With reference to the second paragraph of my L–257 to the Department of
November 19, 1924,78
there is also enclosed one original copy of memorandum initialed by Mr.
Gutt, the Belgian representative on the Expert Committee which is
preparing the work for the forthcoming conference of Finance
Ministers.
[Enclosure 1—Translation79]
Memorandum of a Conversation Between the French
Minister of Finance (Cleméntel) and the American Representative at the Conference
of Finance Ministers (Logan), October 25, 1924
Mr. Logan informed M. Clémentel that he had come to see him to
explain the position of the United States in the matter of their
claims against Germany and of their right to participate in the
Dawes annuities. Mr. Logan explained that the claims of the United
States were of two kinds; (1) the costs of the Armies of Occupation,
and (2) the claims for damages to persons and property. He stated
that the United States Government believed it had an equitable and
legal right to participate in the Dawes annuities, and that it hoped
to have the aid of France in this matter at the forthcoming
Conference of Finance Ministers. For M. Clémentel’s confidential
information, Mr. Logan expressed the opinion that an arrangement
could probably be reached for the annual amount payable on these two
classes of claims to the United States which would not greatly
surpass the annual obligations already stipulated in the Wadsworth
agreement on costs of the Army of Occupation, although the annual
payments would nevertheless be spread over a longer period.
M. Clémentel stated that the French Government was favorable to
American participation in the Dawes annuities, but that the legal
advisers of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were of the opinion that
the strictly legal position resulting from the treaties did not
constitute a basis for the American claims.
Mr. Logan, on the contrary, deemed that the United States had a legal
right to participate in the Dawes annuities but that his Government
was disposed to avoid if possible technical discussions of law and
to stand on the general basis of equity.
M. Clémentel replied that although the French Government thought its
legal point of view to be well-founded, nevertheless, for general
reasons of equity, that Government was favorable to participation
[Page 82]
of the United States in
the Dawes annuities with a view to the settlement of the claims
formulated. He asked that the American position be explained in
detail.
Mr. Logan stated that France and the United States had been allied
during the war and that both had suffered damages and other losses
which ought to be compensated by the common enemy. Both had incurred
expenses for the occupation on the Rhine. Although the United States
had not signed the Treaty of Versailles, it had signed a treaty in
which Germany had accorded it the rights, privileges, and advantages
to which the United States would have been entitled by virtue of the
Treaty of Versailles. As the Dawes annuities represented the total
payments to be effected by Germany it seemed only just and necessary
that the United States should participate in them; Mr. Logan
observed that the United States was formulating no claim for
pensions or allowances to families.
M. Clémentel reiterated that on the general principle of equity the
French Government was ready to admit the justice and necessity of
American participation in the Dawes annuities from the outset of the
execution of the plan, and to adopt this point of view. The French
Government was not holding to technical points of law raised by its
legal advisers (and not admitted by the Government of the United
States), thus giving a new proof of the friendship existing between
the two Republics. Naturally the importance of the participation and
the details of its application are reserved and would be the object
of discussion at the Conference of Finance Ministers. After having
conferred with M. Herriot, M. Clémentel was able to state that the
French Government would support the merits of the American cause set
forth by Mr. Logan, with the sole reservation that the French
Government believed that the service of this claim, the importance
and modalities of which would be fixed by the conference, should not
in any event be assured at a more rapid rate than the service of the
French claim of the same kind.
Mr. Logan thanked M. Clémentel for his friendly attitude and stated
that he would communicate the assurance of the French Government to
the Secretary of State. For his own part, he was very happy to note
that M. Clémentel agreed that the United States should participate
in the Dawes annuities from the outset of the execution of the plan.
Inasmuch as for the first year of the plan there would not be, in
practice, any payment effected outside of Germany, he thought it
very probable that his Government would not ask any participation
for the first year. The observation formulated by M. Clémentel,
namely, that the claims of the United States would be paid at a rate
similar to that of French claims of the same kind, seemed a just and
reasonable proposition. As M. Clémentel had observed, the importance
of the American participation and
[Page 83]
the details of its application were a subject
for discussion by the Conference of Finance Ministers and Mr. Logan
remained convinced that this conference, when it would have to
consider the questions of priority and percentages, would doubtless
recognize that the costs of the American Army of Occupation,
according to the terms of the treaties as well as by virtue of the
provisions of the pending Wadsworth Agreement, were entitled to a
priority, and would accord moreover some consideration to the fact
that the other claims of the United States contained no amount
whatever for pensions or for allowances to families—a detail which
would reduce materially the total of their claims in comparison with
those of the other powers.
Mr. Clémentel observed that in his opinion these questions were
within the competency of the Conference of Finance Ministers.
