[Sailor Steve]

Thursday, November 6, 1919

PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE

M Pichon’s Room, Quai d’Orsay, Paris, 10:30

Meeting of the Heads of Delegations of the Five Great Powers.


1. The Council had before it two telegrams from Sir George Clerk to the Supreme Council dated November 4th and November 5th, a telegram from situation in the Interallied Military Mission dated November 5th, and another telegram from the same sources dated November 3rd, all concerning the situation in Hungary.

M Pichon points out that the telegram sent by the Council to Sir George Clerk on the preceding day satisfied in great measure the requests contained in his two telegrams. Both Sir George Clerk and the Inter-Allied Military Mission are opposed to the despatch of Yugoslav and Czech troops. As the suggestion of the French Delegation has not met with approval the point will not be insisted upon.

Sir Eyre Crowe observes that Sir George Clerk had asked authority to recognize at once the coalition government which he hoped would be formed. It would be well to give him this authority. The telegram of the preceding day gave him, as a matter of fact, an answer on this point. Sir George Clerk likewise desires not to be obliged to insist on the immediate withdrawal of Friedrich. On this point also the Council should meet his views.

M Pichon says that a telegram should be sent to Sir George Clerk confirming the previous instructions of the Council and stating, moreover, that the Council relies on his tact. But the question still remained: What will happen after the departure of the Romanian troops? Would not the presence of an Inter-Allied force be necessary? Would the Inter-Allied Mission suffice for the maintenance of order?

Sir Eyre Crowe points out that this question had already been raised in the telegram sent on the preceding day, which had crossed Sir George Clerk’s telegrams. He wishes to call attention to another point: Would it not be well to request the Yugoslavs and the Czechs to retire immediately within their frontiers as laid down by the Council? According to the telegram of November 3rd, from the Inter-Allied Military Mission, the Czechs are raising difficulties with respect to the evacuation of the mines of Salgo-Tarjan: they were demanding as a condition precedent, reimbursement for their expenses relative to the supply of the Hungarian population. Would it not be well to request the Czechs to withdraw, at the same time assuring them that the Council would take into consideration the question of reimbursement for their expenses? Likewise, in the south, the Yugoslavs were still occupying the mines at Pecs, whereas, according to the decisions of the Council, that territory was to remain in the possession of Hungary.

S de Martino thinks that this is the time to insist upon all States bordering on Hungary recognizing the frontiers of the Hungarian State.

Mr Polk observes that the Governments concerned had been notified of the lines laid down as the northern and eastern frontiers of Hungary; he wishes to inquire whether there has been a similar notification with respect to the frontier between Hungary and the Serb-Croat-Slovene State.

M de Saint Quentin explains that at the time the Council had disallowed the Yugoslav claims in Baranya and Batchka, the Serbian Delegation had been notified of its decision. As a result of this notification the Serbs had formulated new proposals: They had, in particular, asked the right of exploiting the mines of Pecs for five years. The Serbian request had been referred to the Reparation Commission and the Economic Commission but both of these considered themselves without jurisdiction, as the question, to their minds, was essentially a political one; however, the Serbian request had neither been examined by the Central Territorial Committee nor the Committee for the Study of Territorial Questions relating to Romania and Yugoslavia.

M Pichon says that the Serbs must be informed that the territorial question had been settled, but that this decision would not prejudice the decision to be taken by the Council with respect to the exploitation of the mines of Pecs. He suggests that the latter question should be referred to the Committee for the Study of Territorial Questions relating to Romania and Yugoslavia.

Sir Eyre Crowe points out that a new fact had occurred; on October 25th the Serbian Delegation had asked that the evacuation of the territories actually held by the Yugo-Slav troops should be deferred until the question of the exploitation of the mines had been settled.

M Berthelot thinks the Yugo-Slav request inadmissible from the territorial point of view.

M Pichon says it was agreed that the Czechoslovaks and the Yugoslavs, as well as the Romanians, should be asked to evacuate. Moreover, M Berthelot will prepare a draft telegram to Sir George Clerk.

M Berthelot reads a draft telegram prepared in accordance with the views expressed by the Council.

Sir Eyre Crowe feels it useless, since it had been decided not to send Czech and Yugoslav contingents into Hungary, to ask Sir George Clerk if he deems it expedient to send an Interallied force.

M Berthelot thinks that the question should nevertheless be raised, because if Sir George Clerk should say that such a force is necessary it will be worthwhile studying the plan anew. In view of Sir George’s report as to the attitude of Friedrich it might be well to reflect on what would happen when Friedrich, with 30,000 men, found himself opposed to the Supreme Council and a mission of Generals without any troops.

Sir Eyre Crowe wonders what would happen if Sir George Clerk indicates that the sending of an Inter-Allied force is essential or even desirable. The only possible reply would be that no one could be sent.

M Berthelot acknowledges that the situation will be difficult but he thinks that it will not present an absolute impossibility.

S de Martino remarks that Italy will certainly not send any troops.

M Pichon agrees that the French also would find great difficulty in sending any.

Sir Eyre Crowe thinks that the question is purely an academic one. The wording proposed by M Berthelot presents the difficulty that Sir George Clerk might well think that he was being offered something which the Council could not give him.

M Pichon agrees that the telegram should be modified in the light of Sir Eyre Crowe’s remarks and should state that the Principal Allied and Associated Powers would find it very difficult to send any troops if the need should arise.

Sir Eyre Crowe thinks that Sir George Clerk should also be asked if he deems the Hungarian Police force adequate to cope with the situation.

S de Martino desires a further addition to the effect that the Police force could be placed under the control of the Interallied Military Mission.

(It is decided:

(1) That Sir Eyre Crowe should send to Sir George Clerk, in the name of the Supreme Council, the telegram prepared by M. Berthelot;

(2) That the Czech and Serb-Croat-Slovene Governments should be requested to withdraw their troops immediately beyond the frontiers of Hungary as laid down by the Council;

(3) That the Serb-Croat-Slovene Government should be informed that the decisions taken by the Council with respect to territorial questions are final, but that the evacuation requested will not prejudice the solution of the question of the exploitation of the mines of Pecs;


(4) That the request of the Serb-Croat-Slovene Delegation proposing the grant to that Government for five years of the exploitation of the mines of Pecs, should be referred to the Committee for the study of Territorial Questions relating to Romania and Yugoslavia.


2. M Berthelot informs the Council that the Germans have given to the Press a fairly complete summary of the note and annexed Publication of protocol sent to them by the Council. He inquires if, under the circumstances, it would not be advisable to publish the complete text of that note.

(After a short discussion it is decided to publish the text of the note addressed to the German Government relative to the putting into force of the Treaty of Peace as well as the draft protocol annexed to that note.


3. The Council has before it a letter from General Nollet dated October 21, 1919, a note from the Drafting Committee dated October 29th 1919, and a letter from Marshal Foch dated November 3, 1919, concerning the Salaries of the Personnel of Commissions of Control in Germany.

General Walch reads and comments upon Marshal Foch’s letter.

Mr Polk, with respect to the organization of the personnel of the Commissions of Control, asks why it is necessary to call upon civilian engineers?

General Walch explains that the military technical personnel are inadequate to control the manufacture of war material. It is necessary to call upon competent specialists who cannot be found in the regular army.

General Nollet has called upon about 10 engineers and about 40 university graduates. In so doing he has only followed the example furnished by the British Commission of Control.

(It is decided that the payment of the salaries of the personnel of the Military Commissions of Control in Germany not belonging to regular military forces, should be assumed by Germany.)


4. The Council has before it a note from the British Delegation dated November 3, 1919, concerning the Publication of the Correspondence With the Austrian Delegation.

Sir Eyre Crowe points out that the note of the British Delegation specifies that extreme care should be exercised with respect to the publication of the Austrian Notes marked “Confidential”.

Mr Polk says that evidently such notes cannot be published without the consent of Chancellor Renner.

Sir Eyre Crowe suggests that Dr Renner could be asked if he still objects to the publication of those Notes.

S de Martino observes that the publication of the notes raises some questions which are delicate from an Italian point of view, and he asks that a decision on this point be postponed.

(The question is adjourned)


5. The Council has before it a letter from Marshal Foch to the President of the Peace Conference dated October 30th, 1919, and a note from the Drafting Committee dated November 5th, 1919, concerning the Demobilization of the Men of Haller’s Army.

M Fromageot reads and comments upon these documents.

(After a short discussion it was decided to approve the recommendations of the note of the Drafting Committee relative to demobilized Poles who had borne arms against Germany.)


6. The Council has before it a note from the Committee on Organization of the Reparation Commission dated October 31st, 1919, concerning Financial Measures of Coercion Taken Against Germany on Account of the Non-evacuation of the Baltic Provinces.

M Fromageot reads and comments upon this note. He observes that it is not correct to speak of the annulment of authorizations which might have been given: The question is one of revocation of said authorization. Germany cannot now create new pledges by availing itself of authorizations previously given, inasmuch as any such authorizations are now revoked.

(It is decided that the Drafting Committee should prepare a reply to M Loucheur’s letter dated October 31st, 1919, relative to the interpretation of the financial measures of coercion taken against Germany on account of the non-evacuation of the Baltic Provinces.


7. The Council has before it a note from the Drafting Committee concerning the Liquidation of the Property of Inhabitants of Schleswig.

M Fromageot states that the Danish Government has pointed out that after the plebiscite the inhabitants of Schleswig would become Danish citizens. What would become of the interests of those newly-made Danish subjects whose property in the meantime might have been liquidated by one of the Allied and Associated Powers as belonging to enemy subjects? The Drafting Committee has considered this contingency in the note which the Council had before it. It appears that answer might be made to the Danish Government along the lines of the last paragraph of the said note; the Allied and Associated Powers, however, would always be at liberty to avail themselves of their rights of liquidation with respect to such new Danish subjects as did not seem to merit the consideration therein contemplated. Moreover, if the Principal Allied and Associated Powers arrive at such a decision, they should notify the other Allied Powers who, doubtless, will raise no difficulty over adopting the same procedure.

M Pichon suggests that the Drafting Committee should come to an agreement with the Economic Commission, which has the question in hand, on the draft of a resolution to be communicated to the other Allied Powers.

Sir Eyre Crowe points out that the Danish Government will have to be approached.

Mr Polk takes it as understood that the draft resolution will be submitted to the Council. He points out that he will have to refer the matter to his Government.


8. M Berthelot reminds the Council that at a previous meeting the question of an American Military Mission reported to be at Riga had been brought up. According to his present information there appears to be at Riga, besides a mission of relief and supply and a Red Cross mission, a mission under Colonel Holliday, who was reported to have arrived at Riga on October 15th. The Colonel was reported to have stated that he did not desire to collaborate with the Anglo-French Mission.

Mr Polk explains that Colonel Holliday is there alone. His duties are purely to collect information, and he has no political role to play. Moreover, General Cheney will see that he does not exceed his powers.


9. S de Martino informed the Council that the Italian delegates to the Plebiscite and Delimitation Commissions will arrive at Paris on November 10th. They will be ready from that day on to confer with their Allied colleagues.

M Pichon says that Marshal Foch will be informed of this.


10. S de Martino says that he has been informed from Vienna that Serbian and Romanian representatives wish to participate in the work of the Commission, presided over by Sir Francis Dent, which is charged with the distribution of rolling stock. This claim seems inadmissible, inasmuch as neither Serbia nor Romania had signed the Austrian Treaty.

Sir Eyre Crowe thinks that the Commission in question is only a provisional one.

M de Saint Quentin explains that it has been decided to send to Vienna a provisional Commission which would become a permanent Commission when the Treaty comes into force. The character of the Commission is apparent from the fact that Hungary, an enemy country, is represented on it; it will therefore be difficult to deny representation to the Serbs and Romanians.

S de Martino says that he will examine the question anew.


11. Mr Polk says that his Government wishes to know if the question of the recognition of Luxembourg is to be decided by the Council.

M Berthelot summarizes the history of the question: When the question first arose five or six months ago the French Government declared that, from a political point of view, it would refrain from active participation in the Luxembourg question, and that it thought that the Belgian Government should be the first to make a decision. Belgium had told the French Government that it was opposed to recognizing the Grand Duchess. The French Government had transmitted this information to Rome, Washington and London and the Principal Powers abstained from recognizing the Grand Duchess. Eventually, and after at first refusing, Belgium consented that the fiancé of the Grand Duchess should be allowed to go to Luxembourg. The marriage was taking place that very day. Two days previously the Belgian Government had asked the French Government if it intended to recognize the Grand Duchess and to be represented at the marriage ceremony. He himself had replied by putting the same question to the Belgian Ambassador, since France had decided that Belgium should have the first word in political questions concerning Luxembourg. The Belgian Government had not yet replied. The French Government had been informed from other sources that the British Government intended to recognize the Grand Duchess and to be represented at the marriage ceremony. The French Government had then acquainted the British Government with the exact situation, at the same time informing the Italian Government.

M Pichon says that the Council will arrive at a decision on the Luxembourg question.

(The meeting then adjourns.)