UN Conciliation Commission (1949). United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine Working Paper on the Holy Places. стр. 26. „The Palestine Administration interpreted the Status Quo in respect of the Wailing Wall as being that the Jewish Community had a right of access to the pavement in front of the Wall for their devotions, but that the Wall itself, the pavement in front of it and the adjacent Moroccan Quarter, were legally Moslem property. The Jews might bring to the Wall only those appurtenances of worship that were allowed under the Ottoman regime. This position was in general reaffirmed by the International Commission appointed by the British Government in 1930, with the approval of the Council of the League of Nations, to enquire into conflicting rights and claims concerning the Wailing Wall. The International Commission further ruled that although the Jews enjoyed no sort of proprietary rights to the Wall or the adjacent pavement, they should have free access to them at all times, subject to certain stipulations. The placing of benches and screens against the Wall was prohibited; the Moslems were similarly forbidden to carry out the Zikr ceremony during the progress of Jewish devotions or to cause annoyance to the Jews in any other way; no political speeches or demonstrations near the Wall were to be allowed; the Moslems' right to repair the pavement was affirmed, and if any repairs were not carried out by them in due time, the work was to be undertaken by the Government. The maintenance of the Wall itself was entrusted to the Government, but it was understood that repairs to it should be carried out only after consultation with the Supreme Moslem Council and the Chief Rabbinate.”
wikisource.org
en.wikisource.org
Cust, L. G. A. (1929). The Status Quo in the Holy Places. H.M.S.O. for the High Commissioner of the Government of Palestine. стр. 44—45. „The immediate neighbourhood of the Wailing Wall is inhabited by a number of Moroccan families, who are the beneficiaries of the ancient Waqf dating from the thirteenth century of Abu Midian. Some of the dwellings are entered from the space in front of the Wall. The wall separating the garden to the north from the Wailing Wall was rebuilt without incident in 1929. The wall overlooking the Wailing Wall by the Bab-al-Mughrabi was also rebuilt at the same time. The Moslems wanted to erect a low wall, but it was ruled, to preserve the Status Quo, that the wall must be rebuilt to its former height. The Wailing Wall, as being one of the few relics of the Temple of Herod of undisputed authenticity, is held in very great veneration by the Jews. Jewish writers refer to it as "the Holiest possession of the fifteen millions of Jews throughout the world which they have not forgotten for one moment since the Dispersion." On Sabbaths and other Holy Days the Wall is thronged with worshippers, the American and European Jew mixing with the Orthodox Jew in his caftan and the Bokharan in his gorgeous silks. The Jewish custom of praying here is of considerable antiquity, being mentioned by Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela and has now become an established right. This right to pray has, however, become linked with the claim to the actual ownership of the Wall. The Moslems resist this on the ground that the Wall is an integral part of the enclosure wall of the Haram al Sharif, and that the space in front of it is a public way, and part of the premises of the Abu Midian Waqf. For this reason the Moslems have always protested against the placing of benches or chairs in front of the Wall by the Jews as causing an obstruction in this public way and implying possessory rights. Though benches have certainly from time to time been introduced, there is extant a resolution taken by the Administrative Council and confirmed by the Mutasarrif in 1912 that chairs or tents or curtains (to divide the women from the men) are not to be allowed. This is still enforced, but portable camp-stools or boxes or tins with cushions are permitted for the convenience of worshippers. This ruling was notified to the Jewish religious authorities and the Police by the District Governor in 1922, and confirmed in 1926 after a rather serious dispute had arisen on account of the introduction of some benches on the previous Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur).”
