to avoid interference by the Powers. It would be a pity to give her a pretext for resisting.

M. PICHON restated the proposal that a Commission should study the revision of the 1839 treaties with the object of establishing Belgian sovereignty, leaving aside all territorial questions. Holland and Belgium should be invited to solve all the subsidiary problems they could solve together. The Powers would not intervene if any agreement were reached.

MR. LANSING suggested that the investigation be made only by the Powers signatory to the Treaties of 1839. The Commission could then report to the Council.

MR. BALFOUR said that in his view President Wilson would not wish America to be left out of the investigation. He would like to make an informal suggestion. If this were a private transaction, he thought it would be best if M. Pichon asked M. van Karnebeek to come to see him informally, and ask him to state exactly what Holland's position was;

(a) regarding territorial matters;

(b) regarding local questions;

c) regarding the Scheldt.

M. Pichon might tell him that the matter had been discussed in the Council and no resolution had been made. He might ask him whether, if all territorial matters were excluded, a good arrangement regarding the Scheldt could not be secured. It might be indicated to M. Van Karnebeek that if such a settlement were not arrived at, there was always a chance that the River might be declared international. It was often easier to get useful results in this way than by a more formal method. Holland might be more yielding than if face to face with a formal document.

MR. LANSING said that he agreed and the result of this conversation might furnish a guide for a resolution later on.

M. SONNINO thought that the Dutch might be more frank with the Belgians, especially as they seemed very anxious about their public opinion.

MR. BALFOUR added that it might be better to leave M. Pichon a completely free hand and avoid stating at the outset that the Powers had no thought of taking territory from Holland. In fact, they had no such intention and could not carry it out if they had, but it might be inexpedient to say so categorically.

M. PICHON replied that he had already had a talk with M. Van Karnebeek, who had told him that Holland could not take part in any negotiations touching her sovereignty, or her territory. He could not even submit to his Government any question of this sort, as this would cause an explosion of public feeling. As to bringing

about better relations between Holland and Belgium, he expected good results from direct negotiation. He thought that a solution could be found to all the questions relating to Canals, to connection between the Meuse and the Rhine, to the Scheldt, in fact, to all the questions pending between the two countries. He felt sure that he would be able to satisfy the Belgian Government. That was the ground on which he stood and he would not change it. It was for this reason that M. Pichon thought the proposal for a Commission was a good one. It gave satisfaction to the Dutch Government and might result in satisfaction to Belgium.

MR. LANSING said that he would agree, still with the proviso that 'territory' included rivers just as it included three miles of sea from the coast of any country.

M. SONNINO said that the main object was to allow the two countries to decide all they could with every appearance of freedom. Too close a definition of functions was therefore undesirable.

MR. BALFOUR pointed out that 63 kilometres of the navigable course of the Scheldt were in French territory, and the French fluvial ports of Condé and Valenciennes were situated on this course. The Scheldt was therefore an international river.

(After some further discussion, the following formula was adopted :

"Having recognised the necessity of revising the Treaties of 1839, the Powers entrust to a Commission comprising a representative of the United States of America, Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Belgium and Holland, the task of studying the measures which must result from this revision and of submitting to them proposals implying neither transfer of territorial sovereignty nor creation of international servitudes.

The Commission will ask Belgium and Holland to present agreed suggestions regarding navigable streams in the spirit of the general principles adopted by the Peace Conference.")

(The Meeting then adjourned.) PARIS, June 5th, 1919.

Paris Peace Conf. 180.03201/23

FM-23

Secretary's Notes of a Meeting of Foreign Ministers Held in M. Pichon's Room at the Quai d'Orsay, Paris, on Wednesday, 11th June, 1919, at 10 a. m.

Boundaries of

Hungary: (a) With Roumania

1. M. PICHON said that the reason for the meeting of the Foreign Ministers that morning was fully set forth in the following letter, addressed by the Secretary of the Supreme Council to the Secretary-General of the Peace Conference:"In confirmation of my telephone message this evening, I am directed to inform Your Excellency that at a meeting of the Council of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers this afternoon, the Military situation on the Roumanian and CzechoSlovakia borders of Hungary was under consideration. M. Bratiano and M. Misu were present to represent Roumania and M. Kramarcz and Dr. Benes represented Czecho-Slovakia.

A radio telegram from the Government of Bela Kun intimating the readiness of his Government to enter into some arrangement for the cessation of fighting and for the early commencement of Peace negotiations, was also read.

It was agreed that instead of drawing an Armistice line and making temporary arrangements, which are apt to prove unsatisfactory, the best plan would be, as a preliminary step to the cessation of the fighting at the earliest possible moment, to fix the permanent boundaries between Hungary and Czecho-Slovakia and between Hungary and Roumania. As soon as these boundaries have been agreed between the Allied and Associated Powers, it is proposed to notify them to the Hungarian Government and to arrange for the withdrawal behind these frontiers of all the contending forces. Any subsequent violation of these lines will bring about an immediate cessation of the Peace negotiations.

I am directed to request that Your Excellency will arrange for a meeting of the Foreign Ministers to take place tomorrow morning, Wednesday, June 11th. The object of this meeting is for the Council of Foreign Ministers to communicate to the Delegations of Roumania and Czecho-Slovakia the boundaries they have recommended between Hungary and Roumania and Hungary and Czecho-Slovakia. M. Kramarcz and Dr. Benes for Czecho-Slovakia and M. Bratiano and M. Misu for Roumania should be invited to attend this meeting.

I am further to request that a report of the meeting and in particular of the frontiers agreed to may be furnished to the Council of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers before 4 p. m. tomorrow, Wednesday, June 11th."

MR. BALFOUR enquired whether the representatives of the JugoSlavs had been invited to attend.

M. PICHON replied in the negative. The terms of reference did not relate to Jugo-Slavia. He would call on M. Tardieu to explain to the Roumanian Delegates the decisions reached in regard to the boundaries of Hungary with Roumania.

M. TARDIEU thought that it would be a loss of time to describe in detail the boundaries of Hungary with Roumania as agreed upon by the Council of Four on the recommendation of the Foreign Ministers, and of the Commissions who had studied the question. A draft giving the boundaries in detail had been circulated, (Annex A), and

he would also ask the Roumanian Delegates to refer to the map accompanying the report.1

3

M. BRATIANO said that he was not in a position to make any remarks in regard to the boundaries of Roumania, as described in the report, which he had only just seen for the first time. The boundaries, as therein described, differed so materially from those accepted by the Treaty of 1916 that it would be impossible for him to take the responsibility of expressing any opinion without first consulting the Roumanian Government and the Roumanian General Staff. His remarks applied more particularly to the Northern and Southern portions of the boundary between Hungary and Roumania, which differed entirely from the frontiers claimed by Roumania. Consequently, he could not take upon himself the responsibility of discussing the question. He wished to lay stress upon the fact that the study of the problem had been carried out by a Commission representing the Principal Allied and Associated Powers without the assistance of Roumanian representatives. As a result, the Roumanian Delegation and the Roumanian Government had been kept in entire ignorance as to the reasons which had guided the Commission in reaching a decision. Under the circumstances, he would press that the minutes of the meetings of the Commission should be communicated to the Roumanian Delegation in order to enable the latter to study the question in conjunction with the Ministers of the Government of Roumania, who would alone be able to accept the responsibility of abandoning the just territorial claims of Roumania.

4

(At this stage Dr. Kramarcz and Dr. Benes entered the chamber.) M. TARDIEU expressed the view that the Council of Foreign Ministers would have to decide in regard to the request made by M. Bratiano that he should be supplied with a copy of the proceedings of the Commission on Roumanian Affairs. He, himself, would be prepared to answer any questions on that subject, which M. Bratiano would care to put to him; but he thought M. Bratiano, in making his statement, intended to ask for an adjournment of the meeting.

M. BRATIANO replied that he had not exactly intended to ask for an adjournment: but, in his opinion, it was imperative that he should be supplied with copies of the reports and of the arguments, (as contained in the procès-verbaux), which had caused the Allied and Associated Powers to take decisions so materially differing from the claims advanced by the Roumanians.

1 Map not filed with the minutes.

. An alternate version of the proceedings from this point on, differing in some respects from that given here, is to be found filed with the minutes and is printed post, p. 818.

Italy, R. Ministero degli Affari Esteri, Trattati e convenzioni fra il regno d'Italia e gli altri stati, vol. 23, p. 412.

The Commission on Roumanian and Yugoslav Affairs.