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
Whether the lot of the Saar territory will appear enviable to other
neighboring districts, it is still too soon to say. In spite of
the misrepresentation of this chapter of the treaty by German and
pro-German writers, an examination of its provisions shows that the
rights and interests of the inhabitants have been carefully safeguarded
under international guarantees. Indeed their position has so many
advantages as compared with their neighbors in France and Germany
that there were those at Paris who predicted that the plebiscite
of 1935 would declare for the maintenance of an independent status
under the League of Nations, free from outside responsibilities, both
military and fiscal. Undoubtedly the issues will be economic as well
as political, and much of the success of the new regime will depend
on the economic and social policy of the Governing Commission. During
the delays of ratification and organization the labor legislation
of the district necessarily stood still at the point reached at the
time of the Armistice, and a considerable task of readjustment and
reconstruction falls on the new Commission, in a region inhabited by
a concentrated mining and industrial population with a strong local
organization of its own. It should be noted that, besides the general
obligation to consult a local legislative assembly, it is provided
that “in fixing the conditions and hours of labor for men, women, and
children, the Governing Commission is to take into consideration the
wishes expressed by the local labor organizations, as well as the
principles adopted by the League of Nations,”[41] so that a progressive
policy is clearly laid down. Moreover, by virtue of its geographical
position, the labor of the Saar should be able to secure conditions at
least as favorable as in adjoining regions, while, with a plebiscite
in view, the French state administration of the mines will have every
reason to maintain good relations with the mining population. At the
same time neither France nor the Commission will have any reason
for holding back the production of coal or the general industrial
development of the district in favor of the mines and factories of
Westphalia. In any event the people of the Saar will be in a position
to decide for themselves, district by district, after actual experience
of the new regime; nor are they likely to welcome the proposal of an
ardent revisionist of the treaty of Versailles, who, while admitting
that the arrangements respecting the Saar should stand for ten years,
would take away from the inhabitants all opportunity of voting as
to their future.[42] If government by the League of Nations is as
“odious” as the German delegates declared at Versailles, then ten years
of it is as indefensible in principle as fifteen. But if perchance
the League’s Commission should prove less odious than its enemies
anticipate, the fact will be worth recording for the sake of the League
as well as of the people directly concerned.
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