Paris Peace Conf. 180.03501/25

HD–25

Notes of a Meeting of the Heads of Delegations of the Five Great Powers Held in M. Pichon’s Room at the Quai d’Orsay, Paris, on Wednesday, August 6, 1919, at 3:30 p.m.

  • Present
    • America, United States of
      • Hon. F. L. Polk.
    • Secretary
      • Mr. L. Harrison.
    • British Empire
      • The Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour.
    • Secretaries
      • Mr. H. Norman.
      • Sir George Clerk.
    • France
      • M. Clemenceau.
      • M. Pichon.
    • Secretaries
      • M. Dutasta.
      • M. Berthelot.
      • M. de St. Quentin.
    • Italy
      • M. Tittoni.
    • Secretary
      • M. Paterno.
    • Japan
      • M. Matsui.
    • Secretary
      • M. Kawai.
Joint Secretariat
America, United States of Capt. Chapin.
British Empire Major Caccia.
France Capt. A. Portier.
Italy Lt. Col. A. Jones.
Interpreter—Professor P. J. Mantoux.

1. At the suggestion of Mr. Balfour (see Annex “A”) it was agreed to modify the text of the decision taken by the Conference on the 1st August, 1919, (H. D. 21, Item I1), and to request Marshal Foch to submit a report on the military measures necessary order to oblige the German Government to surrender the persons guilty of breaches of the Laws of War. Surrender of Officers Guilty of Breaches of the Laws of War

(It was agreed that no compensations should be demanded from the German Government. The revised text of the decision taken by the Conference on the 1st August, 1919, would therefore read as follows:—

It was decided—

(1)
That no immediate reply to the German Government’s request should be given.
(2)
That the Military Representatives at Versailles in collaboration with Marshal Foch should investigate the accuracy of the statements contained in the communication of the German Government, and [Page 548]should utilise all available sources of information at their command.
(3)
That Marshal Foch should report to the Council on the military measures that might be enforced in order to oblige the German Government to comply with the Clauses of the treaty relating to the surrender to the Allies of officers guilty of breaches of Laws of War.)

2. Mr. Polk said that before the questions on the Agenda paper came under discussion, he wished to communicate to the Supreme Council the latest information received from Budapest. Situation in Hungary

(Mr. Polk then distributed copies of the documents included in Annex “B”.)

M. Clemenceau said that from the telegram sent on the 5th August by Mr. J. A. Logan,2 it would appear that the Roumanians had proposed an armistice to the Hungarian Government. He did not think that the Hungarians [Roumanians?] had been authorised by the Allied and Associated Powers to take such action.

M. Tittoni thought that the Roumanian Government had merely put forward certain proposals.

Mr. Balfour said that the Roumanian Government regarded itself as absolutely independent, and had acted and put forward its conditions as if the Allied and Associated Governments did not exist. Technically, Roumania was quite independent since Marshal Foch had not been placed in command of the Roumanian troops. Roumania had quarrelled with the Allies: M. Bratiano had left Paris thoroughly discontented, and he was now acting as the head of one independent State dealing with another equally independent State.

Mr. Polk informed the Conference that he had that morning had a long conversation with Mr. Misu, shortly after the receipt of the documents he had just distributed. He had communicated the contents of those documents to Mr. Misu and had explained to him that Roumanians action amounted to an attempt to conclude a separate peace. He (Mr. Polk) had pointed out that he did not consider it right that the Roumanians should obtain the delivery of the war material referred to in the document under consideration. Mr. Misu had replied that the measures taken were dictated by military necessity. He further stated that Roumania had not been treated with justice in regard to the matter of reparations. He maintained that the Belgians, whose territory had similarly been invaded, had been permitted to appoint a representative on the Commission of Reparations and had thereby been able to look after their interests. On the other hand, Roumania had not been permitted to appoint a representative on that Commission.

Mr. Balfour suggested that Mr. Misu should be invited to attend in order to discuss the question under reference. Mr. Misu was a [Page 549]very sensible man with whom it might be possible to arrive at an agreement.

M. Clemenceau saw no objection to Mr. Misu being heard by the Council.

Mr. Polk thought it would be preferable for Mr. Balfour in the first place to have a private conversation with Mr. Misu. He thought that procedure would yield better results.

Mr. Balfour agreed that talking alone gave opportunities for the excuse of a certain flexibility of conversation that could not be got in a formal conference. On the other hand he thought a greater impression would be produced by an interview with the Council as a whole. He proposed, therefore, that Mr. Misu should be received in that room. Otherwise, that M. Clemenceau be authorised to speak on behalf of the Conference.

M. Tittoni enquired whether it would be possible for the Generals forming part of the Allied Mission to Budapest to start at once.

M. Clemenceau thought that a telegram should at once be sent to the Roumanian Government stating that the Council did not recognise the right of Roumania to conclude an Armistice. Should the Roumanians fail to accept those instructions, the situation would become exceedingly grave.

Mr. Balfour pointed out that the Armistice proposed by the Roumanians would in addition deprive the Commission on Reparations of material and property which belonged to the whole of the Allies.

Mr. Polk added that Mr. Hoover had also drawn attention to the fact that by withdrawing 50% of the rolling stock from Hungary, the Roumanians would thereby render the distribution of supplies impossible.

(Marshal Foch, General Bliss, General Weygand, General Belin and Col. Georges entered the room.)

M. Clemenceau said that the Supreme Council had decided that the four Generals should forthwith be sent to Budapest. He enquired what measures Marshal Foch had taken to give effect to that resolution.

Marshal Foch replied that the four Generals who were to form part of the Military Mission to Budapest were scattered, consequently the following measures had been taken—General Graziani, being under the orders of General Franchet d’Esperey, a telegram had been transmitted to him through General Franchet d’Esperey together with copies of instructions. General Franchet d’Esperey had also been asked to forward copies of these documents to General Mombelli who was said to be at Sofia.

M. Tittoni, intervening, said that General Mombelli was now actually in Turin. He would therefore himself send him copies of the instructions. General Montpelli [Mombelli?] had, as a matter of [Page 550]fact, already been warned and would be ready to start within six hours after receipt of orders to that effect.

General Weygand said that he had forwarded to General Bliss the instructions intended for General Bandholtz, the American Representative. In regard to the British General, he believed him to be at Pressbourg, and he had consequently asked General Sackville-West to forward the necessary instructions. He had, however, just learnt that General Gorton had already reached Budapest. It would therefore be necessary to forward his instructions to that town.

Mr. Polk wished to call attention to a certain matter connected with the instructions to be issued to the four Generals. Yesterday M. Tittoni had proposed an amendment in order that the Generals might fully realise that the instructions given them should be carried out in agreement with the Hungarian Government: that is to say, the required results were to be obtained rather by persuasion than by the issue of orders. The text of the telegram which he had received that morning from General Weygand did not appear to contain that amendment. He proposed, therefore, that the words “in agreement with the Hungarian Government”, should be inserted in paras. (b) and (d).

General Weygand thought that the first paragraph of the instruction fully met Mr. Polk’s view, since it was therein clearly stated that the mission should place itself in communication with the Hungarian Government in order to obtain certain concessions which were detailed in paragraphs which followed. He thought that sentence clearly indicated that an agreement should be reached between the mission and the Hungarian Government.

Mr. Polk agreed that his objection had been fully met.

M. Clemenceau suggested that the Council should proceed to draft the text of a telegram to be sent to the Roumanian Government, stating that the Allied and Associated Governments would not admit her right to conclude an independent armistice with Hungary; that such an armistice would not receive recognition, particularly as it was intended to take away large quantities of material, the joint property of all the Allies and not of Roumania alone.

Mr. Balfour said he had prepared a draft telegram.

(After a short discussion, the following draft telegram was approved:—

“Supreme Council have learnt that Roumanian Military Authorities at Buda-Pesth have imposed Armistice on Hungarian Government, to be accepted at a few hours’ notice. Terms of this armistice render it impossible for Hungarian Government to fulfil armistice concluded with Allied Powers on November 13th.3 Moreover, terms [Page 551]in themselves pay no regard to rights of reparation of other Allies. Supreme Council desire formally to record their refusal to recognise right of Roumanian Commander-in-Chief to impose any armistice without authority of Allied and Associated Powers.”)

(At this stage M. Misu and M. Vaida-Voevod entered the room.)

M. Clemenceau said that the Council had invited M. Misu and M. Vaida-Voevod to attend in order to consider the situation in Hungary, which was very grave. The Roumanians had seized Budapest.

M. Misu, intervening, said that he had received no official communication on the subject.

M. Clemenceau, continuing, said that information which left no doubt on the matter had been received from various sources. Furthermore, the Supreme Council had learnt that the Roumanians had proposed an armistice to the Hungarian Government.

M. Misu said he had received no information on that subject, with the exception of the telegram which Mr. Polk had shown him that morning.

M. Clemenceau, continuing, said that the Supreme Council had just decided to send a telegram to the Roumanian Government.

(M. Clemenceau then read the telegram above quoted.)

M. Misu said he would forward a copy of the telegram to his Government, laying stress on the view expressed by the Council.

M. Clemenceau said that the Allied and Associated Powers had given many proofs of goodwill to Roumania. M. Bratiano had not always received these in the spirit in which they had been meant. The situation to-day, however, was very grave, and he was authorised to say that the Supreme Council were determined that the Armistice of Versailles4 should be respected and executed everywhere.

M. Misu drew attention to the fact that the situation had entirely altered in consequence of the last attack made by the Hungarians.

M. Clemenceau remarked that the relative position of the Entente and Roumania had in no way altered.

M. Misu, continuing, said that Mr. Polk had that morning communicated to him a list of the material which had been demanded by the terms of the alleged armistice. He wished to point out that the Roumanians demanded the delivery of this material solely in the general interest. This material was being taken over solely with the view of disarming Hungary, since it was essential to disarm her as rapidly as possible. The measures so taken would not, however, in any way prejudge the eventual distribution between the Allies of the material so obtained.

[Page 552]

M. Clemenceau said he wished to read to the Roumanian Delegation a copy of the instructions which had been sent to the Allied Generals who were proceeding to Budapest.

M. Misu said he had received the text of the telegram that morning, and had already telegraphed the same to his Government. On the other hand, the Council should not lose sight of the fact that Roumania had been treated unjustly by the Commission on Reparations from which she had been excluded. Roumania had consequently not obtained the authority to seek out the material which had been looted from her territory by her various enemies.

M. Vaida added that the Roumanians had merely claimed the return of their own property.

M. Clemenceau enquired how the Roumanians could pick out their own personal goods from the mass of material in question?

M. Vaida pointed out that the Roumanian rolling stock had been taken by the Bolsheviks with the result that at the present moment Roumania only possessed some 50 locomotives. On the other hand, Roumania had been obliged to incur serious expense in order to maintain the army at a time when their Allies had already begun to demobilise. Mackensen, during the course of his retreat, had carried off a large quantity of material, which had subsequently fallen into the hands of the Magyars. The Roumanian Delegation had on several occasions requested the Conference to return this material, but no answer had ever been vouchsafed. It was essential that the material in question should be returned with as little delay as possible; otherwise the marks and signs, which would enable the Roumanians to recognise their property, would disappear. Should this material at once pass into the possession of the Roumanians, he thought it would be quite as safe as if it remained with the Magyars, and should it subsequently be proved that the engines, which would be used to revictual his unhappy country, in reality belonged to any particular one of the Allies, the Roumanians would be ready to surrender them without a murmur. The Council would undoubtedly agree that the material in the hands of the Roumanians would be a safer guarantee than if left in the hands of the Magyars.

M. Clemenceau feared he had explained himself badly. The exact question that he wished to place before the Delegates was the following. The Council would not permit Roumania to conclude an Armistice which would in any way hinder the Hungarian Government from executing the terms of the Armistice which she had already concluded with the Allies. For some months past the Principal Allied and Associated Governments had endeavoured to enforce the execution of that Armistice. It had been agreed to enforce that Armistice, and even if possible to enlarge its scope by agreement, [Page 553]in order to obtain a more complete disarmament. The Roumanians had now seized Buda-Pest. Nevertheless, the conditions of the Armistice concluded with the Entente would have to be fulfilled. The Allied and Associated Governments intended shortly to make peace with Hungary, and they could not allow the action of Roumania to retard the conclusion of peace. With that object in view, the Generals had been sent to Buda Pest.

M. Misu said that he would transmit the wishes of the Conference to his Government.

M. Clemenceau pointed out that these were not the wishes, but the final decisions of the Conference. Furthermore, the Council wished to know as soon as possible what action Roumania intended to take in the matter. In regard to the material, he wished to point out that the Allied and Associated Governments had no desire to deprive Roumania of that portion of the material to which she was entitled: but the whole must enter into the common pool. That was the principle which Roumania was required to accept.

M. Misu pointed out that it was a matter of urgency that the Inter-Allied Commission should proceed to Buda Pest with as little delay as possible. The Commission would then be in a position to obtain particulars, and to give the necessary instructions.

M. Clemenceau expressed the view that the situation at present in Hungary was so confused that it would be necessary, in order to avoid all misunderstanding, that all questions should be settled directly between the Conference and the Roumanian Government.

Mr. Balfour said that he could add very little to what had been said by M. Clemenceau. It was quite clear that Roumania had been cruelly treated both by Germany and by Hungary. Without doubt, she would never recover all that she had lost, since an act of spoliation necessarily involved an act of destruction, and it would be impossible to get back material which had been destroyed. Roumania would doubtless find herself in the same situation as Serbia, Belgium and France. It was equally true to say that the Magyars had taken from the Roumanians the greater part of their rolling stock, but the fact that rolling stock constituted the material which Europe most urgently required in order to reconstitute her economic life should not be lost sight of. Consequently, in spite of her rights, Roumania should realise that in the general interest this material must be distributed in an equitable manner for the benefit of all parties.

In regard to the proposed Armistice he wished to invite attention to the following paragraph which the Roumanian Government desired to impose on Hungary, namely:—

“The factories existing in Hungary which may have served for the manufacture of arms and munitions of all kinds must be demolished [Page 554]to the benefit of Roumania. This operation shall be carried out by Roumanian specialists with the help of Hungarian Officers”.

He need hardly point out that in Hungary, as in all Allied countries, every factory and every workshop had been utilised for the production of war material. Consequently, the whole of the Hungarian factories would have to be handed over to Roumania. Such a solution was impossible for Hungary, and he thought that it would be equally unacceptable to the Allied and Associated Governments, since it contravened the principles which had hitherto guided the Conference in their labours.

Mr. Vaida said that the opportunities of presenting their case to the Conference which had hitherto been offered to the Roumanian Delegation had been so few and far between that he could not allow the present opportunity of making a statement to escape. He wished to impress upon the Conference the fact that the Magyars had never complied with the conditions of the Armistice of the 13th November, 1918. The Entente had for many months past struggled against the situation so created, and had on frequent occasions issued instructions which the Roumanian Government had always accepted whatever might have been the consequences entailed. On the other hand, the Allied and Associated Powers had never been able to compel the Hungarians to accede to their wishes. Finally, the Hungarians had attacked Roumania thereby annulling the Armistice. In spite of the Armistice, the Hungarians had treated the Roumanians as enemies and compelled the latter to take military measures to defend themselves.

He wished on this occasion to beg the Conference to make certain alterations in the terms of the existing Armistice. He would ask the Conference to add to the instructions to be issued to the Generals a clause to the effect that the Armistice of the 13th November having been broken no longer existed, and that it must be replaced by a new Armistice to be imposed in Budapest by the representatives of the Entente. Many of the clauses of the Armistice of November, 1918, could no longer be carried out: others had no further value. Yesterday, the Hungarians were the enemies of Roumania, to-day they were conquered, and Roumania in the future desired that they should become her friends. He begged the Conference therefore, to reconsider the text of the telegram which it was proposed to send to the Roumanian Government and to modify it so as to add a sentence which would prove to his Government that it could still count on the same goodwill as the Conference had extended to himself personally. Every telegram issued by the Conference was invariably at once published in the newspapers of Vienna and Budapest. Consequently, it was essential that the message should not be open to the interpretation [Page 555]that the Conference desired to blame Roumania when a word of encouragement would cause hopes to arise, which would lead more easily to the desired goal.

M. Clemenceau promised that this request would receive the favourable consideration of the Conference.

Mr. Misu added that the Roumanian Delegation merely asked for some sign of goodwill.

(Mr. Misu and Mr. Vaida-Voevod then withdrew.)

M. Clemenceau expressed the view that the remarks made by the Roumanian representatives were just, and that a sentence should be added to the draft telegram to give effect to their wishes.

M. Tittoni pointed out that Mr. Vaida-Voevod had also declared that the Hungarians had no further claim to the maintenance of the first Armistice, and that the four Allied Generals should be charged with the duty of dictating new conditions.

(After a short discussion it was decided to insert in the telegram above quoted the following sentence:—

“Fully recognising the just claims of Roumania and her devotion to the common cause”.)

(It was agreed:—

(1) To transmit the following telegram with all due urgency to the Roumanian Government through the French Chargé d’Affaires at Bukarest:—

“The Supreme Council had [have?] learnt that the Roumanian Military Authorities at Budapest have imposed Armistice on Hungarian Government to be accepted at a few hours notice. The terms of this Armistice render it impossible for Hungarian Government to fulfil Armistice concluded with Allied and Associated Powers on November 13, 1919. Moreover, the terms in themselves paid no regard to rights of reparation of other Allies. The Supreme Council, whilst fully recognising the just claims of Roumania and her devotion to the common cause, desired formally to record their refusal to recognise the right of Roumania’s Commander-in-Chief to impose any Armistice without authority of the Allied and Associated Powers.”

(2) To forward instructions to the four Generals, members of the Military Mission to Budapest, to proceed thither without delay.

3. M. Clemenceau said he wished to communicate to the Conference, for information, the following telegram dated Constantinople, 4th August, 1919:— Results of the Decision of the Conference in Regard to Smyrna

“The High Commissioners of Great Britain, France and Italy on the 3rd August, 1919, transmitted to the Turkish Government, the decisions of the Supreme Council in regard to the delimitation of the Greek and Italian zones of [Page 556]occupation5 and in regard to the creation of a Commission of Enquiry into the events which have taken place in consequence of the occupation of Smyrna.6

“The Grand Vizier received this communication with great satisfaction and declared that the Conference had thereby increased by 50 per cent, the authority of the Government.

“An official communiqué dated on the 4th August ends as follows:—“Without doubt the humanitarian decision of the Peace Conference will fill everyone with gratitude.”

4. M. Clemenceau read the following telegram, dated 5th August, 1919, which he had received from the French Ambassador in Washington, in reply to the request made by the Conference to the American Government on the subject of the repatriation of the Czecho-Slovaks in Siberia:— Repatriation of Czecho-Slovaks in Siberia

“The American Government possesses no tonnage which could serve for the repatriation of the Czecho-Slovaks, and does not believe that any other country is in a position to supply tonnage for that purpose. In view of the fact that the matter relates to the repatriation of people who would no longer fight, it enquires whether it would not be possible to send these people to the Black Sea passing through the region occupied by General Denikin.

The American Government is considering at the same time the repatriation which must soon take place of the 200,000 German-Austro prisoners still in Siberia.”

M. Clemenceau, continuing, said that the Conference were faced with a cruel situation. The Military Experts at Versailles, to whom the question had been referred, had reached the conclusion that the Czecho-Slovaks could only be repatriated by the sea route. To the demand for tonnage made to the American Government, the reply was that no tonnage was available, and that the repatriation of the Czecho-Slovaks could only be made by the land route. The Conference felt obliged, therefore, as a last resort, to turn to the Japanese Government to whom the question had already been submitted.

M. Matsui said that during the course of the Meeting at which this question of repatriation had first been discussed, the view had been expressed that the Czecho-Slovaks should be withdrawn from the Trans-Siberian railway and placed on the right of Koltchak’s army, in order to reinforce the latter. It had then been suggested that the Japanese Government should furnish military contingents in order to relieve the Czecho-Slovaks along the Transiberian Railway. Later, the situation had altered, and it had been found that the Czechoslovaks could not be used to reinforce Koltchak’s army since they desired to be repatriated and refused to fight. The situation having thus altered, Baron Makino had telegraphed to the Japanese Government [Page 557]for fresh instructions. No reply had yet been received. He did not wish to prejudge the question, but he felt compelled to inform the Conference that he did not think the Japanese Government would be in a position to accept the proposal. He was led to that conclusion by the refusal of his Government to comply with a similar request made by the Roumanian Government, who had asked for tonnage to repatriate the Roumanians at present in Siberia, whose numbers fell far below those of the Czecho-Slovaks. Nevertheless, his Government had been unable to obtain the necessary tonnage.

M. Clemenceau gathered that, under the circumstances, it would apparently be impossible to repatriate the Czecho-Slovaks either by the land or by the sea route. On the other hand, all information went to show that they could not spend the winter in Siberia.

M. Tittoni enquired how the Czecho-Slovaks at present obtained their supplies?

Mr. Balfour replied that they received their supplies from America via Vladivostock.

M. Clemenceau enquired whether the ships which brought these supplies did not return empty, and, if so, whether they could not be used for repatriating the Czecho-Slovaks.

Mr. Balfour thought that the steamers were not suitable for employment as troopships.

M. Clemenceau thought that the men would prefer to be repatriated in discomfort rather than not to be repatriated at all.

Marshal Foch expressed the view that the shortest route would be via Vladivostock and Vancouver and thence across the Atlantic to Europe. He enquired whether the ships which came to fetch the American troops could not be used for bringing the Czecho-Slovaks across the Atlantic.

M. Clemenceau urged that some solution should be found.

Mr. Polk said that if the Council would adjourn the question for a few days, he would again refer the matter to his Government.

(It was decided that Mr. Polk should telegraph again to the American Government7 to urge the necessity of supplying the tonnage required for the repatriation of the Czecho-Slovaks, the American proposals to send the men across the territories occupied by General Denikin having been found to be unworkable.)

5. M. Clemenceau said that the following telegram dated 3rd August, 1919, had been received from the French Military Attaché at Stockholm:— Situation in the Baltic Provinces Action of General von der Goltz

“From information supplied by our Military Mission at Libau, the Germans, far from evacuating Courland, as promised, continue to reinforce them [Page 558]selves by fresh drafts and additional materiel. They at present possess 35,000 men in that region.

Von der Goltz is determined not to leave. He encourages the entry of Russian Bolshevists, and German Spartacists who have considerable funds at their disposal. He counts on their action to provoke a revolutionary movement which would give him the excuse for intervention.

The situation is extremely critical and will become more so after the 10th August, the date from which the American revictualling must cease except for the children at Riga. Unless the Ulmannis Government receives at once the arms, material and money which the British Mission had caused it to expect, it cannot maintain itself beyond the 15th August, and will be replaced by extreme Socialists. This will bring about a Bolshevik Revolution. The Germans will then intervene as saviours and definitely occupy the country.”

M. Clemenceau, continuing, called on Marshal Foch to express his views on this question.

General Weygand said that the Conference had decided on the 30th July,8 to accept the proposals made by General Gough. The telegram giving effect to that decision had only been dispatched by Marshal Foch on the 1st August. The telegram to the French Military Attaché at Stockholm had been dispatched on the 3rd August, and he doubted whether Marshal Foch’s telegram which had to be forwarded through General Nudant in Berlin, could have reached General von der Goltz by the 3rd August.

On the other hand, that morning, Marshal Foch had received the following telegram from General Gough:—

“Please thank Marshal Foch for the firm attitude taken by him in regard to von der Goltz. Should the latter carry out the orders now sent him, many of the difficulties will have been overcome. I shall do all that is possible in regard to the Lithuanian Polish question.”

He (General Weygand) thought it would be best to await the receipt of later information.

(It was decided to postpone the consideration on this question until the receipt of further information.)

6. Mr. Matsui proposed that the Japanese Delegation should be authorised to appoint a Japanese Officer to form part of the Allied Commission appointed on August 4th, 1919 (H. D. 23)9 to negotiate between the Polish and German Governments. Appointment of Allied Commissioners Negotiating Between the German and Polish Governments

(It was agreed that a Japanese Officer should be nominated to represent Japan on the Allied Commission for negotiation between the German and the Polish Governments.)

7. Mr. Headlam-Morley10 invited attention to the draft of a Treaty [Page 559]between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers on the one hand, and Czecho-Slovakia on the other hand (Annex “C”).

The Commission on New States were anxious that a copy of the Treaty should be communicated to the Czecho-Slovak Delegation, and he had been deputised to obtain the sanction of the Council to this procedure being adopted. The Treaty had been unanimously accepted by the Commission on New States, but it was considered politic that the Czecho-Slovak Delegation should at once have an opportunity of expressing their views. Treaty Between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and the Czecho-Slovak State

(It was decided to approve the draft of the Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Czecho-Slovakia as submitted by the Committee on New States; the draft to be submitted to the Czecho-Slovakian Delegation by the Secretariat-General.)

8. Mr. Headlam-Morley said that the Commission on New States had proposed that the Treaty between the Allied and Associated Powers and Roumania (Annex “D”) should also forthwith be communicated to the Roumanian Delegation. Treaty Between the Principal Allied and Associated Power and Roumania

The treaty dealt with matters of very great complexity. The Commission had therefore refrained from entering into direct negotiations with the Roumanian Delegation. It was now considered expedient that the draft Treaty in its final form, should forthwith be communicated to the Roumanian Delegation, with the intimation that though the general principles had been accepted, the Roumanian Government would have the opportunity of making their observations on matters of detail. He pointed out that the same procedure had been followed with advantage in the case of Poland.

Mr. Polk enquired whether any reservation had been made by any of the representatives on the Commission.

Mr. Headlam-Morley replied that the American representative had made a reservation in regard to the clause dealing with navigation on the Dniester.

Mr. Polk said that he could only accept the Treaty with the reservation on the question of the Dniester. President Wilson himself was greatly interested in this question.

Mr. Hudson suggested that the clause dealing with the Dniester should not be communicated to the Roumanian Delegation. The Dniester was situated in Russian territory.

Mr. Polk stated that for that very reason, the inclusion of this clause might convey the idea to the Roumanians that the Council accepted their claims in Bessarabia.

Mr. Headlam-Morley maintained that if the Dniester were not [Page 560]mentioned, great difficulties might subsequently arise. He suggested that in communicating the Treaty to the Roumanian Delegation, a forwarding letter should be sent explaining that certain questions could not be definitely decided until the frontiers of Czecho-Slovakia had been settled.

(It was decided to approve the draft of the Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Roumania as submitted by the Committee on New States; the clause concerning the Dniester River to be revised by the Committee to meet the objections of the American Delegation; the draft thus revised to be submitted to the Roumanian Delegation at once by the Secretariat-General.)

9. Mr. Headlam-Morley read the following report submitted to the Council by the Commission on New States:—

“Complying with the direction of the Supreme Council under date of 21st [29th?] July, 1919,11 the Commission on New States has studied the comments of the Austrians on the clauses concerning the Protection of Minorities, as included in the Conditions of Peace, and the Commission has the honour to submit to the Supreme Council the attached draft of a reply to the Austrian counter-proposals. Reply to the Note of the Austrian Delegation on the Protection of Minorities

“The Commission favours the revision of Articles 79 and 87 of the Conditions of Peace to which the Austrian comment has taken particular exception. This revision would have the effect of bringing the Austrian Treaty into conformity with the Treaty already signed with Poland, and the Treaties to be signed with Czechoslovakia, Roumania, Jugo-Slavia, Greece, and Bulgaria, in that which concerns the League of Nations enforcement of the guarantees to minorities. The Commission on New States had previously made an informal suggestion that this course should be adopted. The Austrians, in their comment, have stated the objections which the Commission had anticipated. As originally presented to Austria, Articles 79 and 87 are far from clear and are perhaps not altogether consistent. In the opinion of the Commission, the suggested revision will in some points constitute a distinct mitigation of Austria’s terms, for the following reasons:—

(1)
Whereas the former Article 79 conferred jurisdiction on the League of Nations over all obligations in this part of the Treaty, the revision would limit the jurisdiction of the League of Nations to the provisions regarding racial, religious and linguistic minorities.
(2)
Whereas the former draft outlined no definite procedure for the League of Nations and made it possible that appeals might be prosecuted by interested minorities, or even individuals, the revised draft would limit the League of Nations jurisdiction to disputes between States, and would prescribe a definite procedure to be followed. By recognising the jurisdiction of the International Court, the judicial feature of disputes is emphasised [Page 561]and the possibility of political interference to which the Austrians object is greatly diminished.
(3)
Whereas the former Article 87 required the consent of the Council of the League of Nations for any modification of those clauses, meaning the unanimous consent of the Council, the revised draft would allow a modification to be made if it received the assent of a majority of the Council of the League of Nations.

“The Commission on New States is convinced that the suggested revision will more effectively serve the purpose of the Allied and Associated Powers in including these clauses in the Austrian Treaty, at the same time that it more clearly meets the views of the Austrians, as expressed in their counter-proposals.”

Mr. Headlam-Morley, continuing, said that the Commission on New States had prepared a Draft reply to the Austrian counterproposals giving effect to the conclusions contained in the report just read (Annex E).

(It was agreed:—

(1)
To accept the draft reply to the Austrian Counter-Proposals on the protection of Minorities, submitted by the Commission on New States (Annex E)
(2)
To forward the same to the Editing Committee for incorporation in the final and comprehensive reply to the Austrian Counter-Proposals.

10. Mr. Headlam-Morley said that M. Venizelos had submitted a report (Annex F) dealing with certain difficulties in the Balkans by the encouragement of voluntary emigration. M. Venizelos’ proposals had been discussed unofficially by the Committee on New States, who considered these to be so good as to justify their extension to all the Balkan States. It had been suggested that an Inter-Allied Commission should be appointed by the League of Nations to control the proposed emigration. The Commission now sought permission from the Council to discuss the question in the first place with M. Venizelos and subsequently, should an agreement be reached, with the various Balkan States concerned. The Commission on New States had drawn up a report (Annex F) which bad already been submitted to the Council. Proposal by M. Venizelos To Deal With Certain Problems by Voluntary Emigration

M. Tittoni said he would accept the proposal provided a strict control were established so that the suggested emigration should not be used by the Governments concerned as measures of expulsion.

Mr. Headlam-Morley pointed out that the proposal to create a strong Commission of control under the League of Nations had been brought forward with the very object of preventing any such abuses.

M. Clemenceau expressed the view that since the question had not been placed on the Agenda paper, it should be adjourned for further [Page 562]consideration at a later date.

(It was agreed to adjourn to a later date the further consideration of the report submitted by the Commission on New States on the proposals submitted by M. Venizelos on the subject of encouragement of voluntary emigration in the Balkan States.)

(Mr. Headlam-Morley then withdrew. Mr. Laroche12 entered the room.)

11. M. Laroche read the note submitted by the Committee on Political Clauses on the subject of the eventual restitution to the Allies of Rolling Stock moved beyond the Armistice frontier in violation of the Armistice of Villa Giusti13 (Appendix “G”). Note From the Committeee on Political Clauses on the Eventual Restitution to the Allies of Rolling Stock Moved Beyond the Armistice Frontier in Violation of the Armistice of Villa Giusti

(It was agreed to refer the question raised by the Italian Delegation (Appendix “G”) to the Military Representatives of the Supreme War Council at Versailles for examination and report.)

12. M. Laroche read the note submitted by the Committee on Political Clauses respecting the desirability of reconciling the Clauses of the Treaty of Peace with Austria with those of the Treaties to be concluded with the Allied States formed out of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. (Appendix “H”.)Desirability of Reconciling the Clauses of the Treaty of Peace With Austria With Those of the Treaties To Be Concluded With the Allied States Formed Out of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy

(It was agreed to accept the proposals contained in the note above referred to (Appendix “H”) and to authorise the Committee on Political Clauses to prepare as soon as possible in conjunction with the Drafting Committee and the Commissions concerned, the new text of the Clauses of the Treaty with Austria therein referred to.)

(M. Laroche then withdrew.)

13. M. Dutasta read the following Note, dated Paris, July 30th, 1919, addressed by M. Tittoni to the President of the Peace Conference on the subject of the dispatch of war material to the Serb-Croat-Slovene State. Reference to the Supreme War Council at Versailles of the Dispatch of War Material to the Serbo-Croat-Slovene State

“Confirming declarations made yesterday to the Supreme Council, I have the honour to inform you that the Italian Delegation has telegraphed to the competent authorities in order that necessary steps be taken to avoid every obstacle to the passage through Italy of French trains transporting merchandise including these the destination of which was Serbia, as well as the military trains agreed upon between France and Italy.

As for the war material destined to Serbia, as I had the honour to ask of you in my note of the 20th instant, as well as at yesterday’s [Page 563]session, I would be infinitely obliged to you if you would be good enough to submit the question as soon as possible to the Inter-Allied Council of Versailles.

Please accept, etc. …”

Mr. Polk drew attention to the fact that Mr. Lansing had maintained the view that the Allied and Associated Governments had no right to prevent the material going to Serbia; but he, personally, would raise no objection to the question being discussed by the Military Representatives at Versailles.

(It was agreed forthwith to submit the question above referred to, to the Military Representatives, Supreme War Council, Versailles.)

(At this stage General Groves14 entered the Room.)

14. General Groves said that under the Peace Treaty, Germany was forbidden to have any Naval or Military Aviation, and was required to surrender all her service aircraft to the Allied and Associated Powers. The Inter-Allied Aeronautical Commission of Control appointed to supervise the carrying out of the Air Clauses would not be able to begin work until after ratification of the Treaty. Reports received from the British Military Commission at Berlin and from other sources (See Appendix I), showed that Germany was circumventing the Air Clauses by the following means:— Note From the Air Commission Asking That Measures May Be Taken to Prevent the Germans From Disposing of their Air Material

(1)
She had sold and continued to sell her aircraft and aircraft material to various neutrals.
(2)
She was adapting her aircraft to commercial use.
(3)
She was also negotiating to sell to private companies for the sum of 400,000 marks some 500 aircraft engines captured from the Allies.

With regard to (1), namely, the sale of aircraft to neutrals, that entailed the securing of neutral markets at the expense of the Allies. Those markets would also support the German Aircraft Industry, which was the production of her air power, and also the basis of her commercial aeronautical development, which will be in competition with that of the Allied and Associated Powers. It was therefore suggested that this sale shall be forbidden through the Supreme Council, and that Germany shall be called upon to refund to the Allies the sums which she had already made out of such sales.

With regard to (2), that is, the conversion to commercial use of service types of aircraft, a service type of aircraft could be converted to commercial use by slight structural alterations within 48 hours. Such aircraft could equally well be re-converted to service use within the same period. It was suggested that the German Government shall be informed that the Allies are aware that service types are being converted [Page 564]to commercial use, and that the President of the Inter-Allied Aeronautical Commission of Control shall be the sole judge as to whether any aircraft is of a service type or otherwise.

With regard to (3), (i. e. the sale of aircraft material captured from the Allies), under the Military Clauses all war material captured from the Allies was to be returned. This material was required by the Allies, particularly the engines.

It was, therefore, suggested that the German Government should be informed that the 500 engines referred to shall be delivered to the Allies at once, at a place to be specified, and all other material of this description shall be handed over to the Inter-Allied Commission of Control.

Mr. Balfour enquired whether the fact that the German Government had sold a certain number of captured aircraft engines to private firms re-acted in any way to the detriment of the Allies from a commercial point of view.

General Groves replied in the negative. He would point out, however, that the engines in question were in very good order; they had been well looked after; and they were urgently required by the Allies.

(It was agreed to accept the proposals made by General Groves, namely:—

1.
That the sale of aircraft and aircraft material to neutral Powers shall be forbidden through the Supreme Command, and that Germany shall be called upon to refund to the Allies the sums which she has already made out of such sales;
2.
That the German Government shall be informed that the Allies are aware that service types of aircraft are being converted to commercial use, and that the President of the Inter-Allied Aeronautical Commission of Control shall be the sole judge as to whether any aircraft is of a service type or otherwise;
3.
That the German Government be informed that the 500 engines sold to private companies shall be delivered to the Allies at once at a place to be specified, and all other material of this description shall forthwith be handed over to the Inter-Allied Commission of Control.)

(General Groves withdrew, and Colonel Morgan15 entered the room.)

15. Colonel Morgan pointed out that the situation referred to in M. Pachitch’s letter (Annex “J”), on the subject of the immediate liberation of prisoners of war had already been covered by a decision of the Supreme Council taken on May 23rd,15a and, if that decision were duly acted upon, no difficulties should arise. Liberation of Prisoners of War Formerly Belonging to the Austro-Hungarian Army, Now Nationals of an Allied or Associated State

M. Tittoni said that the Supreme Council had on May 23rd passed the following resolution:— [Page 565]

“The Heads of Governments agree that all war prisoners, formerly nationals of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, now subjects of an Allied or an Associated Nation, should be immediately liberated in a measure to conform with transportation possibilities, and where the frontiers of the States shall have been definitely fixed. In any event, they should not be liberated later than the prisoners of war who are subjects of the new Austrian States.”

Since that date, the Italian Government had taken every possible step to give effect to that decision, with the result that 80,000 prisoners had been repatriated even though the frontiers of the new States had not yet been definitely fixed. 60,000 prisoners still remained in Italy. The Italian Government had no wish to keep those men: but, owing to want of coal at the present moment, fewer trains were running than in wartime. The immediate repatriation of all prisoners of war no doubt deserved every consideration: but the essential needs of the population must in the first place receive attention. His Government had done, and would continue to do, all in their power to repatriate the prisoners in question at the earliest possible date.

(The Supreme Council took note of M. Tittoni’s statement.)

16. Colonel Morgan explained that at the present moment there were 112,000 Turkish prisoners of war in Egypt. The safe custody of these men called for the maintenance of a considerable force. The British authorities felt they could not afford the man-power required for the purpose. The British War Office was therefore very anxious to repatriate the prisoners at the earliest possible date in anticipation of the signature of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey. The British Government considered that it could not authorise the execution of these measures without first obtaining the approval of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers thereto. Immediate Liberation of Turkish Prisoners of War in Egypt

(It was agreed to authorise the British Government to undertake the immediate liberation of the Turkish prisoners of war in Egypt.)

(The Meeting then adjourned.)

Villa Majestic, Paris, August 7, 1919.

Appendix “A” to HD–25

[The British Plenipotentiary (Balfour) to the Secretary General of the Peace Conference (Dutasta)]

Dear Monsieur Dutasta: I notice that, according to our “Procès-Verbal”, one of the conclusions arrived at on August 2nd [1st],16 was [Page 566]to the effect that Marshal Foch should be directed to consider what Military equivalent could be exacted from the Germans should they fail to carry out that provision of the Treaty which requires them to surrender Officers guilty of crimes against humanity and the laws of war.

This is not in accordance with my own recollection of what passed; but I have spoken to the Secretariat on the subject, and they are so convinced of the accuracy of their report that I am forced to admit that I must have failed clearly to hear what was said by my colleagues.

I do not therefore ask that any alteration should be made in the Minutes, but I should be grateful if you would place on record my dissent from this particular conclusion, which seems to suggest the possibility of comparing the punishment of criminals on the one hand, with some kind of Military advantage on the other;—an idea difficult clearly to grasp.

My own view was that we resolved to ask Marshal Foch to consider by what kind of Military threat we could prevent the German Government evading its Treaty engagements with regard to the surrender of accused Officers,—a quite different proposition.

Perhaps you would be kind enough to add this letter to our records.

A. J. Balfour

August 5, 1919.

Appendix B to HD–25

[Translation17]

To Colonel Wallace18 in care of General Tasker H. Bliss, Hotel Crillon, Paris.

My Dear Colonel Wallace: I am sending you herewith a copy of a telegram that has just been received from Budapest signed by the British General Gorton, by the Italian Colonel Romanelli, and by the American Colonel Causey, giving the text of the ultimatum sent by the Roumanian High Command to the Hungarian authorities yesterday evening at 6 o’clock. This text is somewhat garbled, but I send it to you just as it is, and I shall telegraph you a corrected copy as soon as I have it.

Mr. Hoover would appreciate your bringing this fact, as soon as possible, to the attention of General Bliss.

Kindly believe etc.

A. Logan
[Page 567]
[Enclosure—Translation19]

[Telegram From the Inter-Allied Military Mission at Budapest]

112 x U.

Paris

When the Supreme Roumanian Command lays down for acceptance the cessation of hostilities requested by the Hungarian state. Contents of the military convention which will terminate the hostilities between Roumania and Hungary.

A.
The Roumanian High Command foregoes the occupation of all of Hungary, if the Hungarian High Command engages:
(1)
To deliver:
(a)
All war materials of every kind which are still in the possession of the troops and of the Hungarian state.
An exception to this rule is the material which will be judged necessary to the armed forces which Hungary shall have the right to maintain in order to preserve internal order until the ratification of the peace with Roumania.
The effective of these forces shall not in any case exceed the number of 15,000 (fifteen thousand) men, including officers.
Their organization into units as well as their officering, arming, and grouping shall be decided upon later by the Roumanian High Command.
(b)
Factories in Hungary for the manufacture of armament and munitions of all categories shall be dismantled to the advantage of Roumania by Roumanian specialists with the cooperation of Hungarian officers.
(c)
Equipment of all categories necessary to a strong army of 300,000 soldiers.
(d)
Fifty per cent of the rolling stock which, according to the registers, still belongs to the Hungarian state, and of the materials existing in Hungary which are used in the construction, maintenance, and repair of the railways and rolling stock.
(e)
200 (two hundred) touring cars and 400 (four hundred) motor trucks in good operating condition and with all their accessories.
(f)
Thirty per cent of the cattle and animals of all kinds which actually exist in Hungary according to the registers.*
(g)
Thirty per cent of all agricultural machines of all kinds actually existing in Hungary.*
(h)
20,000 (twenty-thousand) wagonloads of wheat, 10,000 (ten thousand) wagon loads of maize, and 5,000 (five thousand) wagon loads of barley and oats.*
(i)
All floating material of every kind which, belonging to the Roumanian state, to private associations [or companies], and to Roumanian citizens, have been appropriated by the enemy in Roumania, and which are found in Hungarian state.
(j)
Fifty per cent of all floating material of all kinds which belong to the Hungarian state.
(k)
All Roumanian prisoners and hostages.
(1)
All the Roumanian deserters, of every nationality, living as refugees in Hungary at the signature of the present convention.
(2)
A. To maintain at the expense of the Hungarian state during all the time that the Roumanian troops shall occupy the regions to the west of Tisza, all the Royal Roumanian forces which are in these regions at the moment of the signature of the present convention.
(3)
A. To procure the coal necessary to the traffic in relation to Roumanian military needs in the region to the west of Tisza.
(4)
[sic] B. The Royal Roumanian Army will not retire to the east of Tisza until the Hungarian High Command shall have satisfied all the conditions imposed in paragraph A.
C.
The reception of material and animals of all the categories provided for in paragraph A shall be made by commissions which shall be established. The composition and seat of the commissions, as well as conditions and places for the delivery of materials and animals will be determined later by the Roumanian High Command. The commissions should begin to function not later than 48 hours after the Roumanian High Command shall have officially notified their nomination to the Hungarian Command. Notification may be made for all of the commissions at the same time or for each one separately. The minimum term during which the delivery should be effectuated shall be fixed later by the Roumanian High Command for each category separately in relation with the technical possibilities.
D.
A Roumanian mission for the supervision of the execution of this convention shall operate in Budapest. The mission shall function until the ratification of the treaty of peace between Roumania and Hungary by the lawful Hungarian authorities. The mission shall enjoy all the privileges and immunities accorded under extraterritoriality in civilized countries.
E.
The present convention should be accepted or rejected as a whole; consequently, counterproposals will not be received. The time limit for reply expires at 10 p.m., August 5, 1919.
F.
In case the conditions are not accepted, the Roumanian High Command shall appropriate from Hungary, without regard for proportion, [Page 569]the material and animals which shall be necessary to Roumania in order to replace, at least in part, the grievous gaps created in Roumania by an enemy which during all the period of the occupation and on the occasion of the peace of Budapest had been a stranger to humanitarian feelings.

General Gorton, English

Lieut. Col. Romanelli, Italian

Lieut. Col. Causey, American

The above conditions were delivered to the Hungarian Ministry at 6 a.m., August 5, and it was allowed only until 10 a.m. to accept them.

The acceptance of these conditions would lead without a doubt to the fall of the Government and the ruin of the country.

Gregory
20

Appendix C to HD–25

CZECHO-SLOVAKIA

Draft of a Treaty

The United States of America, the British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan,

the Principal Allied and Associated Powers,

On the one hand;

and Czecho-Slovakia,

On the other hand;

Whereas the union which formerly existed between the old Kingdom of Bohemia, the Markgraviate of Moravia and Duchy of Silesia on the one hand and the other territories of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy on the other, has definitely ceased to exist, and

Whereas the peoples of Bohemia, of Moravia and of part of Silesia, as well as the peoples of Slovakia have decided of their own free will to unite, and have in fact united in a permanent union for the purpose of forming a single sovereign independent state under the title of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, and

Whereas the Ruthene peoples to the south of the Carpathians have adhered to this union, and

Whereas the Czecho-Slovak Republic in fact exercises sovereignty over the aforesaid territories and has already been recognised as a sovereign independent state by the other High Contracting Parties,

The United States of America, the British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan on the one hand, confirming their recognition of the [Page 570]Czecho-Slovak State as a sovereign and independent member of the Family of Nations: within the boundaries which have been or may be determined in accordance with the terms of the Treaty of Peace with Austria of even date:

Czecho-Slovakia on the other hand desiring to conform its institutions to the principles of liberty and justice, and to give a sure guarantee to all the inhabitants of the territories over which it has assumed sovereignty:

The High Contracting Parties anxious to assure the execution of Article 66 of the said Treaty of Peace with Austria have for this purpose named as their Plenipotentiaries, that is to Say:

The President of the United States of America, His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions Beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, the President of the French Republic, His Majesty the King of Italy, H. M. the Emperor of Japan, the President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic.

Who after having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows:

Chapter I

Article 1

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes that the stipulations contained in articles 2 to 8 of this chapter shall be recognised as fundamental laws and that no law, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation or official action shall [sic] prevail over them.

Article 2

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to assure full and complete protection of life and liberty to all inhabitants of Czecho-Slovakia without distinction of birth, nationality, language, race or religion.

All inhabitants of Czecho-Slovakia shall be entitled to the free exercise, whether public or private, of any creed, religion or belief, whose practices are not inconsistent with public order or public morals.

Article 3

Czecho-Slovakia admits and declares to be Czecho-Slovak nationals ipso facto and without the requirement of any formality German, Austrian or Hungarian nationals habitually resident at the date of the coming into force of the present Treaty in territory which is or may be recognised as forming part of Czecho-Slovakia under the [Page 571]Treaties with Germany, Austria or Hungary respectively, or under any Treaties which may be concluded for the purpose of completing the present settlement.

Nevertheless, the persons referred to above who are over eighteen years of age will be entitled under the conditions contained in the said Treaties to opt for any other nationality which may be open to them. Option by a husband will cover his wife and option by parents will cover their children under eighteen years of age.

Persons who have exercised the above right to opt must, transfer within the succeeding twelve months their place of residence to the State for which they have opted. They will be entitled to retain their immovable property in Czecho-Slovak territory. They may carry with them their movable property of every description. No export duties may be imposed upon them in connection with the removal of such property.

Article 4

Czecho-Slovakia admits and declares to be Czecho-Slovak nationals ipso facto and without the requirement of any formality persons of German, Austrian or Hungarian nationality who were born in the territory referred to above of parents habitually resident there, even if at the date of the coming into force of the present Treaty they are not themselves habitually resident there.

Nevertheless, within two years after the coming into force of the present Treaty, these persons may make a declaration before the competent Czecho-Slovak authorities in the country in which they are resident, stating that they abandon Czecho-Slovak nationality, and they will then cease to be considered as Czecho-Slovak nationals. In this connection a declaration by a husband will cover his wife, and a declaration by parents will cover their children under eighteen years of age.

Article 5

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to put no hindrance in the way of the exercise of the right which the persons concerned have, under the Treaties concluded or to be concluded by the Allied and Associated Powers with Germany, Austria, or Hungary, to choose whether or not they will acquire Czecho-Slovak nationality.

Article 6

All persons born in Czecho-Slovak territory who are not born nationals of another State shall ipso facto become Czecho-Slovak nationals.

[Page 572]

Article 7

All Czecho-Slovak nationals shall be equal before the law and shall enjoy the same civil and political rights without distinction as to race, language or religion.

Difference of religion, creed or confession shall not prejudice any Czecho-Slovak national in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil or political rights, as for instance admission to public employments, functions and honours, or the exercise of professions and industries.

No restriction shall be imposed on the free use by any Czecho-Slovak national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the press or publications of any kind, or at public meetings.

Notwithstanding any establishment by the Czecho-Slovak Government of an official language, adequate facilities shall be given to Czecho-Slovak nationals of non-Czecho speech for the use of their language, either orally or in writing, before the courts.

Article 8

Czecho-Slovak nationals who belong to racial, religious or linguistic minorities shall enjoy the same treatment and security in law and in fact as the other Czecho-Slovak nationals. In particular they shall have an equal right to establish, manage and control at their own expense charitable, religious and social institutions, schools and other educational establishments, with the right to use their own language and to exercise their religion freely therein.

Article 9

Czecho-Slovakia will provide in the public educational system in towns and districts in which a considerable proportion of Czechoslovak nationals of other than Czech speech are residents adequate facilities for ensuring that the instruction shall be given to the children of such Czecho-Slovak nationals through the medium of their own language. This provision shall not prevent the Czecho-Slovak Government from making the teaching of the Czech language obligatory in the said schools.

In towns and districts where there is a considerable proportion of Czecho-Slovak nationals belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, these minorities shall be assured an equitable share in the enjoyment and application of the sums which may be provided out of public funds under the State, municipal or other budget, for educational, religious or charitable purposes.

[Page 573]

Chapter II

Article 10

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to constitute the Ruthene territory south of the Carpathians within frontiers delimited by the Principal Allied and Associated Powers as an autonomous unit within the Czecho-Slovak State, and to accord to it the fullest degree of self-government compatible with the unity of the Czecho-Slovak State.

Article 11

The territory Ruthene south of the Carpathians shall possess a special Diet. This Diet shall have power, of legislation in all linguistic, scholastic and religious questions, in matters of local administration, and in other questions which the laws of the Czecho-Slovak Republic may attribute to it. The Governor of the Ruthene territory shall be appointed by the President of the Czecho-Slovak Republic and shall be responsible to the Ruthene Diet.

Article 12

Czecho-Slovakia agrees that officials in the territory Ruthene will be chosen as far as possible from the inhabitants of this territory.

Article 13

Czecho-Slovakia guarantees to the territory Ruthene equitable representation in the legislative assembly of the Czecho-Slovak Republic, to which Assembly it will send deputies elected according to the constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. These deputies will not, however, have the right of voting in the Czecho-Slovak Diet upon legislative questions of the same kind as those attributed to the Ruthene Diet.

Article 14

Czecho-Slovakia agrees that the stipulations of chapters I and II so far as they affect persons belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, constitute obligations of international concern and shall be placed under the guarantee of the League of Nations. They shall not be modified without the assent of a majority of the Council of the League of Nations. The United States, the British Empire, France, Italy and Japan hereby agree not to withhold their assent from any modification in the Articles which is in due form assented to by a majority of the Council of the League of Nations.

[Page 574]

Czecho-Slovakia agrees that any Member of the Council of the League of Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the Council any infraction, or any danger of infraction, of any of these obligations, and that the Council may thereupon take such action and give such direction as it may deem proper and effective in the circumstances.

Czecho-Slovakia further agrees that any difference of opinion as to questions of law or fact arising out of these Articles between the Czecho-Slovak Government and any one of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers or any other Power, a Member of the Council of the League of Nations, shall be held to be a dispute of an international character under Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The Czecho-Slovak Government hereby consents that any such dispute shall, if the other party thereto demands, be referred to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The decision of the Permanent Court shall be final and shall have the same force and effect as an award under Article 13 of the Covenant.

Chapter III

Article 15

Each of the principal Allied and Associated Powers on the one part and Czecho-Slovakia on the other shall be at liberty to appoint diplomatic representatives to reside in their respective capitals, as well as Consuls-General, Consuls, Vice-Consuls, and Consular agents to reside in the towns and ports of their respective territories.

Consuls-General, Consuls, Vice-Consuls and Consular agents, however, shall not enter upon their duties until they have been admitted in the usual manner by Government in the territory of which they are stationed.

Consuls-General, Consuls, Vice-Consuls and Consular agents shall enjoy all the facilities, privileges, exemptions, and immunities of every kind which are or shall be granted to consular officers of the most favoured nation.

Article 16

Pending the establishment of an import tariff by the Czecho-Slovak Government, goods originating in the Allied or Associated States shall not be subject to any higher duties on importation into Czechoslovakia than the most favourable rates of duty applicable to goods of the same kind under the Austro-Hungarian Customs Tariff on July, 1944.

[Page 575]

Article 17

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to make no treaty, convention or arrangement and to take no other action which will prevent her from joining in any general agreement for the equitable treatment of the commerce of other States that may be concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations within five years from the coming into force of the present Treaty.

Czecho-Slovakia also undertakes to extend to all the Allied and Associated States any favours or privileges in customs matters, which it may grant during the same period of five years to any State with which since August, 1914, the. Allies have been at war other than favours or privileges which may be granted under the special Customs arrangements provided for in Article 218 of the Treaty of Peace of even date with Austria.

Article 18

Pending the conclusion of the general agreement referred to above, Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to treat on the same footing as national vessels or vessels of the most favoured nation the vessels of all the Allied and Associated States which accord similar treatment to Czecho-Slovak vessels.

Article 19

Pending the conclusion under the auspices of the League of Nations of a general convention to secure and maintain freedom of communications and of transit Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to accord freedom of transit to persons, goods, vessels, carriages, wagons and mails in transit to or from any Allied or Associated State over Czechoslovak territory, and to treat them at least as favourably as the persons, goods, vessels, carriages, wagons and mails respectively of Czechoslovak or of any other more favoured nationality, origin, importation of ownership, as regards facilities, charges, restrictions, and all other matters.

All charges imposed in Czecho-Slovakia on such traffic in transit shall be reasonable having regard to the conditions of the traffic. Goods in transit shall be exempt from all customs or other duties.

Tariffs for transit traffic across Czecho-Slovakia and tariffs between Czecho-Slovakia and any Allied or Associated Power involving through tickets or waybills shall be established at the request of that Allied or Associated Power.

Freedom of transit will extend to postal, telegraphic and telephonic services.

[Page 576]

Provided that no Allied or Associated Power can claim the benefit of these provisions on behalf of any part of its territory in which reciprocal treatment is not accorded in respect of the same subject matter.

If within a period of five years from the coming into force of this Treaty no general convention as aforesaid shall have been concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations, Czecho-Slovakia shall be at liberty at any time thereafter to give twelve months notice to the Secretary General of the League of Nations to terminate the obligations of the present Article.

Article 20

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to adhere within twelve months of the coming into force of the present Treaty to the International Conventions specified in Annex I.

Czecho-Slovakia undertakes to adhere to any new Convention, concluded with the approval of the Council of the League of Nations within five years of the coming into force of the present Treaty, to replace any of the International instruments specified in Annex I.

The Czecho-Slovak Government undertakes within twelve months to notify the Secretary-General of the League of Nations whether or not Czecho-Slovakia desires to adhere to either or both of the International Conventions specified in Annex II.

Until Czecho-Slovakia has adhered to the two Conventions last specified in Annex I, she agrees, on condition of reciprocity, to protect by effective measures the industrial, literary and artistic property of nationals of the Allied and Associated States. In the case of any Allied or Associated State not adhering to the said Conventions Czecho-Slovakia agrees to continue to afford such effective protection on the same conditions until the conclusion of a special bi-lateral treaty or agreement for that purpose with such Allied or Associated State.

Pending her adhesion to the other Conventions specified in Annex I, Czecho-Slovakia will secure to the nationals of the Allied and Associated Powers the advantages to which they would be entitled under the said Conventions.

Czecho-Slovakia further agrees, on condition of reciprocity, to recognize and protect all rights in any industrial, literary or artistic property belonging to the nationals of the Allied and Associated States in force, or which, but for the war would have been in force, in any part of her territory. For such purpose she will accord the extensions of time agreed to in Articles 254 and 255 of the Treaty of Peace with Austria.

[Page 577]

Annex I

Postal Conventions

Conventions and agreements of the Universal Postal Union concluded at Vienna, July 4, 1891.21

Conventions and agreements of the Postal Union signed at Washington, June 15, 1897.22

Conventions and agreements of the Postal Union signed at Rome, May 26, 1906.23

Telegraphic and Radio-Telegraphic Conventions

International Telegraphic Convention signed at St. Petersburg, 10/22 July, 1875.24

Regulations and Tariffs drawn up by the International Telegraph Conference signed at Lisbon, June 11, 1908.25

International Radio-Telegraphic Convention, July 5, 1912.26

Railway Conventions

Convention and arrangements signed at Berne on October 14, 1890,27 September 20, 1893,28 July 16, 1895,29 June 16, 189830 and September 19, 1906,31 and the current supplementary provisions made under those Conventions.

Agreement of May 15, 188632 regarding the sealing of railway trucks subject to custom inspections, and Protocol of May 15 [18], 1907.33

Agreement of May 15, 188634 regarding the technical standardisation of railways as modified on May 18, 1907.35

Sanitary Conventions

Conventions of Paris and Vienna of April 3, 1894,36 March 19, 189737 and December 3, 1903.38

[Page 578]

Other Conventions

Convention of September 26, 1906 for the suppression of night work for women.39

Convention of 26th September 1906 for the suppression of the use of white phosphorus in the manufacture of matches.40

Conventions of May 18, 190441 and May 4, 191042 regarding the suppression of the White Slave Traffic.

Convention of May 4, 1910, regarding the suppression of obscene publications.43

International Convention of Paris March 20, 1883,44 as revised at Washington in 1911,45 for the Protection of Industrial Property.

International Convention of Berne of September 9, 1886,46 revised at Berlin on November 13, 1908,47 and completed by the additional protocol signed at Berne on March 20, 1914,48 for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.

Annex II

Agreement of Madrid of April 14, 1891,49 for the Prevention of False Indications of Origin on goods, revised at Washington in 1911,50 and

Agreement of Madrid of April 14, 1891,51 for the International Registration of Trade Marks, revised at Washington in 1911.52

Article 21

All rights and privileges accorded by the foregoing Articles to the Allied and Associated States shall be accorded equally to all States members of the League of Nations.

The present treaty, of which the French and English texts are both authentic, shall be ratified. It shall come into force at the same time as the Treaty of Peace with Austria.

The deposit of ratifications shall be made at Paris.

Powers of which the seat of the Governments is outside Europe will be entitled merely to inform the Government of the French Republic through their diplomatic representative at Paris that their ratification [Page 579]has been given; in that case they must transmit the instrument of ratification as soon as possible.

A procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications will be drawn up.

The French Government will transmit to all the Signatory Powers a certified copy of the procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications.

In Faith Whereof the above-named Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty.

Done at Versailles, in a single copy which will remain deposited in the archives of the French Republic, and of which authenticated copies will be transmitted to each of the Signatory Powers.

Appendix D to HD–25

ROUMANIA

Draft of a Treaty

Between

The United States of America, Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan,

Described as the Principal Allied and Associated Powers,

On the one hand;

And Roumania,

On the other hand;

Whereas under Treaties to which the principal Allied and Associated Powers are parties large accessions of territory are being and will be made to the Kingdom of Roumania, and

Whereas in the Treaty of Berlin53 the independence of the Kingdom of Roumania was only recognised subject to certain conditions, and

Whereas the principal Allied and Associated Powers now desire to recognise unconditionally the independence of the Kingdom of Roumania as regards both its former and its new territories, and

Whereas Roumania is desirous of its own free will to give full guarantees of liberty and justice to all inhabitants both of the old Kingdom of Roumania and of the territory added thereto, to whatever race or religion they may belong.

For this purpose the following Representatives of the High Contracting Parties:

The President of the United States of America, His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions Beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, the [Page 580]President of The French Republic, His Majesty the King of Italy, H. M. the Emperor of Japan, His Majesty the King of Roumania.

After having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows:

The Allied and Associated Powers, signatories to the Treaty of Berlin, of the 13th July 1878, taking into consideration the obligations contracted under the present Treaty by the Roumanian Government, recognize that Roumania is definitely discharged from the conditions attached to the recognition of its independence by Article 44 of the said Treaty of Berlin.

Chapter I

Article 1

Roumania undertakes that the stipulations contained in Articles 2 to 8 of this chapter shall be recognised as fundamental laws, and that no laws, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation or official action prevail over them.

Article 2

Roumania undertakes to assure full and complete protection of life and liberty to all inhabitants of Roumania without distinction of birth, nationality, language, race or religion.

All inhabitants of Roumania shall be entitled to the free exercise, whether public or private, of any creed, religion or belief, whose practices are not inconsistent with public order and public morals.

Article 3

Roumania admits and declares to be Roumanian nationals ipso facto and without the requirement of any formality, all persons habitually resident at the date of the coming into force of the present Treaty within the whole territory of Roumania, including the extensions made by the Treaties of Peace with Austria, Hungary, and Bulgaria, or any other extensions which may hereafter be made, who are not at that date nationals of any other foreign state except Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria.

Nevertheless, Austrian, Hungarian and Bulgarian nationals who are over eighteen years of age will be entitled under the conditions contained in the said Treaties to opt for any other nationality which may be open to them. Option by a husband will cover his wife and option by parents will cover their children under eighteen years of age.

[Page 581]

Persons who have exercised the above right to opt must, except where it is otherwise provided in the Treaty of Peace with Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria, transfer within the succeeding twelve months, their place of residence to the State for which they have opted. They will be entitled to retain their immovable property in Roumanian territory. They may carry with them their movable property of every description. No export duties may be imposed upon them in connection with the removal of such property.

Article 4

Roumania admits and declares to be Roumanian nationals ipso facto and without the requirement of any formality persons of Austrian, Hungarian or Bulgarian nationality who were born in the territory ceded to Roumania by the Treaties of Peace with Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria of parents habitually resident there, even if at the date of the coming into force of the present Treaty they are not themselves habitually resident there.

Nevertheless, within two years after the coming into force of the present Treaty, these persons may make a declaration before the competent Roumanian authorities in the country in which they are resident, stating that they abandon Roumanian nationality, and they will then cease to be considered as Roumanian nationals. In this connection a declaration by a husband will cover his wife, and a declaration by parents will cover their children under eighteen years of age.

Article 5

Roumania undertakes to put no hindrance in the way of the exercise of the right which the persons concerned have, under the Treaties concluded or to be concluded by the Allied and Associated Powers with Austria, Hungary or Bulgaria, to choose whether or not they will acquire Roumanian nationality.

Article 6

All persons born in Roumanian territory who are not born nationals of another State shall ipso facto become Roumanian nationals.

Article 7

All Roumanian nationals shall be equal before the law and shall enjoy the same civil and political rights without distinction as to race, language or religion.

Differences of religion, creed or confession shall not prejudice any Roumanian national in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil or [Page 582]political rights, as for instance admission to public employments, functions and honours, or the exercise of professions and industries.

No restriction shall be imposed on the free use by any Roumanian national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, in religion, in the press or in publications of any kind, or at public meetings.

Notwithstanding any establishment by the Roumanian Government of an official language, adequate facilities shall be given to Roumanian nationals of non-Roumanian speech for the use of their language, either orally or in writing, before the courts.

Article 8

Roumanian nationals who belong to racial, religious or linguistic minorities shall enjoy the same treatment and security in law and in fact as the other Roumanian nationals. In particular they shall have an equal right to establish, manage and control at their own expense charitable, religious and social institutions, schools and other educational establishments, with the right to use their own language and to exercise their religion freely therein.

Article 9

Roumania will provide in the public educational system in towns and districts in which a considerable proportion of Roumanian nationals of other than Roumanian speech are resident adequate facilities for ensuring that in the primary schools the instruction shall be given to the children of such Roumanian nationals through the medium of their own language. This provision shall not prevent the Roumanian Government from making the teaching of the Roumanian language obligatory in the said schools.

In towns and districts where there is a considerable proportion of Roumanian nationals belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, these minorities shall be assured an equitable share in the enjoyment and application of the sums which may be provided out of public funds under the State, municipal or other budget, for educational, religious or charitable purposes.

Article 10

Educational Committees appointed locally by the Jewish communities of Roumania will, subject to the general control of the State, provide for the distribution of the proportional share of public funds allocated to Jewish schools in accordance with Article 9, and for the organisation and management of these schools.

The provisions of Article 9 concerning the use of languages in schools shall apply to these schools.

[Page 583]

Article 11

Jews shall not be compelled to perform any act which constitutes a violation of their Sabbath nor shall they be placed under any disability by reason of their refusal to attend courts of law or to perform any legal business on their Sabbath. This provision however shall not exempt Jews from such obligations as shall be imposed upon all other Roumanian citizens for the necessary purposes of military service, national defence or the preservation of public order.

Roumania declares her intention to refrain from ordering or permitting elections, whether general or local, to be held on a Saturday, nor will registration for electoral or other purposes be compelled to be performed on a Saturday.

Article 12

Roumania agrees of [to] accord to the communities of the Saxons and Czecklers in Transylvania local autonomy in regard of scholastic and religious matters, under the control of the Roumanian State.

Article 13

Roumania agrees that the stipulations in the foregoing Articles, so far as they affect persons belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, constitute obligations of international concern and shall be placed under the guarantee of the League of Nations. They shall not be modified without the assent of a majority of the Council of the League of Nations. The United States, the British Empire, France, Italy and Japan hereby agree not to withhold their assent from any modification in these Articles which is in due form assented to by a majority of the Council of the League of Nations.

Roumania agrees that any Member of the Council of the League of Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the Council any infraction, or any danger of infraction, of any of these obligations, and that the Council may thereupon take such action and give such direction as it may deem proper and effective in the circumstances.

Roumania further agrees that any difference of opinion as to questions of law or fact arising out of these Articles between the Roumanian Government and any one of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers or any other Power, a Member of the Council of the League of Nations, shall be held to be a dispute of an international character under Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The Roumanian Government hereby consents that any such dispute shall, if the other party thereto demands, be referred [Page 584]to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The decision of the Permanent Court shall be final and shall have the same force and effect as an award under Article 13 of the Covenant.

Chapter II

Article 14

Roumania undertakes to make no Treaty, Convention or arrangement and to take no other action which will prevent her from joining in any general Convention for the equitable treatment of the commerce of other States that may be concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations within five years from the coming into force of the present Treaty.

Roumania also undertakes to extend to all the Allied and Associated Powers any favours or privileges in Customs matters, which it may grant during the same period of five years to any State with which since August 1914 the Allied and Associated Powers have been at war or to any State which in virtue of Article 6 of Part X of the Treaty with Austria has special Customs arrangements with such States.

Article 15

Pending the conclusion of the general convention referred to above, Roumania undertakes to treat on the same footing as national vessels or vessels of the most favoured nation the vessels of all the Allied and Associated Powers which accord similar treatment to Roumanian vessels. As an exception from this provision, the right of Roumania or of any other Allied or Associated Power to confine her maritime coasting trade to national vessels is expressly reserved.

Article 16

Pending the conclusion under the auspices of the League of Nations of a general convention to secure and maintain freedom of communications and of transit, Roumania undertakes to accord freedom of transit to persons, goods, vessels, carriages, wagons and mails in transit to or from any Allied or Associated State over Roumanian territory, including territorial waters, and to treat them at least as favourably as the persons, goods, vessels, carriages, wagons and mails respectively of Roumanian or of any other more favoured nationality, origin, importation or ownership, as regards facilities, charges, restrictions, and all other matters.

All charges imposed in Roumania on such traffic in transit shall be reasonable having regard to the conditions of the traffic. Goods in transit shall be exempt from all customs or other duties.

[Page 585]

Tariffs for transit across Roumania and tariffs between Roumania and any Allied or Associated Power involving through tickets or waybills shall be established at the request of the Allied or Associated Power concerned.

Freedom of transit will extend to postal, telegraphic and telephonic services.

Provided that no Allied or Associated Power can claim the benefit of these provisions on behalf of any part of its territory in which reciprocal treatment is not accorded in respect of the same subject matter.

If within a period of five years from the coming into force of this Treaty no general convention as aforesaid shall have been concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations, Roumania shall be at liberty at any time thereafter to give twelve months notice to the Secretary General of the League of Nations to terminate the obligations of the present Article.

Article 17

Pending the conclusion of a general Convention on the international Régime of Waterways, Roumania undertakes to apply to such portions of the River Systems of the Pruth (and Reservation made by the American Delegation of the Dniester) as may lie within, or form the boundary of, her territory, the régime set out in Articles 332–337 of the Treaty of Peace with Germany.

Article 18

All rights and privileges accorded by the foregoing articles to the Allied and Associated Powers shall be accorded equally to all States members of the League of Nations.

The present Treaty, of which the French and English texts are both authentic, shall be ratified. It shall come into force at the same time as the Treaty of Peace with Austria.

The deposit of ratifications shall be made at Paris.

Powers of which the seat of the Government is outside Europe will be entitled merely to inform the Government of the French Republic through their diplomatic representative at Paris that their ratification has been given; in that case they must transmit the instrument of ratification as soon as possible.

A procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications will be drawn up.

The French Government will transmit to all the signatory Powers a certified copy of the procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications.

In Faith Whereof the above-named Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty.

[Page 586]

Done at Versailles, in a single copy which will remain deposited in the archives of the French Republic, and of which authenticated copies will be transmitted to each of the Signatory Powers.

Appendix E to HD–25

Draft Reply to Austrian Counter-Proposals on the Protection of Minorities

The Allied and Associated Powers have received the comment of Austria on Section VI of Part III of the Conditions of Peace, containing the Articles for the Protection of Minorities. They note that the Austrian Delegation seems to concur with the Allied and Associated Powers in thinking that the provision of these guarantees for racial, linguistic and religious minorities will mean much toward the establishment of harmonious relations among the peoples of Europe. The Austrian comment breathes a spirit which augurs well for Austria’s co-operation in the solution of one of the most difficult and complex of European problems.

The amendments suggested by the Austrian Delegation to these clauses have been carefully studied by the Allied and Associated Powers. The chief concern in the Austrian comment is in connection with the two clauses which relate to the enforcement of the guarantees for minorities by the League of Nations. The Austrian Delegation recognises that the fulfilment of these undertakings constitutes a matter of international concern, and it is not at variance with the Allied and Associated Powers in their recognition of the necessity for conferring upon the League of Nations authority and jurisdiction to safeguard and protect the guarantees laid down.

The Austrian Delegation has criticised the wording of Articles 79 and 87, which refer to the League of Nations, and it has called attention to possible doubts which might arise in connection with the application of these Articles.

To a large extent the desires of the Austrian Delegation will be met if these clauses are made to conform to the similar clauses which have already been included in the Treaty between the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and Poland. Such conformity would seem also to meet the Austrian desire that the duties imposed upon the Austrian State should be so far as possible the same as those which are undertaken by other States which may be formed out of the territory of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The Allied and Associated Powers have therefore revised these Articles so as to bring them into line with the clauses which have [Page 587]been inserted in the Treaty with Poland. As revised, these clauses define more precisely the League of Nations jurisdiction and the procedure by which it is to be exercised. The former reduction was criticised as leaving it open to the League of Nations to intervene in a dispute between the Austrian State and an individual citizen. It is now made clear that the Council of the League of Nations will act only at the instance of a State which is a member of the Council, and that the Permanent Court of International Justice to be established under the League of Nations will have jurisdiction only of disputes between Austria and a State which is a member of the Council of the League of Nations. The conferring of jurisdiction on this Court emphasises the judicial nature of disputes which may arise and fully meets the Austrian desire to restrict the possibility of political interference in her affairs.

This will remove any appearance of a contradiction between former Article 87, which limited the “protection of the League of Nations”, to the provisions regarding the “racial, religious and linguistic minorities”, and the former Article 79, which conferred jurisdiction over all “obligations contained in the present section”.

If any difficulty should arise in the execution of these clauses, their modification will be facilitated by the provision that it may be effected with the assent of a majority of the Council of the League of Nations, and the Allied and Associated Powers now agree not to withhold their assent to any such modification.

Revised Clauses Former Redaction
Article 79 Former Article 85 was similar.
Austria undertakes that the stipulations contained in Articles 80 to 84 shall be recognised as fundamental laws, and that no law, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation, or official action prevail over them. Austria undertakes to embody the stipulations of Article 79 to 84 in her fundamental laws as a declaration of rights with which a law, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere, and over which no law, regulation or official action shall prevail.
(Former Article 79 is included later.)
Article 80 No Change.
Article 81 No Change.
Article 82 No Change.
[Page 588]Article 83 This Article combines former Articles 83 and 84, which were as follows:—
Article 83
Austria will provide in the public educational establishments in town and districts in which a considerable proportion of Austrian nationals of other than German speech are resident adequate facilities for ensuring that instruction shall be given to the children of such Austrian nationals through the medium of their own language.
In towns and districts where there is a considerable proportion of Austrian nationals belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, these minorities shall be assured an equitable share in the enjoyment and application of the sums which may be provided out of public funds under the State, municipal or other budget, for educational, religious or charitable purposes.
Austria will provide in the public educational system in towns and districts in which a considerable proportion of Austrian nationals of other than German speech are residents adequate facilities for ensuring that the instruction shall be given to the children of such Austrian nationals through the medium of their own language. This provision shall not prevent the Austrian Government from making the teaching of the German language obligatory in the said schools.
In towns and districts where there is a considerable proportion of Austrian nationals belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, these minorities shall be assured an equitable share in the enjoyment and application of the sums which may be provided out of public funds under the State, municipal or other budget, for educational, religious or charitable purposes.
Article 84
The above provisions regarding public or private instruction in languages other than German do not preclude the Austrian Government from making the teaching of German obligatory.
Article 84 Former Article 79
Austria agrees that the stipulations in the foregoing Articles, so far as they affect persons belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, constitute obligations of international concern and shall be placed under the guarantee of the League of Nations. They [Page 589]shall not be modified without the assent of a majority of the Council of the League of Nations. The Allied and Associated Powers hereby agree not to withhold their assent from any modification in these Articles which is in due form assented to by a majority of the Council of the League of Nations. Austria undertakes to bring her institutions into conformity with the principles of liberty and justice and to give to all the inhabitants of her territory a sure guarantee. With this object she declares herself to be in agreement with the Allied and Associated Powers in recognising that the obligations contained in the present section constitute obligations of international concern, over which the League of Nations has jurisdiction.
Former Article 87
Austria agrees that any member of the Council of the League of Nations shall have the right to bring to the attention of the Council any infraction, or any danger of infraction of any of these obligations, and that the Council may thereupon take such action and give such direction as it may deem proper and effective in the circumstances. The provisions contained in this Section regarding the protection of racial, religious or linguistic minorities shall be under the protection of the League of Nations, and the consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification thereof.
Austria further agrees that any difference of opinion as to questions of law or fact arising out of these Articles between the Austrian Government and any one of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers or any other Power, a Member of the Council of the League of Nations, shall be held to be a dispute of an international character under Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The Austrian Government hereby consents that any such dispute shall, if the other party thereto demands, be referred to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The decision of the Permanent Court shall be final and shall have the same force and effect as an award under Article 13 of the Covenant.
Article 85 Same as former Article 86.
[Page 590]

Appendix F to HD–25

[Translation54]

Draft Letter to the Council of Five on the Special Clauses Proposed by M. Venizelos—Prepared by the Committee on New States

In connection with the investigation of the clauses dealing with Minorities to be inserted in the Treaty with Bulgaria, which was referred to the Committee of New States, the Committee also took into consideration certain proposals which had been made by M. Venizelos, copy of which is attached, drawn up with the object of facilitating emigration between Bulgaria and Greece of Patriarchist Greeks resident in Bulgaria and exarchist Bulgarians resident in Greece. Although these proposals had not been officially referred to them by the Council of Five, the Committee were of opinion that it was necessary for them to take them into consideration in dealing with the whole matter of the protection of minorities in Greece and in Bulgaria.

As a result of their examination they note that certain of the clauses seem rather to be concerned with questions of reparation, and they have therefore confined their observations to those which are more strictly connected with the questions of Minorities. With regard to this matter they further note that certain of these clauses contemplate reciprocal stipulations relating to emigration arising from the right of option and certain others deal with collective property as e. g. with that of communities, churches or convents. The Committee are of opinion that the general idea of these clauses, so far as they relate to individual emigration, is useful and should be adopted; with regard to the second point dealing with collective property, they would limit themselves to the cases in which the population of an entire village should desire to exercise the right to be conferred on them; the examination of these special clauses would have to be considered by the Mixed Commission which it is proposed will deal with the whole question.

The Committee, moreover, consider that the general conception is one which might with advantage be extended to all Balkan countries and that it should not be limited to the inhabitants of territories transferred by the present Peace, but to all inhabitants of any one of the Balkan States who wish to transfer their place of residence to some other Balkan State. If extended in this way it would, they hope, do much to help a permanent settlement of the troubles which have so long affected the Balkans and be a valuable supplement to the clauses dealing with the protecting of minorities. They do not think that [Page 591]it is possible to limit it by saying that these clauses shall apply only to those of special nationality or race; the only real criterion on these matters is the feeling of the individuals concerned.

The Committee also agree that it is necessary in order to carry out this idea that the different States concerned should agree to the establishment of a Mixed Commission to superintend the consequent emigration; it will be necessary that the interested States should advance funds from public sources, the administration of which would be entrusted to the Mixed Commission.

As to procedure they consider the identical clauses should be inserted in the sections of the Bulgarian and Turkish Treaties and also in the special treaties which are being drawn up on the rights of minorities for Greece and Serbia. As regards Greece and Serbia, these clauses could not be imposed, but would have to be agreed. They therefore propose at once to communicate first of all with M. Venizelos to ask him whether he would accept the proposed modifications of his proposals, and if he does so, to submit them for their consideration to the Serbian Delegation.

The Committee have therefore drawn up the following heads [terms] of agreement which will indicate more clearly the nature of the convention which they would suggest:

Heads of Agreement

1.
Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria and Turkey agree that they will accord to all citizens within their territories the right to declare their desire to transfer their residence and remove to any one of the other States.
2.
This right of option can be exercised at any period within two years of the coming into force of this Treaty.
3.
Those who under these clauses exercise this right of option shall have the free right to emigrate into the State which they choose without any form of hindrance or impediment, and to take with them their movable property. The disposal of their immovable property will be controlled by the Commission to be appointed under the following clauses.
4.
There shall be established a mixed commission to be appointed by the League of Nations for the purpose of supervising and facilitating the consequent emigration and for dealing with the immovable property of the emigrants.
5.
In order to facilitate the work, there shall be appointed sub-Commissions, each of which will deal with the emigration between two countries; each of these sub-Commissions shall consist of three members, one appointed by each of the interested countries, and the other, who shall be Chairman, appointed from among its own members by the Central Commission.
6.
The funds necessary for facilitating the emigration shall be advanced by the interested States to the Central Commission. The Central Commission shall make such contributions as may be necessary from these funds to the individuals who exercise the right of option [Page 592]conferred upon them. They shall also advance to the emigrants the value of the immovable property, the ownership of which shall be transferred to the Commission. The Commission will arrange for the eventual sale.

The Committee therefore venture to ask whether they would be permitted to adopt the procedure indicated, and in particular, to enter into communication with M. Venizelos to ask whether he would agree to the proposed modification of his articles; and further, whether they would be permitted to lay this suggestion before the Delegation of the Serb-Croat-Slovene State.

[Enclosure]

Special Clauses [Proposed by M. Venizelos]

1. Patriarchist Greeks (recognising the Greek Patriarch as Head of their Church) who are Bulgarian subjects will have the right to emigrate freely into Greece. The Bulgarian Government undertakes to facilitate in every way the emigration of those exercising this right.

Emigrants of more than 18 years of age shall declare their intention of emigrating before the Mixed Commission referred to above or before its representatives. A husband’s declaration will cover that of his wife. The declarations of parents or guardians will cover those of children less than 18 years of age.

They may freely carry with them (or have transported) their possessions and household effects of all kinds, as well as those belonging to their communities, churches, convents, schools, hospitals and foundations of every kind, without any export duty being imposed upon them.

2. With regard to their immovable property, whether rural or urban, together with that belonging to their communities, churches, convents, schools, hospitals and foundations of every kind, the Bulgarian Government shall be bound to pay them the value thereof according to the provisions set forth below. The same obligation shall exist with regard to Greek subjects desirous of permanently leaving Bulgaria.

3. Exarchist Bulgarians (recognising the Bulgarian Exarch as head of their Church), who are Greek subjects living in Macedonian territory transferred to Greece in virtue of the Treaty of Bucharest of 28/10th August 1913, shall have the right to emigrate freely into Bulgaria. A husband’s declaration shall cover that of his wife. The declarations of parents or guardians shall cover those of children less than 18 years of age.

With regard to the transfer and liquidation of property and [Page 593]possessions, the provisions of Articles 1 and 2 hereof shall reciprocally apply.

4. The Bulgarian Government undertakes to pay to the Greek Government, for account of those entitled thereto, the value of immovable urban or rural property belonging to Patriarchist Greeks, who took refuge in Greece either before or after the year 1914.

5. The Bulgarian Government also undertakes to pay to the Greek Government, for account of those entitled thereto, the value of all immovable property and possessions of any kind which belonged to individual patriarchist Greeks or to communities, churches, schools, convents, hospitals and other Greek foundations situated in Bulgaria and at various times seized, confiscated, or destroyed by its authorities or nationals, a detailed list of which will be transmitted to it by the Greek Government.

6. Whereas the Bulgarian Government and the Greek Government both undertake not to hinder freedom of emigration, directly or indirectly, emigrants shall under no pretext be prevented from carrying out their intention. And therefore all laws and regulations of any kind existing in the two countries and which might be prejudicial to freedom or emigration shall be considered null and void from the coming into force of the present Treaty. The departure of an emigrant shall not be prevented by any legal proceedings whatsoever, whether civil or penal, on the part of the authorities of either country. In the event of penal proceedings against an emigrant, the authorities of the prosecuting country shall nevertheless hand him over for trial to the country for which he is bound.

It is hereby agreed that no legal proceedings of any kind pending before civil or administrative courts of law, even if concerning the Government (e. g. claims for taxes, contributions, or fines made by the Government or provincial, communal or other authorities) shall prevent an emigrant from leaving the country, his right to appoint an attorney to represent him being reserved.

7. The Bulgarian Government undertakes to hand over to the Greek authorities within 30 days from the coming into force of the present Treaty, all Patriarchist Greeks undergoing sentence in Bulgaria for political offences or offences under common law. Individuals so handed over shall be considered as finally exempt from all prosecution or penalty in Bulgaria.

8. The Bulgarian Government undertakes to capitalise all civil or military pensions acquired in Bulgaria, at the date of the signature of the present Treaty, by Patriarchist Greeks emigrating according to the provisions of Article E, and immediately to pay the value thereof to the banking office (caisse) hereinafter provided for.

9. Any law or regulation to the contrary notwithstanding, property and possessions situated in Bulgaria and having belonged to [Page 594]Patriarchist Greeks who emigrated either before or after 1914 shall not be considered as having no owner. The liquidation thereof shall take place in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 hereof.

10. Patriarchist Greeks emigrating into Greece and Exarchist Bulgarians emigrating into Bulgaria in accordance with the provisions of Article 1, shall be exempt from all past or present military obligations and their departure shall not be prevented on that account.

11. Immediately on leaving a country, emigrants shall cease to be nationals thereof.

12. The right to emigrate under conditions similar to those contained in the preceding articles is also granted to Bulgarians who are Greek subjects settled in Bulgaria and profess another Christian creed.

13. From the date of the coming into force of the present Treaty, a mixed Commission shall be organised, which shall be responsible for dealing with questions relating to the above-mentioned emigration of Patriarchist Greeks. It shall be composed of three delegates, representing France, Greece and Bulgaria respectively. The seat of the Commission shall be at Philippopolis.

A similar Commission shall be constituted at Salonica, to deal with the above-mentioned emigration of Exarchist Bulgarians.

Each Delegate of either Commission shall have an assessor, who shall be entitled to a consultative vote.

The decisions of each Commission will be taken by a majority of votes and will be put into execution without appeal.

14. Each Commission shall, whenever necessary, establish offices to ensure all necessary measures being taken for the practical organisation of the emigration in the best interests of the emigrants. It shall in particular determine the procedure with regard to the declarations to be made by the emigrants, and the valuation of their immovable property by a fixed Commission of experts, on which the interested parties shall be represented, and the collection of the value thereof. It shall further fix the dates of departure, and in general make all other necessary arrangements.

The Commission constituted in Bulgaria shall further be responsible for effecting a valuation of the immovable property referred to in Articles 4, 5 and 9.

15. The right of emigration in the above conditions shall remain in force during a period of four years. The Commissions shall be entitled to ask the two Governments concerned to extend this period by one year should they deem it necessary. The work of the Commissions shall end three months after the termination of the period of four years referred to above, or of its extension as the case may be.

16. The total value of the immovable property enumerated in [Page 595]Articles 2 and 3 shall be paid into the banking office provided for in Article 18 by the Government of the country of departure immediately the Commission established there shall have notified it of the result of the valuation. Such payment shall be effected as to one quarter of the currency of the country, or its counter-value in francs, pounds sterling or dollars, and as to three-quarters in short-dated treasury bills in francs gold.

17. The total value of the immovable property referred to in Articles 4, 5 and 9, shall be paid by the Bulgarian Government into the banking office provided for in Article 18. Payment shall be effected in Bulgarian currency or its counter-value in francs, pounds sterling or dollars immediately the Commission established in Bulgaria shall have completed the valuation and notified the Government of its result.

18. Each of the Commissions constituted in conformity with Article 13 shall establish a banking office which shall collect all sums due to the parties entitled thereto under the provisions of Articles 1 and 2. Each banking office shall make advances to the emigrants in the amounts paid in on their account, and will audit all the accounts in collaboration with the Greek and Bulgarian Governments.

19. The Banking Office of the Commission established in Bulgaria shall further collect all sums due to the parties entitled thereto, in conformity with Articles 4, 5 and 9 and 17, and all amounts resulting from the capitalisation of civilian pensions in conformity with Article 8.

20. With a view to facilitating its working, the Banking Office established in Bulgaria shall immediately be supplied with the sum of 5 million leva, and the banking office in Greece with an equivalent amount in drachmas, according to the rate of exchange.

21. The cost of the maintenance and working of the Commission established in Bulgaria and of its various offices shall be borne by the Greek Government. Those of the Commission in Greece, and of its offices, shall be charged to the Bulgarian Government.

Appendix G to HD–25

Note to the Supreme Council [From the Commission on Political Clauses in Regard to the Eventual Restitution to the Allies of Rolling Stock Moved Beyond the Armistice Frontier in Violation of the Armistice of Villa Giusti]

[Translation]55

Among the stipulations studied by the Commission on Political Clauses, on the proposal of the Italian delegation, with a view to [Page 596]the drafting of a treaty to be concluded among the Allied States which are successors to Austria-Hungary, was included the following draft article:

“All rolling stock which, in violation of the terms of Article 3 of the Armistice of November 3, 1918 (Villa Giusti) shall have been transported beyond the boundary established by the armistice after the negotiations leading to the said armistice, should be returned to the Allies within a period of two months, independently of material which shall be due them under the reparations clauses of Article 311 of the treaty of peace with Austria.

They shall satisfy themselves directly of the quantity and quality of the rolling stock thus delivered with a view to the allocation of the locomotives. The cars and trucks shall be allocated in the ratio of twenty for each locomotive, and shall consist of 1/10th in passenger coaches and 1/25th in freight cars.”

The Italian delegation supported its proposal by the fact that the number of cars which should have been delivered to the Allied High Command according to the armistice of November 3, have been retained or transported into the territory of the Yugo-Slav state.

The TheCommission considered that it was a question, of a sort, of an application of the armistice which could not have a place in the treaty which it was studying, and it declared itself incompetent [to consider it.] Nevertheless, it deemed that it could not omit to submit to the Supreme Council the considerations presented on this subject by the Italian delegation which are formulated in the attached note.

It is for the Supreme Council to decide whether the question raised by the Italian delegation should be decided in the sense suggested by that delegation, or referred for study and continuation either to a military commission competent to examine the questions raised by the execution of the armistice or to the Supreme War Council.

The Commission believes it should add also to the present communication, the observations formulated by the British technical delegate, General Mance, on the subject of the draft article presented by the Italian delegation.

[Enclosure 1]

Considerations Presented to the Supreme Council by the Italian Delegation

Article 153 of the treaty of peace with Austria lays down that the provisions of the armistice convention, among others those of paragraph 3, to which the proposed clause refers, remain in force, a fact which authorizes one again to demand the execution of them, even after the signature of peace. Should this application be demanded only with regard to Austria? The Italian delegation thinks it should not; the armistice having been concluded with the representatives of [Page 597]the entire Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Allies reserve the right to search for the material which shall have been left in place on this side of the armistice line in all the territory belonging to the former Monarchy into which it may have been taken.

Consequently, the new states that have become the assignees of these territories could not avoid this search or the obligation to surrender the material which is found, for any reason whatever, dispersed on their soil.

The proposed clause has, then, no other purpose than to state precisely the import of article 153 of the treaty of peace with Austria, by a completing stipulation to which the states that find themselves in the situation anticipated by the said clause shall be signatories.

If the Supreme Council considers that this completing stipulation is not indispensable and that the interpretation of article 153 could not lead to doubts and misunderstandings, the Italian delegation would be satisfied with a declaration in this sense.

[Enclosure 2]

British Note on Article 8 of the Draft Clauses on the Reciprocal Relations of the Ceded Territories

1. The paragraph of article 3 of the armistice of November 3 treating of the return of rolling stock is as follows:

“All the military and railroad equipment of every kind (including coal) which is situated in the interior of these territories shall be left in place and returned to the Allies and to the Americans according to special orders given by the commander in chief of the Armies of the Associated Powers on the various fronts.”

The removal of rolling stock in the course of negotiations leading up to the armistice would not then violate article 3, and the article thus drafted would constitute the imposition of a new obligation upon Austria. This observation applies to the second paragraph of the draft article.

2. It is understood that this article has as its sole purpose to assure the execution of the conditions of the armistice, and it appears then that it should be treated entirely as a question of the armistice. One should point out that in virtue of article 153 of the treaty with Austria, one could have the above article of the armistice respected even after the entrance into force of the treaty of peace.

3. These cars referred to in the armistice should not be confused with the rolling stock which should be delivered under article 310 of the treaty of peace with Austria, for their delivery is confirmed by article 195 of the treaty with Austria.

4. Supposing that every addition to the conditions of the armistice [Page 598]should be recited, the questions under discussion seem to be the following:

(a)
Italy maintains that certain cars which should have been returned under the armistice, have been taken beyond the line established by the armistice. This is a question of fact.
(b)
It is pointed out that some of these cars have been taken into present Yugo-Slavia. In this case, the difficulty arises of knowing whether the cars which could still be restored to Italy under the armistice should be surrendered by Austria or by Yugo-Slavia.

Appendix H to HD–25

Note to the Supreme Council [From the Commission on Political Clauses in Regard to the Desirability of Reconciling the Clauses of the Treaty of Peace With Austria With Those of the Treaties To Be Concluded With the Allied States Formed Out of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy]

[Translation]56

In conformity with the mission which was confided to it by the Supreme Council of the Allied and Associated Powers by the resolution dated July 11, 1919,57 the Commission on the Political Clauses of the Treaty of Peace with Austria has examined “The proposal of M. Sonnino for the application to all of the countries of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy of certain political clauses of the treaty of peace with Austria.”

Its labors have led to the elaboration of a draft treaty to be concluded among the Allied states that were formed from the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy or that are assignees of territories that belonged to the said Monarchy, with the participation of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers.

A treaty of this kind, in which only Allied states take part, should necessarily be freely agreed to by all the interested parties. For this reason, the stipulations that it contains could not assume the same character as analogous stipulations which have been drafted for a treaty of peace imposed on Austria, an enemy state.

The draft elaborated by the Commission, and regarding which it is now consulting the interested Allied states, does not, therefore, reproduce textually the articles of the treaty with Austria that bear on subjects of the same kind.

In the opinion of the Commission, it would, nevertheless, be necessary that questions of this kind be settled in accordance with a view of the whole situation in all of the states successor to the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, including therein the new Austria and the new Hungary.

[Page 599]

Consequently, it would seem expedient as far as possible to put the corresponding clauses of the treaty of peace with Austria (as well as those of the future treaty with Hungary) into harmony with the treaty studied by the Commission.

These contingent modifications of the treaty with Austria would not seem, moreover, to give rise to objections on the part of the Austrian delegation since they do not aggravate the conditions already presented to this delegation.

It is self-evident that it would be necessary, if this contingency is to be realized, that the treaty among the Allied states be drafted and approved by the Supreme Council in sufficient time to permit the modifications which it involves to be included in the conditions which will be definitively submitted to the Austrian delegation in response to the observations which the latter is going to present on the conditions which have been communicated to them.

In this eventuality, the Commission has taken all the steps necessary to be prepared to submit as soon as possible to the Supreme Council a text approved by the interested parties.

Nevertheless, the Commission would like to know, at the present moment, whether the Supreme Council approves its suggestion, and considers that in fact there is occasion to put the clauses of the treaty with Austria, corresponding to those of the projected treaty among the Allied states, into harmony with these latter clauses. In case the Supreme Council would like to give its consent to this view, the Commission, in order to avoid all cause for delay, would take steps to prepare, as soon as possible, in cooperation with the Drafting Committee and the interested commissions, the new text of the clauses of the treaty with Austria which should be thus revised.

Appendix I to HD–25

General Duval, President of the Commission on Aerial Clauses.

To the President of the Supreme Council of the Peace Conference.

I have the honour to submit herewith the report addressed to General Groves by the British Military Mission at Berlin.

General Groves, British Delegate of the Commission on Aerial Clauses has asked me to draw the attention of the Supreme Council to this report so that instructions may be given to the Commander-in-Chief to oppose the sale of the motors in question.

This report clearly shows the importance of the facts mentioned and I think it is necessary that this question should be examined without delay.

Duval
[Page 600]
[Enclosure]
No. 6599.3.1.

General Haking,
Armistice Commission Cologne.

I forward herewith a report by Captain T. Breen of this Mission, which is of importance and seems to demand prompt action. Capt. Breen is making further investigations, but looks upon this report as quite reliable. There is no doubt that the Germans will make use of the period before the treaty comes into force to dispose of as much property as possible.

N. Malcolm

Major General,
Chief of British Military Mission
1 Moltkestrasse, Berlin
[Subenclosure]

To General Malcolm

In accordance with Section 3 of part V of the Conditions of Peace (Air Clauses 198 to 202) Germany is restricted in the manufacture of aeroplanes and engines. Accordingly the Government have arranged to close down a series of factories including that at Adlershof, near Johannesthal, Berlin immediately.

This factory employs 4,800 hands, who have been given notice of dismissal the first week in August: shed 404 contained approximately 500 engines captured from Allied Machines many of which were of the most modern type, Rolls-Royce, Hispano-Suiza, [illegible name] Liberty, etc. The workmen of the factory informed me some time ago that a Commission of British Officers had visited Johannesthal in December accompanied by a German Staff Officer, who did not show them the booty hall at Adlershof. A deputation of two workmen informed me yesterday that the motors are now being removed in all haste to a small depot at Kurfurstendamm, Berlin. It would appear that a private firm has purchased the contents of the hall for 400,000 Marks. So far 120 Rolls-Royce engines and Hispano-Suiza engines have been removed and the remainder should be moved in the course of this week. The men at the present moment are being dismissed. They receive three weeks pay in advance.

[Page 601]

If the Allied Military Authorities wish to obtain delivery of this material according to Article 202, the powers conferred by Article 210 of Section IV (Interallied Commissions of Control) might be temporarily transferred to an Allied Aviation Commission in order to obviate the secretion of the material in this way by the German authorities, otherwise it will be very difficult to recover material and engines disposed of to private buyers before the ratification of the Treaty.

T. F. Breen

Captain

Appendix J to HD–25

Translation

delegation of the kingdom of the
serbs, croats, and slovenes

To: The President of the Peace Conference.

For some time rumours have persisted, of various epidemics which are said to have broken out in the prisoner camps in Italy; according to these same rumours, the prisoners are dying in large numbers.

The Delegation of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes at Rome, troubled by this news, and anxious about the lot of their compatriots who, as soldiers of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy are in captivity in Italy, drew the attention of the Royal Italian Government to these facts, during the months of February and March last, and begged it to kindly inform them whether these rumours were well-founded. In its reply, addressed to the Legation, the Consulta denied them, almost with indignation. However, this news continued to be propagated more and more and even appeared in the Press.

The Italian newspaper “Epoca” of June 18th, 1919, published that the Italian Ministry of War ordered the concentration of prisoners of war in the villages of Ladispoli and Palo, near Civita-Vecchia, and that it is to be feared, by reason of this concentration, that the diseases existing among the prisoners may spread to the population, especially if it is considered that exanthematous typhus exists among the prisoners to such a degree that in a small camp near Rome, the physician of the camp himself, has succumbed to it. This newspaper states the opinion that it would be better to leave the prisoners in smaller groups, and the epidemic would in this way be easier to combat.

The Italian newspaper “Azanti” of June 19th, 1919, publishes a statement according to which the military authorities were said to have ordered a grouping of all the Austro-Hungarian prisoners of [Page 602]war, among whom exanthematous typhus prevails, the grouping to he made in certain localities on the sea shore, near Rome. As a result of this fact, it is affirmed in the same issue of the newspaper, a deputation presented itself on the same day before the Governor of Rome, in order to draw his attention to the danger which would result from the installation of these sick prisoners in the vicinity of Rome, and from their concentration on the sea shore, where Italian workmen go during the summer, since the disease might also spread among the population. The Governor requested that a memorandum on this subject be submitted to him, and promised to forward it, especially recommending it to the attention of the military authorities. The “Azanti” continues: “It is known that exanthematous typhus prevails in certain prisoner camps, such as those of Frascati, Capagendi, Bari, where 60 prisoners are dying daily from typhus, and from black smallpox. …”, and it adds that most of the sick and dead are Jugo-Slavs. The Delegation of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes learns from other sure sources, that an epidemic of exanthematous typhus prevails also in the prisoner camps of Southern Italy and that the mortality rate is very high there.

The situation of these prisoners in Italy, soldiers of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, among whom are a large number of co-nationals, makes the delegation of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, very anxious, for if it persists as at present, it is very probable and almost certain that they will perish within a very short length of time.

After having set forth the terrible situation of our compatriots in Italy, I have the honour, Mr. President, knowing the humanitarian sentiments of our Great Allies to draw the attention of Your Excellency to these facts and to beg you to kindly intervene in order that our compatriots who are still treated in Italy as prisoners, be given aid and be saved from certain death. It is absolutely essential to separate the well prisoners from those who are sick, to give the former every hygienic care possible, and to make it possible for them to return home as soon as possible, and to give the greatest care to the sick as well as the needed aid.

The Serbs, Croats and Slovenes have suffered too much during this war for them to be permitted to suffer longer.

Our soldiers, taken prisoners, have perished en masse during the war in the enemy camps in Germany, Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria, and we believe that our enemies should not be left the possibility of defending themselves by invoking the present situation of prisoners of war in Italy, at the moment when they are asked to render an account thereof.

Accept, etc.

For the S. C. S. Delegation
Nik. Pachitch
  1. Ante, p. 449.
  2. Col. James A. Logan, Jr., member of the American Relief Administration at Paris.
  3. The reference may be either to the armistice with Austria-Hungary, signed at Villa Giusti on November 3, 1918 (vol. ii, p. 175), or to the military convention between the Allies and Hungary, signed at Belgrade on November 13, 1918 (vol. ii, p. 183).
  4. The reference may he either to the armistice with Austria-Hungary, signed at Villa Giusti on November 3, 1918 (vol. ii, p. 175), or to the military convention between the Allies and Hungary, signed at Belgrade on November 13, 1918 (vol. ii, p. 183).
  5. HD–8 and 10, pp. 154 and 191.
  6. HD–11, minute 4, HD–12, minute 5, and HD–13, minute 12, pp. 207, 238, and 264.
  7. Telegram No. 3546, August 7, 1919, 3 p.m., from the Commission to Negotiate Peace, Foreign Relations, 1919, Russia, p. 294.
  8. HD–19, minute 4, p. 404.
  9. Ante, p. 515.
  10. J. W. Headlam-Morley, British representative, Commission on New States.
  11. See HD–18, minute 1, p. 369.
  12. Jules A. Laroche, French representative, Committee on Political Clauses for Europe.
  13. Armistice of November 3, 1918, between the Allies and Austria-Hungary, vol. ii, p. 175.
  14. Brig. Gen. P. R. C. Groves, British representative, Aeronautical Commission.
  15. Lt. Col. John Hartman Morgan, British representative, Commission on Prisoners of War.
  16. CF–27. minute 1. vol. v, p. 873.
  17. HD–21, minute 1, p. 449.
  18. Translation front the French supplied by the editors.
  19. Lt Col. William B. Wallace, military and civil secretary to Gen. Tasker H. Bliss.
  20. Translation from the French supplied by the editors.
  21. Destined to be distributed to the Roumanian soldiers who cannot cultivate their land for the two following reasons: (a) They have been kept mobilized to safeguard the safety of the State against those who continually disturb the peace. (b) They have lacked the necessary means because these means had been appropriated by the enemy. [Footnote in the original.]
  22. Destined to be distributed to the Roumanian soldiers who cannot cultivate their land for the two following reasons: (a) They have been kept mobilized to safeguard the safety of the State against those who continually disturb the peace. (b) They have lacked the necessary means because these means had been appropriated by the enemy. [Footnote in the original.]
  23. See footnote on preceding page.
  24. Capt. Thomas T. C. Gregory, member of the American Relief Administration at Vienna.
  25. British and Foreign State Papers, vol. lxxxiii, p. 513.
  26. Ibid., vol. lxxxix, p. 65.
  27. Great Britain, Parliamentary Papers, 1907 (Cd. 3556), vol. xcix, p. 353.
  28. British and Foreign State Papers, vol. lxvi, p. 19.
  29. Ibid., vol. cii, p. 214.
  30. Ibid., vol. cv, p. 219.
  31. Ibid., vol. lxxxii, p. 771.
  32. Ibid., vol. lxxxv, p. 750.
  33. Ibid., vol. lxxxvii, p. 806.
  34. Ibid., vol. xcii, p. 433.
  35. Martens, Nouveau recueil général de traiés, 3 sér., tome iii, p. 920.
  36. Ibid., 2 sér., tome xxii, p. 42.
  37. Ibid., 3 sér., tome ii, p. 878.
  38. Luigi Palma, Nuova Raccolta dei Trattati e delle Convenzioni (1881–1890), vol. 3, pt. 2, p. 783; see also Germany, Reichs-Gesetzblatt, 1887, p. 111.
  39. Martens, Nouveau recueil général de traité’s, 3 sér., tome ii, p. 888.
  40. British and Foreign State Papers, vol. lxxxvii, p. 78.
  41. Ibid., vol. lxxxix, p. 159.
  42. Malloy, Treaties, 1776–1909, vol. ii, p. 2066.
  43. Great Britain, Treaty Series, 1910, No. 21 (Cd. 5221).
  44. Ibid., 1909, No. 4 (Cd. 4530).
  45. Malloy, Treaties, 1776–1909, vol. ii, p. 2131.
  46. Great Britain, Treaty Series, 1912, No. 20 (Cd. 6326).
  47. Treaties, Conventions, etc., 1910–1923, vol. iii, p. 2918.
  48. Ibid., 1776–1909, vol. ii, p. 1935.
  49. Ibid., 1910–1923, vol. iii, p. 2953.
  50. British and Foreign State Papers, vol. lxxvii, p. 22.
  51. Ibid., vol. cii, p. 619.
  52. Great Britain, Treaty Series, 1914, No. 11 (Cd. 7613).
  53. Ibid., 1892, No. 13 [C. 6818].
  54. Ibid., 1913, No. 7 (Cd. 6804).
  55. British and Foreign State Papers, vol. xcvi, p. 839.
  56. Ibid., vol. cviii, p. 404.
  57. Foreign Relations, 1878, p. 895.
  58. The translation is that found under Paris Peace Conf. 185.4134/2.
  59. Translation from the French of note and its enclosures supplied by the editors.
  60. Translation from the French supplied by the editors.
  61. HD–5 minute 4, p. 101.