The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1922-12-17

r"Ah, Monsieur lie Marechal, if only
your advice had been listened to-"
| Has he also gone back on opinion
so historically expressed? Let us hope
| for the best.
know it will be said that although
the boundaries of Germany were to
| end at the Rhine the province on the
| left bank was not to be- annexed but
to be reconstructed into an 'inde-
pendent republic
What manner of independence, and
what kind of republic? All German
officers We're to be expelled. 1t was
I to be detached by special provision
| from the economic life of Germany,
upon which it is almost entirely de-
pendent for its existence. 1t was not
to be allowed to associate with the
Fatherland. The Rhine, which di-
vided new territory from Germany.
was to be occupied in the main by
French troops. Territories of an in
dependent republic were to be occu-
pied by foreign soldiers. It's young
men We're to be conscripted and
trained with view to absorbing them
into the French and Belgian armies.
to fight against their own country
men on the other side of the Rhine.
The whole conditions of life of this
free and independent republic were
to be dictated by an accord" be
tween France, Luxemburg and Bel
sium, and, in the words of Marshal
FOch, Britain would be ultimately
! brought in
What Did Proposal Mean7
But [ am told these proposals did
not mean annexation. Then what
| else did they mean? You do not
swallow the oyster. You only first
give it an Independent existence by
detaching it from its hard surround
| ings. You then surround it on all
/ sides and absorb it into your own
system to equip you with added
strength to prey on other oysters.
What independence! And what
republic.
1t would have been. ana was intend
Ito be, a sham republic. Had the
plan been adopted it would have been
a blunder and a crime, for which not
France alone but the world wound
have paid the penalty later on.
In the face of these quotations ana
of these undoubtcd facts can anyone
say that l illuminated France When
said there was a powerful party in
Rhine should be treated as a natural
barrier of Germany and that the peace
treaty should be based upon that as
sumption?
Let it be observed that I never
stated that this claim had the sup
port of French democracy. The TACT
that the treaty, which did not realze
that objective, secured ratification by
an overwhelming majority in the
French Parliament, and subsequently
by an emphatic verdict i'll the coun-
try, demonstrates clearly that the
French people as whole shranh with
their invincible good sense from 1oi-
lowing even the lead they admired on
to this path of future disaster BUT
the mere fact that there are potent
influences in France that still press
this demand and take advantage Oh
every disa ppointmcnt to urge II lor-
ward, calls for unremitting vigilance
amongst all peoples who have the
welfare of humanity at heart.
In conclusion l should like to add
that to denounce me as an enemy OIL
France because | disagree win the
international policy Of It's present
rulers is petulant abSufdlty4 Dul
ing the whole OF my pubic career
have been q consistent advocate Oh
cooperation between the French and
British democracies. l took that line
when fawning on German imperialism
was fashionable in this country. Dur
ing the war 1 twice rislled my pre-
miership in an effort to place the
British army under the supreme COM
mand of a French General To pre-
serve French friendship l have re-
peatedlv given way to French de
mands and thus often have antag-
onized opinion in this country. But
: cannot go to the extent Of approv-
ing a policy which is endangering the
peace of the world. even to please one
section of a people for whose country
have always entertained most gen.
uine admiration. --<~-A4zsAs=>-.4-A4--AG