Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

Newspaper commentary and minor cases, Palestine 1930

The Palestine Bulletin, 2 January 1930


   In order to deal more expeditiously with the many criminal cases arising out of the disturbances there is to be an additional Criminal Assize Court in Jerusalem.  Chief Justice McDonnell will preside over one of the Courts and Mr. Justice Corrie will preside over the other.  Eleven Jews of Jerusalem are among those to be tried for premeditated murder.


   A Bedou of Beersheba who told in court the story prepared for him by his lawyer, has been sent to prison for three months, and the lawyer is likely to be arrested.


The Palestine Bulletin, 8 January 1930

The Macleff Case.  [see 1929]

The Palestine Bulletin, 9 January 1930

The Macleff Case.


Mr. Justice De Freitas (to the interpreter): Tell him, with my compliments, that he is the biggest liar I ever met.  Tell him that as the Mukhtar of his village he should be ashamed of himself.  I have met some big liars, but he is the worst.  Tell him to walk all the way back to his village and tell all those he meets he has lied here.  He has shamed his grey hairs.               

The Palestine Bulletin, 10 January 1930

The Macleff Case.


Before there was time for putting any further questions to the witness, word came to Court that Judge Litt had died in Haifa.  Chief Justice McDonnell said: "I regret to announce the death of the President of the District Court of Haifa.  Out of respect to Judge Litt, the Court is adjourned till next Monday."


The Palestine Bulletin, 14 January 1930

The Macleff Case


It is expected that the Macleff case will be finished by the end of this week, but it is unlikely that judgment will be given before next week.

The Progestin Bulletin, 17 January 1930

The Palestine Bulletin, 21 January 1930

The Macleff Case.


The Palestine Bulletin, 23 January 1930


Public Prosecutor Sums Up.

Summary of the Macleff Tragedy.


The Palestine Bulletin, 24 January 1930


... Two hours later, before a Court filled to overflowing, the Chief Justice declared all twelve released.  ...                                                            


The Palestine Bulletin, 24 January 1930


... The Chief Justice declared the Court did not credit the witnesses for the Prosecution.


The Palestine Bulletin, 26 January 1930




The Palestine Bulletin, 2 February 1930



The Palestine Bulletin, 14 January 1930



   The first Jew to be killed in Jaffa during the riots was Mr. Rosen.  An Arab was tried for having taken part in the murder of the Jew.  The District Court sentenced him to seven years imprisonment.  The prisoner appealed against the decision and the appeal was heard yesterday.  The Court of Appeal held, that the facts of the case were indistinguishable from those in the Manaan murder case in Safed.  The Court of Appeal therefore increased the sentence to one of fifteen years hard labour.


   Shlomo Eleazar, was charged with attempting the murder of an Arab in August during the riots.  The District Court found him guilty of the charge and sentenced him to four years imprisonment.  In giving his decision, the judge said that he did not believe the witnesses for the prosecution but that he could surmise from the evidence given, what was the true state of affairs.  The prisoner appealed.  The appeal was heard yesterday.  Dr. Eliash, appearing for the prisoner, argued before the Court of Appeal that the sentence could not stand, having regard to the fact that the District Court admitted that the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution was not to be believed.  The Court allowed the appeal as far as the charge of attempted murder was concerned. The prisoner was sentenced by the Court of Appeal, however, to six months imprisonment for being in possession of firearms.  The five weeks he has already spent in prison will be taken into account.


The Palestine Bulletin, 16 January 1930


   An Arab, found guilty of counterfeiting Palestine money, was sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment.  He brought his case before the Court of Appeal and was fined L.P. 300 in place of imprisonment.


The Palestine Bulletin, 16 January 1930


   The hearing has begun at Haifa of the case of the alleged murderers of Meir Cohen and Elisha Kliers at Safed during the riots. The Court is composed of Mr. Justice Corrie and Mr. Justice Tute.

   The prisoners are Kasim Dibis, who was acquitted on a charge of having taken part in the murder of advocate Toledano; his brother, Mustafa Dibis, who has already been sentenced to death in the Toledano case, and Said Shamaan, who was acquitted on a charge of arson. ...


The Palestine Bulletin, 17 January 1930


      When the case of the three Safed Arabs, Said Shamaan, Kasim Dibas and Mustafa Dibas was heard yesterday in the Haifa Court, Mr. Faraday, Superintendent of Police, and Sergeant Salamander were among those who gave evidence.  The prisoners were charged with the murder of Mr. Cohen and Mr. Kliers during the Safed riots. The Judges conferred for a brief interval and then announced that the three defendants were acquitted.

   Mustafa Dibas was sentenced to death some time ago for the murder of Mr.  Toledano, the lawyer. The High Court has already confirmed the death sentence. His brother has already been acquitted on the charge of having taken part in the murder of Mr. Toledano.


The Palestine Bulletin, 20 January 1930


   An interesting case is to be heard to-day in Jaffa when Mr. Rosengart is bringing an action for criminal libel against the editor of the Falastin newspaper.  The paper charged him with using his fishing smack for the purpose of smuggling rifles and other arms into the country.  Mr. Rosegart is the only Jew who has a fishing smack of his own and has for a long time been the butt of attacks on the part of jealous Arabs.  He alleges that the libel against him was an attempt to carry the vendetta still further.  Mr. Rosengart has invested much money in his fishing smack and believes that there is a future for Jewish fishermen.


   Mr. Habab owed money to the Ottoman Bank; when he failed to pay, the Bank foreclosed on the land of which the bank held a mortgage.  The land has been bought by Mr. Felix Warburg.  Mr. Habab now demands a recission of the sale.

   When the case was heard on Friday, Mr. Richardson, on behalf of the bank, pointed out that since there had been a sale by auction and title deeds had passed to the purchaser, the High Court had non jurisdiction to hear any application for the cancellation of the sale.  Mr. Henigman and Mr. Moyal on behalf of the applicant, argued that the Court had power to reconsider the sale.  The Court decided, following Avoda v. Jacobus Kann, that it has jurisdiction, and that the applicant would be allowed to carry on his case.


The Palestine Bulletin, 30 January 1930



   Mr. Abcarious, who believes that the Arabs who have been condemned to death for the murder of Jews during the riots in August last, have not had a fair trial, proposes to brief English Counsel to plead their case before the Privy Council.  The arguments of this counsel are said to be as follows:

  1. That the Court of Appeals which confirmed the death sentences were improperly composed and that the judges sitting in these courts were familiar with the proceedings in the lower Court.
  2. That the hearing of all cases of premeditated murder should have been postponed until the finding of the Commission of Enquiry had been published in order to show whether or not the riots were organised.
  3. That there are grave discrepancies regarding premeditation between the English and the Ottoman law and that these discrepancies had worked to the disadvantage of the accused.
  4. That the fact that a very large number of prisoners (about thirty or forty) were being tried for murder constitutes a problem of such unusual gravity that the greatest possible care should be taken in the trial of the cases and this can best be done outside the somewhat tense atmosphere of Palestine itself.                                       


The Palestine Bulletin, 31 January 1930


   Three Arabs were discharged by Mr. Justice De Freitas after he had heard the evidence of a man, his wife and his son that the prisoners had looted in Hebron during the riots.  The judge told the man that he believed the evidence that the man himself had given but that the wife had so exaggerated that it was not possible to accept her evidence.


The Palestine Bulletin, 31 January 1930                                   [India]


   The district court of Indore (India), at the request of the bride's mother, has granted a temporary injunction restraining Abdul Rachid, a Mahommedan secretary of the ex-Maharajah of Indore, from marrying a Hindu girl, the marriage being objected to on religious grounds.


The Palestine Bulletin, 2 February 1930                                                         [UK WALES]



   Last week a judge in a Welsh Court referred to the use of the Welsh language in the courts.  He pointed out that there still remained on the Statute Book the law of King Henry VIII which provides that all proceedings in Welsh Courts should be conducted in English.  Public opinion, he said, has long recognized the injustice of compelling persons habitually thinking and speaking Welsh to give evidence in a language which they understand but imperfectly.  Notwithstanding the statute, the right of Welshmen to use their own language in the courts should be maintained.

   The learned kluge was bold enough to declare a statute obsolete in the interests of the national language.  It is to be hoped that every care will be taken in this country to preserve the various languages which are used by large sections of the country.  It would be tragic if English were to replace either Arabic or Hebrew.  ...


The Palestine Bulletin, 9 February 1930


   The Court dismissed the appeal of a Jew of Jerusalem who claimed that a decision of the Rabbinical Court against him was not valid on the ground that he is not member of the Official Jewish Community.


The Palestine Bulletin, 11 February 1930


Safed Murderers To Die.

   The Court of Appeal to-day dismissed the appeal of the Arabs of Safed who were sentenced to death by the Court of Assize for the murder of members of the Afriat family during the August riots.  The Arab condemned to fifteen years imprisonment in connection with the same crime, also had his appeal dismissed.


   Mr. Justice De Freitas yesterday dismissed the charge against the four Arabs who were charged with looting the shop of Solomon Gozland in Hebron during the riots. ... When one of the witnesses was giving evidence to prove an alibi for a prisoner, Mr. Justice De Freitas remarked, "You seem to me to be a stupid liar.  I will not ask you any questions.  Everyone can see what a fool you are, you have got a brain of a two year old.  You are so stupid that you are not worth punishing.  Don't come again."  To this, the witness replied, "No, Sir. I will not come again."                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             


The Palestine Bulletin, 14 February 1930


Abrupt End Of Sanhedria Case.

   The four Jews charged with the murder of Ahmad Awas in the Synhedria Quarter on September 1st, were acquitted yesterday afternoon when the Court session was resumed at 4:15 o'clock.  Mr. Justice Baker said, "We do not believe the principal witness for the Prosecution, Ali Abdullah Sabh.  The important part of his story does not tally with the statements of the other witnesses for the Prosecution and the statement which he made on the 4th of September is inconsistent with the one he made here.  It is quite apparent that he could not have been present at the place of the incident.  The remaining evidence of imp trance, for the Prosecution, is that of Police Constable Schwilly and Portugal, the Hassid.

   The evidence against Zion Cohen, the first accused, is that he was in the crowd and near the deceased.  But the evidence against him, according to Mr. Schwilly, is that he arrested Cohen on nothing more than suspicion.

   The second prisoner, Abraham Goldstein, stated that he took hold of the deceased and handed him over to the third prisoner.

   The third prisoner said that he took the deceased over from the second prisoner and was about to lead him to the Police Station, when a crowd set upon him and beat him.  He himself took no part in the assault.  And his story has neither been shaken nor disproved.

   The only evidence against the fourth prisoner is that of Portugal, and that is merely a disproval of the accused's own statement - that he was in the synagogue at the time of the incident.  All the accused are acquitted. ...


   The Arab press reports that Counsel for those Arabs condemned to death in connection with the riots of last August has received intimation that the Chief Secretary has granted him leave of appeal to the Privy Council.

   On inquiring of the highest legal authorities in this country, The Palestine Bulletin was informed that not the Chief Secretary but the Privy Council itself alone can grant permission for an appeal in any given case.  It is understood that Abcarius Bey, who appeared for the condemned men, will leave for England to discuss the possibility of appeal with Counsel in England.


The Palestine Bulletin, 16 February 1930


Prisoner Over 18 Years of Age.

   Naif Jaben of Safed, an Arab who was sentenced to death and whose Counsel, Mr. Abcarius Bey, had appealed on the strength that the accused was under eighteen years of age, appeared yesterday in the Supreme Court before Mr. Justice Corrie, Mr. Justice Copland and Mr. Justice Tute.  Dr. MacQueen the Government doctor who examined Jaben gave evidence which proved conclusively that he is well over 18.  The Court upheld the judgment of the lower court. [See Palestine Bulletin, 6 December 1929]


The Palestine Bulletin, 28 February 1930


  Abcarius Bey will leave for London today.  He is going in the interest of certain of the 17 Arabs whose death sentences have been confirmed by the Court of Appeal.  Counsel for the defence hopes to obtain leave to be heard before the Privy Council.


The Palestine Bulletin, 12 March 1930


   The two Bukharian Jews who were freed of the charge of looting during the riots have brought an action against the Arabs who gave evidence against them.  The case was heard yesterday before the Examining Magistrate, Jamil Habib.  Mr. Ussishikin appeared on behalf of the complainant.  The case was adjourned until Thursday, March 20th, when the records of the Clerk of the Court will be produced. [See Palestine Bulletin, 21 November 1929.]


The Palestine Bulletin, 20 March 1930


   In connection with the attempts of Abcarius Bey to bring the case of the Arabs condemned to death for murder, before the Privy Council, the following sentence from the judgment of Lord Dunedin, delivered last week in the Privy Council in the appeal of Dr. Knowles, appealed against conviction of murder, may not be without their significance.

   "Before dealing with the question of the evidence, their Lordships thought it necessary emphatically to repeat what had been said on many occasions, that they did not sit as a Court of Criminal Appeal.  To use the words of Lord Watson in Dillett's case: There must have been substantial and grave injustice done to allow criminal proceeding to be reviewed.  In the present case if it had turned out that it was against the law for a Judger to try a capital case without a jury, that would have been substantial injustice, for it would have been a conviction without jurisdiction, and it was on that ground that leave to appeals was manifestly granted.

   But the case once brought up,, it was incumbent on their Lordships to examine the judgment as given, even in that somewhat exceptional case; however, their Lordships were still not sitting as an ordinary criminal court appeal, in which case they would be entitled to consider what would have been their own verdict.  Though the criterion was hardly as strict as it would have been on an application for leave based on the single ground that the evidence did not support the verdict, yet they must be satisfied, to use the words of Lord Sumner, that there is something, which in this particular case, deprives the accused of the assurance of fair trial."

   It is understood that Dr. Eliash may ask for leave to appeal ton the Privy Council in the case against Hinkis, who, on appeal, was found guilty of murder without premeditation.  Dr. Eliash is awaiting the full judgment of the Court of Appeal.



   A rather remarkable plea raised by Counsel for the defence in the Mear Shearim case that the office of the Attorney General should be reprimanded for having kept in prison for 6 months, when there was no case against them.  This is somewhat a curious plea, seeing that it is the duty of the Attorney-General to present cases to the Court when evidence has been presented to him.  Although, of course, he must satisfy himself that there is a case, it is not for him to try it.  He presents what evidence there is to the Examining Magistrate and it is for the Examining Magistrate to say, whether, on that evidence, there is a prima facie case for the Courts to consider.

   In England we have the Grand Jury, and, again, their sole duty is to discover whether there is evidence on which a case may be sent to the judges for hearing.  If there is no evidence they do not return a true bill and the man is released.  There is no Grand Jury here but the Examining Magistrate has the same functions.  It is also not his duty to try a case but merely to see whether there is sufficient evidence to send the case further.  It is a matter of opinion whether in this particular case it was the duty of the Examining Magistrate to dismiss the case before sending it further.  It would certainly not appear to have been within the jurisdiction of the Attorney General. [see Palestine Bulletin 26 March 1930.]


The Palestine Bulletin, 30 March 1930


   A father and daughter who gave evidence against certain Bukharian Jews, charging them with looting, have been committed for trial before the Magistrate Jamaal Habib.  It will be remembered that the Judge himself visited the scene of the incident and declared that the witnesses could not possibly have seen what they swore they had seen. [See Palestine Bulletin, 21 November 1929 and 12 March 1930 above.][No further report found.]


The Palestine Bulletin, 30 March 1930.



London, March 29 P.T.A. - The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council refused leave to appeal which was asked for on behalf of sixteen Arabs sentenced to death for murder during the riots in Palestine.

   Lord Dunedin, who presided, said that the Appeal was not from the decision of the trial Judge but from the Court of Criminal Appeal.

   Abcarius Bey, who appeared for the prisoners in Palestine, argued on behalf of the appellants.  Mr. Preedy, who appeared on behalf of the Palestine Government before the Inquiry Commission appeared on behalf of the Attorney General of Palestine.

   When Abcarius Bey had concluded his argument, Lord Dunedin said that the Privy Council could not grant leave to appeal in these purely criminal cases without infringing on the principle which had regulated their practice for many years.


   The decision of the Privy Council, writes our legal Correspondent, was expected.  As was pointed out in The Palestine Bulletin last week, the Pricy Council never acts as a Court of Criminal Appeal.  This was laid down very clearly only three weeks ago when the Pricy Council gave its decision in the Dr. Knowles case.  The Pricy Council is loath to interfere in cases where the local courts had given their decisions in criminal cases.  It is only when on the face of it some gross injustice has been done that the Privy Council will upset a decision of a local court.


London, March 29.  A case involving as number of intricate constitutional points was raised in the Privy Council when the Appeals were heard of a number of men sentenced to death in connection with the Palestine riots.

   Before Counsel had an opportunity of making his opening speech, the presiding Judge, Lord Dunedin, who was sitting with Lord Macmillan and Lord Tankerton, raised the question of jurisdiction.  He pointed out that the appellants were not British subjects to whom the right of appeal was limited.  He suggested that the cases ought to be taken to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

   Counsel for the Appellants argued that the cases involved a denial of natural justice.  He was allowed to proceed and cited the French Penal Code, which had been quoted by the Turkish Authorities.  Under this code, there was a distinction between murder punishable with imprisonment and aggravated murder punishable with death.

P.T.A. - R.


The Palestine Bulletin, 31 March 1930


   In August 1929 Arabs made attacks on Jews.  They murdered over one hundred and wounded as many.  Large numbers were arrested.  Some were tried and acquitted.  Some were found guilty and condemned to death.  Those condemned to death appealed to the Court of Appeals in Palestine.  In the case of sixteen Arabs the death sentence was upheld.  No further appal was possible in Palestine although, doubtless, the Crown has a right to decide the ultimate fate of the condemned men.  Nevertheless, an attempt was made to carry the case before the Privy Council in London.  On Saturday the case was heard as to whether leave to appeal should be allowed.  The Privy Council decided against the right on the ground that it was not a Court of Criminal Appeal and the question was also raised by the presiding judge as to whether the Arabs, not being British subjects, had a right of appeal to the Privy Council at all.

   There was one phrase in the judgment of Lord Dunedin which should be pondered over very carefully by certain sections of the community in this country.  He referred to the cases before him as purely criminal cases.  Attempts are being made in certain quarters to turn the murderers of Hebron and Safed into martyrs.  We have protested against this unethical way of treating callous murderers.  Lord Dunedin was right, these are purely criminal cases.  In the case of Hebron it was murder of old and unarmed persons, as well as of young students who had not so much as sticks wherewith to defend themselves.  Murder and loot constitute the main business of criminal courts throughout the world.  Lord Dunedin refused to listen to the appeals because they were those of murderers, and the Privy Council is not a Court of Criminal Appeal.

The Palestine Bulletin, 20 April 1930





Palestine Riots: Arabs' Appeal in Murder Cases (Before Lord Dunedin, Lord Tankerton and Lord Macmillan.)

(Reprinted from the London Times.)

   Their Lordships refused petitions for leave to appeal by a number of Arabs, who following the disturbances in Palestine in August, 1929, were tried on charges of murdering Jews, were found guilty, and were sentenced to death.

   Mr. Pritt, K.C., Mr. Horace Douglas, and Abcarius Bey appeared for the petitioners and Mr. Kenelm Preedy for the Attorney-General of Palestine.

   Mr. Pritt said that in some of the cases the Courts in Palestine had utterly ignored the Ottoman Penal Code which they had to apply.  The petitioners were charged with "murder with premeditation contrary to Article 170 of the Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, No. 27."  By Article 169 premeditated killing was defined as occurring when a person had "conceived and resolved upon in his mind the act of killing before committing it."  By Article 170 a killer with premeditation was rendered liable to be sentenced to death.  Persons who killed without premeditation were liable to varying terms imprisonment.  The distinction in Ottoman law with regard ton murder with premeditation was, indeed, poles asunder from the law which the Judges in Palestine applied to the petitioners.  They might just as well have found the petitioners guilty of some crime which was unknown to the code which they were applying.  In fact they gad done so.  If their decision was allowed to stand it would lead to grave uncertainty and confusion.

   Lord Dunedin - That is very good matter for a Court of Criminal Appeal, but not for us.

   Mr. Pritt - If your Lordship found that any Criminal Court had sentenced a man to three years' imprisonment for a crime which did not exist, I submit that you would certainly interfere.

   Lord Dunedin - That would be a denial of natural justice.

   Mr. Pritt - I submit that there has been a denial of natural justice here.

   Some of the petitioners, added counsel, had been found guilty of murder with premeditation because there was evidence that they had helped other people who committed murder with premeditation.  That was fundamentally wrong.  For there to be premeditation within the meaning if the Penal Code there must be a calm of mind, a cold-bloodedness, and an interval of time between the planning of the crime and its commission which never existed in the circumstances of the present cases.  There must be some point when bad law ceased to be law at all.

   In other cases, petitioners were sentenced to death for killing in order to prepare, facilitate, or carry out certain other offences.  The Palestine Court, however, failed to consider whether there was any evidence even to suggest that the petitioners were acting with a view to facilitate looting and arson.

   There were three defects on the trial of Mustapha Ahmed Deiblis.  The first was that once again the Judge had failed to consider the question of premeditation.  The second was that the whole of the evidence given by the prosecution went to prove that Deiblis did not commit the offence.  The wife of the man who was killed described her struggles with the murderer, who, she said, she did not know.  Deiblis, on the other hand, was well known to her.  In the third place, Deiblis was convicted of one offence with which he was not charged until the second day of the trial, and of two other offences with which he had never been charged at all.

Leave Refused.

   After their Lordships had consulted Lord Dunedin said that it was to be noticed that the appeals were sought not from the decision of a trial judge, but from the considered judgment of a Court of Criminal Appeal before whom had been urged each and every one of the considerations regarding the interpretation of the Ottoman Penal Code and the Criminal Ordinance, and regarding the adequacy of the evidence adduced which had been repeated before the Board.  Their Lordships could not give the leave asked for without infringing the principles relating to appeals in criminal cases which had regulated their practice for many years.


The Palestine Bulletin, 14 April 1930


   The editor of the Falastin was acquitted yesterday, in the Jaffa Court, when he appeared before the District Commissioner to answer to a charge of libelling the Nutram Company.  The Court found that under the Ottoman law libel was possible against persons but not against Companies.

   The case was first heard on March 4th when the plaintiff claimed that in its issue of December 3 and 4th the Falastin had contained articles alleging the Nutram Company had taken over "the Jewish explosive trade."

   Mr. I. Weizmann and Mr. Scott manager and assistant manager of the Company, gave evidence that explosives for quarrying and similar purposes are being sold only to those whom hold permits from the Government. ...


The Palestine Bulletin, 21 April 1930



   We give below the arguments in the important land case to which reference was made last week.  The land involved covers an area of thirty thousand dunams.  The land has been paid for by the Jewish National Fund but they are unable to go into possession owing to the fact that a large number of tenants claim the tight to remain on the land.  The present cultivators live in a wretched condition and the very minimum of subsistence.  Notice has been served but the claim of those on the land is that under a recent Ordinance they cannot be evicted, at least without further notice.  The land is situated in the Wadi Huwareth region over which ground there has already been much litigation.

   The Solicitor General represented the Director of Lands, Dr. Eliash represented Tayan, and Mr. Horowitz the Jewish National Fund.

   The three Arab petitioners are: Saleh Ibrahim el Aufi, Abd el Amer and Houssein Mussa.  Mr. Mohamied Ali Tamini represented the petitioners.

   Dr. Eliash opened the case.  He stated that the land was bought and paid for by his client Tayan from the Execution Office and sold again by his client to the Jewish National Fund.  A notice to evacuate the land was sent to most of the tenants.  Abd el Ameer, one of the petitioners, was only a cultivator down to 1926.  The land was not cultivated during 1926, 1927, 1928.  He was a watchman in Hedera.  The remaining three cultivators did not pay rent during 1929.  "Strictly speaking, my client is entitled not to consider them as tenants.  My client has fully discharged his duty to the petitioners.  A notice of one year was served.  The legislation in favour of the cultivator came into force only at the end of July, 1929, but the purchase was concluded previously and my client has discharged his duty of giving one years' notice.  That cannot be interpreted to mean that notice should begin from the time when the ordinance was passed.  The second point raised by the petitioners is that they were not served with one year's notice according to law.  I say that they were served according to law, and the Chief Executive Officer is satisfied with the notice.  The main point raised is that not all of them were served.  I say that any one of them can be served, and in law it can be accounted as service upon all."

   Mr. Horowitz then spoke on behalf of the Jewish National Fund.  He started: Before going into the legal points, I say that my clients have given proper notice and satisfied themselves that the cultivators will not be evacuated at once or without notice.  My client has had prolonged negotiations with the Government and was anxious not to be harsh to the tenants.  They have made agreements with 44 cultivators and offered them land of 5000 dunams or more.

   The whole area in dispute is 30000 dunams. My clients are prevented from occupying the land by the spasmodic claims of the various tenants.  I am anxious to go only into legal points.  The president of the District Court has lawfully terminated the tenancy and the Ordinance of 1929 Section 3 does not apply.  Even if the ordinance in favour of the cultivators which came into force on Junky 31st, 1929, were to be applied, I say that one year's notice is sufficient.  On the otter hand, no notice is necessary because the tenants paid no rent.  The Solicitor-General followed Mr. Horowitz, appearing in behalf of the Director of Lands.  The Solicitor-General said that the petitioners do not suggest that the Director of Lands should have withheld the transfer of land on an application under the Law of Evacuation of 1920 and 1921.  The Solicitor-General supported the argument of Dr. Eliash.

   The Solicitor-General was followed by Muhamed Ali Tamini, counsel for the petitioners.  He stated: My point is that my clients are cultivators and should not leave the land.  My application was made before the Cultivators Ordinance came into force.  I submit that there is no difference between voluntary sale and any other sale of land.  The right of the debtor only can be sold but not the right of the cultivator.  It is not true that one of the petitioners did not cultivate his land after 1926.  I have evidence to the contrary.  I ask the Court to set aside the order of bathe Chief Executive Officer.

   Judgment is reserved.


The Palestine Bulletin, 7 May 1930

In Court.


The second appeal was dismissed of Sayid Ibrahim Irani of Zarmoulka village, who was found guilty of murder with premeditation of Said Sasbaji who married the prisoner's divorced wife.  This is the second time that Irani's appeal against the death sentence has been upheld.

   The Court after hearing the speech of Counsel for the Defence and Counsel for the Attorney General consulted together and upheld the death sentence.

   The women relatives of the accused stood outside the Court beating their breasts and wailing.


Arieh Levy and Ben Nahoumy were brought before the District Court on the charge of having distributed pamphlets of a seditious nature in the Mizrahi College when the students were in the school.  The students who saw the accused distributing the pamphlets gave evidence against the accused and were followed by the police Constable who arrested the accused. The case stands adjourned.


The appeal of Ahmed Habib who was sentenced to death at Haifa for the murder of his sister, was heard yesterday.  The accused had pleaded guilty before the Assize Court and had been sentenced to death, but there had been a recommendation to the High Commissioner to commute the death sentence.  The Court of Appeal, after hearing the argument of Counsel for the defence, Mr. Wadia Bustani, upheld the death sentence but stated that it accepted the recommendation of mercy of the lower Court, and would forward it to the High Commissioner.


The case against Sabah Effendi Said, who is charged with subornation of witnesses when he was sitting as Magistrate, was continued yesterday and is likely to be continued to-day.  The accused gave evidence in his own defence and quoted authority to shew that he was justified in committing the two witnesses for trial.


The Palestine Bulletin, 11 September 1930


   For a long time a dispute has been going on as to the Jewish claim to land in Wady Huwareth.  The courts have decided in favour of the Jews.  Owing to political pressure exercised from Jerusalem, certain of the squatters on the land have refused to move and have, for a very long rime, trespassed on lands which did not belong to them.

   This week the police have been sent to eject the trespassers and the Arab press reports with apparent satisfaction that the wives of the trespassers opposed the police throwing sticks and stones at them.

   The police are removing the Bedawi huts which are illegally standing on the land.

   Many sheikhs and others were removed from the land and were taken in cars some distance away.  When, however, the back of the police was turned, they returned.

   The Falastin reports that 4 woman and 2 policemen were injured in a scuffle.

   When the Jews began ploughing the land they were attacked and four, according to the same source, were injured and left off ploughing.

   The Bedawi are reported to have 200 rifles among them, and certain of the less responsible sections of the Arab press are inciting them to oppose authority.

The Palestine Bulletin, 5 October 1930


   The Court of Tulkarem has decided that the eviction of Arab tenants from the 3,000 denims of land which the settlers of Wadi Huwareth claimed they owned was illegal and that the tenants are entitled to resettle on that land.

   This is the first adverse decision in the long litigation but Jewish authorities state that they are not unduly perturbed since the sale to the Jewish National Fund was made with the condition that if it were proven that the disputed area belonged to the tenants the former would be refunded the amount of the sale.  Aouni Abdul Hadi appeared on behalf of the plaintiff.


The Palestine Bulletin, 28 Junky 1930


   We learn that the Privy Council in London has refused to hear the appeal against sentence of death passed on the Persian Jew, Urphali, who was found guilty of murder during the riots.

   Urphali was originally found guilty and his case was sent back for re-hearing by the Court of Appeal.  He was a second time found guilty and his second appeal was dismissed.

   When H.E. the High Commissioner commuted the death sentences to terms of penal servitude for life, Orphali was excepted because his appeal to the Privy Council was then under consideration.

   Only one other Jew, P.C. Hinkis, was found guilty of murder (by the Court of Appeal - murder without premeditation) as a result of the riots and he is serving sentence of 15 years' imprisonment.

   It is very unusual for the Privy Council to hear appeals in cases of murder, although very recently in the case of Dr. Knowles they heard the appeal and upheld the sentence.

   Abcarius Bey also appealed unsuccessfully to the Privy Council for the Arab murderers.


The Palestine Bulletin, 29 April 1930


HAIFA, April 28. - Complete contradiction between the evidence given before the Examining Magistrate and before the Court yesterday, led to the acquittal of a Jew, Doktorski, charged with murdering an Arab.

   Before the Court of Criminal Assize in Haifa, the case was heard against Nathan Doktortski, aged 27, a member of the Labour Settlement of Ayeleth Hashachar, who is charged under Article 170 with premeditated murder in that on August 31st, 1929, he killed an Arab, Abdul Latif Muhammed, of Bint el Gelab village, between Ayeleth Hashachar and Yesod Hamadah.  The Court was composed of Mr. Justice Webb, and Mr. Justice Plunkett and Dr. Washitz appeared for the defence.

   Five witnesses for the prosecution appeared, including the doctor who examined the body after exhumation, a fortnight after his death.

   A young shepherd, aged 17, who was an eye-witness gave evidence before the Court.  The evidence he gave to-day was in total contradiction to the evidence he had given against the prisoner before the Examining Magistrate.

   In reply to questions by the Public Prosecutor as to who asked him to give different evidence before the Court from what he had given before the Magistrate, and whether he was employed by Jews, the witness replied that no none had asked him to change his evidence and he added that he was not employed by Jews.

   The prisoner was acquitted by the Court.  Mr. Justine Webb said that there was no evidence on which a conviction could be based.


The Palestine Bulletin, 4 May 1930


  Because doubts have arisen as to the validity if the warrant by which Mr. Salim Shehadeh has sat as Judge in the Courts of Criminal Essex and District Courts, since the enactment of the Courts Ordinance, 1924, an Ordinance has been enacted, whereby any judgment given by a Court of Criminal Assize or District Court of which Mr. Salim Shehadeh has been a member shall be as valid as if Mr. Shehadeh had received authorisation in each case from the Chief Justice to sit as Judge.


The Palestine Bulletin, 8 May 1930


   The annual conference of Jewish lawyers which met over the weekend, began its session in the afternoon and did not finish its discussions until the next morning.  This was perhaps inevitable when fifty lawyers were present.

   Among the resolutions that were ultimately adopted was one  which declared that the courts should take into account, in dealing with riot cases, that the Jews were those attacked and where they inflicted injuries on others it was in self-defence/.  Attention was called to the fact that none of the chief instigators had been punished.  Complaint was made about the amount of false evidence that was given in court. ...


The Palestine Bulletin, 13 May 1930                                                  [EGYPT]


   Cairo. - A judgment which is likely to draw a protest from feminists in Egypt, the Times reports, was delivered on Tuesday at the Abdin Sharia Court.  An Egyptian woman had brought a suit against her husband, claiming an allowance for the education of her daughter.  The claim was rejected, the Judges maintaining that, as there was no provision in the canonical law of Islam for the education of girls, girls should not be educated.


The Palestine Bulletin, 1 June 1930


   The High Commissioner has been moved to exercise his prerogative and commute to life imprisonment the death sentences of 22 of the 25 Arabs condemned for murders committed on Jews during the attack last August. ...There still remain several Arabs whose appeals have not been confirmed by the Court of Appeal, and paradoxically though, there is still the case of Orphali, who because he is making application for special leave to appeal to the Privy Council, is apparently not included in the commutation order. ...


The Palestine Bulletin, 2 July 1930


   Mohamed Rashid and Mohamed Darwish who were condemned to death on thebe charge of the murder with premeditation of a policeman, were released by the Court of Criminal Assizes yesterday.  Originally, the two prisoners were condemned to death on Jaffa, but the Court of Appeal quashed the death sentence and ordered a rehearing of the case because the Magistrate, Dr. Salim Shehadeh, who was one of the judges had no warrant from the Chief Justice to sit. ...   [see 4 May above.]


The Palestine Bulletin, 8 July 1930

ENGLISH COMPANY FINED L. 3,000.                                                          [Iraq]

Baghdad. - The Iraqi Courts have ordered the English Company, Launch and Co., to pay the sum of L. 3,000 for violation of the Companies Act.  This is the first case in which an Iraqi Court has passed sentence on an English Company.


The Palestine Bulletin, 10 July 1930

SEQUEL TO EGYPTIAN POLICEMAN'S MURDER.                               [Egypt.]

Cairo. (By Mail). - The British Consular general, Cairo, called officially on the Governor of Cairo on Saturday morning to express regret on his own behalf and on the part of the British Community in Cairo, at the murder of an Egyptian policeman by a British subject.  The incident in question was the murder of as policeman  of Seggala district in May last by a British Cypriot, who was sentenced to 7 years hard labour last week by H.B.M. Supreme Court.


The Palestine Bulletin, 13 July 1930


   The case of Saba Said, a former Examining magistrate and member of the District Court, appeared before the District Court on Friday.  Saba Said is charge with subornation.  It is alleged that he induced certain witnesses to give false evidence in the case of Jaralla of Bethlehem.  Mr. Justice De Freitas, Acting President of the Jerusalem District Cory was called as a witness by the Prosecution.  Mr. Justice De Freitas told the Court how Saba Said had on one occasion complained to him that there was some enmity between himself and Mussa Effendi el Alami, the prosecuting Counsel in this case, and that Mussa Effendi was gathering information by unfair means to bring a charge of bribery against him.  Saba Said had asked him, he said, to arrange a Court of Inquiry to clear up the matter.  There were a number of other prosecution witnesses one of whom was a policeman who made the investigations into the Jaralla case.

The Palestine Bulletin, 22 July 1930

In Court.


   The case against Saba Effendi Said, a former Magistrate, who is charged with subornation in connection with the case of Jad Allah El Araj, of Bethlehem, was continued yesterday.

   The charge arises out of the case of Jad Allah, a rich man of Bethlehem.  He was charged with inciting others to murder his mother.  The investigations were being carried out before the magistrate Alexander Khoury, but before the inquiry had finished and only two witnesses had been heard the case was transferred and was heard before the prisoner, Saba Said, who was then Examining Magistrate in Jerusalem.  Saba Said heard the case and committed for trial Jad Allah El Araj.  He also committed for trial for conspiracy the two witnesses who gave evidence against Jad  Allah, saying that he ha incited them to kill his brother.  The present case has been brought against Saba said, as he is alleged to have been given money by Jad Allah El Araj and is alleged to have influenced the two witnesses.  Zaki Eff. Daoudi, a second Inspector, continued his evidence yesterday and was cross examined by Dr. Eliash, counsel for the Defence.

   Zaki Eff. was followed by Saleh Azoukeh who conducted the investigations in the Jad  Allah case before the Examining Magistrate.  The last witness was Asack El Asali.  He stated that he met the accused with Zaki Effendi Daoudi, on August 3rd, 1929, and the accused asked him whether he had not helped him after he had killed a man.  He answered "Thank you."  The witness stated that a convict who had escaped was killed by himself and at that time Saba Said was Public Prosecutor.  The Attorney general ordered that no proceedings should be taken against the witness doe the murder of the convict.

   This concluded the evidence of the Prosecution.

   The case will finish to-day and judgment is expected.

   The case was heard before Mr. Justice Copland, Mr. Justice Tutt and Dr. Shehadeh.

   Must. Eff. El Alami represents the Attorney General and Dr. Eliash for the defence.

The Palestine Bulletin, 24 July 1930


   After listening to the appeal of Dr. Eliash, the District Court pronounced Saba Effendi Said, former Magistrate, "not guilty of the charge of attempting to conspire with on Zaki Daoudi to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to Section 10 of the Perjury Ordinance."

   Mr. Justice Copland delivered the judgment yesterday morning before a full Court, after a long deliberation.  He stated that they had unanimously found the accused guiltless of the first charge and by a majority had freed him of the perjury charge.  When Saba Said had been released, he warmly shook the hand of his Counsel.  Several relatives of the former Magistrate who were present in Court embraced Dr. Eliash and expressed their gratitude for his fine appeal.

   It is understood that Saba will be reinstated in the Magistrate's office and that he will be granted the half pay which was withheld whole there were charges against him.

   The Court was composed of Mr. Justice Copland, Mr. Justice Tute and Dr. Shehadeh.  Moussa Effendi El Alami appeared for the Prosecution.


The Palestine Bulletin, 28 July 1930


   We learn that the Privy Council in London has refused to hear the appeal against sentence of death passed in the Persian Jew, Urphali, who was found guilty of murder during the riots.

   Urphali was originally found guilty and his case was sent back for re-hearing by the Court of Appeal.  He was a second time found guilty and his second appeal was dismissed.

   When H.E. the High Commissioner commuted the death sentences to terms of penal servitude for life, Urphali was excepted because his appeal to the Privy Council was then under consideration.

   Only one other Jew, P.C. Hinkis, was found guilty of murder (by the Court of Appeal) - murder, without premeditation) ass a result of the riots and he is serving sentence of 15 years imprisonment.

   It is very unusual for the Privy Council to hear appeals in cases of murder, although very recently in the case of Dr. Knowles they heard the appeal and upset the sentence.

   Abcarius Bey also appealed unsuccessfully to the Privy Council for the Arab murderers.


The Palestine Bulletin, 1 August 1930


   Can a Government advocate appear for a private person?  Till now it has been supposed that there was no objection, but the Court has given its decision to the effect that such an advocate cannot appear except non behalf of the government.

   The point was raised by Abcarius Bey in a case where the Junior Government Advocate of Haifa had been asked to appear for one Hassan el Haj Said of Zeita.  Abcarius Bey, on behalf of his clients, petitioned the Court and as a result of his successful application, the Attorney General has been ordered to issue instructions to the Government Advocate in Haifa not to appear for Hassan el Haj Said.


The Palestine Bulletin, 8 August 1930


Ten Years Imprisonment For Twice Condemned Man.

   It is officially announced that His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government has reprieved Joseph Mizrachi Orphali, who was sentenced to death for a murderous offence committed at Jaffa on the 25th August, 1929.

   His Excellency commuted the sentence to one of imprisonment for ten years.

   The above official announcement may satisfy no one but at least it will give a breathing space to those who have felt for a long time that the decisions in this case were, to say the last, unfortunate.  The Arab Press was recently demanding the head of Orphali and his counsel demanded a release and actually went to the Privy Council that a final decision might be given.  The Privy Council refused to hear the case and the High Commissioner has given no uncertain reply to the other inhuman demand.

   Here we shall merely give the details of this case: ...


The Palestine Bulletin, 11 August 1930.


... The Falastin could not understand why when persons on both sides were convicted after a "revolt" the condemned Jews should have received more favourable treatment. ...

   The Jews succeeded in delivering their son Urphali, without much noise and empty words of protest, says "Al Hayat." ...

   Thus the flood of articles, to use Falastin's language, has already been let loose, and their authors seem to have overlooked one vital factor, that is, that this reprieve would not have been granted had not the Actins High Commissioner and his advisers had very substantial reasons for believing that any other course would have been a miscarriage of justice.   


The Palestine Bulletin, 22 September 1930


   A question of great importance was decided against the Police, acting on instructions from the Palestine Railways in connection with the right of an interpreter to act as such in a railway carriage without special permission.

   An Arab interpreter was yesterday brought before the Magistrate, charge with having unlawfully acted as interpreter in a train, without special license from a station-master.

   The Magistrate held that since the interpreter had paid the normal fare and had received as ticket, he was entitled to travel in the train and to interpret for travellers without permission.


   The Palestine Bulletin, 6 October 1930

Can An Agent Sue?

Foreign Company Not Registered Here.

   A case of very great importance to the business community if Palestine was yesterday decided by the Court of Appeal to Jerusalem.  The judgment decided that where a person orders goods through an agent in Palestine of a company abroad, that agent can sue whether the Company be registered in Palestine or not.

   The facts of this particular case may be shortly stated.

   A merchant of Jaffa, Daoud Khoury, ordered goods from Hayim Rohald, of Tel Aviv, the agent for the Victoria Porcelain Factory Ltd of Czechoslovakia.  This company is not registered in Palestine.

   When the goods arrived, Daoud Khoury refused to accept them.  The agent brought an action against the purchaser, but the Magistrate decided that he could not hear the case because the Company was not registered here.

   The case was taken on appeal to the District Court of Jaffa and the judgment of the Magistrate was upheld.  It was from this latter decision that the Court of Appeal yesterday dissented.

   The case has been sent back to be heard on its merits. The Court was composed of the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Frumkin and Mr. Justice Moustapha Khalil.  Mr. Fealty appeared for the appellant.  Mr. Goldberg appeared for the respondent.


The Palestine Bulletin, 17 October 1920


   An important case was yesterday heard before the High Court in Jerusalem, Me. Justice Corrie, Nr, Justice Frumkin and Mr. Justice Hayat.  A case is being made by Mr. Hankin who bought 6000 dunams of land more than 15 years ago in the neighbourhood of Nablus.

   The land was never registered in his own name, noir did he take the title to it.

   In 1928 Mr. Hankin asked the Court at Nablus to register the land to his own name.  The vendor, Mahmoud Sammarreh, claimed that the land was now his, owing to the fact that so many years had passed by.

   The Court held against Mr. Hankin and refused to register his title.

   Yesterday it was argued by Mr. [Ma....] on behalf of Mr. Rankin, that 15 years had indeed lapsed since the purchase, but that his client had been absent from the country during the War and that therefore time could not run against him till he returned.

   The case was adjourned in order to give Mr. Hankin time to prove when he was absent from Palestine and when he had returned. Aouni Bey and Mr. Moughannem appeared for the respondent.


The Palestine Bulletin, 20 October 1930


   "Falastin" states that a suggestion has been made to take the Sharia Moslem Courts out of the competence of the Supreme Moslem Council and to place them under the same department as the Civil Courts.


The Palestine Bulletin, 17 November 1930


   On November 20 judgment will be delivered in Nablus in the case of Alel Ali, one of the five brothers accused of murdering his sister.  The judgment will be read with interest because for the first time in Palestine the life of an accused person depends on the result of an X-Ray examination.  The Public Prosecutor is Dr. Bardaki.


The Palestine Bulletin, 20 November 1930


   The heirs to the Estate of the late Jawdat Said Dajany beg to make it known that the Moslem Religious Court has approved the appointment of the deceased's wife, Aziz Bey Daoudi and Rafat Bey Dajany as Guardians to the children of the deceased, and that all the heirs have approved that the said Guardians administer the estate on their behalf.  The said Administrators have therefore appointed the Auditor Mr. F. S. Saba to act as Liquidator for the said Estate, and it is hereby requested that all matters regarding the Estate should be referred to the said Liquidator in his Office at Connaught House, Jerusalem, P.O. Box 268, Tel. 295.


The Palestine Bulletin, 26 November 1930


   An interesting case came before the Court of Appeals yesterday.  For having a document, made in 1925 without a stamp, M. Tribunivitz was fined L.P. 11 by the District Court.  The judgment was based on the Mejelle and on the Stamp Duty Ordinance of 1927.

   The Court of Appeal held yesterday that only the Mejelle applied since the document was dated 1925, and was made before the publication of the new Ordinance.  The fine was reduced to L.P. 2 by the Court of Appeal.  Mr. N. Ruda, of Jaffa, appeared for the appellants.


The Palestine Bulletin, 28 November 1930


   Mr. Silver has been fined L.P. 5 by the District Court of Jaffa for passing off his tooth paste at that of Gibbs and for infringement of Trade Mark.  The cartons in which the Palestine paste was placed were intended, the Court held, to give the impression that the famous English paste was being sold.  Mr. Turtledove for the Attorney General.  Dr. Gershman for Mr. Silver.


   The Mufti of Jerusalem, acting as President of the Supreme Moslem Council, forced Sheikh Mohamed Hifzi to vacate the post of Muezzin of Acre Mosque.

   For many generations the Muezzinship has been in the Hifzi family.

   Sheikh Muhammed took his complaint to court, producing firmans from various Sultans shewing that he and his family held the right to remain Muezzins.  The Court held in his favour and he will return to Acre in spite of the Supreme Moslem Council.


The Palestine Bulletin, 11 December 1930

CHIEF JUSTICE OF PALESTINE IN EGYPT.                                        [Egypt]

   The Chief Justice returned to Palestine from Egypt yesterday after a busy two days.

   It was he who sat as President of a special Court of Appeal, together with Judge Holmes, the procureur general of the Mixed Courts of Egypt, and Mr. Musgrave Thomas, Acting Chief Justice of Cyprus.

   The appeal arose out of a decision of H. H. Sir Wasey Sterry, Judge of the Supreme Court of Egypt, who sentenced one Foley to two years' imprisonment because he had smuggled drugs into that country.

   The appeal had to be held over from early in the morning till late in the afternoon, because the warrant providing for Judge Homes to sit was not in order.  Mr. Silley, who appeared for the Arabs before the Shaw Commission, now appeared for the drug traffickers.


The Palestine Bulletin, 29 December 1930


Cairo, Saturday. - Yesterday at the Italian Consular Court, Cairo, the trial of the persons implicated in the forged share case was commenced before Cay, Impalomeni.  The accused in this case are Aldo Ventura, Attilio Ventura, Giuseppe Bambi and Mlle. Angelina Sarubi.  Gambi has not yet been found and will be tried by default.  The following banks are represented in a civil action against the accused: National Bank of Egypt (Ex Lloyd), Ottoman Bank, Commercial Bank of Egypt and the Comptoir National d'Escompte de Paris.

   Aldo Ventura is accused of (a) having appropriated L. 57,000 worth of unified debt shares and Fcs. Gold 42,000 worth of Credit Foncier Egyptian Founders shares; (b) of having put into circulation 3 falsified Unified Debt bearer shares of a nominal value of L. 1000 each and (c) of having substituted 20 false Credit Foncier Egyptien founders shares at the Ottoman Bank in Cairo in place of real ones.

   Attilio Ventura is accused of (a) having received in Cairo between 1925 and September 1930, Unified Debt 4 per cent from founders shares to a nominal value of L. 37,000 and 20 Credit Foncier Egyptien founders shares, the fruits of the charges imputed to Attilio Ventura, but not with being implicated in the charges, and (b) of having negotiated at the offices of M. Naggiar, in Cairo, false Credit Foncier Egyptien bearer shares; of having sent to Cairo, between April 17, 1930, and September 29, 1930, to Milonas Zaccarias, false founders shares in the Credit Foncier Egyptien.

   Giuseppe Gambi is accused of having sold 37 false Unified Debt 4 per cent bearer shares of a nominal value of L. 1,000 each to Attilio Ventura, without being accused of falsifying them, and of having deposited at the National Bank of Egypt, ex Lloyds Bank branch, as a guarantee for L. E. 11,900, 16 false Unified Debt bearer shares of a nominal value of  L. 1,000 each, and (b) of having since 1915 sold 20 false Credit Foncier Egyptien founders shares.

   Mlle Angelina Sarrubi is accused of having received, probably since September 1930, Italian Lire 225,000 from Attilio Ventura, without being concerned in the charge.


The Palestine Bulletin, 31 December 1930



(From Our Haifa Correspondent.)

Three years imprisonment was the sentence passed yesterday on Napthali Rubenstein who was found guilty of injuring and attempting to murder Rozk Elias Rozkallah.  This is the last case arising out of the Riots of 1929. ...

Published by Centre for Comparative Law, History and Governance at Macquarie Law School