As a Mohammedan Delegate, I wish to make more precise, on certain points, the sentiments of my fellow believers.

(c) Statement by Mussulman Delegate

We are of opinion that it is necessary for our country to be helped by a friendly power in order to achieve its full development.

On the other hand, we are convinced that such a help would only completely satisfy our aspirations, if it made itself felt within recognition of our independence and in the direction of a democratic Government, free from any religious and theocratic form. The spirit of liberalism and religious tolerance in France prompts us to trust this power and beg for its help.

We are moreover convinced that France's collaboration must extend to the whole extent of the Syrian territory. We are of opinion that the unity of collaboration is necessary to the evolution of the various groups of which it is constituted towards the national unity of the country."

(The Delegates, having been thanked by M. Clemenceau for their statements, then withdrew.)

2. MR. LANSING said that he had certain additional remarks to offer in regard to the question which had been discussed the previous day, relating to the passage of troops and supplies through Holland. He would call on General Bliss to make a statement on his behalf.

Passage of Troops
and Supplies
Through Dutch
Territory:

(a) Concessions
Granted by Hol-
land to U. S. A.

GENERAL BLISS said that after referring to the documents in the American archives relating to this question, he found that he had yesterday correctly stated the facts of the case. The question of the passage of troops and supplies through Holland had first been mentioned in a letter addressed by General Pershing to Marshal Foch on January 15th last. In that letter General Pershing had submitted a request that all the Allied Armies of occupation should obtain, firstly, the right to transport supplies of all sorts through Holland, including gasoline, oil, etc., but not including military munitions, and, secondly, the right to withdraw their forces, military equipment and supplies via Rotterdam.

When the question had been taken up with Holland, sufficient stress had not been laid on the second point, and, therefore, the Government of the United States had taken up the question direct with the Dutch Government, through their representative at the Hague. As a result of the latter démarche, on the 15th February a telegram had been received by the American Headquarter Staff stating that the two requests made by the United States of America had been accorded by the Dutch Government, namely: the transport of supplies (not including material of war) through Holland, and the withdrawal by

* See BC-32 (SWC-8), vol. ш, p. 1040.

the Rhine of troops and war material. The American Government thus obtained permission to use Rotterdam as a base for the supply of materials, but the American Government was not thereby accorded the right, desired by Great Britain, of conveying troops and munitions of war through Holland to Germany. Consequently, no precedent had been created, and the demands of the Allies in this respect could not be based on the concessions already accorded to the United States of America.

(b) Draft Telegram to Holland

MR. BALFOUR remarked that nothing could be clearer than General Bliss' statement-it was clear that the concessions made by Holland to America were less than Great Britain demanded. On the other hand, the British authorities held that it would be impossible for them to maintain their forces in the occupied areas along the Rhine unless the right of importation was granted, as well as that of exportation. He did not himself feel competent to argue how far that necessity existed, but he would call on the British Chief of the Imperial General Staff to put the military case to the Conference.

GENERAL SIR HENRY WILSON said that the British authorities wanted permission to bring troops up the Rhine as well as down the Rhine. The congestion on the railways was such that it was impossible either to demobilize or to forward reliefs to the British forces on the Rhine. The British had some 70,000 to 80,000 young troops to send to the occupied areas, and unless this could be done, it would be impossible for the British troops to be ready to march into Germany should the necessity arise.

MR. LANSING said he appreciated the situation in regard to the replacement of troops. Everyone was anxious to aid in every way to make it easy to send troops. The last two paragraphs of the draft, however, were so worded as to give the impression that something was being asked as a matter of right, whereas it was not a matter of right. The paragraphs appeared to contain a threat, and, therefore, in his opinion, required some amendment.

MR. BALFOUR expressed a doubt as to whether the last two paragraphs were really open to that interpretation. He did not pretend to judge international questions, but the appeal made was not to the technicalities of international law, but to the consideration of a situation without precedent. To obtain a durable peace an armistice had been made, which Germany had accepted. The armistice involved the necessity of moving troops, and this could not be done unless the Dutch yielded on the point in question. Should the Dutch entrench themselves behind the duties of Neutrals and refuse to facilitate a military action by nations, who, as a matter of fact, were still belligerents, he could give no good answer. But he would

For the text of the telegram as finally agreed upon, see p. 9.

appeal to the Dutch to take a broader view. It was true the Allies were not at peace with Germany, but if Holland wished to facilitate an early peace, it could do so by helping in the manner suggested. Consequently he did not think the Allies went beyond the moral principle of the matter in telling the Dutch that "the matter was so grave and urgent that the Five Powers must express the earnest hope that the Netherland [s] Government will consider the question of giving their immediate consent; failing which the responsibility for the state of things which might ensue, and which might endanger both the general peace and the flow of food and supplies into the countries of Western Europe, will fall upon the Netherlands Government". This message only stated the fact that if the Dutch adhered to their view, a very serious situation would thereby be created.

M. SONNINO pointed out that the vital question had not yet been put to the Dutch. Holland had accorded to the Americans the right of passage for supplies, and she would no doubt extend the same right to all the Allies. But, in regard to the transport of troops, the question had still to be put to Holland. Should Holland refuse, it would be difficult to see how pressure could be applied without violating those very principles for which the Allies had fought, namely, the integrity of neutral territories. The only reason that could be given for putting pressure on Holland was "Necessity", but no neutral need recognize that reason. The humanitarian side of the question, namely, the transport of food and other supplies, had been accepted by Holland. But as regards the military question, it would only be possible to urge the reasons given by Mr. Balfour, that is to say, that a refusal would result in a prolongation of the war. It would, however, be impossible to go beyond that, though possibly in international law some distinction did exist between the transport through neutral territory of troops, arms, munitions and supplies.

MR. CHURCHILL wished to insist on the practical side of the question. If 80,000 troops could not be sent by the Rhine route, a lesser number of troops would have to be maintained in the occupied territories, and the promises made to Marshal Foch would not be fulfilled. That would be the inevitable result. The Dutch Government had in principle accepted all that was asked for. It did not object to troops being sent down the river, why should it, in logic, object to troops being allowed up the river? The principle was, therefore, already accorded. Obviously the Allies could not go to war with Holland on that question, but she would, by her refusal, have placed herself in antagonism with the Allies, a position which she could not well afford to maintain.

MR. BALFOUR thought that he could perhaps suggest certain slight alterations in the last two paragraphs of the draft despatch, which would meet Mr. Lansing's difficulties.

M. CLEMENCEAU said that, for his part, he would be sorry to see any toning down of the text of the telegram. As Mr. Churchill had said, Holland could not appeal to the question of principle, because she had already allowed troops to be moved in the opposite direction. The fact could not be overlooked that Holland had allowed 2/300,000 Germans to cross the province of Limburg. These 300,000 Germans would now have been prisoners of the Allies but for the action of the Dutch. Holland greatly feared the consequences of the act she had thus committed. She feared the Allies might call her to account, especially in view of the claims to Limburg so ably set forth a few days ago by M. Hymans. It would not be

necessary to pursue the argument, but it should not be lost sight of. Holland would not forget it. About a fortnight ago influential members of the Dutch Government, in conversation with members of an Allied Government, whose names need not be mentioned, had displayed considerable anxiety about Limburg, and had begged that Holland should not be made to pay for her act. They had even offered to bring a certain person to Paris to give evidence on the subject before that Conference.

It would not be necessary to recall the incident in writing to the Dutch Government, but he thought that in the present state of mind of the Dutch, the demands of the Allies would quickly receive satisfaction. For that reason he (M. Clemenceau) strongly supported Mr. Churchill's proposal, and asked his colleagues to do the same. The question was a serious one. It was well known how great were the difficulties, and the congestion of traffic in the North. It was not intended to commit any warlike act. It was not intended to reinforce the Allied troops in Germany. It was merely intended to substitute units in order to carry out certain demobilisation arrangements. He (M. Clemenceau) therefore urged that the text proposed be adhered to. Should Holland refuse, the Allies would be in a position to bring forward further arguments, without actually resorting to threats. The Dutch felt guilty and feared the consequences. And, when the time for making territorial adjustments came, there would be ample opportunities for obtaining satisfaction. But he thought that a simple and rather discreet allusion to the Limburg incident would suffice to obtain the desired concessions.

MR. LANSING held that his reason for objecting to the despatch being sent was that it constituted an admission that the Limburg act was right, since the Allies proposed to do the same.

MR. BALFOUR replied that he could not accept Mr. Lansing's contention for two reasons. Firstly, the substantial reason, that the course proposed by the Allies would cause no injury to Germany, whereas the act of Holland had caused an injury to the Allies by 'See BC-28, vol. I, p. 963.

depriving them of 300,000 prisoners. Secondly, a request was being made to Holland, whereas the Limburg act had been carried out by the Dutch on their own authority.

COLONEL HOUSE enquired what alterations Mr. Balfour proposed to make in the draft telegram.

MR. BALFOUR said that he had made certain alterations in the last two paragraphs of the telegram, which would now read as follows:

"In these circumstances the five Powers, sensible of the solemn duty which lies upon them to see that their efforts directed to the speedy conclusion of a durable peace for the benefit of the whole community of nations, earnestly request the Netherlands Government to cooperate with them to this end by facilitating in every way the movements of troops and supplies across Dutch territory strictly for the purpose agreed upon with the German Government under the terms of the Armistice.

The matter is so grave and so urgent that the five Powers must express the earnest hope that the Netherlands Government will see the necessity of giving their immediate consent; failing which the responsibility for the state of things which may ensue and which may endanger both the general peace and the flow of food and supplies into the countries of Western Europe, will fall upon the Netherlands Government."

He suggested that the text of the telegram as amended should be accepted.

MR. LANSING said he would accept the telegram as amended.

M. CLEMENCEAU laid particular stress on the fact that he accepted the amendments introduced by Mr. Balfour with regret, and wished that his regrets should be recorded.

BARON MAKINO pointed out that this was the first time he had seen the draft telegram. He was only too ready to associate himself with the Allies, but before engaging his Government he would like to obtain the views of his military advisers.

M. CLEMENCEAU held that the matter was one which called for immediate action. He thought, therefore, the four Powers should act at once without awaiting the results of Baron Makino's reference to his Government.

BARON MAKINO agreed to this procedure being followed.

It was agreed that the four Allied and Associated Powers (United States of America, British Empire, France and Italy), should forward the following despatch to their representatives at the Hague for presentation to the Dutch Government:

"The four Allied and Associated Powers consider it of vital importance in the interests of the general peace which they are earnestly striving to conclude at the earliest possible moment, that the preliminary arrangements already entered into with the enemy to this end, shall be effectually carried out.

Those arrangements provide, among other things, for the occupa