CFM Flies
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 54
No Delegation supported the Hungarian observations to Article 36 and Article 37. The Commission thereupon adopted Articles 36 and 37.
The Commission then proceeded to discuss the Yugoslav new article to come after Article 9 (CP Gen.Doc. 1 U 32 (b)).78 The Czechoslovak Delegation supported the amendment with details regarding the removal of books and archives belonging to the University of Bratislava and said that Slovakia had been left devoid of culture by the retention by Hungary of a number of documents and archives which had been accumulated in libraries in Budapest before the first World War by the contributions of the people of Slovakia. He said Hungary [Page 577] had not fulfilled their obligations in the Trianon Treaty to return these cultural documents and without a stipulation in this Treaty they could not be assured of recovery. Therefore, cultural relations with Hungary would be impossible. General Smith (U.S.) said that when the original amendment had been proposed by Yugoslavia it had been unacceptable because of the vagueness of the drafting. The second draft was equally vague, and although he sympathized with the objectives, he could not now accept the new draft and would regrettably have to vote against it. The Yugoslav Delegation said that present-day Hungary had divorced itself from the previous regime and therefore Yugoslavia had hoped it would show some consistency in correcting the misdeeds of the Horthy regime. The best proof of this would be the return of these cultural objects, which the previous Hungarian regime had promised to return but had not. He pointed to the fact that the archives of Zagreb taken in 1884 were still in Budapest. The Chairman read a letter from the Hungarian Delegation requesting inclusion in the Treaty of its willingness to return cultural property taken between 1941 and 1944.
The French Delegation stated that it supported the United States position and the proposed amendment was far too inclusive; its loose drafting would cover many sorts of claims. He then proposed that a subcommittee be appointed and nominated Yugoslavia, India, and South Africa. This subcommittee would draft an acceptable amendment, which would cover the claims of both Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, and would perhaps be acceptable to the Commission. The Byelorussian and New Zealand Delegations supported this amendment, but the U.S. Delegate felt that a new subcommission might prevent realization of the stated time limit on the Commission’s work. He said he had a resolution to propose which might satisfy Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.
After a long discussion regarding the composition of the subcommission, in which General Smith stated that in his own opinion it was only “fair play” that the countries which had a vested interest in the decision should not be members of the subcommission, it was finally agreed that the original French proposal be accepted. The Chairman stated that the subcommission would so be appointed and would report to the Commission on October 2.