763.72119/8216½
The Secretary of State to President Wilson
My Dear Mr. President: I feel it necessary to send you a note which I received Saturday evening19 from the French Ambassador [Page 681] and which contains an earnest appeal for the retention of our Commissioners in Paris and a continuance of the Supreme Council.
I have given the matter careful consideration and, while I appreciate the French desire to continue the Council and the validity from their standpoint of some of the arguments urged, I still think that our Commissioners should return as they have planned to do on December 6th.
It seems to me (and I have had the feeling for some time) that the Supreme Council has been growing less and less potent in directing affairs in Europe and the way its commands have recently been ignored by some of the smaller nations convinces me that its usefulness is nearing, if it has not reached, its end. I am sure that our Commissioners feel this, though they have not said so, because they are insistent that they can do no good by remaining longer.
Of course the French desire the Council to continue because, as it is now constituted, M. Clemenceau practically dominates it, and is using, as far as I can judge, such power as it still possesses to carry out French policies in Europe which, if pursued, will be likely to cause the overthrow of the present German Government, a fact which would be most unfortunate.
Everything of importance which may arise from now forward can be handled more efficiently through regular diplomatic channels. At least it seems to me that the close relation of the proceedings in the Senate to our activities in connection with such questions as have come before the Supreme Council require daily contact and knowledge of what is taking place here, and, therefore, can be better guided from Washington.
The British Government have made no appeal such as the French have made, and have not even intimated that they are anxious to continue the Council beyond the time planned for its dissolution. Of course they may do it yet, but I am sure that, if they do, it will be at the instigation of and out of consideration for the French. If those two Governments had been of the same mind in the matter they would certainly have addressed to us a joint appeal. My own impression is that the British feel very much as we do about the moribund character of the Council.
As to the effect here at home of continuing the Council I hardly need to speak. I am sure though that it would do no good and might do harm. To me the supreme aim is to secure a ratification of the Treaty. Anything which might even remotely divert a single vote from support of the Treaty ought to be avoided. Whether continuance of the Council would do that I am not sure, but the very fact that I am doubtful makes me feel that we ought not to take the chance of continuance, especially as there are what appear to me to be other strong reasons for not doing so.
[Page 682]It seems not improbable that Germany will delay signing the protocol until this country ratifies the Treaty. The thing to do, therefore, is to bend every energy to that end. When that is obtained the protocol will be signed and ratifications deposited, but I doubt very much if continuance of the Council would have the slightest effect on the Germans no matter how long it sat unless the United States ratifies.
From every American point of view I feel that it would be a serious mistake to keep our Commissioners longer in Paris. I hope that you will find that you can approve my views, so that I can answer the French Ambassador accordingly.
Faithfully yours,
- November 29.↩