\n
19th Meeting<\/p><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n\n (PM) TAKE #6<\/p><\/div>\n \n Press Release GA\/PAL\/22<\/p><\/div>\n \n 21 October 1947<\/p><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n <\/p>\n \n AD HOC COMMITTEE ON PALESTINE – (PM) TAKE #6<\/p><\/div>\n \n Dr. Evatt then asked if the Canadian Delegation would be willing to withdraw the Canadian amendment to the US resolution.<\/p><\/div>\n \n The Canadian Representative, Mr. L. B. Pearson, replied Canada would prefer to retain its amendment which dealt with implementation.<\/p><\/div>\n \n The next speaker, Dr. Joaquin E. Meyer of Cuba, said he agreed with the El Salvadorian proposal for conciliation. He agreed also on the conciliation sub-committee and believed it should have all freedom to study the problem as it saw fit, including the problems of Jews and Arabs of Palestine, as well as hearing from the Jews and Arabs from other parts of the world.<\/p><\/div>\n \n He reserved the right to speak in the two other sub-committees on the substance of the problem.<\/p><\/div>\n \n The next speaker, Prof. E. R. Fabregat (Uruguay) said the committee was now faced by two fundamentally different matters; first, the matter of procedure, and second, the matter of principle.<\/p><\/div>\n \n Until the procedural question was solved, he said, the committee would not be able to study the principles. He then proposed that the <\/span>majority report<\/a> |