of America, for instance, would not have been able to have carried out its large programme of   
emigration, had it not succeeded in tapping the resources of relatives. This source should   
continue to be tapped after the war, and in particular, as regards to the expenses of emigration.   
As already mentioned, reunion of families will be an important post-war activity. Where the   
breadwinner, himself a former refugee, has established himself in his country of adoption, it is   
right that he should make his full contribution towards the cost of reunion. Similarly, relatives   
who are not refugees, but have lived long in the country of emigration, and who are prepared to   
act as sponsors, should be encouraged to bear a reasonable share of the cost. There is a private   
      as well as an international side to the problem.      
 
                                                            
 
 
 (c) Contributions from refugees themselves. Until they are permanentlv settled, the great   
majoritv of refugees are not self-supporting, unless they are allowed to take remunerative   
employment. Even when they were able to get or bring out some of their resources, these have been   
exhausted in many cases. This, however, is not always the case. Some have still considerable   
capital. Moreover, many have been able to earn their own living during the war, e.g., temporary   
migrants in Great Britain. Even if they are not able to continue that emoloyment after the war,   
some of them at any rate will not be entirely without resources. The general rule must be that   
nce to the individual should be determined by the necessity 
 
                                                            
 
 
 Apart, however, from this elementary principle, the question arises as to what contribution   
if any, refugees can reasonably be expected to make towards the finance of the problem. The   
tendency in the east has been too much in the direction of making them dependent on charity. It   
is obviously necessary to make physical distress independent of any guestion of repayment. But   
the benefits afforded to refugees often go beyond this, e.g., training or retraining, the   
provision of the implements of his profession or calling, the cost of professional education,   
expenditure on emigration, land settlement, etc. Many of the refugees from Nazi oppression are   
able, enterprising men, qualified to make a career for themselves, given the opportunity. It is   
due to their own self-respect, to a charitable public and to the taxpayer, that the assistance   
given to them should be repaid, at least in part, if and when they are able to repay it. The   
sums so repaid then become available for others less fortunate. I would like to see a wider   
he princinle of loans and repayments than has been the pract
 
                                                            
 
 
 Again, having regard to the size of the financial problem involved,, it will be necessary   
for the governments concerned to consider how far refugees should make a special contribution to   
or the puropse of refugee relief. There are several preceden
 
                        ?~  
     (i) In some countries a special duty is levied on the issue and renewal of Nansen passports,   
the proceeds of which are credited to a humanitarian fund.  
 
     (ii) Switzerland has given temnorary asylum to many refugees from Nazi persecution. The   
   Federal Government has made a graduated capital levy,