The Washington herald., 1921-09-11


But since it was plain that the area could not be
divided the problem in fact, either to give to
Germany or to Poland. Now it is at this precise
point where the British view which supports Ger
many, falls afoul Of the French which backs Poland
and 1t Is the quarrel over this division which has
produced one incident" after another in the Anglo
French entente and nearly If not actually ryOtured
this union OF the two great nations most responsible
for German defeat.
THE French, behalf OF Poland, claimed for her
i the whole of the industrialized area. They
based their claim squarely upon the treaty of Yer
sailles and the results of the pebscite have already
cited these figures which reveal that in the industrial
Poland carried FIVE of nine counties, three
quarters of the communes and her total vote in the
whole area more than 10000 in of that Of
The Germans. Despite all that has been said up to
the present time. have failed to see any argument
which touches the legastic side of the Polish claim
But the British undertook to justify an opposite
view by considerations which lay wholly outside of
the pprview Of the treaty itself They said and con-
tinue to say that the most important thing in the
world is the restoration of economic "normalcy;"
that the first element in this restoration the return
of Germany to prosperity, at least to condition
of healthy econmic life. To deprive Germany of her
second largest industrial with 40 per of her
present coal production and than 50 per cent
of her coal reserves would then, obviously, be
grave if not fatal blow to German recovery.
The truth is that British recovery is contingent
upon Germany to very considerable degree and in
reality, this explains the British policy. But the
British base their contentious on~a wholly different
ground. They argue that the French policy is di-
reced at the destruction of Germany and that France
is perfectly prepared to Germany ruined forever,
provided that th result of the ruin would be French
frnrr AnL II
this view, the British proceed to attack French pol
icy as chauvinstc, miarisc shortsghted for France
and disastrous for the world. Nr..
As for the French position, it is not bit more
unselhsh let us perceive this fact. What France is
after is frankly the Strengthening of Poland the
expense OF Germany wherever possible not merely
because Poland is ally Of France, but also be-
cause the weaker Germany is in the future the less
danger France will be in of having to endure still
another German attack and invasion. And the Upper
Siesian industrial is of the most important
details in German economic strength for war. As
for the loss France either in trade or in reduced
indemnities consequence of their pro-Polsh pol
icy, the French willing to risk all of this if they
can gain security as well.
N the last conference in Paris in August there was
i amusing passage between BRAND and Lloyd
George, which accurately revealed the position of
The two countries, In of his innumerabe ad-
dresses Lloyd George said
? "The difference between French and British pol
icy would seem to be this: I'VE believe that the
German COW should be kept alive and milked you
believe that it should be cut up for steak"
To this BRAND replied "Wel, what concerns us
is, if the stays alive that its horns shall be
pointed in our direction"
But it seems to that in this, as in all other
European disputes, Americans should soid being de-
ceived by the propaganda of either side. The British
standpoint is obviously to keep the COW alive and
milk it, because this is the method which best serves
British economic interests. The French would rath-
take the steak and abolish the horns But the
real is between the Poles and the Germans and
rests upon the Interpretation Of the treaty Of Ver-
saies If this treaty is to be interpreted it was
written, then the Poles have the industrialized