Paris Peace Conf. 184.011102/661
Mr. Albert Halstead to the Secretary of State53
Subject: Interview with State Chancellor Renner on the hopelessness of Austrian situation.
Sir: I have the honor to state that in view of reports that had reached me from sources that have previously been reliable that other [Page 590] countries were interested in Austria’s downfall for their own benefit, and because of the desperate conditions existing in Vienna, I called on Dr. Renner to-day to obtain his view of the situation. I did not intend, of course, to refer directly to those reports, but rather to tactfully draw from the State Chancellor his opinion of the situation and of the future. It was, however, wholly unnecessary to ask Dr. Renner any questions, for as soon as I entered his office he began in a jerky, nervous, overwrought manner, which had never been characteristic even at times when the outlook was most critical, to appeal to me for direct help from the United States. The following is a brief memorandum of the conversation, in which it was unnecessary for me to do anything except listen:
Dr. Renner declared that he and his colleagues in the government were at their wits’ ends, hopeless and sleepless, because they could see no way out of the difficulties that confronted the Austrian Republic, and he asserted that the machinery of the Government would break down from utter exhaustion if relief did not come within the next week. The strain was shown upon his face, and he repeated himself frequently. That was not usual. He declared that the “Entente exist no longer”, that the four Powers had intricate organizations including Supreme Councils, sub-divisions thereof, commissions in each country and commissions of enquiry, ministers and diplomatic and military missions, and other functionaries including committees and sub-committees, which met, argued, consulted and accomplished nothing. All questions were confused with conflicting political policies, constitutional disabilities, financial insecurities, domestic politics and general inefficiency. The problem was simple: It was to furnish Austria with “a little piece of money” with which she could buy “a little piece of bread” to carry her through.
He said that the United Kingdom was in a bad condition financially, that France was far worse off, and that Italy was still more embarrassed by financial matters, and that a loan by the four Powers was apparently not possible; the United States with its hundred million people and its wealth alone being in position to help. He realized that the situation of the United States would not permit its Government to help directly, but it could, as it had in the past, advance money which the other three Powers would loan to Austria provided they could agree to do so. But governmental assistance was not necessary. Austria could pledge herself, her waterpower, her woods, her State property, and an American financial group, which by advancing say 200 million of dollars, could save seven million people, and be in a position of practical control of the future of this country at an immense profit. It was simply a matter of having one business man with power to act come to Austria and make the arrangements. Immediately thereafter he spoke of a Mr. Meyer, representing the New [Page 591] York bankers, who [was?] here and of a representative of the International Corporation who was to meet a representative of Austria in Rotterdam for the purpose of considering financial advances, but this took too long; that the help must be immediate; that without help, the people would within a few days be wholly without bread; that they must contract within a week for food after the 8th of January. But in the meantime he apprehended that about Christmastime that the whole country would fall to pieces, and with 100,000 men starving they could be expected to break into warehouses, private homes and Government buildings, seize what they could lay their hands on. This might keep the population for three days thereafter, but when those three days were ended, what was to happen? It seemed to him that it meant the utter destruction of Austria, which would mean disorder and confusion throughout all Central Europe, for say what one might Austria was the center, and upon the good order and contentment of the population of Vienna depended the future welfare of the country surrounding. The states of Central Southern Europe were all irretrievably bound together.
Asked about food from Jugo-Slavia, he said that the food that was on the border had been received; Jugo-Slavia was not unfriendly; that in fact the Jugo-Slavian Minister and he were friends for years and addressed each other as “thou”. The fact was that Jugo-Slavia had one main railroad which runs from Belgrade to Laibach, a single track in bad condition; that the Austrian railroads, bad as they are, compared to those of Jugo-Slavia were ideal; that the Jugo-Slavs had said “send us engines and cars and we will use them to take food to Laibach and then to Austria;” in Belgrade and vicinity there was an abundance, but at Laibach there was a want, simply for lack of rolling stock and railways that could carry the traffic. Austria could not provide the engines. The Czechs could not furnish coal because they hadn’t the rolling stock; here is the same problem; where is it to come from? One goes constantly in a vicious circle.
Dr. Renner then referred to the Reparation Sub-Commission, which he said was composed of men of the highest purpose, who had labored unceasingly, but they could get no results from the various commissions and sub-divisions of commissions both in Paris and in their own countries to which their recommendations had to be referred.
To bring the State Chancellor back to the immediate subject, he was asked what would follow the breakdown in Vienna. With a jerk of his shoulders he said “probably the entrance of the Czechs into Vienna”, and he added “troops from other countries, perhaps from Italy, possibly from Hungary and possibly Germany, and general chaos”. What was to be done? He answered his own question by saying: “American bankers must give us financial help, and at once. [Page 592] Please telegraph your Government to this effect. They cannot understand the immediate, the present, the heartbreaking needs of Austria”.
With reference to the food question, I asked Dr. Renner as to the report that the Germans were making sacrifices in order to furnish twelve million kilograms of flour to Austria. He drew a diagram of the Rhine and Danube, on the Rhine marking Rotterdam and Mannheim, and on the Danube, Passau. He stated that a ship-load of grain was on the way from Rotterdam to Mannheim, and that from other sources in the vicinity of Passau in order to save time the Germans would furnish grain, taking over the Austrian owned grain when it reached Mannheim.
November 27, 1919.
The papers repeat the report to-day that the Germans will reduce their food allowance in order that they may give Austria two million kilograms of flour per month. This does not agree with what Dr. Renner said yesterday, and looks as if it were an attempt on the Germans’ part to cultivate the good-will of Austria by an appearance of generosity while Austrian officials in the present condition of this republic could not deny the statement.
I have [etc.]
- Copy transmitted to the Commission by Mr. Halstead under covering letter No. 491, November 28; received December 1.↩