Great Britain, British Jews, and the international protection of Romanian Jews, 1900-1914: a study of Jewish diplomacy and minority rights

 
197
not mentioned. Mişu expressed his satisfaction with the British position, since 
Britain was not attempting to modify the Treaty of Bucharest.
62
 
 
As a result of the Balkan Wars, Romania became practically independent 
of the alliances. While Romania did not break its alliance with Austria, relations 
between the two countries worsened. The situation on the eve of the First 
World War was such that both alliances courted Romania.
63
 The British 
Minister in Bucharest, George Barclay, believed that in the event of war 
Romania was unlikely to carry out any arrangement with Austria — and this 
was exactly what happened when the First World War broke out. Romania was 
strong after the Balkan Wars: it had acquired the territory it wanted with very 
little cost.
64
 Russia and France tried to exploit the change in Romania’s position, 
while Britain did not really want to get involved in the matter. Consequently, 
Russia accused the British Foreign Office and the British minister in Bucharest 
of being too inactive.
65
 Britain did not want to meddle in purely Balkan 
problems — those problems that did not touch the Straits, Asiatic Turkey, and 
the Mediterranean. If Britain had to become involved in Balkan questions, it 
wished to preserve the present alignment of power and tried to limit the scale 
of the conflict.
66
  
 
A worry that Russians had was the fear that Britain was willing to push 
for a new minority rights guarantee which would irritate the Romanian 
government.
67
 As a reply to this accusation, Grey argued that British interests 
embraced all minorities who were covered by the Berlin Treaty, not only those 
residing in Romania. Presently, the main question was the situation of those 
minorities that resided in the recently annexed territories.
68
 Grey therefore 
hinted at the fate of the Dobrudjan Jews, but did not particularly single them 
out. He also appeared to imply that the Romanian Jewish question as a whole 
was not to be forgotten. 
 
The status of the territory annexed by Romania, Southern Dobrudja, came 
under scrutiny again in spring and early summer 1914, when the Romanian 
government set up the administrative structure of the province. The British 
minister in Bucharest, George Barclay, was not very well-informed as far as the 
new legal arrangements in the region were concerned. In June 1914, Barclay 
complained that he had not received a French-language copy of the Dobrudjan 
administrative law. He had tried to read about the law in the newspapers but, 
due to his limited knowledge of the Romanian language, could not quite grasp 
                                                           
62
  
FO 371/2110/72/13558, Grey to G. Barclay, 23 March 1914. 
63
  
Schroeder 1976, 3. The section of Schroeder’s paper discussing the British attitude 
towards the Balkans and Romania is based on Arthur Nicolson’s correspondence in 
the Foreign Office private papers (FO 800) series.  
64
  
FO 371/2089/13944, G. Barclay to Grey, 11 March 1914, annual report of 1913.  
65
  
FO 371/2089/23138, G. Barclay to Grey, 24 May 1914; FO 371/2089/23138. Grey to 
G. Barclay, 2 June 1914. 
66
  
Schroeder 1976, 15, 18-19. 
67
  
FO 371/2089/23138, G. Barclay to Grey, 24 May 1914. 
68
  
FO 371/2089/23138, Grey to G. Barclay, 2 June 1914. 

---

 
198 
the provisions of the law! However, he concluded that there ‘appeared to be’ no 
discrimination against Jews.
69
  
 
Jews were not the only section of the Southern Dobrudjan population that 
sought foreign support. Claud Russell, a clerk in the Foreign Office, remarked 
after reading a complaint sent by representatives of the Bulgarian population: 
 
 
‘I do not see what can be done for them and I am afraid they have nothing to look 
forward to under the “rights of minorities” reaffirmation. H. M. Govt. cannot 
intervene effectively on their behalf with a Govt. like that of Roumania.’
70
  
 
However, if George Barclay was not sure what the legal position of Dobrudjan 
residents was going to be, British Jews were not much more knowledgeable 
about the matter either. The Jewish Chronicle hinted on several occasions in late 
1913 that the position of the Dobrudjan inhabitants — Jews and non-Jews alike 
— would turn out to be ambiguous and that their status would be that of 
second-class Romanian citizens.
71
 This assessment had been repeated over and 
over again since early 1913. However, the Jewish Chronicle did not write 
anything specific on the circumstances in Dobrudja nor did it base its views on 
any facts. When the Dobrudjan administrative law was finally adopted in 
Romania, it escaped the notice of the Jewish Chronicle altogether.   
 
The Romanian law on the administration of the new territories was passed 
in April 1914. Bulgarian citizens living in the Southern Dobrudjan district on the 
date of the Bucharest Treaty of 11 August 1913 were to become Romanian 
citizens. Thus, the Jewish inhabitants of Dobrudja were granted Romanian 
citizenship — at least on paper. The Jews, as a group or a special category, were 
not singled out in the law, even though some provisions were aimed at the 
Moslem inhabitants.
72
 Therefore, the worst scenario for the Jewish community 
— the discriminatory treatment of Dobrudjan Jews on the basis of their religion 
— did not come to pass. There were, nevertheless, some serious shortcomings 
in the new piece of legislation as to political rights and citizenship procedures. 
These stipulations revealed that the fears expressed by, for example, the Jewish 
Chronicle had materialised to some extent; the inhabitants of Dobrudja did not 
acquire political rights identical to those of their Romanian counterparts.  
 
The Dobrudjans were not happy with the new administration, but their 
complaints did not directly refer to the Jewish situation in the province. 
Criticism centred on the fact that the Dobrudjans were going to form a new 
category of Romanian subjects without full rights. The authorities established 
special commissions to deal with the citizenship process. The Dobrudjans did 
                                                           
69
  
FO 371/1917/25550, G. Barclay to Grey, 3 June 1914. This despatch can only be 
found in the Bulgarian files, although it arrived from Bucharest. In general, British 
representatives in Romania were able to obtain information more easily than George 
Barclay was in this particular case. Problems like Barclay’s were therefore rare 
occurrences.  
70
  
FO 371/1917/32730, minute by Russell, 21 July 1914. 
71
  
JC, 12 Nov. 1913 and 28 Nov. 1913. 
72
   FO 371/2089/28020, G. Barclay to Grey, 13 June 1914, enclosure: copy of the 
Administration Law, 31 March/13 April 1913. 

---