Paris Peace Conf. 185.1/36
The Secretary General of the Commission to Negotiate
Peace (Grew) to the Secretary
of State
Dear Mr. Secretary: At the meeting of the
Commissioners on March 11th, the following letter from General Bliss to his
colleagues of the Commission was read, and I was directed to send a circular
letter, based thereon, to the Secretaries of the various Commissions
appointed by the Peace Conference or by the Council of Ten, instructing them
to submit reports by noon on March 13th:
[Here follows text of memorandum printed on page
522.]
Action accordingly was taken by me; and I beg herewith to submit a statement
(with the papers mentioned therein appended thereto) based on the reports
which have been received from the various Commissions.
I am sending these reports to you in accordance with your request at
yesterday’s meeting and shall furnish you with copies of further reports as
soon as they are received.
Yours very respectfully,
[Page 524]
[Enclosure]
Statement Concerning Possible Violations of Any of
the Presidents Declarations in Commission or Committee
Reports
In accordance with instructions from the Commissioners, based on a
memorandum by General Bliss under date of March 11, inquiry has been
made to the Secretaries of the Committees or Commissions appointed by
the Peace Conference or by the Council of Ten, as to whether the report
of his Committee or Commission violates any of the President’s
declarations, and if so, in what respect; and also to state the
justification therefor.
In response to this inquiry, replies summarized as follows have been
received:—
The following named commissions have not progressed sufficiently to date
in the preparation of their reports to admit of making a statement in
regard to the subject given above:—
- Commission on International Labor Legislation.
- Reparation Commission.
- Supreme Economic Council.
- Central Commission for Territorial Questions.
- Economic Commission.
- Financial Commission.
The reply of Dr. Clive Day and Dr. W. L. Westermann, members of the
Committee on Greek Claims, to the above noted inquiry is quoted in full
as an annex to this memorandum. (See Annex “A”)
The reply of Captain Stuart Montgomery, Secretary of the Polish
Commission states that it is believed that the report of that commission
adheres to the President’s principles in an entirely reasonable manner.
He explains that the report consists of two main sections (Sections 2
and 3), both of which were prepared by Dr. Bowman, and accepted by the
British and French Delegations. (See Annex “B”)
The following commissions have not reported:—
- League of Nations,
- Responsibility,
- Ports, Waterways and Railways,
- Czecho-Slovak Affairs,
- Rumanian Territorial Claims.
In regard to the reports submitted by the Belgian and Danish Territorial
Commission the Secretary, Mr. Frank L. Warrin, Jr., stated by telephone
that the report relative to the Treaty of 1839 recently adopted by the
Council of Ten as submitted by this commission contains no violations of
the President’s principles. He said that the second report of the
commission was not as yet sufficiently advanced to admit of a statement
on the question at hand.
[Page 525]
[Subenclosure 1—Annex A]
Dr. Clive Day and Mr. W. L.
Westermann to the Secretary General of the Commission
to Negotiate Peace (Grew)
Subject: Violation of the President’s Declarations in
the Report of the Committee on Greek Claims.
The points where the American Delegation disagrees with the other
delegations, in the effort to hold more closely to the President’s
Declarations, are given in the report itself. The points can be
summarized as follows:
- 1.
- As regards the proposal for Northern Epirus, it is the belief
of the American Delegation that argument III of the British and
French Delegaton “For political and strategic reasons” was the
determining consideration in the minds of the British and French
delegates, and that the attribution of the Koritza district to
Greece would be a clear sacrifice of the national interests and
aspirations of the great majority of the people
concerned.
- 2.
- In regard to Western Asia Minor the United States Delegation
could not accept the proposal of the British and French to give
a coastal strip to Greece basing its position on the fact that
such an assignment is not for the best interest of the Greek and
Turkish populations and is not desired by a large part of the
Greeks; basing its position also on the large percentage of
Turks included in any such arbitrary assignment, and furthermore
on the inexpediency of cutting off a narrow coastal strip from
its hinterland, especially when the intention of the Peace
Conference is to assure the equitable government in
Anatolia.
- 3.
- The British, French and Italian Delegations felt themselves,
because of the Treaty of 1915, unable to discuss the Islands of
the Dodecanese in Italian possession.
The United States delegates did not recognize the applicability of that
treaty and on plain grounds of justice recommended assigning the islands
to Greece.
[Subenclosure 2—Annex B]
Captain Stuart
Montgomery to the Secretary General of the Commission
to Negotiate Peace (Grew)
With reference to your memorandum of March 11th, instructing me to
report, before the arrival of the President, in what respects if any the
report of the Polish Commission violates or does not violate any of the
President’s declarations, and the justification therefor, I beg to say
that it is believed that the report of the Commission
[Page 526]
adheres to the President’s principles in
an entirely reasonable manner.
This statement is considered to be all the more justified because the
report of the Commission consists of two main sections (Sections two and
three), the first of which deals with the principles which guided the
deliberations of the experts in determining the boundaries, and the
second the application of the principles to special cases.
In addition the fact may be noted that both these paragraphs were
prepared by Dr. Bowman, and accepted by both the British and the French
delegations, and that in the preparation of these sections the
President’s principles were always kept in mind.
