up in as concise a form as possible. In order fully to understand them reference should be made to the minutes of the meetings at which the questions dealt with were discussed. 1. Nationality. The Commission would be glad to be informed of such measures as may be taken in order to reach a final solution of the question of the national status of the inhabitants in the different parts of the mandated territory. 2. Personnel. It is requested that full information be given in future reports as to the number of French nationals holding official positions of any kind other than military in the territory, and the posts which they occupy, distinguishing those in the pay of the Mandatory and those in the employ of the native Governments ; what are the relations between army officers and the civil Government, and what are the regulations concerning the appointment of native officials.

Publications of the League of Nations VI.A. MANDATES S- d llT so o (A) + 800 (F) 3/26. — Imp. de la “T. de C,.". 1926. VI.A. 2 x ; x A -v ■ fgt 591 gfe at g - f e — j ■---■'*"ï X ■;- i " - ioc-- -,s SÜH**-s *~> r 5UUÔ5J -- ' "'■ li \ u ' '■ ï ' > /,■- >m f« * 3. Justice. The Commission desires to be kept informed as to the success of (hé system of introducing French judges into the native courts in the Great Lebanon.

4. International Conventions. The Commission would welcome further information as to the steps taken by the mandatory Power to adhere, on behalf of Syria and the Lebanon, to the conventions mentioned in Article 12 of the Mandate, and to the Convention on the Use of White Phosphorus in the Manufacture of Matches.

5. Antiquities Law. The Commission, taking note of the statement of the accredited representative concerning the Antiquities Law which" the mandatory Power was required by the mandate to enact within one year, understands that it will be promulgated without delay. It is requested that a complete list of permits granted and refused during 1924 and 1925 be communicated to the. Commission. .

6. Labour. The Commission desires to find in the next report a complete account of all legislation or administrative decrees applying to corvées, paid or unpaid ; of the number of workers so employed and the number of days of work under the corvées during the year ; and of measures taken by the Government to prevent abuses which might arise from this system.

7. Education. The Commission would like particularly to be informed of progress made in the training of teachers for primary and secondary schools.

8. Public Health. The Commission notes with satisfaction the efforts made in the interest of public health. It would like to have more detailed information concerning the regulation of prostitution. It would attach importance to the presentation of statistics of natality and infant mortality. -

9. Economic DevelopMent. In regard to the plans of the mandatory Power for the general improvement of economic conditions in the territory, particularly by the develop­ ment of public works and services, industry and agriculture, the Commission hopes that they will not prove too onerous for the possibilities of the country, and that the full collaboration of the local authorities will be obtained. The Commission would ask for a list of public tenders and concessions for the con­ struction of public works in the mandated territory which were granted during 1924 and 1925, in addition to those for irrigation and electric power which are mentioned in the 1924 report, also a list of permits for prospecting licences and concessions of land, showing the nationality of the concessionaires. It would also be glad to be kept informed of the results of the practical application of the new system of the adjudication of concessions which is described in the 1924 report. The Commission noted with satisfaction that the Armenian refugees had to a large extent found it possible to earn their living in the country. It will follow' with interest the results of the examination by the mandatory Power of the possibility of settling certain of these refugees on suitable agricultural lands. The offer of the accredited representative to furnish further information concerning the measures taken to ensure the food supply of the country in case of shortage was noted.

10. The Hedjaz Railway. The Commission noted with satisfaction the assurance of the accredited representative that the mandatory Power had been able to bring about radical improvement in the administration of the Hedjaz Railway. It asks, however, that further data concerning the Hedjaz Railway be given in future reports, especially as regards the solution of the problem of the legal ownership of the line, the exact terms of the arrangement under which it is operated, the regulations in force concerning fares, and full explanations concerning the financial condition of the railway.

11. Customs. Complaints alleging discriminatory treatment of imports into Syria by the Customs officials according to the nationality of the senders or importers h a v in g been made, the accredited representative took note of them without recognising in principle that they were well founded, and the Commission requests the mandator)7 Power to give all necessary explanations. The Commission hopes that the ad valorem duties will be replaced as soon as possible by specific duties. The Commission would ask to have the text of th e Turkish-Syrian Customs Convention of September 1925 communicated to it. It would be interested to know the extent to which the supplies intended for the French armed forces are subjected to Customs duties. 12. Public Finance. The Commission was interested to learn that, throughout certain portions of the territory, the imposition of a fixed tax had been substituted for the farming of the tithes. It would be glad to be kept informed of the extent to which this change has been made, the way in which it has been received by the people and the views of the mandatory Power on the success of the new measures.

13. Demographic Statistics. It is requested that as complete statistics as may be possible concerning the population of the territory, classified by States, by religion and by nationality, be inserted regularly in the annual reports.

14. Documentation. Article 17 of the Mandate provides that “copies of all laws and regulations promulgated during the year shall be attached to the said (annual) report”. ’ It is with regret that the Commission, which recalled this obligation in the report on its fifth session, finds it necessary to note that the texts in question have not been communicated to it with any of the reports of the mandatory Power on Syria, and that it has in consequence been handicapped in its effort to understand the situation in the mandated territory. The accredited representative communicated to the Commission during the session one copy of a collection in five volumes of the administrative Acts of the High Commissioner, 1920-1924, but it has not received similar texts for the year 1925.

II. — O bservations r e s u l t in g from t h e E x a m in a t io n of t h e P ro v isio n a l E epo r t from t h e M a n d a t o r y P o w er on t h e S it u a t io n in S y r ia a n d th e L e b a n o n in 1925, AS WELL AS OF CERTAIN PETITIONS. 1. At the outset of this Eeport, and having in view- its exceptional importance, the Com­ mission desires to state the conception which it has formed of its mission and to dissipate, as far as lies in its power, the misunderstandings which exist on this subject. This concep­ tion is implicit in Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and in the charter of the Commission, which was adopted by the Council in its resolutions of December 1st, 1920 (Constitution), and January 10th, 1922 (Eules of Procedure). By the last paragraph of Article 22 of the Covenant, the Commission is instructed “to receive and examine the annual reports of the Mandatories and to advise the Council on all matters relating to the observance of the Mandates”. Moreover, when the Council was drawing up the Constitution and Eules of Procedure of the Commission, it laid special stress on the importance which it attached to the co-operation of a group of experts, inde­ pendent of the Governments of their respective countries. From these provisions it will be seen that the Commission itself, its constitution and its duties, possess two salient characteristics : the Commission is purely an advisory organ, and its deliberations are simply the result of the sum of the individual convictions of its members. The task of the Commission is one of supervision and of co-operation. It is its duty, when carefully examining the reports of the mandatory Powers, to determine how far the principles of the Covenant and of the Mandates have been truly applied in the administra­ tion of the different territories. But at the same time it is its duty to do the utmost that lies in its power to assist the mandatory Governments in carrying out the important and difficult tasks which they are accomplishing on behalf of the League of Nations, and on which they render reports to the Council. Supervision and co-operation are functions which, though neither incompatible nor in conflict with one another, may yet be accompanied with genuine difficulties when they have to be carried out simultaneously. If the task of the Mandates Commission were merely to supervise the administration of the mandated territories, it would be natural that, in all difficult cases, it should propose to visit these territories itself, or should recommend the holding of enquiries on the spot. If, on the other hand, the rôle of the Mandates Commission were merely to facilitate the task of the mandatory Power, it should offer it lavish encouragement and abstain from passing any critical judgments which, if conveyed to the population under mandate, might create embarrassment and render the task of the Government more difficult of execution. The procedure followed by the Commission and the character of the observations which it has the honour to submit to the Council have been dictated by its desire to carry out, so far as the circumstances enable it to do so, this double mission of supervision and co-operation. As it is anxious not to make the task of France in Syria and the Lebanon impossible of performance, it does not in the present instance recommend the Council to set up a commission of enquiry independent of the mandatory Power. Nevertheless, recognising its duty of supervision, it has not felt able to abstain from expressing certain criticisms. The institution of the mandatory system is provided for by the Covenant itself, and the mandate over Syria and the Lebanon was assigned to France at San Eemo in 1920, in virtue of a decision of the Supreme Council in which the League of Nations took no part. This last consideration has led the Mandates Commission to refrain from examining those petitions which claim the complete independence of Syria and also those which protest against the administration of that country being assigned to France as the manda­ tory Power. The Commission desires to observe that any attempt to infer from this cir­ cumstance that these claims and protests have encountered tacit or indirect approval from the Commission would be singularly ill-inspired.

2. The mandate for Syria and the Lebanon came definitively into force on September 29th, 1923. The first annual report on the administration of those territories since that date was examined by the Commission during its fifth session in October 1924. It covered the period from . July 1923 to June 1924. In October 1925, a few days before the opening of its seventh session, the Commission received a further report from the French Government, which, however, only covered the period to the end of 1924, and therefore gave no infor­ mation regarding the disturbed conditions in 1925. The Commission considered that it was indispensable to have before it the Mandatory’s full account of these conditions, but that it could not postpone the examination for more than a relatively short time. Since the accredited representative was able to promise in the name of the French Government that a report upon them would be submitted in January 1926, the Commission proposed to the Council that it should meet at the beginning of 1926, sufficiently early to allow of its observations being communicated to the Council before the latter’s session in March 1926. The Commission understood that the mandatory Power would furnish it with a written report, fully documented, on the events which have led to the insurrection in 1925, and also on the policy which it proposed to adopt in the future. The Council approved theconclusions of the Commission during its sitting of December 9th, 1925. The Chairman of the Commission proposed to convoke the Commission for February 5th, but, having been notified by the mandatory Power that the accredited representative could not be furnished with supplementary information before the middle of February, he considered it convenient to adjourn the session until February 16th.

3. The material which the Permanent Mandates Commission had at its disposal to enlighten it as to the remoter or more immediate causes of the disturbances in the Jebel Druse and in Syria, the gravity of the events, the character of the repression, and the extent of theloss of life and of the destruction resulting from these disorders, consisted firstly of areport furnished by the mandatory Power entitled “Provisional Eeport to the League of Nations on the situation in Syria and the Lebanon for the year 1925”, which was received in Geneva on February 3rd, 1926. It included also a large number of petitions furnished by Syrian and Lebanese groups, as well as parliamentary report and various publications. The Commission considered that it should regard the report of the mandatory Power as its principal source of information, and it expected to find in that report all the material necessary for its enlightenment. The Commission regrets to record that this document does not fulfil its expectations : it contains laèünæ not only in its statement of the immediate causes of the present risings, but also in regard to the deeper causes of an unrest which had in no way been brought out in the reports for preceding years. Moreover, this document was not accompanied by any reports of enquiries into the gênerai situation in the mandated territory nor on the extent to which the various repre­ sentatives of the mandatory Power in Syria might have incurred responsibility, though some of these persons had been exposed to serious charges, more particularly in the French Parliament, - The petitions emanate from various groups — Syrian for the most part, but in some cases Lebanese. Most of them make complaints against the mandatory Power or its officials. There are others which protest against the charges aimed at the mandatory Administration and defend its. actions. In some cases the petitions are in the form of elaborate memoranda and develop their case at great length. These petitions were forwarded to the Commission by the Secretariat of the League of Nations at different dates prior to the opening of the extraordinary session ; but, in addition, a constant stream of requests, protests and telegrams, from North and South America and other foreign countries, has reached the Secretariat of the Commission during the session. As regards petitions from the last-named sources, it must be remembered that their authors have more or less lost direct touch with their countries of origin, so that they may be regarded as being imperfectly acquainted with the present conditions. But the great majority of the petitions emanate from an organisation with its head­ quarters at Cairo, and to these the Commission gave particularly careful consideration. It thought right to do so, because it learned that the group in question maintained permanent relations with the inhabitants of the mandated territory and also because its members were invited by M. de Jouvenel to express their views. No protests coming directly from Syria have reached the Commission through the mandatory Power. The accredited representative gives several reasons for this— among others, that certain of the inhabitants of Syria would fear to submit complaints owing to the customs of the country and the apprehension inspired by the authorities among popula­ tions long subject to the oppression of the old regime. By the terms of a resolution of the Council of the League of Nations, dated January 31st, 1923, any petition regarding the inhabitants of a mandated territory which is received by the League of Nations from any sources other than that of the inhabitants themselves has to be communicated to the Chairman of the Permanent Mandates Commission, who discriminates between those which are to be regarded as claiming attention and those which are obviously trivial. Petitions in the first category are communicated to the Government of the mandatory Power, which is ashed to furnish within a time-limit of six months such comments as it may consider desirable. Having regard to the special circum­ stances, this time-limit could not be strictly observed on the occasion of the extraordinary session at Eome, and on October 28th, 1925, the Chairman of the Commission drew the attention of M. Briand, Acting President of the Council of the League of Nations, to the decision of the Commission “to examine all the petitions, which it was receiving daily in regard to the situation in Syria, during the extraordinary session to be held at Rome”. In conformity with this procedure, petitions which arrived after October 1925 were communicated to the French Government as they were received. In no single case, however, have they been the subject of any judgment or comment by the mandatory Power. The Permanent Mandates Commission, while taking due account of the circumstances, was thus disappointed in the hope which it had justifiably formed of finding in the replies of the mandatory Power an authoritative opinion concerning the personalities of the petitioners, the extent to which they enjoyed the confidence of a majority of the Syrian people and the weight to be attached to the accusations and complaints set forth in their petitions. The inadequacy of the written documentation supplied by the mandatory Power has rendered the heavy task of the Mandates Commission yet more difficult. It had the effect of prolonging the oral discussions, during which the accredited representative was able to give useful information, thus supplementing the deficiencies of the documentation on many points. •

4. Departing from the method which it usually follows when examining the annual reports of the mandatory Powers, the Permanent Mandates Commission proceeded, on this occasion, to examine the provisional report on Syria and the Lebanon for 1925 conjointly with the petitions which had been submitted to it. This procedure appeared necessary both for the sake of the order and lucidity of the discussions and also because a large number of the memoranda and petitions received from Syrian groups dealt with questions of administration or were actually concerned with the policy of the mandatory Power. The Commission could not expect that M. de Caix would be able to enlighten it on all the points which the report of the mandatory Government had passed over, or that he would reply in detail to all the questions which were raised in the petitions. The case would have been different if the accredited representative had been assisted by an official closely associated with the mandatory Administration during the last few months. Nevertheless, the Commission desires to place on record how greatly it values the co-operation which it has received from M. de Caix and to express its cordial appreciation of the importance and frankness of his statements.

5. In order to prevent the present report from attaining immoderate dimensions, the Permanent Mandates Commission has found it necessary to set forth, in the body of the report, only such conclusions as affect the essential points examined during the session. A perusal of the Minutes of its meetings will disclose the evidence on which these conclusions were based, and the Minutes must therefore be regarded as an amplification of the report .

6. Before commencing its examination of the provisional report for 1925, the Commis­ sion considered it desirable to give the accredited representative of the mandatory Power an opportunity of stating the conception which the French Government holds of its mission in Syria. At the sixth meeting, on February 19th, 1926, M. de Caix made a precise declaration on this subject, which the Commission thinks it desirable to quote. M. de Caix spoke as follows :

[Translation] “The idea which has governed, if not the whole exercise of the mandate, at any rate all the efforts made to organise it, is the following : The mandate is a provisional system designed to enable populations which, politically speaking, are still minors to educate themselves so as to arrive one day at full self-government. This presupposes that the mandatory Power will gradually create native organisations in the mandated territory such as may, when complete, be able to ensure entirely the government of the country and such as may, if they carry out their duties in a proper manner, render the intervention of the Mandatory unnecessary. It appears from this that there should not be any intervention on the part of the organs of the mandatory Power in the internal affairs of the native governments.” The Commission heard this declaration with very great satisfaction. There was, in truth, nothing in it to cause surprise, since its governing idea had already been expressed on several occasions bv other official interpreters of the doctrine of the mandatory Power. Nevertheless, the Mandates Commission desires, for two reasons, to direct very special attention to the declaration of M. de Caix. In the first place, the conception of the mandate, as thus defined, appears to be in strict harmony both with the letter and the spirit of Article 22 of the Covenant, and also of the Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon ; secondly, the Commission believes that the doctrine thus stated will be found to offer the real solution of the difficult problem which has arisen in these countries. The more unmistakably the mandatory Power gives evidence, by every act of its administration, that it remains true to this doctrine, and the more generally the inhabitants of the mandated territory are imbued with that doctrine, the more speedily and completely will peace be established in the regions which are now the scene of disorder.

7. Before proceeding to examine the action of the mandatory Power or the justice of the criticisms directed against its administration, it will be of interest to consider how far Syria presented a favourable field for applying the doctrine of the mandate, as defined by the representatives of the French Government. We must first recapitulate briefly the circumstances in which the mandates system was introduced into that country. It must in fairness be admitted that the proclamation of the right of peoples to determine their own destiny and the declarations regarding the future of Syria made during the war by the British and French Governments may have led the to believe that their country would be accorded complete independence without further delay. The Covenant of the League of Nations itself may have assisted in fostering such hopes ; indeed, Article 22 of the latter instrument lays down — subject, it is true, to the essential reservation of the institution of the mandates — that certain communities formerly belonging to the Ottoman Empire can have their existence as independent nations “provisionally recognised”. Moreover, as the accredited representative observed, although it was the intention, as early as the beginning of 1919, that Syria should be placed under a French mandate, the authority of France was not immediately established over the whole of Syria. It was restricted at the outset to the Lebanon and to the coastal zone, and the interior of the country was entirely outside its purview. Thus, for nearly two years, from October 1918 until the entry of the French troops into in August 1920, an incessant campaign of propaganda was being waged against France and in favour of the ephemeral rule of the Emir Feysal. Thus, from the time when the mandate was first introduced, there existed in Syriai alongside of the party favourable to France, other parties which were hostile to French influence and, it may be added, to the mandatory system itself. This opposition lias never relaxed for a moment. It has been recruited from the upper classes, from the most active and independent circles. These are the classes whose voices are most insistently raised. The more important of the groups which have been referred to above are the spokesmen of their claims, chief among which — the fact is noteworthy — is the claim for an immediate recognition of the complete independence and sovereignty of Syria. The hostility which an influential section of the Syrian upper classes has evinced towards the mandatory system is easily accounted for by the fact that, in the eyes of those classes, any European intervention, no matter what it might be, would threaten to deprive them of their privileges. In the view of this class of opponents, the independence of the country implies the conservation of the positions which they have gained, the maintenance unchanged of social and economic relations. It is true that a large section of what may be called the governing class, especially iu the Lebanon, has supported the mandatory Power with a zeal and loyalty to which the accredited representative more than once paid a tribute during the discussions. But the Commission has noted that, in many cases, this class has nevertheless failed to display those vitally important qualities of devotion to the public wreal, w illingness to accept respon­ sibility, a practical spirit, or personal disinterestedness which may justly be expected from servants of the State or representatives of the public. Finally, it must be noted that, in wide tracts of the country, more particularly in the rural districts of Syria and the Jebel Druse, the masses of the people are economically in a state of dependence on the great landed proprietors or subject to the traditional despotism exercised by the chiefs. An upper class consisting of elements some of whom cling to a policy of system atic opposition and the remainder of whom are insufficiently prepared to play an effective part in the working of a modern State, and a majority which, for the most part, is passive and in a state of dependency — such was the environment amid which France, as the Mandatory of the League of Nations, had to establish an efficiently conducted native government and organise the machinery of representative institutions. The application of the mandatory system in Syria has encountered the whole resisting power of Oriental traditionalism. To these difficulties may be added the fact that, in a population of only 2 % millions of different races, there were no fever than 18 different religious creeds more or less mutually antagonistic. While rendering this tribute to the facts, the Mandates Commission is far from aiming any reproach at peoples who, submissive during centuries to a regime which has never prepared them, to quote the words of the Covenant, “to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world”, and who, in virtue of the sufferings they have e n d u r e d and of the justice of some of their present aspirations, are deserving both of our interest and of our sympathy.

8. Having thus reviewed the principal difficulties which were inherent in the admi­ nistrative problem confronting the mandatory Powrer, let us now consider the method in which it handled certain particularly controversial points. We shall take note of some of the grievances to which the administration of the mandatory Power may have given rise. We shall then refer to the general policy indicated by the mandate and to the explanations furnished by the representative of the mandatory Power. Certain briet" conclusions will quite naturally emerge from this examination. In view of the complexity of most of the questions considered and the inadequate infor­ mation at the disposal of the Commission, its conclusions must necessarily be rather vague and uncertain in regard to some points. The external policy conducted by France on behalf of the mandated territories has given occasion to two principal complaints on the part of the petitioners. They are disappointed, in the first place, that the inhabitants of Syria and the Lebanon have not been more closely associated with the action taken in this field ; and, secondly, they criticise the mandatory Power for having unjustifiably abandoned certain territorial rights of the mandated countries in favour of their neighbours. Article 3 of the mandate lays down that “the mandatory shall be entrusted with the exclusive control of the foreign relations of Syria and the Lebanon” ; and Article 4 lays down that “the Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no part of the territory of Syria and the Lebanon is ceded or leased or in any way placed under the control of a foreign Power”. In view of the terms of Article 3, it is clear that the mandatory Power is alone responsible for the foreign relations of the mandated territories, and that in consequence the complaints of the petitioners on this head are devoid of any legal foundation. The Commission has, moreover, noted with satisfaction M. de Caix’s statements to the effect that the High Commissioner has made a point of associating the representatives of the local authorities in various international negotiations of a technical character, and that he proposes to continue this policy. The Commission has further noted that in some of the French Consulates overseas nationals of the mandated countries have been given posts in which they could render useful service, for instance in questions of immigration. As regards the political agreements which the mandatory Power has so far concluded on behalf of the mandated territories, it does not appear that they have unjustifiably affected the territorial integrity of Syria and the Lebanon. The Commission has noted with satisfaction M. de Caix’s statements to the effect that the conventions recently con­ cluded in this field between M. de .Touvenel and the Angora Government will be communi­ cated to the League of Nations for approval so far as they affect the territorial boundaries of the mandated territory before they are put into force. A second point in the policy of the mandatory Power which has been the subject of complaints on the part of the petitioners is the territorial organisation of Syria and the Lebanon. Article 1 of the Mandate lays down that, in framing the organic law, account shall he taken of “the rights, interests and wishes of all the population inhabiting the said territories”. It also lavs down that “the Mandatory shall further enact measures to faci­ litate the progressive development of Syria and the Lebanon as independent States”, and that it shall, “as far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy”. It is clear that these passages, so far from forbidding the mandatory Power to set up a system of the widest local self-government in the mandated territories, actually require it to do so. Moreover, the statements of M. de Caix show' that there has never been any intention of erecting barriers in the interior of the territories of such a nature as to endanger their economic unity. These statements also show that it is not the intention of the mandatory Power to encourage a separatist policy such as might give grounds for the allegation that Prance was designing to abolish all political links between the different portions of Syria. Nevertheless, the Commission observes that disadvantages may have resulted, during the last few years, from the alterations effected on various occasions in the territorial organisation fand that a stable and definitive regime would be advantageous both for the mandatory Power and for the inhabitants of the mandated territories. The organisation of the judicial system was the subject of a- prolonged exchange of views between the Commission and the accredited representative during several meetings. — 8 —

It appears from the explanations given that some degree of uncertainty and confusion has been created in the minds of the populations owing to the multiplicity of civil, penal, administrative and military courts, native and French. The Commission considers that it would be in the interest of good administrative order and of appeasement that no doubt should exist as to the court before which the inhabitants of the territory may bring their complaints when they believe that they have suffered wrong. The Commission considers that, if the judicial system were perfectly well defined, if no room were left for doubt in the minds of the people as to the competence of the different courts, and if access to the competent court were facilitated, a notable step would have been made in the direction of appeasement. If this were done, several of the petitions which have reached the Commission would cease to have any ground. Some of the petitioners complain that the Moslem Wakfs have been removed from the management of the elected representatives of the Moslem communities and are administered directly by the High Commissioner’s Office. According to the terms of Article 6 of the Mandate, “the control and administration of Wakfs shall be exercised in complete accordance with religious law and the dispositions of the founders ”. M. de Caix, who was questioned on this subject, stated that the administration of the Wakfs was conducted in conformity with Article 6 and that the financial results of the present administration were satisfactory. As a fact, the Commission has received no complaints in regard .to this., last point. It notes that, according to the report on the administration for 1924, a scheme was being considered under which the members of the councils of the Wakfs would be appointed by a Moslem electoral college which would have the right to choose the general comptroller. The Commission will follow with interest the development of this question and in particular the carrying out of the proposed scheme. The so-called “Executive Committee of the Syro-Palestinian Congress” makes the following declaration in its statement on the economic position of the mandated territories :

. ; . ' ' j i t l • [Translation.] )(1!; “The Bank of Syria was instituted and was authorised to issue bank-notes, without gold cover, on the basis of the French franc and subject to the fluctuations of the exchange. This arrangement enabled the Bank to extract and export the greater part of the gold of the country.”

It appears from an exchange of views wrhich took place on this subject between the Commission and M. de Caix that :

(1) The Bank of Syria has a monopoly for the issue of notes ; (2) The metallic cover for these notes is less than 3 per cent ; (3) The value of the Syrian pound, being fixed at 20 French francs, is subject to the fluctuations of the French monetary unit ; (4) The representative of the mandatory Power absolutely denies that this Bank has ever attempted to drain the country of its gold. As considerable quantities of gold still remain in the country, though the Bank of Syria has been at work for several years, and as there are no regulations or statistics which give colour to the idea that its operations have resulted in an appreciable export of gold, the Commission feels that it should not give any weight to the complaint of the petitioners on this last point. The mandatory Power has been itself accused of employing various devices to drain away the gold currency which circulates in Syria. This allegation is naturally of a nature to impress the popular imagination. The Commission has taken note of the accredited representative’s statement to the effect that the mandatory Power has never had any intention of depriving the mandated territories of the gold currency which circulates therein. The Commission considers that a monetary system which is based on the parity of the Syrian and French currencies has a twofold disadvantage for the mandated territories. For the fluctuations of the French franc must necessarily produce unfortunate effects on the economic state of Syria and the Lebanon ; and it may be asked whether the mandatory Power, by closely relating the Syrian pound with a currency foreign to the country, does not run the risk of impeding the development of its own policy, which, as we have seen, aims at preparing the mandated territories for the full exercise of their independence, a result which would be inconceivable without autonomy in financial and monetary matters. The Mandates Commission calls the attention of the mandatory Power to these observations in view of the monetary regime to be instituted when the agreement passed with the Bank of Syria, which is valid only for 15 years, comes to an end. Some of the petitioners complain of the disbandment of the old and the inefficiency of the local militia by which it has been replaced, as well as the excessive burdens which the organisation of this militia imposes on the treasury. Under Article 2 of the Mandate, it is open to the mandatory Power, until the entry into force of the organic law and the re-establishment of public security, to organise local militia. This is an option and not an obligation : by disbanding the old Syrian army, which was animated by a spirit clearly hostile to the mandatory Power, the latter has accordingly in no way violated the terms of the mandate. As to the alleged inefficiency and the cost, w h ic h has been deemed excessive, of the local militia, these factors must depend, in part at least, on the sources in the country from which recruits could be drawn and the cost of their equipment, upkeep and pay. The Commission does not therefore consider that there is any reason for addressing any recommendation on this subject to the Council. M. de Caix informed the Commission that M. de Jouvenel, the present High Commissioner of the French Republic in Syria, has been instructed by the mandatory Government to institute a searching enquiry into the causes of the present situation in the mandated territories, considered in all its aspects. M. de Caix volunteered the information that M. de Jouvenel has been requested to extend this enquiry to all the facts alleged in the petitions received by the Permanent Mandates Commission, in regard to which it has not been in a position to form any opinion. The Commission took note of this statement and expressed its hope that the results of M. de Jouvenel’s enquiry would be communicated to it at the same time aa the final report for 1925.

9. The events which had their origin in the Jebel Druse received special consideration by the Commission. Nothing in the report of the mandatory Power, which the Commission had examined during its fifth session, gave any grounds for anticipating the revolt which broke out in the Jebel Druse in July 1925 ; the Commisision is therefore bound to regard it. as an occurrence which is due to immediate causes of recent origin. At the same time it is evident that, in order to gain an intelligent view of this insurrection, account must be taken of the very peculiar environment in which it broke out. The mountaineers who now inhabit the Jebel Druse have constituted, for centuries past, a very primitive community with a political organisation which, in some respects, recalls the feudal systems of mediaeval Europe. It is composed of poor villagers, the authority over whom, in social affairs, is divided between a few great families who exercise it in rivalry with one another. The most salient characteristic of this people appears to be their fierce, desire for independence and their fidelity to their religion, which distinguishes them and contrasts them with the majority of the- other inhabitants of the mandated territories. This love of independence was so clearly recognised by the representatives of the mandatory Power that, as early as March 1921, M. de Caix, who was then Acting High Commissioner, was led to sign a special agreement with the Druse chiefs. Under this agreement— which the Commission regrets was only communicated to it during its present session — the inhabitants of the Jebel Druse were accorded a very large measure of autonomy. It seems clear that one of the causes of the revolt Of this people was the failure on the part of those who subsequently represented the mandatory Power in the Jebel Druse to understand the peculiar conditions which had led to the agreement of 1921. One of these officials, far from granting the mountaineers of the Jebel Druse the liberties and autonomy to which they were entitled under that agreement, seems to have governed them with a particularly heavy hand. Nor does the question of the Jebel Druse and its people seem to have been the subject, on the part of the High Commissioner’s Office, of sufficient enquiry or attention, nor of a careful and far-sighted consideration of all the contingencies. It seems difficult in any other way to account for the fact that Captain Carbillet, who had become the. effective head of the local go vernement, should have been able to pursue in so hasty .• a fashion the execution of far-reaching reforms in regard to land tenure and public works, without his zeal being restrained by instructions from Beirut. Moreover, when a delegation of Druse notables approached General Sarrail in April 1925 with the request that Captain Carbillet should be recalled and that the agreement referred to above should once more be observed, it was dismissed in none too gentle a fashion, and informed that this agreement had ceased to have other than an historical value. There is no doubt that such circumstances may have given rise in the minds of the Druses, who had been disturbed in their traditional habits and subjected to excessive demands in the form of forced labour, to a deep feeling of resentment.

The Commission does not feel called upon to trace from day to day the course of the events which now followed rapidly upon one another, nor the abuses of authority which appear to have characterised the last part of Captain Car billet’s administration. It was particularly impressed by the story of the gathering discontent, the repeated — and dis­ regarded — warnings, the obstinacy of General Sarrail, growing more intense till it cul­ minated ^ after the curt dismissal of another Drnse delegation, in thé arrest, on July 11th, of a delegation of notables who had been summoned “on the pretext” of hearing their tomplaintsV These proceedings have, however, received their fitting penalty by the recall — perhaps too long deferred — of General Sarrail, and the Commission does not think it should dwell any further upon them. ' " ; ' ... — 1 0 —

The extension of the disorders in the Jebel Druse, Damascus and other parts of Syria appears to have been due to the following causes :

The failure of the first attempts at repression, which were ordered without adequate preparation, and which inevitably encouraged the insurrection by giving it enhanced possibilities of success in the eyes of the malcontents ; The intervention of unruly bands, eager for plunder ; The propaganda, carried on by inhabitants who are hostile to the mandate assisted by the social influences at their disposal ; Finally, and above all, the unrest and latent discontent which prevailed in different parts of Syria — more particularly at Damascus.

The Commission will not be expected to comment on the military operations which were undertaken in consequence of the insurrection in the Jebel Druse and the subsequent disorders. It prefers to reserve its opinion on the character of the measures of repression till it is able to examine them in the light of the report of the enquiry which M. de Jouvenel has been instructed to carry out and to which reference has already been made. The Commission thinks it sufficient to point out that it is part of the duty of the man­ datory Power to maintain order in the mandated territories. Although the execution of this duty may oblige it to adopt measures which are particularly painful when they are taken by a guardian against his ward, such measures are only defensible in so far as they are necessary for the restoration of peace and do not create unnecessary suffering or arouse justifiable resentment. In other words, it is desirable in Syria as in other mandated territories that the governing consideration in the conduct of operations of this kind should be to preserve the moral authority of the Mandatory free from all blemish and to do nothing which may compromise the future success of its policy.

10. The difficulties peculiar to the environment in which the mandatory system has operated in Syria and the Lebanon, and produced among a people so wedded to traditions by the intervention of European influences, were pointed out at the beginning of this report. It was the duty of the Permanent Mandates Commission to form an opinion on the extent to which mistakes in policy attributable to the Administration, the errors, incom­ petence and inexperience of its officials, may have contributed to the unrest and discontent which has developed in those territories and which could alone account for the fact that the flame of revolt, once kindled in the Jebel Druse, spread with such startling rapidity to various points of Syria proper. This question was exhaustively discussed during the extraordinary session at Eome, and, after hearing the accredited representative of the mandatory Power, the Commission arrived at the following conclusions : It was particularly struck in the first place by the lack of continuity which appears to have marked the policy followed by the mandatory administration in Syria in certain ques­ tions of primary importance. The most characteristic example is furnished by the successive changes which took place within a period of five years in the territorial organisation of the country. From 1920 onwards, this organisation assumed successively the form of four autonomous States, to which the Jebel Druse was added in .1922, and the form of a federation of three of these States, created in 1922 and dissolved two years later. This has in turn been succeeded by a group, with a somewhat ill-defined status, of three autonomous States — the old States of Damascus and having been amalgamated — connected with one another and with the Lebanon by only one apparent link, apart from the Office of the High Commissioner, namely, a Customs and currency union. Nor was this to be the final stage, for it is now proposed to constitute a Syrian union including all the States — which are now only four in number — whose common interests would be managed by a central organisation which will be provided by the Organic Law now in course of preparation. At the same time, frequent changes have been introduced in the internal administration of the different States, particularly in the number of the judicial bodies and in the compe­ tence and composition of the courts. To form a precise idea of all these successive changes and of the present state of the administrative and judicial organisation of the different States in which the mandated territories are divided would require a detailed and exhaustive study of the administrative Orders of the High Commissioner which the Commission has not had time to examine. These Acts, consisting of five volumes, covering the years 1920-24, were communicated to the Commission only during the course of the present session. The Commission thinks it beyond doubt that these oscillations in matters so calculated to encourage the controversies inspired by the rivalries of races, clans and religions, which are so keen in this country, to arouse all kinds of ambitions and to jeopardise serious moral and material interests, have maintained a condition of instability and unrest in the m a n d a t e d territories. — u —

.. These abrupt changée in policy may be accounted for by a- conscientious endeavour tv* arrive at the best possible adjustment of all the interests concerned. But the Commission cannot help thinking that it would have been possible to avoid these changes if the problems in question had been made the subject of more careful study beforehand, and, even more certainly, if the mandatory Administration had not been subject successively to contra­ d ic to r y influences and tendencies. From 1019 to 1925, the post of High Commissioner in the mandated territories was held by five officials — exclusive of Acting High Commissioners — all of whom appear to have left on the general conduct of affairs the impress of their powerful personalities. The disadvantages resulting from this situation, though not very noticeable at the outset, were seriously aggravated during the last part of the time, when an Agreement which had been regularly concluded was repudiated, and men — such as the French Governor of the Lebanon — who enjoyed the full confidence of the High Commissioner were superseded on the arrival of his successor. Inconsistency in the higher direction inevitably prevents any continuity of policy and produces instability throughout all grades of the organisation. Here it seems proper to ask whether the conception of the mandate which has been brought out so clearly by the authorised spokesmen of the French Government, and last of all by M. de Caix during the extraordinary session of the Commission, has invariably guided the mandatory Administration in Syria. It is natural that the application of a political system so novel as that of the mandate should have gone through a certain evolution before its import became finally established. But the spirit of this institution emerges sufficiently clearly from the Covenant and from the mandate itself, for otherwise the provision 111 the mandate for Syria and the Lebanon that, “pending the coming into effect of the Organic law, the Government of Syria and the Lebanon shall be conducted in accordance with the spirit of this mandate”, would have to be regarded as an empty phrase. The preamble of the mandate indicates that the Mandatory “shall be charged with the duty of rendering advice and assistance” and alludes to “the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory”. According to Article 11, the latter may impose taxes and Customs duties. These provisions obviously assign to the Mandatory an active rôle in the Administration and it is natural that it should have been led to intervene with particular energy in the earlier years of the mandate : but it seems clear that the French advisers have shown a too pronounced tendency to take the place of the native authorities. In this way the mandate has appeared to the Syrians to be gradually transforming itself into a system of direct administration. It must be added, in defence of the mandatory Administration — and the report has already emphasised this point — that the apathy and inefficiency of the native organis­ ations account in a large measure for this departure of the French advisers from the rôle assigned to them. The active and dominating rôle thus assumed by the mandatory Administration in the government of the native States required, if collisions were to be avoided, that the officials who had to carry it out should possess high professional qualifications and intimate acquaintance with the country. But the staff which was at the disposal of the mandatory Administration for the most delicate and highest duties, even for those of State governors, did not constitute, owing to the diversity of its origin, a sufficiently coherent and expe­ rienced body of officials. This, again, appears to be beyond doubt, and the Commission is compelled to record it, though it is in no way blind to the difficulties of constituting a complete administration with a staff drawn from different sources, whose cohesion and unity have not been established by common traditions and common principles. Finally, it must be observed that the condition of public opinion and constant threats of revolt led the authorities to maintain a military intelligence service whose officials, stationed all over the country, may in certain cases have been beyond the control of the local authority. The proclamation at intervals of martial law, with all that it implies — the partial replacing of civil courts by courts-martial, the extraordinary powers conferred 011 the commander of the occupying troops, including, for instance, the power to impose forced residence 011 persons suspected of endangering the security of the army by their proceedings — was bound to impede both the action of the civil power and the regular establishment of the mandatory regime. The result was a certain degree of confusion, the evidence of which was particularly apparent when the duties of High Commissioner and commander of the occupying troops were united in the same hands. If the present events appear to be attributable in a certain measure to the represent­ atives of the mandatory Power in Syria, it would be unjust not to refer, in noting this fact, to the sacrifices made by France on behalf of the country. But for these sacrifices, amounting to thousands of human lives and milliards of francs, the inhabitants of the mandated territories would probably have long since fallen again under a foreign yoke, from which their unaided efforts would never have sufficed to free them. Their protests would have had more weight if they had appeared to be more aware of this elementary truth. France proclaims that she is not pursuing in Syria and the Lebanon any other aim beyond that of assisting nations which from henceforth are recognised as sovereign to acquire the capacity to exercise this sovereignty themselves. It must be admitted that a refusal to collaborate in carrying out the mandate, far from hastening the day of complete emancipation, can only postpone it. The impatience of the Syrian patriots, which some­ times takes the form of an attitude indifferent and even hostile to the mandate, should henceforth find expression in a loyal and trustful collaboration. The Commission ventures to hope that the energy hitherto shown by certain Syrian parties in preventing the success of the policy of the mandatory Power within the country and in denouncing this policy outside will henceforth be devoted to supporting it. Since the mandatory Power affirms solemnly and quite clearly that its policy has no other aim beyond the establishment of a free Government in Syria and the Lebanon, and since the new High Commissioner, Senator de Jouvenel, has conspicuously shown by his declarations and acts that he entirely adheres to this policy, it will be easy for those living under its administration, by associating themselves with the mandatory Power, to show proof of their wisdom and their maturity ; and, since their ideal is bound up with that of the country which is provisionally exercising a political guardianship over them, their efforts should tend to encourage and to hasten the realisation of this ideal. Henceforth, persistence in rebellion must be deprecated, not only by the mandatory Power and by the League of Nations, but by all those in Syria, in the Lebanon, or outside, who desire to see peace, prosperity and freedom prevailing in a country which is now divided by sterile bloodshed and strife.