CFM Files
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 27
The representative of South Africa suggested that the Commission should hear the views of former enemy states when considering frontier problems and related technical questions. He proposed that the Commission hear this morning a representative of the Italian [Page 295] Delegation who was then waiting outside the Conference hall. The Chairman pointed out that the rules of the Conference permitted Commissions to hear delegations of former enemy states when considered desirable. In the absence of any objection a small Italian delegation was brought to the Conference table by a representative of the General Secretariat.
The Italian representative, Sig. Saragat, (President of the Italian Constituent Assembly) opened his remarks on the Italo-French frontier problem with the observations that (1) the Italian people felt historically responsible for the crimes of Fascism, and that (2) the Italian people wanted the friendship of France not only to wipe out the past but as evidence of Italian democratic rebirth. Saragat developed the Italian position on the north-west boundary along the lines of the Italian memorandum (circulated to the members of the Commission as CP(IT/P) Doc. 12, Annex 1 A.)69 conceding the French claims on four points, namely, (1) The Little St. Bernard Pass (2) The narrow Bardonecchia Valley (3) Mont Chaberton and (4) The Tinee and Vesubie Valleys, and defending the Italian claims to Mt. Cenis plateau and the Upper Roya Valley containing Tenda and Briga. He was ushered out of the meeting at the conclusion of his speech.
The Chairman announced that the Yugoslavs had withdrawn the first part of their amendment to Article 1 (CP Gen Doc 1 U2) on condition that the Commission record the following statement:
“The Commission assumes that adequate and sufficiently detailed maps will be attached to the Treaty in connection with territorial changes.”
The second part of the Yugoslav amendment was formally moved in the following modified form:
“In case of a discrepancy between the textual description of the frontiers and the maps, the text shall be deemed to be authentic.”
At the request of the U.K. representative consideration of this amendment was postponed until the next meeting to give his Delegation an opportunity to study it.
The Commission passed to the consideration of Article 2 and the representative of France introduced the general discussion thereon. He offered to make available all documents relating to rectification of the Italian-Franco frontier to any interested delegation and referred [Page 296] to the memorandum explaining the French position already circulated to members of the Commission (CP(IT/P)Doc.10).70 He continued that the French Delegation had studied closely the Italian memorandum and the statement made by the Italian Delegate this morning and was happy to know that the Italians admitted the justice of four of the French claims. On the two disputed points, the Mont-Cenis plateau and the Upper Roya Valley he briefly defended the French position.
The first paragraph of Article 2 (the Little St. Bernard Pass) on which no amendments had been submitted was approved by the Commission.
The representative of France observed that no amendments had been submitted with respect to the second paragraph of Article 2 (Mont-Cenis Plateau). He questioned the accuracy of Italian figures on pasturage and French ownership and considered that appropriate guarantees were given to the Italian population in the Annex to the Treaty with respect to water and power from the water reservoir on the Plateau. The representative of Australia considered that this was an appropriate question to refer to a special subcommittee in view of the conflicting French and Italian claims and figures. Mr. Hodgson moved that the Commission appoint a sub-committee of seven, including representatives of the four sponsoring powers, to examine and report on Article 2, paragraph 2, and the first part of Annex 2 of the Italian Draft Treaty. Before permitting any discussion on the Australian motion the Chairman obtained approval for adjournment of the meeting at 12:50 p.m.
- C.P.(IT/P) Doc. 12, an introductory document, is not printed. Its annexes however, are virtually identical with the component parts of “Observations on the Draft Peace Treaty With Italy by the Italian Government,” vol. iv, p. 117, which deal with the political and territorial articles of the treaty. C.P.(IT/P) Doc. 12, Annex 1 A is virtually identical with Doc. 11(P), a section of the Italian Observations, ibid., p. 119.↩
- Not printed. The document defends the provisions of the Italian Treaty which deal with the Franco-Italian frontier. (CFM Files)↩