J Paris Peace Conf. 180.03401/33 CF-33 Notes of a Meeting Held at President Wilson's House in the Place des Etats-Unis, Paris, on Monday, May 26, 1919, at 4 p. m. M. Lamont, M. Tardieu and M. Crespi attended to present the attached note from the Reparation Commission (Appendix). MR. LLOYD GEORGE asked that his decision on the first point might be reserved, as he had received a letter from General Smuts, and wished to discuss the whole question with him, before giving a reply. In regard to the second point it was agreed :That the Commission was empowered to discuss the remarks made by the Delegation of the Powers having special interests, and eventually to present before the Supreme Council new proposals both as regards the Reparation Clauses and the Financial Clauses, and particularly as regards the recommendation of the participation of small Nations in the burden of reparation. MR. LLOYD GEORGE expressed the hope that the question should be rediscussed with an open mind, as though no decision had already been taken. He expressed his intention of instructing the British representatives in this sense. At this point the members of the Committee on New States were introduced. The proceedings of this part of the Meeting are recorded as a separate Meeting. VILLA MAJESTIC, PARIS, May 26, 1919. 43 Appendix to CF-33 [Note From the Reparation Commission to the Council of the 26 MAY, 1919. The Commission, sitting this morning, has heard the Delegations of the Powers having special interests. After the departure of these Delegates, the Commission, as a result of an exchange of views between Messrs. Lamont, Lord Sumner, MM. Loucheur & Tardieu, think it necessary to ask the Supreme Council: 1°-Whether General Smuts and Mr. Keynes, who have not attended this morning's meeting, have been officially appointed by Mr. Lloyd George, in the same way as M. M. Loucheur & Tardieu have been appointed by M. Clemenceau, and Messrs. Lamont, Baruch & Davis by President Wilson. 2°-Whether the Commission is empowered to discuss the remarks made by the Delegations of the Powers having special interests, and eventually, to present before the Supreme Council new proposals both as regards the Reparation Clauses and the financial Clauses, and particularly as regards the reconsideration of the participation of small Nations in the burden of Reparations. Paris Peace Conf. 180.03401/34 CF-34 Notes of a Meeting Held at President Wilson's House in the Place des Etats-Unis, Paris, on Monday, May 26, 1919, at 4:15 p. m. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA President Wilson. FRANCE M. Clemenceau. Dr. Miller PRESENT BRITISH EMPIRE The Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd George, M. P. ITALY M. Orlando Members of the Committee on New States and Experts Mr. Hudson Mr. Headlam-Morley. T M. P. J. Mantoux, Interpreter. 1. The Council had before them the draft articles prepared by the Committee on New States for inclusion in the treaties with Austria and with Hungary. (Appendix I.) Committee on Draft Articles for Austria and With It was pointed out that the clauses were the same as those already approved for Poland, except that the special clauses relating to the Jews were not included. These were believed to be unnecessary in the case of Austria, where the situation was different in that respect to the situation in Poland. PRESIDENT WILSON raised the question whether it would not be better to include these clauses, even if unnecessary, in the Treaty with Austria to avoid giving offence to Poland, but did not press the point. MR. HEADLAM-MORLEY asked whether Austria was regarded as a new State or as an old State, the inheritor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Some parts of the Treaty appeared to have been drafted on the former hypothesis, some on the latter. It was dangerous to treat Austria as possessing the rights formerly belonging to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He produced a Memorandum and some draft articles which he had prepared on the subject. MR. LLOYD GEORGE thought that there was a good deal in this idea, and proposed that the point should be examined by the Drafting Committee. M. ORLANDO said that the question would require careful consideration and that at first sight he was not favourably impressed by the suggestion. He thought it was creating a new precedent. M. CLEMENCEAU entirely supported M. Orlando. PRESIDENT WILSON thought that M. Orlando had not entirely realised the difficulty. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was in an entirely special position. (It was decided to refer this point to the Drafting Committee who should be authorised either to deal with the matter themselves or to take such advice as might seem to them requisite.) (The draft clauses relating to minorities were approved). 2. PRESIDENT WILSON said he had received no reply yet from the Luxembourg Government, but he read a press announcement according to which the reply was that the Luxembourg Government was ready to send a deputation to Paris, and would like to know on which day it would be received. Luxembourg (It was agreed that the Deputation should be heard on Wednesday afternoon, May 28th.) 3. SIR MAURICE HANKEY said he had consulted the British member of the Drafting Committee, and that the whole Drafting Com Date of Handing the Treaty of Peace to the Austrian Delegates mittee had considered subsequently the question of the date on which the Treaty of Peace could be handed to the Austrians, omitting the Military terms and the Reparation clauses. The Drafting Committee had expressed doubt as to whether the Treaty could possibly be ready by Saturday next. One reason for this was that the printing of the Treaty in the Italian as well as in the French and English languages increased the length of time required by the printers. MR. LLOYD GEORGE suggested that it might be presented in typewritten form. (It was agreed to discuss the matter with the Drafting Committee on the following day). R Reply to the Letter Delegation 4. SIR MAURICE HANKEY handed round a draft reply which he had prepared under instructions from the Council. CerFrom the Austrian tain amendments were suggested and Sir Maurice Hankey was asked to prepare a fresh draft. 5. M. ORLANDO raised as a point of urgency the fighting which was continuing between the Austrians and Slovenes. He said that the Austrian Delegation at St. Germain had made an appeal to the Allied and Associated Powers to intervene. Southern Bound aries of Austria.bb Carinthia. The Fighting Be-vintage tween the Aus trians and Slovenes (After a considerable discussion, in the course of which the appointment of an Armistice Commission was proposed and rejected, it was agreed that the best plan would be to settle the frontiers of Austria first, and then insist on the withdrawal of both forces behind those frontiers. It was therefore decided to meet the Foreign Ministers and the Expert Commission which had considered this question on the following afternoon. Sir Maurice Hankey was instructed to circulate a document communicated by M. Pachitch.1) 6. Sir Maurice Hankey handed round a copy of a letter addressed by the Ukrainian Delegation to General Botha, together with General Botha's reply (Appendix II). Polish-Ukrainian Armistice (It was agreed that this question should not be discussed until M. Paderewski's arrival.) 50 7. M. CLEMENCEAU said he wished to make a last appeal to his Italian colleague. The situation had fortunately not as yet reached the worst point of gravity. Nevertheless, it was necItalian Claims one essary to present the terms to the Austrians very shortly, and consequently it was impossible to leave them much longer at St. Germain without a conversation. Yesterday he had seen M. Orlando, and had explained to him the gravity of the present situation for France as well as for Italy. M. Orlando, with his usual open-mindedness, had said that some proposal must be made. First, however, some definite conversations must take place. He did not want to anticipate M. Orlando's proposals, but he hoped that some proposal would be made to get out of the diffitulty. It would be an immeasurable relief, even if an unsatisfactory solution could be reached, and this relief would extend not only to Governments, but to peoples. If M. Orlando was not prepared to propose anything today, he hoped he would do so as early as possible. M. ORLANDO said that, as he had remarked this morning, it would be a veritable liberation to get a solution, and he was fully in accord with M. Clemenceau on this, and he thanked him for raising the question. M. Clemenceau had stated his own sentiments perfectly. M. Clemenceau asked what was the decision of Italy? When this question had been discussed here between April 15th and April 20th, a marked difference had been shown between the maximum demands of Italy and the common views of all the Allied and Associated Powers. On April 20th he himself had said that, given the situation in which Italy had to renounce everything outside the Treaty of London, he would insist on adherence to the Treaty of London with all that it involved. He recognised, however, that this would divide him and his Allies from President Wilson, for the Allies stated that they would adhere to the Treaty 'This document does not accompany the minutes. |