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
In France, at least, there were many who had not forgotten. The demand
for the frontier of 1814 was noticeably greater than that for other
parts of the Left Bank. It was partly historic, a desire to reclaim
what had once been French and had played its part in the great deeds
of French history. This was not confined to partisans of the old
regime: Aulard, historian and upholder of the Revolution, urged the
return of Saarlouis and Landau on the ground that they had sworn the
great revolutionary covenant of 1790 and had been torn from France by
violence in 1815, as were Alsace and Lorraine half a century later.[39]
Popular interest would have been greater if the frontier of 1814 had
been a real line separating peoples for a term of years, instead of
a provision on paper. And the historic frontier of 1792, the actual
boundary during the eighteenth century, had become impossible; no one
asked for that. The best historic argument for the frontier of 1814 was
that it had then been considered a just and practical equivalent for
the line of 1792; in that sense it represented the peace of justice,
while the line of 1815 was clearly the peace of violence.
Stronger than the historic argument was the economic: France, a
country poor in coal, had been forcibly despoiled of the Saar mines
in 1814; she needed them back; and her need was now much greater
since the wanton and systematic destruction of her mines in the Nord
and Pas-de-Calais by the Germans. The two arguments did not entirely
coincide, so far as the Saar was concerned. The historic argument was
strongest in respect to the district of Saarlouis, where there was
little coal. Saarbrücken, the centre of the coal field, had been French
only for a brief period, 1793-1815. Moreover, the frontier of 1814 did
not cover the whole of the mining area, perhaps a third of which lay to
the north toward Ottweiler and to the east in the Palatinate, and its
reëstablishment would have disrupted the economic life of the region.
Many Frenchmen were genuinely opposed to any annexations of territory
beyond the Alsace-Lorraine of 1871, as contrary to the principles on
which the war had been fought. They had not, they said, been fighting
for the Rhine or the Saar. This was the Socialist contention, and it
was shared by many Republicans who were not Socialists. All, however,
who looked facts in the face felt the need of the coal. “If we could
only get the coal without the people,” said a distinguished Socialist
early in the winter. “We must have the coal, and we must find some
arrangement to get it without annexing the population,” a great
historian said a little later.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account