Paris Peace Conf 180.03401/134

IC–178C

Notes of a Meeting Held at President Wilson’s House in the Place des Etats-Unis, Paris, Wednesday, April 30, at 5:30 p.m.

  • Present
    • United States of America
      • President Wilson
    • France
      • M. Clemenceau
      • M. Klotz
      • M. Lasteyrie
      • M. Lyon
    • Great Britain
      • The Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd George, M. P.
Sir Maurice Hankey, K. C. B. Secretary.
Professor Mantoux. Interpreter.

Reparation. Joint and Several Liability 1. M. Klotz pointed out that the first part of the reparation clauses laid down that Germany acknowledges liability to pay. The question arose as to whether in drafting this should be stated as “Germany” or “Germany and the enemy States.” The most important instance was that if joint liability was admitted, Italy might be in a position to claim the total of the damage inflicted on her against Germany. If this was accepted without qualification, it would reduce what France and Great Britain could obtain for reparation. One plan would be to state that joint liability should be pro rata with the military effort. For example, in applying the case of Germany’s liability to Italy, it might be said that Germany had sent divisions corresponding to, say, one-tenth of the total number of divisions used, thus Germany would only be responsible for one-tenth of the damage inflicted. Without some such qualification the acceptance of the principle was very dangerous.

Mr. Lloyd George said that this point had always puzzled him. All he wanted to do was the fair thing. As a matter of fact the German forces had not been anything like one-tenth of the total on the Italian front. He believed only five German divisions had been employed out of a total of about sixty, and these for only a very short time. Moreover, Italy had never declared war on Germany for thirteen months after she entered the war with Austria, consequently, when claiming pensions, she would be claiming them for the time when Germany was at peace with Italy. There would be no justice in this.

President Wilson pointed out that there would be other complications. He remembered that in conversations with the Italian representatives [Page 388] they always claimed that they identified more German divisions on their front than other nations did. He remembered they claimed there had been six divisions.

Mr. Lloyd George said that in Serbia Germany had taken a leading part. Under M. Klotz’s principle, Serbia could make out a substantial claim for reparation. The same applied to Roumania, but it would not apply to Italy, except in the case of the battle of Caporetto.

President Wilson pointed out that Italy would have a good claim in the case of submarines against Germany.

Mr. Lloyd George agreed, and suggested that the basis should be the relation of the military and naval effort. The Italians could not complain at this.

M. Klotz proposed the following draft:—

“Les dommages de guerre, conséquences des hostilités sur l’un des fronts de combat, sont réparés par l’Allemagne et ses Allies au prorata de l’effort militaire et navale fourni par chacun d’eux sur ce front. Les proportions seront déterminées par la Commission des Réparations.”1

(This was accepted.)

Villa Majestic, Paris, 30 April, 1919.

  1. Translation: “War damages resulting from hostilities on any one of the fronts shall be compensated by Germany and her allies pro rata with the military and naval force supplied by each of them on that front. The proportions win be determined by the Reparations Commission.”