HOMELESS RUSSIANS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18198, 18 September 1922, Page 7

HOMELESS RUSSIANS.

A BUEDEN ON EUROPE. LEAGUE'S EMIGRATION PLAN. AUSTRALIAN OPPOSITION. By Telecraph—Press Association—Copyright. (Received 11.30 p.m.) A. and N.Z. GENEVA. Sept. .17. Sir Mark Sheldon (Australia) conducted a persistent and ultimately successful opposition to a well organised attempt on the part of the- Social Committee of the Leaeue of Nations to dump Russian refugees in tens of thousands in the overseas Dominions. The proposal came up in the form of the following four resolutions by the representative of Czechoslovakia :— (1) Requesting all Governments who are members of the League to accord support to Dr. Nansen, who has been officiating as High Commissioner on behalf of the League in succouring 500,000 Russian refugees. (2) Recruiesting the Governments to place Labour exchanges at the disposal of the Russian refugees for the purpose of employment with full liberty to travel within their territories. (3) To provide refugees with identity certificates to enable them to dispense with passports. (4) Urging the Governments to come to the relief of the over-crowded European labour markets by relaxing immigration restrictions in favour of the Russians and making concrete offers of employment. Dr. Nansen supported the proposals in a strong speech in which he pointed out that 150,000 Russian refugees, mostly belonging to the richest and best-educated classes, were now penniless and workless and scattered throughout Europe. In some countries they and their women and children were foodless and destitute and were becoming a menace to the public health of Europe. Their only hope lay in transportation to healthier conditions in new countries. He appealed to international charitable organisations for help for hundreds of thousands registered in ConstantWarsaw,, Sofia, Belgrade, Paris and Berlin.

Tho committee was on the point of adopting the resolutions when Sir Mark Sheldon intervened. While not attempting to dictate to other countries, he said that, it was impossible for- him, as Australia s representative, to agree to resolutions two and four, the former being contrary to Australia's laws and the fourth impracticable owing to Australia's distance from Europe. Australia, he said, was arranging for 100,000 British emigrants a year, thereby relieving the British labour market to that extent. Furthermore, the refugees were unlikely to become readily assimilated with the Australian people. They were better fitted by language 'and racial' characteristics to be assimilated in Europe. Sir Mark Sheldon urged that the report be referred back. Ultimately the subcommittee redrafted the recommendations, ! omitting the second and fourth resolutions. Dr. Nansen frankly acknowledged that the original proposals were rot. applicable in the Dominions, and agreed that Sir Mark Sheldon was perfectly justified in. this opposition.