158 A Short History of the Middle East
manner. If it means that had it not been for incitement by the not-
ables, the efiendis and the sheikhs, there would have been no riots,
the allegation cannot be substantiated.... Any anti-British feeling
on the part of the Arabs that may have arisen in the country
originates in the association of the Government with the further-
ance of the policy of Zionism/
Concerned at the continued unrest, the Cabinet resolved to
make a new definition of its policy, which appeared in the
'Churchill White Paper3 of 1922. While affirming that the place
of the Jews in Palestine was 'of right and not on sufferance', it
marked a definite recognition of the hard facts of the situation, in
that it did for the first time acknowledge the existence of the Arabs
as such. It remarked that 'unauthorized statements have been
made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly
Jewish Palestine. ... H.M. Government regard any such expecta-
tion as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they
at any time contemplated . . . the disappearance or the subordina-
tion of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine.
They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the
(Balfour) Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine
as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but
that such a home should be founded in Palestine.9 The White
Paper introduced for the first time the principle of'economic ab-
sorptive capacity' as a regulator of immigration. It proposed to
set up a Legislative Council, but this was boycotted by the Arabs,
who refused to recognize the validity of the Mandate. The com-
position of the proposed Council was indeed distinctly weighted
against the Arabs, since, though Muslims and Christians combined
still constituted 89 per cent, of the population, their ten elected
members could be outvoted by the ten official members and the
two elected Jewish representatives. A proposal to set up an Arab
Organization with an official status comparable with that of the
Zionist Organization was also rejected by the Arabs, 'since its
members were to be nominated by the High Commissioner, him-
self a Zionist, and the offer was conditional on its being understood
that acceptance signified the settlement of all Arab claims, together
with Arab recognition of the Balfour Declaration/1
For the next six years a sullen but superficially quiet status quo
was maintained. By 1926 it had been possible to reduce the gar-
1 Barbour, op. cit., 111,