426 
APPENDIX 
— problems of principle rather than specific cases — are ordinarily 
dealt with by the Sixth or Political Committee of the Assembly. 
The Assembly does not, however, always confine itself to an exam- 
ination of the work of the Commission, as instanced by the action 
taken by the League in connection with the events which took place 
in South West Africa as a result of the uprising of the tribe of Bond- 
elzwarts in 1922.1 Here the whole question was raised in the As- 
sembly by the representative of a State which belonged to another 
continent. The Bondelzwarts case is typical of how the League 
machinery may serve to operate in special circumstances, but it 
should not be taken as a sample of the normal action of the League 
in this field. 
It is also interesting to note that considerable development has 
taken place in the last five years in the growth of the colonial work 
of the League. It will be sufficient to mention the fact that peti- 
tions from inhabitants of mandated territories or elsewhere may 
now be received officially by the Mandates Commission; ? that 
mandatory Powers are frequently represented before the Commis- 
sion by colonial administrators who are directly responsible for 
conditions in the mandated territories, such as Sir Herbert Samuel, 
British High Commissioner for Palestine, M. Hofmeyr, Administra- 
tor of South West Africa, and M. Bonnecarrére, Commissioner for 
French Togoland, all of whom appeared before the Commission in 
Geneva in 1925; and that the modification of the frontier between 
Ruanda-Urandi and Tanganyika in the interests of the native popu- 
lation resulted from a suggestion by the Commission.® Questions 
of a general character touching a large number of mandated terri- 
tories, such as the nationality of the inhabitants of these areas and 
the problem of the restoration of confidence in the financial stability 
of mandated territories, so that loans, investments, and advances 
for their development might he made without difficulty, have also 
been discussed. Action of this sort is not specifically foreseen in 
the Covenant or in the Mandates, and may perhaps not have been 
contemplated by those responsible for establishing this system of 
colonial government under international responsibility. 
As a result of the study of the operation of the Mandates sys- 
tem one may perhaps come to certain conclusions as to some of 
1 Records of the Third Assembly, Plenary Meetings, 1, p. 166; Permanent Commission: Re- 
port on the Bondelzwarts Rebellion (C. 522, 1923, v1). 
2 It should be noted that in September, 1926, an atlempt was made in the Council to 
sharply criticize tue employment of petitions by the Commission particularly in the case of 
the French suppression of the Druses in Syria. 
8 League of Nations: Official Journal. 1v. o. 1410.