San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-08-26
Tardieu Advocates Direct
Negotiations Instead
of More Notes.
JUSTIFIES HIS CLAIM
Shows That France Must
Get $4,000, 100000
From Germans.
BY ANDRE TARDEIU.

Copyright. by the San Antonio Light.
Paris, Aug. 25.-If France is to
fget her minimum claim of $4,000, 900
600 Germany must pay at least S1o,-
600, 100000 and furthermore our war
debts must be consolidated somewhere
as the German reparations debt is
consolidated. Otherwise Premier
Poincare's remark about two weights
and two measures with the Anglo
Saxons giving more favorable treat
ment to former enemies than to form
er allies would come true. That
would be intolerable.
My conviction is that direct nego-
I tiations instead of exchanges of notes
would quickly reach an agreement OH
this basis. As long as it is said on
one hand that Germany can pay only
ST., 800, 100000 and on the other hand
that France, while receiving only
S6,5O0,O00,000 must pay of this
amount $4,000, 100000 to the allies
keeping nothing for herself, we are
+ in a circle.
From this circle nothing but
anarchy can come. Either more must
be demanded from Germany or less
from France. There is no other
way.
Let US note the exchanges of docu-
ments made four years and two
months after the signing of the Yer
sailles peace treaty and inquire how
| far we have advanced.
French Claim Justified.
Poincare's latest reply answers this
question with touching preciseness.
1t reduces Frances net reparations
demand to $4,000, 100000, whereas
reparations pensions already have
cost us more than 100,000,000, 900
paper francs and there remain at
least 7O,O0O,O0O,OOO yet to be raised.
Poincare says in his note: 1.-The
total which France demands from
Germany is far less than what she
is obliged to spend to build up her
devastated region, leaving pensions
aside" And this, unfortunately, is
true.
The Versailles treaty said: "The
victors will pay their war expenses
tof which Frances share is 100000
|SloO, 000) but Germany will pay dam
to persons and property" After
four years of conferences and nego-
! tiations we have reached the point
where France claims in all S6,5OO,-
100000 and even then she is not sure
that tie allies who made war and
peace with her will accept that fig
ure.
People say we are selfish and do
not listen to the counsel of economic
solidarity. But what more can we
do than we already have done? At
tackled in 1914, invaded during four
years, victors in 1918. we had in our
hands January 10, 1920, the day when
the treaty took effect, document
giving us the right to collect from
Germany the cost of reconstruction
and pensions or according to the
reparation's commission decision in
1921, $500. 100000. OF this we
have already surrendered nearly two
thirds and the modest remainder is
disputed on the grounds that we are
too exacting.
Its Meaning To France.
As the writer said, this $1,000, 000,-
600 which we now claim is net, name
ly, over and above the sum necessary
10 pay our debts to England and
America, which come to about the
same amount. Otherwise France
would have zero for reparations and
zero for pensions. England and the
United States would get full repay
ments of the amounts we spent in
pounds and dollars within the borders
of those two countries for war ma
terials. Which simply means that
England and the United States would
recuperate n part Of their war ex-
penses while France would have to
pay first, all war expenses: second,
all pensions; and third, all recon-
struction costs.
Considering the result the writer
capnot regret his constant opposition
At9ring the last four years to the sue
cessive governments which have
brought us where we are today. Re
call Clemenceau's phrase:
yesterday we were victorsl"
Successive revisions of the Yer
sailles treaty by spineless cabinets
ratified by servile majorities have
led us into a blind alley from which
it seems impossible TO find an exit
and certainly not without sacrificing
60 per cent of the reparations prom
Al