Evening star., 1921-04-01
Editorial Digest
Who Got Silesia2

Who Got Silesia2
Sen-determination In Upper ST.
iesda was not a shining success in the
opinion Of the American press. Ac-
corning to most editorial writer's the
mai results of the plebiscite in Ger
kmanys richest mineral province
which seemed to give the industrial
centers to Germany and the majority
or rural districts, including the mines
TO the Poles. has left the situation full
OF hngefs to the elusive peace Of Eu
rope. Some newspapers feel that the
allies can void t!fe German claim ON the
basis of the treaty clause, stating that
the decision Of boundaries is to be based
likewise upon 1.-The geographic and
economic conditions Of the community" "
Others feel that this would be unjust
There is. of course. general rejoicing
mat the first announcement Of a Ger
man victory was premat ture.
The Baltimore News independently
considers that there is no end to the
Denehcent workings of self-determna =
uon.' for, in the present case. "the
practical effect has been to create a
would never have thought of if it had
not been for the suggested plebiscite.
The New York Times independent dem
ocratic) also hints at trouble for the ar
biters: ITO draw a reasonably fair from
tier according to the vote taken will be
considerably more difficult than the
traditionally delicate task of cutting
ding blood"
Not the strength Of the rival popu-
spective propagandists. has been set
tied by the ballot, in the opinion of
the Grand Rapids Press (republican), i,
Wnlcn mentions that already. before
an official count had been made" re-
ports came that the council in Paris
Will exercise the reservation in the
peace covenant and repartition Silesia
so as to give the rich coal lands to
Poland"
Germany's answer to this threat to
put aside the election results is the
pea that the province constitutes "an
indisso!uble national geographic and
industrial unit" which the Salt Lake
IriDune (republican) interprets as
saying: Despite the fact that large
areas voted Polish, they are to remain
have them Polish" and thus. "the
council OF ambassadors, il it has this
problem placed before il for disposi-
ton, is likely to find that it has been
dandsd dars ave a very modem replica of Pan
Chicago Tribune tindependent repub-
iican) remarks. "it Is not likely to
brlng peace but another phase Of bit
ter contest" and the Bridgeport TeIe-
gram Independently tersely concludes
tnat Che Silesian plebiscite may ring
up the curtain" for great struggle.
number of writer's believe that
under the reservations in the treaty
conce rning the plebiscite the allies, as
the Baltimore Sun independent demo
crsicl puts 1t. have a right to re-
hn 6not Tot
torate." This the Buffalo Commercial
Qndepehden) takes for granted,
since the ''plebiscite is not the all
governing factor in the case" Both
economic and strategic" conditions
must affect it,. The "fallacy Of self
clares. was shown in the rebellion
or the south" during the civil war.
|The Bangor (Me.) Commercial Gn-
oependent grants that the allies are
noS bound to follow the vote indi-
c1tion. but adds that "the natural as
sumption" is that they will If this is
done the Commercial agrees with the
New York Tribune (republican) in
accepting the ballot as German de-
feat; for, though the larger portion
Poland will receive the more vaiu-
able portion"
The Lynchburg News (democratic) Is
emphatic in its demand for fair dear
anu IeeiS that justice demands that the
allies abide by the plebiscite. II this
method is followed. as the Youngstown
Viudicator (democratic) feels it will be-
It will help stabilize conditions in Eu-
rope, whereas a different result would
have caused utter unsettlement and
probably a new war" The Dallas Times
Herald independently also thinks that
III the vote was straight" the allies
must abide by it's results" and the
Norfolk (Neb.) News (independent) be-
lieves that lit will require a very def
mite showing of corrupt manipulation to
give Polish contenders any reason for
their evident hope Of annexing the ter
ritory."
! Agreeing to the principle Of strict
adherence to the plebiscite. the Detroit
Free Press independently points out
that the trouble lies in the fact that
the powers seem to have made a bad
mistake in omitting to say clearly in
advance just what the outcome of the
haHoting would involve. and SO they
have given Germany and Poland a
chance to dispute over a point that
never would have arisen in a we'll con-
Quoted plebiscite. However, there Is
reason to suppose that this was not an
oversight, but a piece of deliberate
strategy intended to keep the way open
to interference in the final assignment
Of Silesia, plebiscite or no plebiscite."