CFM Files
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 47
Before the Commission could resume voting on the remaining amendments to Articles 3, 4 and 16, the representative of Czechoslovakia proposed the appointment of a subcommission to study and report on the Italo-Yugoslav and Free Territory’s Frontiers. The proposal was supported by the Yugoslav Delegate and opposed by the U.K. It was defeated by a vote of 10 to 7.
The Yugoslav amendment to Article 3 (CP(Gen)Doc 1 U 3) was put to a vote in four sections and defeated on each count by a vote of 13 to 5 with 2 abstentions. The Yugoslav amendment to Article 16 (CP(Gen)Doc 1 U 11) was voted on in two sections and likewise was defeated by 13 to 5 with 2 abstentions. The Byelo-Russian amendment to Article 3 (CP(Gen)Doc 1 D 1) was defeated by 13 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions, while the Byelo-Russian amendment to Article 16 (CP(Gen)Doc 1 D 2) was likewise defeated by 13 votes to 6 with 1 abstention.
The South African amendment to Article 3 (CP(IT/P)Doc 21)54 was also lost in a 6 to 12 decision with 2 abstentions.
[Page 492]At the conclusion of the voting on these amendments M. Kardelj (Yugoslavia) expressed regret that the Czechoslovak efforts at conciliation, through the establishment of a subcommission, had not been successful and that the Commission appeared to prefer the method of voting to one of agreement. He concluded that he wished to make it clear for the Record that, with respect to questions which touched Yugoslavia directly, the Yugoslav Delegation would not consider it was bound by any decisions of the Conference of Paris.
The Commission passed to consideration of Article 5 (Boundary Commission for Italo-Yugoslav and Free Territory Frontiers) and related amendments. The Chairman announced that the U.S. did not insist on the first three paragraphs of its proposal to Article 5 but that it would support the fourth paragraph of its proposal thereto. After some discussion as to whether the Australian amendent (CP(Gen)Doc 1 B 3) should be discussed and voted on now, or later in connection with Article 75, it was decided to discuss and dispose of it now in connection with Article 5. Mr. Hodgson (Australia) spoke in favor of his amendment to create a commission composed of the four sponsoring powers and three other members of the Conference to deal with possible disputes arising from the treaty and, in this particular case, from the findings of the Boundary Commission. M. Vyshinsky (USSR) and M. Bebler (Yugoslavia) opposed the amendment. It was subsequently defeated by 14 votes to 5 with 1 abstention.
Senator Connally pointed out that there was a slight difference between the U.S. proposal (paragraph 4) to Article 5 and the Yugoslav amendment to that Article (CP(Gen)Doc 1 U 4) since the latter omitted mention of the boundary between the Free Territory and Italy. M. Bebler pointed out a further difference, namely, the following phrase in the American draft proposal: “except where the line follows Italian provisional boundaries and”. The Senator agreed to the elimination of this phrase from the American draft and to the Chairman’s suggestion that the American and Yugoslav drafts be amended to refer to “the boundaries established by Articles 3, 4 and 16” rather than to name the countries to be bounded. The Yugoslav amendment as thus modified was adopted unanimously. Article 5 was also adopted without further comment or objection.
The Commission then began consideration of Article 10 (Special Clauses for Austria). The Belgian and Netherlands Delegates introduced and spoke in favor of their amendment to this Article (CP (IT/P)Doc 44)55 which would incorporate within the treaty a reference to the recent Italo-Austrian agreement with regard to the German-speaking [Page 493] population of the South Tyrol as well as include a text of the agreement among the annexes to the Peace Treaty.
The Chairman interrupted discussion of this amendment on Article 10 to obtain the Commission’s agreement to his suggestions contained in CP(IT/P)Doc 5356 for more expeditious procedure. With some modifications of his suggestions on limitation of speech and of the list of articles to be referred to the Legal and Drafting Commission the Chairman’s suggestions were adopted. The Chairman further obtained approval for two meetings of the Commission tomorrow to consider Articles 10 to 14, inclusive, as well as to invite the Egyptian, Iraqi and Italian Delegations to be ready to make statements on the Italian colonies (Article 17) on Monday.
- For substance, see the first item in Chapter IV of C.P.(Plen) Doc. 24, report of the Commission, vol. iv, p. 323.↩
- The amendment proposed in C.P.(IT/P) Doc. 44 is not printed; for text of the amendment proposed in C.P. (IT/P) Doc. 44 Revised, see footnote 66, p. 501.↩
- Not printed.↩