The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser. (Upper Marlborough, Md.) 1882-1925, 1922-03-24
OUR Rhine CLAIM
is NOT ALLOWED
Finance Ministers Continue the
Division of German Payments
Among Allied Powers.
BOYDEN ASKS $241,OOO,O0O
Question Will Go to Governments
Upon Whom Washington Is in a
Position to Use Pressure-Say We
Should Collect Our Own.

Paris.-The Washington government
asked the Finance Ministers of the
allied nations engaged in a conference
here for dividing up German payments
to the Reparation Commission for a
settlement of the claim of $241 900, 900
of the American government for the
cost Of the American Army of Occupa-
ton. The Allied Ministers did not
comply, but by subsequent action pre-
sented a direct refusal to grant the
American demand
The American communication was in
the form Of statement by Roland w.
Boyden, American member of the
Reparation Commission, who is sitting
in the allied Finance Ministers meet
ing. Although the official communique
makes no mention of the matter, it is
understood Mr.. Boyden recalled that
the Berlin treaty reserved for America
the benefits she would enjoy under the
Versailles Treaty; that the Versailles
Treaty provided that costs of the
armies of occupation was lien on
German payments of prior validity to
general reparations that the Allies
having practically paid themselves for
their occupation costs, the S241, ,0O0, 900
due America should be paid before any
allotment was made for general repara-
tions.
To grant the American demand the
allied Ministers, after having allotted
sums to meet the French, English and
Belgian army occupation costs, would
have to assign funds to meet the Amer
lean claim. What the Finance Min
listers did was to complete the division
of the 1921 payments aud then provide
for the ALLEGATION of the 1922 payments
by Germany, which actiCn included al
location of funds for other purposes
than payment of the armies Of occupa-
tion. No provision was made for meet
ing the American demand, nor will any
be made before the end of the Minist-
ers' conference, 1t was stated officially.
The attitude of the Finance Min
listers is in accord with that of their
governments, which IS that America,
having a separate treaty with Ger
many, should collect direct from Gei-
many. 1t Is always possible the allied
governments may find delicate reasons
for changing this attitude, but as the
matter stands at present the Allies do
not feel that they should collect for
America,
The American action is important be-
cause for the first time it raises the
issue Of the validity of the Berlin
treaty, in its text, reserves for America
the rights she would have had under
the Versailles treaty. But thatres
serving is done by America and
many, without the consent Of the -
lies, who under the Versailles treaty,
according to the European interpreta-
ton, already held first mortgage on
all German resources.
1t was the expectation Of the allied
nations th.t following the signing of
the Derlin treaty Washington would
negotiate with them to establish Amer
lean rights under the Berlin treaty.
This was pointed out in the Paris dis
patches of the New York Times last
September, which dispatches brought
a statement from Washington that no
such negotiations were necessary. Be-
cause the allied nations eve America
immense sums O. money and America
can bring pressure to bear on them
in that direction they may climb down
from the present stand. But at pres
ent il is not their intention to hand
over 10 America for her occupation
account any sums which havl been col
lected from Germany by virtue of the
Versailles treaty we Gid not ratify IT
is their attitude that the American
claim is a claim against Germany, not
a claim against e Allies.
Up to date the Allies have paid
themselves some $5OO,OOO,OOO as their
costs of occupation. All the French,
Belgian and British claims up to May
| 1, 1921, were met out of the 1921 pay
ments except relatively small amount
still due England.