763.72119/5839
HD–2
Notes of a Meeting of the Heads of Delegations of the Five Great Powers Held in M. Pichon’s Room at the Quai d’Orsay, Paris, on Tuesday, July 8, 1919, at 3:30 p.m.
-
Present
-
America, United States of
- Hon. R. Lansing.
-
British Empire
- The Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour.
-
France
- M. Clemenceau.
-
Italy
- M. Crespi.
-
Japan
- M. Matsui.
-
Secretaries
- Mr. L. Harrison.
- Mr. H. Norman.
- M. Paterno.
- M. Ashida.
-
America, United States of
Joint Secretariat | |
America, United States of | Lieut. Burden. |
British Empire | Capt. E. Abraham. |
France | Capt. A. Portier. |
Italy | Lieut. Zanchi. |
Interpreter—Prof. P. J. Mantoux. |
1. M. Clemenceau said that he had bad news to give to the Council. He had a report of a still graver incident in Fiume. Nine French soldiers had been killed. The day before, General Grazioli had requested the French General to withdraw from the city with his troops. The same request was apparently made to the Serbians. What the Serbians replied, he did not know. The French General refused. It was on the morrow of this that the mob, encouraged by an Italian officer, had attacked a small French post. Sailors from the Fleet had come ashore to join in the assault and warships in the Harbour had fired on the post. This had led to the death of nine men. Situation in Italy
Mr. Lansing said that he had had a report on the previous afternoon, which he had communicated to M. Tittoni, to the effect that a French post of Annamite troops had been attacked by the mob. Then forces had been landed from Italian ships and the Barracks of the Annamites had been surrounded. It was at this stage that some of the latter had been killed. The report quoted a British observer who had seen three Annamites stabbed to death while holding up their [Page 46] hands in token of surrender. In addition to this, a French packet boat had been fired on by Italian volunteers.
M. Clemenceau said that this was more than could be endured. No one in France would submit to treatment of this sort. Therefore, his first act was to ask his colleagues what should be done. He assumed that they were ready to defend the rights of France as he was ready to defend theirs. The Italian Government had installed in Fiume a gang of men, known as volunteers, who controlled the city in the name of the King of Italy. It was to help these volunteers that the Italian General asked his Allied colleagues to withdraw from the city. He therefore proposed to retire with his British and American colleagues and to make his decision after consultation with them.
M. Crespi said that he wished to express on behalf of his Government the sincerest regret for what had taken place. He was deeply impressed by the reports received by his colleagues. He, himself, had no news later than that which had been on the previous day in M. Tittoni’s hands. He was therefore taken by surprise. He hoped and believed that the reports referred to the same incident as has been mentioned on the previous day, namely, to the incident of Sunday. The information in the hands of the Italian Delegation was to the effect that after provocation caused by a French soldier, rioting began. It was alleged that a French soldier had fired first. He had been supported by other men who came from a small post and fired on the crowd. Italian soldiers had then intervened to restore order, then French sailors had fired from ships. The information, therefore, was not quite the same as that in the hands of M. Clemenceau.
Mr. Lansing said that he had no other information than that of which he had given an account. It was therefore possible that it was a new version of the Sunday incident mentioned on the previous day.
Mr. Balfour said that by every account it was a deplorable affair. He, himself, had no information. He had no means, therefore, of judging whether there had been one incident or two. He asked M. Clemenceau whether his dispatches related to events of Sunday or to subsequent events.
M. Clemenceau said that the event described had taken place on the 6th.
Mr. Balfour said it might then perhaps be assumed that everything had taken place on one day.
M. Clemenceau said that this might be true. On the previous day he had not known how serious the matter was. He had then been content with a Commission of Enquiry. Now he thought this was not enough. He could not allow French soldiers to be murdered. It must also be borne in mind that on the day before the incident or incidents, the Italian General had desired the French troops to be removed ten kilometers west of the Town in order to avoid trouble. [Page 47] The Italian General had no right to demand anything of the sort and the French General had rightly refused. The dispatch he had received concluded by asking that Allied warships should be sent to Fiume.
M. Crespi pointed out that according to M. Clemenceau’s news, the Italian General had not given any orders to his French colleague but had only made a proposal. Moreover, General Grazioli, the day before the incident, had driven through Fiume in the same car with General Savy,1 in order to show the good understanding existing between the two Commanders. He had done everything he could to avoid disturbances. Incidents of this kind where troops of various nations were gathered were liable to occur everywhere.
M. Clemenceau said that incidents of this kind had not occurred elsewhere. There was no instance of British or American ships firing on French troops nor of French ships firing on British troops. On the previous day, he had not known that the Italian warships had acted in this manner. He must therefore insist on consulting his British and American colleagues separately as to the action to be taken. He proposed that they should withdraw together.
M. Crespi said that he would, himself, withdraw. (At this point the Italian members of the Meeting withdrew.)1a
2. M. Clemenceau nominated General Naulin as French representative.
Appointment of Inter-Allied Commission To Enquire Into Incidents at Fiume Mr. Lansing nominated Major-General C. P. Summerall.
Mr. Balfour said that he was unable to nominate an officer at that moment.
M. Crespi said he would make his nomination on the following day.
3. The following instructions were accepted:—
Instructions to Commission of Enquiry That the inter-allied Commission of Enquiry for Fiume shall investigate and report the facts as to the incident or incidents of violence, which have recently taken place in that town, and record their opinion on the responsibility therefor. They should further submit to the Supreme Council as soon as possible their recommendations as to the best means of preserving peace and safety hereafter.
4. M. Clemenceau handed M. Crespi a Note regarding the stoppage of trains at Modane.2
Stoppage of Supply Trains at Modane M. Crespi said that it was a technical matter and that he would reply on the following day.
[Page 48]5. Mr. Balfour said that he had prepared the following draft resolution:—
In order to expedite the evacuation of the Baltic States by Germany in accordance with the decision taken by the Council of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers on June 13th4 and communicated to the German Government by Marshal Foch, vide his telegram No. 3029 dated June 18th President of the Inter-Allied Armistice Commission at Spa, it is Resolved: Question of Direct Relation Between General Gough and the German. (See HD–1 paragraph 10.3)
- (a)
- that General Gough shall be authorised to deal directly with local enemy commanders in the Baltic States on matters arising from the above decision;
- (b)
- that General Gough shall have similar powers with regard to the execution of any subsequent decisions of the Allied and Associated Governments in connection with the German troops now in the Baltic States, all such decisions being in the first instance communicated to the German Government through the usual channels;
- (c)
- that Marshal Foch will be informed of this resolution and will be requested to communicate its substance to the German Government, with a request that the German Commanders in the Baltic States may be given the necessary instructions.
There was also a resolution of the Commission on Baltic Affairs:—
The Baltic Commission having been informed of the contents of the telegram[s] from General Gough and Colonel Tallents5 of 25th, 26th and 27th June respecting the necessity of an immediate credit of £500,000 in order to pay Russian and Lettish troops in Libau required for maintenance of order, consider that it is urgently necessary that this sum should at once be placed at the disposal of General Gough on grounds of military necessity as otherwise the position of the Interallied Mission and of General Gough will become shortly untenable in Latvia, and it will be impossible to enforce the evacuation of the German troops.
The Commission, however, desire to draw attention to the fact that this £500,000 is only sufficient to meet immediate military necessities and they therefore recommend that enquiries should be made as to what securities in the way of timber, flax or other raw materials the three Baltic States can give for a loan.
In case such a loan can be raised either from one or more of the Allied and Associated Governments or from private banking institutions on the basis of such security it is recommended that the above advance of £500,000 should ultimately be merged in this loan.
The first was intended to place General Gough in direct relation with the Germans in order to ensure their retirement from the Baltic Provinces.
[Page 49]The second related to a different point though it was also connected with the retirement of the Germans. It appeared that the Germans had been paying the Russian Forces in those parts. Those forces must be maintained, therefore paid. General Gough required £500,000 to do this. He supposed that there was no choice but to agree. He confessed that it was news to him that the Germans had hitherto paid those troops. If, however, the Allies had to become the Paymasters of those forces, he thought it best to entrust the money to General Gough, the Allied Representative, on the spot for proper disbursement.
Mr. Lansing observed that this was a new proposal. The United States were in a difficult position in matters of this kind. He knew of no fund out of which such a cost could be defrayed. American laws were very stringent on the subject of spending money. Until July 1st, while the President was in Paris, there had been funds which he could spend at his discretion. At present there were no funds available. The only means of raising money for such a purpose that he could think of was a loan. Seeing that there was no recognised Government in the Countries in question, it did not appear possible to raise a loan.
M. Clemenceau said that it was not clear to him how the French contribution could be raised.
Report of Committee on Repatriation of Austrian Prisoners of War (It was decided to accept the first resolution and to refer the second for report to the Financial Commission.)
(6) The proposed reply of the Committee (see Annex 1) was accepted.
(7) After some discussion the French text (see Annex II) was accepted with slight alterations. The adjective “German” was suppressed in connection with the expression of “Austria” or “Austrian” and the sentence regarding the boycotting of Serbian cattle was struck out. Reply to the Austrian Note on the Economic Classes of the Treaty
(7) [sic] (It was decided that the answers accepted by the Council regarding economic questions, the League of Nations and Consular and Diplomatic Agents in South America should be handed to the Austrian Delegation on the 9th July, and that the replies should be given to the Press on the evening of the 9th July, so as to be published on the morning of the 10th.)Communication of Replies to Austrian Notes and Publication in the Press
Villa Majestic, Paris, 8 July, 1919.
[Page 50] [Page 53]- Commander of the French forces in Fiume.↩
- For notes of this separate meeting of the heads of the American, British and French delegations, see HD–2A, p. 56.↩
- The note does not accompany the minutes.↩
- CF–63, minute 5, vol. vi, p. 373.↩
- Ante, p. 41.↩
- Chief of the British Economic Mission to Latvia.↩
- Appendix I to CF–37B, vol. vi, p. 86.↩
- Gen. Rudolph Slatin, expert adviser on prisoners of war, Austrian delegation to the Peace Conference.↩
- Appendix III to CF–9, vol. v, p. 574.↩
- Appendix III to CF–9, vol. v, p. 574.↩
- Appendix IV to CF–20, vol. v, p. 749.↩
- The French text which accompanies the file copy of the minutes is the text of the note as transmitted; this translation of it is filed under Paris Peace Conf. 185.22/59 and has been slightly revised by the editors.↩