Paris Peace Conf. 180.03801/4
ICP–9
Notes of a Meeting of the Heads of Delegations of the Five Great
Powers, Held in M. Pichon’s Room, Quai d’Orsay, Paris, on Friday,
January 9, 1920, at 12:15 p.m.
Paris, January 9, 1920, 12:15 p.m.
- Present
- America, United States of
- Secretary
- British Empire
- The Right Hon. D. Lloyd George, O. M., M. P.,
Prime Minister.
- The Right Hon. A. Bonar Law, M. P., Lord Privy
Seal.
- The Right Hon. the Earl Curzon of Kedleston, K.
G., G. C. S. I., G. C. I. E., Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs.
- Secretary
- Sir Maurice Hankey, G. C. B.
- Mr. Leeper.
- France
- Secretaries
- M. Dutasta
- M. Berthelot
- M. Massigli.
- Italy
- Secretary
- Japan
Interpreter: M. Mantoux
Mr. Lloyd George said that he had had the
pleasure of several conversations with M. Nitti in London. The latter
had made certain suggestions which he himself had taken into
consideration with his colleagues. As the result of their deliberations
he had prepared a Memorandum of Proposals which he would now invite his
colleagues on the Supreme Council to examine. The
Adriatic. The Question of Fiume
(At this point Mr. Lloyd George’s proposals were handed
round—Appendix).
His latest proposals, though based on M. Nitti’s suggestions, had not yet
been seen by M. Nitti. His suggestion was that the proposals in his
Memorandum should be considered as presented to the
[Page 860]
Conference and to M. Nitti by the
signatories of the Treaty of London.1 In this connection Mr. Lloyd
George recalled that on April 19th, at the Council of Four, in the
presence of President Wilson, he had informed M. Orlando that Great
Britain stood by the Treaty of London, and had made it clear that, if
Italy insisted on it, Great Britain would abide by it.2 At the same time he had also made
it clear that, in the opinion of the British Government, the Treaty of
London was not quite suitable to existing conditions. He was quite well
acquainted with M. Nitti’s difficulties, which were largely internal.
The fact was that Fiume had become, as it were, a “flag” to Italian
public opinion. Apart from that, it was not really a question of any
great intrinsic importance. Nevertheless, it was very urgent to settle
the matter. Otherwise the situation was full of peril to Italy, to the
Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, and to Europe. He did not think the Council
could take the responsibility of allowing the present state of affairs
to continue. In this complicated question no perfect solution was
possible. The populations of this area were so mixed as to prevent this,
and the only thing to do was to reach some rough and ready solution
which all parties could accept. Consequently, if his new proposals
should prove acceptable to Italy, he proposed that the Council should
then see the representatives of the Serbo-Croat-Slovene State and put
the proposal before them.
M. Clemenceau asked if M. Nitti had had an
opportunity of studying the document.
M. Nitti replied that he had not.
M. Clemenceau then proposed that, in order to
give M. Nitti time to study the question, it should be adjourned until
11-30 on Saturday, January 10th.
Appendix
the adriatic situation
Draft of Suggested Joint Memorandum
by M. Clemenceau and Mr. Lloyd George
The British and French Governments have consistently declared their
willingness to abide by the Treaty of London. They cannot forget
that Italy voluntarily came to the aid of the Allies at a critical
and dangerous moment in the war, and that, in spite of the very
gallant and memorable fight put up by the Serbian nation, it was
[Page 861]
mainly through the
courage, self-sacrifice, and the endurance of the Italian people and
Army that the Croatian and Slovene peoples have won that
independence and freedom from German and Magyar domination which
they now enjoy. They are prepared, should the Italian Government
require it, to abide by the terms of the Treaty they have signed.
If, however, the Italian Government agrees in thinking that, owing
to the disappearance of the Hapsburg monarchy, the rise of national
States in its place, the great uprising of Italian feeling in Fiume,
and the other great events which have occurred since 1915, the
Treaty of London no longer constitutes a satisfactory settlement of
the Adriatic question, they are willing, subject to the amendments
set forth below, to adopt as the basis of settlement the memorandum
presented to Signor Scialoja by the representatives of France, the
United States of America and Great Britain on December 9th,
1919,3 and modified by the
proposals made to them by Signor Nitti on January 6th, 1920.4 They advance these amendments to Signor Nitti’s
memorandum in the conviction that, while they are wholly consistent
with Italy’s vital interests, they are essential to lasting peace
and good relations between Italy and its neighbours which the
British and French Governments have so much at heart and which they
regard as their duty to promote. The British and French Governments,
therefore, would propose to the Conference the following settlement
of the Adriatic question:—
- (1)
- There should be constituted a “Free State of Fiume
according to President Wilson’s plan” but the Western
frontier of the proposed State should in the South be moved
Eastwards. As, however, it is vital that the railway running
northward from Fiume should be wholly within the Free State,
it is proposed that the frontier should run as follows:—
The line should leave the Coast at Punta Kolova and
run through points 642, 1095 and 1142 up to Mount
Planik, thence northwards it would follow the red
line shown on the map.
- (2)
- “The City of Fiume with its district (corpus separatum) should be guaranteed by a
statute efficaciously safeguarding its Italianita”. This
would be fully attained by conferring upon the corpus separatum the same degree of
autonomy within the Free State as it enjoyed under
Austro-Hungarian rule. Both the privileges of Fiume (corpus separatum) and the Free State
itself should be placed under the guarantee of the League of
Nations. The international character of the port, together
with full facilities for its development in the interests of
all nations concerned, and especially of Jugo-Slavia,
Hungary and Roumania, must also be secured under the
guarantee of the League of Nations.
- (3)
- Inasmuch as the preponderant population of the Island of
Cherso is Slav, there are serious objections to the removal
of the Island from the Free State of which it is an integral
part. The Island of Lagosta, however, should be ceded to
Italy should the Italian Government consider it necessary
for strategic reasons.
- (4)
- The Free State of Zara should be governed by a High
Commissioner advised by a Council representative of the
inhabitants which should select its own diplomatic
representation. Arrangements should also be made governing
the economic relations of Zara with the rest of Dalmatia
which falls to the Jugo-Slav State. Zara will therefore be
within the Serb-Croat-Slovene Customs Union.
- (5)
- The Italian proposals for the effective neutralisation of
all the Islands of the Adriatic should be accepted, but the
proposal to neutralise the mainland of Dalmatia as well,
involving as it must the prohibition to an independent State
of all measures of self-defence, is one which can hardly be
forced upon a friendly Ally. The Conference, therefore,
should ask the Italian Government to be content with the
neutralisation of all the Islands which, together with the
other most important safeguards conceded under the present
arrangement, would seem to give as absolute security as they
can reasonably demand.
- (6)
- The Italians of Dalmatia should be free to choose Italian
citizenship without leaving the territory. In view of the
fact, however, that Fiume is to be set up as a corpus separatum within the Free
State under guarantee of the League of Nations, it is not
possible to extend the arrangement to the citizens of
Fiume.
- (7)
- Existing economic enterprises in Dalmatia should have
their security safeguarded by an International
Convention.
- (8)
- There must also be a discussion of the boundaries of
Albania.
In conclusion, the British and French Governments would point out
that the present proposal involving the severance of the Free State
containing an overwhelming majority (200,000) of Jugo-Slavs from
their motherland, the modification of its Western frontier in favour
of Italy the cession of islands containing a Slav majority, and
other points are very great concessions to ask of a State which is
now a friendly Ally. The British and French Governments are prepared
to ask the Serb-Croat-Slovene State to make these great concessions
for the sake of an amicable and prompt settlement of a question
which now threatens the peace and progress of Southern Europe. But
they can go no further and they earnestly trust that the Conference
and the Italian Government will accept them.
Paris, January 9, 1920.
