Some Problems of the Peace Conference — John Shaqi
Some Problems of the Peace ConferenceHaskins, Charles Homer
History
Some Problems of the Peace Conference
Haskins, Charles Homer
Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920); World War, 1914-1918 -- Territorial questions
The Council of Four left the spacious quarters of the Quai d’Orsay.
Sometimes it met in M. Clémenceau’s office at the Ministry of War,
sometimes at Mr. Lloyd George’s apartment, most frequently at
President Wilson’s residence, either in his study, or, when several
outsiders were present, in the large drawing-room. The meetings in
the study were not always “private and unattended,” nor were the
occasional conferences upstairs the confused gatherings which an
infrequent spectator has pictured.[7] Outsiders were called in as
needed, but ordinarily the Four met by themselves, with a confidential
interpreter, Captain Mantoux, very able and very trustworthy. There
was no stenographer, not even a secretary, though secretaries were
usually outside the door to execute orders. The meetings were quite
conversational, and the records necessarily fragmentary. But the
Council at least worked rapidly, sometimes perforce too rapidly.
Steadily the main lines of the treaty emerged.
By March the expert work of the Conference had been largely organized
into commissions, not systematically and at the outset, as the French
had proposed in January, but haltingly and irregularly, as necessity
compelled. Foresight and organizing ability were not the strong
points of the congress. One by one there were created commissions
on Poland, on Greece, on Morocco, on Roumania, etc., on reparation,
finance, waterways, and the principal economic problems of the
conference. Ordinarily a commission consisted of two members from
each of the five great powers, with a secretary from each and special
advisers as required. Their proceedings were regularly noted, and
formal minutes of each session were approved in print. Each country
expressed its opinion, but efforts were made to reach and report a
unanimous conclusion. On one occasion a Japanese delegate, perplexed
by a detailed problem of local topography, gave as his vote, “I agree
with the majority.” As the commission had just divided, two to two, he
scarcely clarified the situation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account