Home

Gareth Jones Books

Gareth Jones

Childhood

Colley Family

My Hobbies

Siriol's Photos

Earl of Abergavenny

The Land Girl in 1917

All Articles of interest

 

Gareth Jones  Lloyd George

 

Major Edgar Jones

Sharm el Sheikh

Book Purchase

Links

Contact Address

Miscellaneous

 

GERMANY AWAKE 

September, 1932.

  Dear Mr. Jones, 

            I have just returned from a Storm Attachment meeting and am just in right mood to write to you on the political situation. 

            We are all exceeding angry that the "old man" has such blind confidence on the clique of monarchists who are now in power.   These people do not seem to know that since the war there have been great and fundamental changes.  They believe that they can drag the cart out of the rut with their old-fashioned pre-war views.  But to save Germany we must have quite different people!  We National Socialists are the young generation and our Hitler is certain to lead us soon into the "Third Reich”, which will be the only solution of our present distress.  It is a disgrace that the clique which has absolutely no majority behind it has such control over Hindenburg that he allows our leader to go away empty-handed.  It was the duty of the President to recognise our overwhelming success in the Elections by placing the political power in Hitler’s hands.   It is quite correct that in numbers we have not a clear majority but figures are not so important here.  What is important is that out party contains all the constructive forces.  We have the elite of the German people in our ranks.  All classes groups of society and ages are represented, and the more they slander and fight us the stronger we are bound together by the feeling that we are destined to give all our energies for the building of a new German Fatherland which contain all those of German blood, and in which all non-Germans will be thrown out of positions of political and cultural work.  There must be no compromising.  There is nothing we hate more than compromising.  That is the reason why we are not satisfied with the way in which our five Upper Silesian comrades have been “pardoned”.  We demand that the trial shall be opened anew in order to prove that our comrades could simply not have acted otherwise towards this Polish Insurgent and Communist.  Since when have we Germans put our own heroes up against the wall?  Thank God that we have amongst us enough people who are willing to lay down their lives if necessary to rid the German people of its diseases. 

We must recognise that the Papen Government has done all it could for the sovereignty and defense of the German people. In principle we agree with it.  But how clumsily they have done everything!  Do not your countrymen feel insulted by the démarche of the German Government at the Quai D’Orsai?  When one has such a plan to carry out surely one should first assure oneself of the agreement of friendly powers before negotiating with the traditional enemy. Our Adolf Hitler would have done things much better but he is not given the possibility to show what he can do.  But his day will come.  We are convinced of this, and we are prepared to take the future of the German people into our hands. 

GERMANY AWAKE

With best greetings, 

Yours,     

Carl.

 

 

 

 

 

TRANSLATION FROM STEEL HELMET.

Sept. 1932.

Dear Gareth,

You have probably read about the great Steel Helmet demonstration held under the protection of the Government, which was the most overwhelming manifestation of the "front line" spirit which we have ever had; and I am very proud of it.  I am very sorry that I could not be there, but my son attended and has described everything in so detailed a manner that I seem to see it before my eyes.

Germany  is now at a turning point, both in home and foreign affairs.

In home affairs  there are two phenomena.  The first is the economic crisis , which hits us Germans in a particular form.  Since the inflation Germany has been bled dry; our capital disappeared; there are no more reserves, which can be called upon in times of stress.  The crisis has made itself felt in the smallest of workers' homes so cruelly that it is just as if you cut into their living flesh.  I read that the weavers of Lancashire are striking because their wages are to be lowered

In Germany no worker think of striking.  He is glad if he is able to earn anything at all.  There have been three, four, or five reductions of salaries  in the middle classes ( officials etc.)  We all live from hand to mouth.  Taxes are terrible and the standard of living has sunk so low that it cannot go lower.  We have to pay income tax here on a wage of £60 upwards, so that the masses of workers who are spared in England have to pay taxes.  Business  is at a standstill.  Tariff walls throttle our exports; and in the home market there is no money  to buy.  It makes one despair.

" Do you think that a parliamentary regime can settle this situation?  And here I come to the second point the ending off the Parliamentary System.  Bruning introduced a veiled dictatorship, and von Papen is merely continuing this.  But now we are changing from the "wait and see" attitude to the “up and do" policy.  We are tired of everlasting waiting.  We  want to see what is going to happen.  And therefore we are for the von Papen Government, because he is against the Parliamentary system, and because they not only publish a fine program to overcome the crisis, but they have the courage to provide the mechanism and to set it going.  They are risking a lot, it is true, but fortune helps the brave!  ( Fortes fortuna adjuvat.)  We are now going to fight the depression, with the weapons in our hand and we are confident of victory.  The Stock Exchange is the best  barometer and that shows that hope is springing up in our breasts.  

"The Nazis  believe in the "Third Empire" and think that if they have all the power in their hands everything will be all right..  My personal conviction is that Hitler lost a great chance when he left the President's Palace blushing all over.  He himself would have, I believe, readily accepted the offer, but he is too much under the influence of his  Radical leaders.  The Nazis fear that they will lose a lot of their adherents if they make compromises and they do not want a new election campaign. Moreover, Hitler’s unwise actions in the matter of the "five heroes of Potempa" have lost him a lot of support.                         

“We must soon have a reform of the voting system and raise the age of franchise and also introduce the personal element into politics again.  We want to vote for men of flesh and blood, not for a list of names as we do now.

“In Foreign policy the question of re-arming is now the most important.  The German aide-memoire seems to have caused a great sensation.  In England they talk about "diplomatic clumsiness."  Warsaw and Paris are angry.  It is just as if one had put one's finger into a wasps' nest.  But surely after the fiasco of the Disarmament Conference the German démarche was the natural consequence and it is quite as natural that Germans of responsibility should speak out their minds frankly and freely.  Schleicher is speaking what every nationally minded German feels in his heart.  We Germans have had enough of the underhanded ways of international politics.  We  want to know where we stand.  The patience of our whole people is at an end.  For thirteen years we have been rigidly bound to the paragraphs of the Treaty of Versailles, which demand a thousand and one things from us.  But the Allies have conscientiously evaded the fulfilment of the  few obligations which they took upon themselves more for the sake of the "beau geste" than in real sincerity.

"The worst of it all is that the French still put the sole blame for the War upon Germany and cannot get rid of the conviction that the naughty boy must remain branded for ever and ever.  All the stipulations of the Treaty of Versailles depend on this belief; and outside France it has been recognized that they must be revised.  Abolition of Reparations was only a step along this path of revision; then general disarmament or German re-arming; and then comes naturally the question of the Eastern frontiers.

"The French stated that no sooner would we be free of reparations than we would spend the money (where is it?) on armaments.  But it is not a question of money.  It is  a question or the national honour of a great people whose will to live cannot be suppressed for all times.  What is right for other nations, should be right for Germany.  That is not chauvinism; that is just commonsense.  We do not want to make War; we feel, however, that the surrounding of Germany by large armies is a threat of war.  Moreover, you have just to look at the map to see  that readiness for defense is a necessary tradition for the German people.  We are pacifists in the sense that we want friendly settlement of international problem; but we are not pacifists in the sense that we must give all our military power up and  thus encourage our neighbours to hit us about,) ( look what the Lithuanians did at Memel.) 

And now just a word about the revision of the Eastern frontiers, which I call the third step of our natural revision.  The Corridor must disappear.  There are only two alternatives; either Danzig and East Prussia will become German or they will become Polish; and we know what they ought to be. 

With heartiest greetings, 

yours.  

R.H. 

***********

 

 

 For Ivy Lee    Private

I should be delighted if you [Dr Ivy Lee - New York Public Relations Consultant - and a former employer of Gareth in 1931] show it to friends but some of  those I interviewed did not want it to be quoted publicly.

IMPRESSIONS OF GERMANY

 Gareth Jones Memorandum - DECEMBER, 1932

The questions which especially interested me during my few days stay in Cologne were the following: 

1.                  Schleicher's programme, his character, and the attitude of the Parties towards him.

2.                  The decline of the Nazis: prospects of Monarchy and the growth Communism.

3.                  The unemployment situation and what is being done to tackle unemployment.

4.                  The general economic situation.

5.                  The outlook on foreign affairs.

I interviewed the Lord Mayor, the Director of Town Planning, former Minister for the Interior (Reich) Sollman, the three Professors at the University specialising in economics, banking and industry, the British Consul General (with whom I stayed), the Director for Poor Relief, the Foreign Affairs, Economic and Political experts of the Kölnische Zeitung and of two other papers, a Nazi, steel industrialist, Baron von Humboldt, the head of the Banking House von Stein, and others.

Since my stay was too short to make a real study of the situation and to draw conclusions for Germany as a whole, what follows is mainly a series of notes of conversations with a few observations.  This visit ended a period of ten years during which I have paid one or more visits to Germany every year. 

1. SCHLEICHER‘S PROGRAMME, HIS CHARACTER AND THE ATTITUDE OF THE PARTIES TO HIM. 

The new Chancellor of Germany, General von Schleicher’s broadcast on December 15th his declaration of policy.  He said that his programme contained only one point, the provision of work.  Nothing else interested Germany, least of all constitutional changes which filled no stomachs.  He wished to colonise 1,300,000 acres in the Eastern Frontier District.  He was in favour of compulsory service in the framework of a Militia.  He stated that the voluntary labour corps, the Reich Board for the Physical Training of Youth, and subsidised sports clubs, which were throttling party political spirits would receive funds for the Government, especially for voluntary groups of young unemployed.  The Chancellor said that in economic matters he would do whatever seemed sensible at the moment without worrying his head about dogmas. 

 Attitude of the Social Democrats. 

Herr Sollman, former Minister of the Interior (Social Democrat) for the Reich, told me: The Social Democrats stand in definite opposition to Schleicher because he is carrying on the same policy as von Papen.  The difference is that Schleicher is much cleverer and more cunning than Papen.  I have known Schleicher for well for fourteen years.  He is clever enough to try to avoid a conflict with parliament, but he wants a defeat of the Social Democrats.  The people around Schleicher want a strong authoritarian Government based on the Reichswehr: The Bourgeoisie, the landowners and heavy industry. 

“Schleicher’s talks with the Trades Unions are a result of his cleverness.  Papen had a front attack on the Trade Unions and on the Social Democrats but Schleicher is trying to split the two.  The Trade Union leaders are advising him and he will listen to them.  A split between the Trade Unions and the S. D. party is what he is aiming at.  The T.U’s are in a difficult position.  If they go too much towards the right they will push millions of S.D.’s to Communism. 

“There may be a vote of no confidence in the Reichstag in January.  The S.D’s and the Communists will certainly vote against the Government, and the Trade Union leaders will also vote with the Party because our discipline is very strong.  What the Nazis will do is uncertain.  Hitler, of course attacks the Government but do not take his speech too seriously, he might enter a Government Coalition.  He is in a critical situation and does not know what to do.  The Nazis can only govern as a dictatorship crushing opposition; therefore, if Hitler goes into Coalition Government he will disappoint the voters.  Still he will want to avoid new elections because he has no money.  I have just come back from Berlin and there are 1500 men collecting for Hitler on the Berlin streets, but they only collect altogether 80 to 100 marks a day. It is a terrible situation for Hitler; still he might make a pact with Schleicher.”           

Just as we were talking a messenger came in to say that in Cassel 600 storm troop men had left the Nazi Party.  Two minutes later another messenger brought the news of local elections which showed a very sharp decline in the Nazi vote. 

I then asked Herr Sollmam whether Schleicher would govern without the Reichstag.  He answered, “No, Schleicher will not ignore the Reichstag.  If there is a vote of no confidence he will be in favour of elections which would strengthen his position.  He would be able to have more combinations and there would be no more Nazi Communist majority.  I think Hitler might lose 40 or 50 seats. Schleicher will maintain the constitutional conflict as long as possible.            

HE CAN REMAIN LONG IN POWER.

A clever Government can do almost anything with Article 48.  Even the budget was carried by Article 48. 

"The Reichbanner is not for Schleicher.  They have definitely decided not to join in the Sports Board.  I am sorry personally for our Young people, pea soup, a piece of meat - to have a full stomach - is a. sensation”.

The Centre Party and Schleicher

The Political Editor of the Kölnische Zeitung told me; "The Centre supports Schleicher loyally.  To us he is a man with common sense.  No other man is possible.  We Catholics have an interest to support a Government with authority which is also Democratic.  The Catholic Church itself is a mixture of Democracy and Authority.  80 per cent of our clergy come from the people.           

“We do not think he wi1l support a Coup d’etat.  He is, of course, only for a transitional period.” 

Dr. Adenauer, Lord Mayor of Cologne, said that the Centre Party were adopting a policy of “wait and see” towards Schleicher. 

Character of Schleicher 

The Berliner Tageblatt describes Schleicher thus:- ­It states that Schleicher is against constitutional experiment, that he had learned to be socially minded in his home, and was never allowed to be rude to a servant or a beggar.  The views of Schleicher are not stable but adapted to circumstances.  Behind his frank thoughts there is a scepticism which takes nothing too tragically, a kind of irony.  He has charming naturalness.  He is a General, and the son of an officer, but also a modern man, and has no similarity with the snobbish type of Prussian officer.  Still, there is in the General’s mentality a hatred of pacifists, and he might well play a Cromwellian part, but he is not the bogy and the militarist which the French imagine him to be.  He is an able army organiser, and wants a common understanding with France.  He wishes to unite the masses now split into organised political battalions into a coalition with a common front.  He is flexible and chameleon -like.  He has been moderate in canceling anti-social decrees and in giving an amnesty for the transport strikers. 

The comments of the Frankfurter Zeitung, December 17th are interesting.  This democratic paper congratulates the new Chancellor on not promising a heaven on earth, but in directing his aim at the Chancellor of the German people.  A man who is thus going to fight the bitter misery of unemployment has a right to be left to his work.  He is socially minded.  Papen aroused the mistrust of the nation, but Schleicher knows that the country’s confidence is necessary.  Nevertheless, the F.Z. is afraid that he has too many tactics, but lacks far-reaching strategy.  It regrets his lack of political principles. 

Schleicher and Parliament 

It is significant that Schleicher spoke to the nation over the wireless and not to the Reichstag.  He prepared his statement himself, consulted none of his Ministers, except to ask certain economic details and did not submit the text for their approval.

Pertinax on Schleicher 

Pertinax commenting on the adjournment of the Reichstag to the second fortnight of January says that Papen’s plans are being taken up a man who is far more clever and can work with all camps.  At present, says Pertinax, his great idea is to put the different military societies into the so-called National Sports Bureau under ex-Generals.  What were formally forces for civil war must now be regular forces obeying the Government.  Soon the same uniform, probably that of the steel helmets, will be imposed on all.  Schleicher hopes that Hitler’s Storm Troops will also be melted into the mass.

The Christian Trade Unions and Schleicher 

Kaiser, the leader, said in a speech, that originally the Christian T.U’s had mistrusted the new Chancellor but now he was known as “THE SOCIALLY MINDED GENERAL”.  The T. U’s had the impression that here was a man who understood the working class.  The Christian T.U.s had a good impression of Schleicher as did the other T.U’s, but their confidence would have to be gained by deeds.  Already, said the Christian T.U’s leader, there is a wave of conciliation throughout the people, and the attempt of reactionaries to seize power had failed.  The man who now governed bad turned successfully to the people and the wave of mistrust end revolt which had made Germany revolutionary was disappearing. 

Views of Steel Industrialist. 

        Herr Pastor, the Steel Industrialist disliked Schleicher.  “He is coquetting too much with the T.U’5.  He is an officer with rubber soles, not an officer with real military boots.  He is not an Iron Chancellor like Bismarck.  He is a victim of his own policy.  He did not want to become Chancellor.  He is intriguing and ambitious.  It is notorious that he threw over Seeckt, Gessler, T, Bruning, Gruener, and Papen, and now he is coming out of his role of “eminence grise” into the open.  He manoeuvres too much and is making arrangements with the left.  He is sphinx like, very clever, but I thought his broadcast was slovenly, arrogant, and vulgar.  He has got the Prussian officer’s tradition and no great culture.  Hitler should be given a chance. Schleicher is all things to all men; a weather cook, changing with the wind. 

“Some Industrialists are opposed to Schleicher because they are afraid he is for agricultural quotas but many say, at least he is not so bad as von Papen.  “Baron von Humbold was also afraid that Schleicher would give in too much to the Socialists. 

Economists on Schleicher. 

Professor Eckert: “There is confidence in Schleicher and the men around him are good, but I do not believe be will last long.  He will certainly rule without the Reichstag because he has the Reichswehr.” 

Herr von Stein, of the Banking House von Stein, said: “Business people do not reckon on a long Schleicher reign.  He only gives himself a couple of months, watch out for January.  There will be difficulties with the Nazis.“ 

Professor Schöffler: “Schleicher rejects all doctrines.  He is like a Englishman in his rejection of theory.” 

Another Socialist View. 

The Political Editor of the Rheinische Zeitung, which was founded by Karl Marx, said: “We are not so bitterly opposed to Schleicher as we were to Papen.  We hated Papen but our opposition to Schleicher is only a Parliamentary opposition, a democratic opposition.  Schleicher never attacks Marxism as Papen always did.  He is a tactician and a cynic. 

2. THE DECLINE OF THE NAZIS: PROSPECT OF MONARCHY AND THE GROWTH OF COMMUNISM.

The Nazi Split 

On all hands there was evidence of a serious split in the Nazi Party of rapidly declining influence end of a grave financial situation.  Hitler is still considered by some industrialists as a barrier against Communism, but they are not likely to subscribe very much more to his funds, as the steel industrialists Consul Pastor told me.  “The why industrialists supported Hitler was because he was against Communism.  Half of the people who voted for Hitler will vote for Communism.  Hitler is without means, and industry cannot help him very much.  

Hitler's Move away from Socialism. 

The Rheinische Zeitung reports that Hitler is forbidding Socialism.  Hitler's new economic advisor is to be Herr Funk, former editor of the Berliner Borsenzeitung, a nationalistic and capitalistic paper.  Hitler is moving away from Socialism in order that heavy industry may have confidence and enable the Nazis to pay their 12 million mark (£600,000) debt.

            The figure of £600,000 debt is confirmed from several sources.  Strasser's ‘a quarrel is also a sign that Hitler is moving away from Socialism. 

Disillusion of Hitler's Followers. 

Many of the young people who joined the Nazis because they thought that they would obtain jobs as policemen in Hitler’s Dictatorship are leaving the Party. 

Bookshops, a Clue to German Politics. 

Last year and in 1930 I noticed that the bookshops were selling very large quantities of books on National Socialism.  They were the rage.  To-day I hardly saw any in the bookshops.  There were fewer books on politics end more on general subjects, such as travel, a sign which seems to indicate a wave of political apathy.  One favourite book, however, is 'Soldaten' which tells of the deeds of Prussian officers and soldiers since the wars of liberation to the present day. 

Communism 

A large increase in the Communist Party is probable and it is thought by many experts that the Communist Party vote, will reach the same level as the Nazi vote did.  The Communist International has decided upon a more active policy in Germany Personally however, I think there is very little danger of a political revolt.  The Reichswehr is too strong, the Communists are badly armed, and German Communists are the sort of people who parade in the very beat clothes with clean collars, and ties. 

Monarchy. 

The question of Monarchy has become less actual.  A keen Monarchist said to me, “Every respectable German is a Monarchist, and must be a Monarchist, but to begin a Monarchy now would be a very great tactical mistake.  The intelligence of the Germans will not permit the return of the Kaiser, and we do not think that the Crown Prince is serious minded enough.  Ruprecht of Bavaria is a Catholic and thus out of the question.  A return of Monarchy is impossible for the next few years. “ 

What will happen if Hindenburg dies? 

If Hindenburg dies the President of the Supreme Court of Justice takes over authority.  This is a very important step, which has been voted by the Reichstag recently.  It stops the schemes for bringing in the Crown Prince.  It stops the Chancellor taking over complete political power 

When Hindenburg dies, therefore, Dr. Bumke, President of the Supreme Court takes over his authority.  Dr. Bumke is irremovable from his present post, and is not old, somewhere in the fifties.  He is a Judge not a politician, and is trusted.  I consider that this step is a very wise and favourable one for German stability. 

 

3. THE UNEMPLOYMENT  SITUATION AND WHAT IS BEING DONE TO TACKLE UNEMPLOYMENT 

Unemplyment Benefit and Poor Relief. 

The City Director for Poor Belief explained to me the situation in Cologne. She stated that in Cologne 210,000 out of a population of 730,000, namely 28.4 % of the population are being helped. 

The unemployment benefit (Reich Insurance) only lasts 36 days, and then the unemployed have to obtain relief from the towns.  The average amount received per head (including children) from Poor Relief is 21.9 marks per month (not per week).  The average married couple in Cologne receive 51 marks per month with 12 marks extra for each child, it they have no other resources.  Poor Relief costs the town of Cologne £3,000,000 per year.  

The City Director gave me the following example of a family budget of a father and mother with two children who had no other means.  They would  receive 75 marks per month, of which they would have to pay about 25 marks in rent.  This left 50 marks, of which 8 marks would have to be spent on coal, leaving 42 marks. This meant 10 marks per week for tour people, or 2/6 per week per person.  Therefore, this family would have to live on 1.50 marks per day, to be spent not only on food, but on light clothes, shoes, etc.  Bread is dear, 50 pfennigs (6d) for 3 1/2 lbs. 

This family would spend about 30 pfennigs of the 1.50 marks on wool, soap, clothes eto, leaving 1.20 marks per day for food.  This is usually divided thus. (The meals, of course, are for four persons.) 

Breakfast 30 pfennigs (3 1/2d.) Substitute coffee with a couple of slices of black bread.

Lunch   50 pfennigs (6d.)     Potatoes, with cabbage or thick soup.  Bread is too expensive for lunch.

Supper 40 pfennigs (4 1/2d) Potatoes. 

This family would have no milk. 

Health conditions are getting worse end worse.  Bedclothing is short.  Many children cannot go to school because they have no shoes.  Often a child being given a free meal will eat eight plates of soup.  There is a terrible lack of warm clothing.  These conditions are undermining the morale of the nation. 

Unemployment among the older middle classes. 

I was deeply impressed by the people who came for the free meal of soup which was being given to former middle class people.   Cultured elderly people who still maintain themselves clean and respectable, and young artists, teachers, professors, with intellectual faces, but absolutely down and out, came for this free meal.  Some of the people there were once very wealthy, now they have absolutely no means but they still maintain a German pride in a respectable appearance 

Unemployment among the students 

Professor Shöffler, head of the English Department, gave me a striking picture of the despair of the students.  He said it is absolutely impossible to get posts.  Of the students from our faculty who went down last summer NOT ONE has had a post.  In the faculty of Law it is just the same.  They will probably be unemployed for ten years getting no relief.  Take my student, Miss Bredenfeld.  She is pretty and clever, a Doctor of Philosophy, of good family, but she cannot get a job.  She is now a Communist.  Communism will certainly grow among the younger academic generation. 

"There is no outlet for the 100,000 who have left college in the last the few years.  There is no army, no navy, no colonies. 

“The Government is cutting down expenses in education and increasing the number of pupils in each class.  The students have next to nothing to live on.” 

Tackling Unemployment 

The Director of Town Planning described to me the method used to tackle unemployment.  He said that there were three methods

            (1)       Land Settlement.

            (2)       Voluntary Labour Service.

            (3)       Public Works. 

(1)  Land Settlement: There are about 200,000 young Germans in the Land Settlements and the number is to be increased.  The Reich government gives 2,000 marks (£100) towards each house in a settlement.  In the first years it is given free, but later they will be a small rate of interest to be paid. 

In Cologne individual groups of unemployed have been formed called Building Groups, consisting of a carpenter, bricklayer, locksmith roof builder, and unskilled workers.  These groups are chosen by the poor Relief Office.  They then help each other to build houses on a settlement where each has his pig,  goats and chickens. They receive Poor Relief pay plus extra food, and cheap tramfares.  These settlements are usually in the suburbs, and usually financed by the Reich. 

In East Prussia, as Schleicher pointed out in his wireless speech, l,300,000 acres are to be settled. 

(2)   Voluntary Labour Service: These are people who voluntarily devote themselves such works as building cycle paths, parks, etc.  They are of the age of 18 to 25, and are usually in groups of people of the same views.  The Christian T.U. group; Steel Helmet Group, etc.

This is usually work which could be given to private con tractors, who still attack it.  In the beginning there was great opposition from the Trade Unions, but finally they became reconciled 

(3)    Public Works: The Government is giving money to such works as iron-bridges, roads,etc.  The Government is to help towns which want electricity machines but cannot pay for them 

Financing of Public Works. 

The Lord Mayor of Cologne pointed out how they were unable as a city to do much in the way of public works because they had no capital.  He demanded a strong initiative from the Reich.  He thought that there would be an expansion of credit in new ways.  But, the financing plans were not to be decided until about a fortnight.  He said that the Government was going to advance money for necessary repairs of houses.           

The economic expert of the Kölnieche Volkzeitung explained to me his ideas on public works as follows: It was not quite clear, he said, what measures the Government would take, but von Papen had issued certain “Taxation Notes” which were based upon the income if the state in future better times and were to be redeemed from 1934 to 1939.  He said that between £50,000,000 and £75,000,000 would be spent on public works.  A tremendous amount of land reclamation had been done and large stretches of moors had been drained.  Much had been done through voluntary work and he believed that next year voluntary workers would be given one standard uniform.  The result of voluntary work had been very good.  Part of it was paid from the surplus receipts of the unemployment insurance.  He was enthusiastic about the settlements to be carried out in the east, but he said, it must be none primitively and simply.  He thought that they would settle a million at the most within several years time. 

Some of the work was given to private firms by communes but there was a lot of work which was too deer to be done through the ordinary economic process and this was done by the state.  The programme, therefore, seems to be a mixture of private initiative and of state interference, which is very similar to the system I studied in Rome in the summer. 

Professor Eckert, economist, was keen on Schleicher’s determination to carryout a policy of public works, settling men and building roads.  He said, “Our unemployed do not starve to but they starve mentally.” 

An industrialist was doubtful whether the plans would provide work for more than about 300,000 men, and could not see how they could be carried out wither creating emergency currency. 

A British official said it was a deep dark mystery to him as to how they got their funds.  The Banks had been giving great credits to the towns and there was a hidden inflation of credit. 

My final conversation in Cologne was with a young fellow selling apples and cigarettes on the station.  He said, “If I lost my job I would have to live on 4/6 a week.  A married man with a family gets about 12 marks a week.”  A friend of mine, an official, had to on an expedition to search for weapons, and said that he found in one family the children were eating potato peelings.  There is no doubt about it, he concluded we must have a big army or a militia again.”

 

4) THE GENERAL ECONOMIC SITUATION

 Signs of Improvement 

There are certain symptoms of improvement. The Deutsche Volkswirt writes “The symptoms of an economic improvement in Germany are numerous and unmistakable … Unemployment is not greatly higher than last year, although the spectre of seven to eight millions out of work was expected ... If political calm remains an upward trend may be expected in the spring.” 

There is an increase in the production of iron and steel.  Electricity production in October reached the same figure as last year.  Shipping shows an improvement in the last few months, but is much worse than a year ago.

Shipping laid up.

Dec.     lst. 1931           765,000 tons     19 % of total tonnage.

Sept.    1st 1932         1,425,000    “     56 %     “        “

Nov.    1st, 1932          l,194,970     “    50.7%    "        “

Dec.     lst, 1932          1,170,000    "     30%       “         “ 

Unemployment  here are now 5,358,000 out of work.  he seasonal increase in unemployment has not been so large as last year.

Stock Exchange.  here has been a recovery on the Stock Exchange in the last few months.  o take two representative shares, Fereinigte Stahlwerke, which dropped to 10 has now risen to 32, whilst Seimen and Halske (electricity) which dropped to 95 has recovered to 124. 

Herr von Stein, of the Banking House von Stein, said, “There are slow signs of improvement.  The shops are satisfied with the Christmas business, people are buying again, but only cheap materials are being bought. 

There is more confidence in Schleicher than in von Papen.  The Stock Exchange is a brighter sign.  Moreover, as long as Luther is at the head of the Reichsbank our currency is safe.” 

Professors at the Cologne University thought that there was a slight recovery because stocks of goods bad declined so low, but as one of them said, “I do not promise much from this recovery.” 

The steel industrialist, Consul Pastor, had little faith in the continuation of the recovery.  He said “There is a slight enlivening of industry and finance, due firstly to empty stocks, and secondly to speculation.  But is it a real recovery?  I do not think so.  A Chinese philosopher said twelve hundred years ago that if men could not bring their minds and morale into line with mechanical progress they would perish.  That is where we are to-day.  I see no hope, but I may be wrong.” 

Inflation 

Some people thought that inflation was probable, others believed that as long as Luther was in the Reichsbank the currency would be safe.  Consul Pastor, Industrialist, said, “I cannot see how we can avoid inflation.  If we cannot bring six million unemployed into production I cannot see where we can get the means to keep them alive.” 

Professor Eckert said that there were two alternatives before Germany.  The first was Inflation, which would be disastrous.  It would mean revolutions and riots.  He feared a great world inflation.  Secondly, if Inflation were avoided, however he saw another alternative.  Perhaps they had reached bottom.  He believed there might be a slow recovery interrupted by recessions.

Professor Eckert pointed out the dangers before Germany.  He said “The Budget” at the Reich is in disorder.  There is a large deficit and the financial situation of the states and of the towns is very bad. Cologne and Frankfurt cannot now meet certain bonds railing due.  The burden of debt towers more and more.  Modified inflation in Germany is almost impossible unless we tackle the burden of debts by drastic cutting down of capital and conversions; there is no other way out except inflation. 

Herr Sullmann, former Minister of the Interior, was also afraid of Inflation.  He said “I am afraid there will be moves in the direction of Inflation.  We have got ‘Taxation Notes’ which are now to be given to the communes to pay for public works.  This will necessitate twenty notes in exchange for these ‘Taxation Notes’; that means that the one and a half million marks which are to be issued as ‘Taxation Notes’ will become marks in circulation.  Hilterding and I fear an inflation.  In Germany every man is an expert in Inflation.  As soon as the danger is known there will be a run on the banks, and people will take their money out end buy goods.  A sign of it will also be a rise in common stocks (shares) on the Stock Exchange.  But I should never write this in my paper.” 

On the other hand there are strong forces working for a stable currency.  Professor Walb, expert on banking, expressed this when he said, “We will right inflation with all the weapons in our power.  No, I do not think there will be inflation.  We will out down capital, out down debts, and have a cleansing of the debt burden.” 

The irremovability of Luther is a strong factor against inflation 

Quotas 

There is very bitter feeling among industrialists against the agricultural quotas.  These, said Professor Walb, sabotaged Papen’s programme and had injured Germany exports, but certain concessions had been made by Germany. 

Tariffs. 

I heard little which led me to hope that there will be a reduction of tariffs, but Schleicher will probably not raise the tariff any higher.  Tariffs have made foodstuffs dear in Germany, and are one of the main causes of the dissension between agriculture and industry. 

State Control of industry. 

The economic expert of the Kölnische Zeitung said, “It does not seem probable that the Government will go much further in the direction of state ownership of industry.  In the aluminium industry shares are owned by the Government. 

Absence Panic 

I was struck by the absence of panic.  The last time I was in Germany there were fears of a sudden catastrophe; now no one expressed these fears, in spite of the profound misery of the vast majority of the people. 

 

5) THE OUTLOOK ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

Germany's Future Policy on "Equality of Rights" 

It is highly probable that Germany will demand the demilitarisation of the French frontiers. The Germans in Cologne believe that the principle of the Equality of Rights justifies them in claiming a zone of 50 kilometres within the French frontier where the French shall have no weapons, or soldiers.  The Badische Presser says that now Germany has Equality of Rights there shall be no more unilateral measures, and that Germany will insist that France shall not only destroy her eastern fortifications but also suppress her aviation camps munition depots, and garrisons in a zone equivalent to the German demilitiarised zone.  

I asked Herr Borowski whether be thought this would happen.  (He is the Foreign affairs editor of the Moderate National Volkishe Zeitung).  He replied, ”Certainly.. If this is not given us we will claim the right to have troops in Cologne.  It is a violation of German sovereignty not to be able to have the Reichswehr in the Rhineland.  What if there should be riots?  Germany would then have to appeal to an outside body for permission to send troops into a part of her own territory.” 

The Army. 

There is strong feeling among all classes that a large militia, or people’s army, should be introduced as soon as possible.  This feeling is shared by Socialists and Nationalists alike.  The Socialist, Herr Sollmann, for example said “I am in favour of a smaller Reichswehr and the creation of a large militia.  The Reichswehr is a danger.  This Pretorian Guard gives twelve years training and after that soldiers get precedence everywhere posts, in offices.  It is also dangerous from a point of view of political power. 

"We must have discipline after the young men leave school. 

"A large army is also a force for national unity.  Before the war 400 men would be receiving training in the Army.  Catholics would share the same hut as Jews; Socialists as Conservatives: and townsfolk with peasants.  They got to know each other.  Germany is divided.  A Nazi will not speak to a Socialist; a Red Front Fighter thinks of the Steel Helmet an enemy.  If only the young people could work together in the army. 

"Today for the German youth the army is a romantic ideal; if the young people were drilled and cursed at; if they had to sweat and have blisters, they would against militarism." 

If those are the views opinion of the Socialist the opinion of Nationalists can be imagined. Professor Schöffler said “The army is organised unemployment.  It will take 500,000 young people from the streets. Moreover, it the state does not play soldiers the parties will.”       

Disarmament. 

            Germany’s attainment of Equality of Status is greeted as a success, but hopes for real disarmament are modified.  I did not get the impression that there was a tremendous  wave of militarism but, of course, I was in Catholic Rhineland demilitarized Cologne , a very bad place to judge. .

Re-armament  

There is a feeling of opposition to rearmament among many tax payers but among steel, leather and uniform firms there is certain support.  There will be financial difficulties, nevertheless, the formation of a large People’s Army  seems inevitable. 

December 20th,1932 
Gareth Jones
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sunday, November 29th 1931. 

Fascist Dictatorship for Germany Now Possibility, Development

Seems Inevitable in Spring.

By Gareth Jones
Specially written for the N. Y. American. A Paper ‘For People Who Think’

In Germany today we are witnessing the revolt of a great nation.  It is, in the eyes of Germany, a revolt against three betrayals - against the betrayal by German politicians, against the betrayal by Versailles and against the betrayal by capitalism. 

A great class has been annihilated, the German middle class.  Their savings swept away by the inflation, educated Germans have been reduced to proletarian conditions.

That is the situation which we must bear in mind in considering the Germany of today and the Germany of tomorrow.  That is the situation which led to the shock of the world when on September 14, 1930, the startling news was flashed around the globe that the National Socialist party of Hitler had gained a triumph of unforeseen magnitude. 

That day set the events moving which led to the present crisis, for the alarm caused capital to flow from Germany and spread mistrust of Germany’s future to London, New York and Paris.  You all will remember the events that followed: terror in France at the Austro-German customs scheme; failure of the Credit Anstalt, threatened collapse of Germany’s finances, just saved by Hoover’s moratorium; delay caused by the French; and that black day, July 13, when there was a run upon German banks; calamitous withdrawal of short-term credits from Germany; spreading of the disease to England and the crash of the pound. 

You will remember the standstill agreement by which short-term credits were to be maintained in Germany for a period of six months.  Germany’s capacity to pay has come to an end and rapid action must be taken to save her. 

Root of Trouble. 

What is at the root of the present trouble?  How far is Germany responsible? 

The roots of the trouble are foremost, the Reparations payments and, secondly, over-borrowing by Germany, without which these Reparation payments could never have been made. 

It is true that Germany borrowed too much - foreign investments exceeded four billion dollars in seven years; but that was a mistake made throughout the world.  Bank credit expanded in the United States so rapidly that it was made easy for everybody in the world to get into debt.  It is false to accuse Germany of financial bad faith, because the German Reichsbank and the German Treasury uttered solemn warnings that too much money was going to German states and municipalities. 

It is true that German towns were reckless in their social expenditures, but of the loans made, the great majority went to industries and public utilities.  To pay reparations the government has imposed upon the German people an almost intolerable burden of taxation and has had to cut down imports to such an extent as to lower still more the standard of living.  The suffering in Germany is no bluff. 

Two Creditors. 

Whoever may bear the responsibility, the fact remains that Germany is faced with two sets of creditors, on the one hand those who claim receipt of reparations amounting to $473,000,000 each year, and on the other, those who hold four billion dollars in private debts:  And the curtain is soon to go up to show this great fight, private debts versus reparations. 

There is only time to mention two things, firstly, that no government can exist in the Germany of the future which is willing to pay reparations. 

The moral is, “First Against Reparations and for the priority of private, debts!”  Secondly, if tariffs throughout the world shut out German goods, she will never be able to pay a part of the private debts. The moral is, “Scrap Tariffs.” 

Whatever happens, however, there is a danger that all is too late.  A Nazi dictatorship in the Spring seems inevitable.  Will this lead to civil war?  Will this lead in the long run to Bolshevism in Germany?  Those are problems we may soon have to face. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Western Mail October 26th 1934

 

Will France Withhold Lorraine Iron Ore

from the Saar?

By Gareth Jones

 

Hermann Röchling is the iron and steel king of the Saar.  He rules over a vast works employing over 4,000 workers, and is the outstanding figure in the campaign to secure the return of the Saar to Germany.  In this he has the support of the large majority of his fellow-Saarlanders.

 

I went to see him in Völklingen, the Llanelly of the Saar territory, and talked to him in his plainly furnished office beneath the shadow of his blast furnaces.

 

“What will be the economic consequences of the return of the Saar to Germany?”  I asked this ironmaster, who had once been sentenced to imprisonment by the French.

 

He replied that if the French made difficulties and refused to send iron ore from Lorraine into the Saar Germany would be able to obtain ore from Donau-Eschlngen, where scientists were making investigations.  “They will not get me on my knees,” he declared.

 

Economic Link

 

He thought, however, it was most unlikely that an economic war would break out between France and Germany when the Saar returned to the homeland.  Lorraine had 1,250,000,000 tons of iron ore lying in the earth and they would certainly deliver the ore to the Saar.

 

The Saar and Lorraine were economically bound together. Lorraine needed Saar coal and the Saar needed Lorraine ore.  The French would be practically obliged to import coal from the Saar, because that was the most suitable coal for their coke-ovens.

 

The Saar would have many economic advantages when it returned to Germany.  Germany already bought over half the steel, half the glass, and half the pottery produced in the Saar.  A gas conduit was to be built to South Germany.  The increase of the electricity supply would be very great indeed.  The Saar would benefit from the improving business conditions so marked in the Germany of Hitler.

 

I brought up the question of German payment for the mines now held by the French.

Security For Mines

 

Herr Röchling stated that Germany could give security for the mines.  The mines had declined enormously In value, he stated.  According to the report of M.Guillaume (Director of the Saar Mines) there had been a loss of 19,075,728 gold marks (£950,000 at par) in 1931 and of 21,813.043 marks (nearly £1,100,000) in 1932.  M. Guillmehad stated:

 

 “If the financial results of the working of the mines do not show a marked improvement in the years 1933 and 1934, one can imagine how the conversations which may begin in 1935 on the question of the re-purchase of the Saar mines will be influenced to the detriment of the interests of the French State.”

 

In conclusion, Herr Röchling stated that Germany would have to spend £5,000,000 to repair and improve the mines after the French departure.

 

 

 

 

********

 

The Contemporary Review

July, 1931

By Gareth Jones

 

POLAND’S FOREIGN RELATIONS.

 

 

POLAND’S policy has been determined by permanent factors which never allow a Foreign Minister to stray far from a certain definite path.  These factors are her geographical position, her history and her economic structure.  Geography teaches Poland to be wary.  Her straddling frontiers run for thousands of miles through the flat European plain.  Not a single mountain bars the way to foreign troops; there is hardly a hillock between Warsaw and the Urals.  To the east and to the west the frontier line winds through villages and farms and towns.  The lesson of history is still more impressive.  The Partition throws a shadow over modern Polish life.  Although it was rectified in 1919, its psychological effect will not be wiped out for many a long day and there remains a lurking fear of a new partition.  Finally, Poland’s economic structure necessitates an outlet to the sea, which raises formidable barriers against friendship with Germany.

 

Two other influences play a great part in Poland’s foreign relations.  These are international finance and the Catholic Church.  One of the main aims of Polish foreign policy is to obtain a loan.  The desire to give the appearance of stability in order to satisfy international financial circles was one of the reasons why Marshal Pilsudski was intent upon gaining a majority in the last elections.  A two-thirds majority in the Sejm is necessary in order to mortgage the country’s securities, which is essential in securing a foreign loan.  Polish diplomats therefore weigh carefully the effect which their actions may have on the Paris Bourse, on the City and on Wall Street.  Poland’s position as the bulwark of Catholicism in Eastern Europe and the hold which the Catholic religion has upon the vast majority of her population make the bond between Warsaw and the Vatican particularly close.  Upon these permanent foundations Poland’s post-war policy has been built.  Poland owes her rebirth to the Treaty of Versailles, which is her Magna Charta, the source of her liberty and sovereignty.  Her frontiers extend far beyond her racial boundaries.  It follows thus that Poland is one of the group of satiated states and that the guiding factor in her foreign policy is the maintenance of the status quo.  The consolidation of peace and the integrity of her present frontiers are two aims which determine her attitude towards the League of Nations and its individual members.  According to the Polish conception, the task of the League should be to organise peaceful collaboration between its members and to stabilise in a judicious manner existing arrangements.  For this reason Poland has enthusiastically supported the Geneva Protocol and has associated herself with M. Briand’s projected European Union.

 

Poland’s interest in the maintenance of the status quo and her search for security determine her two main alliances.  In February 1921 France signed an alliance with Poland which was followed in March of the same year by a defensive alliance between Poland and Rumania.  In 1926, under the Eastern Locarno Pact, France signed a treaty of mutual guarantees with Poland.  The two countries pledged themselves to come to each other’s assistance in the event of German aggression.  There have recently been signs of a growing apprehension in France as to the wisdom of backing Poland too vigorously.  This cooling off in the relations of the two countries has been attributed partly to France’s disapproval of the violence of the election campaign and of the treatment of minorities in Poland, and partly to her fear of being involved in any adventures in the East of Europe.  The close alliance between Poland and her southern neighbour, Rumania, which was renewed and enlarged in 1926, was again renewed in January 1931.  In the event of unprovoked aggression each country undertakes to give the other immediate assistance.

 

Whereas Poland’s southern frontiers are guaranteed by the alliance with Rumania, her attempts to stabilise her northern and north-eastern frontiers and to achieve security by forming a Baltic bloc have been hindered by the continued dispute with Lithuania.  Poland has closely collaborated with Esthonia, and the exchange of visits between the Esthonian Chief of State and the President of the Polish Republic in 1930 showed the cordial friendship existing between the two countries.  The dreams of a Baltic alliance uniting Poland, Esthonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have, however, never been realised.  Political relations with Latvia have been less warm than with Esthonia, and the Polish-Lithuanian quarrel over Vilna, which is still an obstacle to communications across the frontier, shows little sign of settlement.  Recent events have increased the anxiety for security which Poland’s geographical position and her past inspire in her citizens.  The rush of extreme nationalism in Germany, the Nazi cry for a strong conscript Army and the revolt of the German youth against Versailles, have made the Poles guard their security more tenaciously than ever.  No Pole, with the threats of Herr Treviranus still ringing in his ears, can regard the Kellogg Pact as the guardian angel of his peace.  The trade war which began in 1925 has also embittered Poland’s relations with Germany.

 

On her western frontier, therefore, Poland feels no security.  Neither have her relations with Soviet Russia inspired her with great faith in her eastern neighbour, in spite of the signing of the Litvinov Protocol (1929) for the Renunciation of War.  Poland has a propaganda value to the Communist Party. Soviet organs and theatres never cease vilifying the Poles in caricatures and plays, in order to provide an outlet for popular dissatisfaction and to unite the peoples of the Union in the face of the so-called menace of intervention from Poland.  It is the belief in Moscow that war between the capitalist states and Communist Russia is inevitable and that Poland is destined to be the catspaw of France, America and Britain.  In the Soviet Union propaganda banners blare out the slogans “The Imperialists of the West are preparing war on Soviet Russia.”  Great stress is laid on the war industry and everything is done to inculcate a military spirit into the masses.  The Soviet child is taught that Bessarabia is Soviet territory temporarily in the possession of Rumania and that it was snatched away from the socialist fatherland by the capitalists. Poland cannot remain unperturbed by these developments in Russia, especially since most Poles remember that ten years ago the Soviet troops came within sight of Warsaw.  Nevertheless, there is more fear of Germany than of Russia in Poland.

 

The unsatisfactory relations with both Germany and Russia do not lead Poland to envisage disarmament proposals with enthusiasm.  It is true that many observers in Warsaw consider that the present Soviet Union is weak and would never wage war, and that only a Bolshevik Russia would allow Poland to retain territories with a non-Polish population.  Nevertheless the existence of two hostile neighbours makes Poland insist on there being no reduction of armaments which might menace by one jot national security.  This condition of security could, in the Polish view, be best realised by the creation of an organisation of peace based on three principles - arbitration, mutual assistance, and finally disarmament such as was provided by the Geneva protocol.  Present guarantees of security are not considered sufficient to permit Poland to make any considerable reduction in her armed forces.  She will thus not be able to play a helpful part in the Disarmament Conference of 1932.  Poland’s attitude, which can well be understood in view of her geographical situation and of Germany’s growing claims for revision of the frontiers, may be a serious stumbling-block in that critical assembly.

 

The thirties of this century have heralded in the campaign for the revision of the Treaty of Versailles.  Last August a speech was made by Herr Treviranus, German Minister for Occupied Territories, in which he uttered the veiled threat that “the future of our Polish neighbours can only be secured if Germany and Poland are not kept in a state of unrest as a result of the unjust demarcation of frontiers.”  This seriously troubled the Polish nation.  The Poles saw that the areas which Germany claimed corresponded almost exactly with territory lost in the First and Second Partitions.  That did not augur well for the future and the coincidence made a deep impression upon the Polish people, who still tend to be superstitious; revision strikes the Pole as the first step towards a new partition, as the beginning of the end.  The possession of the Polish Corridor is far more a matter of life and death to Poland than it is to Germany.  One half of Poland’s trade goes through Gdynia and Danzig.  To lose the Corridor would mean the loss of political, economic and military independence.  The refusal of the dockworkers in Danzig to unload munitions destined for the Polish Army when it was repelling the Bolshevik attack in 1921 drew attention to Poland’s weakness in the Baltic, should she have no outlet to the sea under her own control.  The eternal fear of a German-Russian Alliance makes the Poles cling more tenaciously than ever to the Corridor.  “If Germany regains her pre-war territory,” said a politician in Warsaw, “ then she will be able to join with Russia through Lithuania and we will be like a nut in a nutcracker, surrounded on almost all sides by hostile neighbours.  We are willing to do anything to have good relations with Germany except commit suicide.”

 

There is complete unity in Poland on the question of her frontiers.  Whenever Revision is mentioned, Socialists, National-Democrats, followers of Korfanty, followers of Pilsudski, all drop their differences and form a united national front.  In Germany the unity of opinion that Germany must change her eastern frontiers is equally striking.  No one demands, however, that the entire pre-war territory be returned.  Responsible German circles have abandoned their claim to Posen and to the surrounding district as irrevocably as they have to Alsace-Lorraine.  Upon the Polish Corridor and Upper Silesia, however, even moderate leaders will hear of no compromise.  The threat to the life of Danzig caused by the creation within a few miles of the new cheap port, Gdynia, fostered by State aid, and the large measure of Polish control over this old and proud German city, gall the Reich and make compromise still more difficult.  The points of view of the two neighbours seem absolutely irreconcilable and the conviction is spreading that the frontiers can only be revised by war.  The Germans invoke Article 19 of the Covenant of the League of Nations as a method by which they can bring about Revision, namely: “The Assembly may from time to time advise the reconsideration by Members of the League of treaties which have become inapplicable.”  The Poles retort that the League has a prior duty to guarantee their frontiers and quote Article 10: “The Members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all Members of the League.”Revision of the frontiers by Article 19 seems out of the question.  Any decision by the Assembly would need unanimity, and even a Conference or a discussion upon Revision would probably be rendered impossible by the refusal of the satiated state to take part in it.

 

Meanwhile, Germany’s internal situation and the distress of her eastern provinces force the Wilhelmstrasse to press their claims for Revision.  It is difficult to see by what practical peaceful method they wish to gain this object.  It is probable that at the back of the German’s mind is the hope that one day Poland will get into difficulties on her eastern frontiers.  In such an event, some Germans state, the price for the Reich’s neutrality would be the return of the Corridor and of Danzig.  The present Revision campaign is to prepare the public opinion of the world for this possible course of action.  In the meantime extreme Nationalist feeling is getting red-hot on each side of the frontier.  Revision propaganda is one of the factors which tend to damage Polish credit and to shake the belief in Poland’s stability as a state.  Any attempt at changing the frontiers at the present moment would cause chaos in Eastern Europe into which France and Rumania would inevitably be drawn.  The Poles would fight to a man rather than yield one inch of land.  At the same time Germany will never be reconciled to her present frontiers.  Will that throw her into closer relations with Russia and Italy?  The stabilisation of the status quo contains elements of future strife, because it will make more clear-cut than ever the division of Europe into two camps, one seeking to revise the Treaty of Versailles and the other aiming at the crystallisation of the present frontiers.  Revision is still more dangerous.  The future is dark and can only be brightened by economic co-operation between the two countries and by such steps as the recent ratification by the Sejm of the German-Polish Commercial Treaty and the Liquidation Agreement.

 

The treatment of minorities in Poland adds fuel to the Revision agitation.  The oppression of minorities reached its height during the recent election campaign in November 1930 and was thus closely connected with the present régime in Poland.  Not only the non-Poles but all opponents of the Pilsudski Government have been treated with the utmost rigour and brutality.  Since the coup d’etat of May 1926 Poland has been governed by a hooded dictatorship and Pilsudski has been the real force behind the scenes.  His Government, formed mainly of military men, rests not on any philosophical foundation or practical programme but on the appeal which this historical figure makes to the Army and to a section of the people.  “Brest-Litovsk” and the election campaign have aroused protests from all those who look towards the West for their political ideals.  “Brest-Litovsk” has become a household word in Poland, for it was in the military fortress of that town that some of the leading deputies were imprisoned and submitted to physical and mental torture.  They included Liebermann, the distinguished Socialist leader, Korfanty, the national hero of the Silesian Insurrections of 1921, and Witos, the peasant leader and former prime minister.  The outburst of moral indignation which the revelations of the treatment of the prisoners caused shows how strong liberal and humanitarian feelings are in Poland.  The Brest-Litovsk imprisonment, however, had no direct effect upon the minorities.  It was the election campaign which caused the minority question to flare up.  Marshal Pilsudski was determined to have a working majority in the Sejm behind his Government, in order to introduce by legal means a new constitution which would strengthen the hands of the President and increase the stability and authority of government.  There is no doubt that the election was an absolute sham.  All the machinery of the administration worked at full speed to ensure the victory of the Government supporters.  Candidates were disqualified and threats and illegal practices were not scorned.  The election has given the Government a subservient bloc in the Sejm which will carry out its orders and vote as it is told.

 

The election campaign brought matters to a head in those parts of Poland inhabited by Germans and Ukrainians.  For many years a policy of Polonisation has been hitting the Germans hard.  German schools have often been closed and parents who send their children to these schools are liable to lose their posts or be submitted to administrative chicanery.  German-speaking people are placed under a disadvantage in the use of their language.  By the Agrarian Reform the Polish authorities have been able to Polonise the former German districts and to divide the estates of German landowners among Polish peasants.  Moreover, Germans are submitted to petty persecution from small officials and from police methods.  They suffer from a feeling of legal insecurity and have not that protection of their liberty which is accorded them by the Geneva Convention.  This Convention lapses in 1937.  During the election campaign party lists in some places were confiscated and there were thus no candidates.  In many towns and villages each voter had to show openly for which party he was voting.  An ex-Servicemen’s organisation called the “Insurgents” numbering 40,000 fought vigorously for the Pilsudski Bloc and was guilty of many violent acts.  One of their election slogans was “Not a single deputy of the national minority shall enter Parliament.”  The whole attitude of this nationalist organisation was calculated to embitter the feelings against the Germans. The “Insurgents were presided over by none other than the Woievode himself, Dr. Grazinski.  The efforts to secure a victory for the Government Bloc at all costs and the methods used by the “Insurgents “ led to a considerable fall in the German vote.

 

In January the League Council considered a petition from the German Volksbund and notes from the German Government on the incidents in Polish Upper Silesia.  It was a test of the sincerity and justice of the League of Nations in its handling of minority problems.  If the League had failed, all Germany would have been justified in calling it, as it is often called in Germany, a “joint-stock company for the preservation of the booty won in the War.”  The League Council was pre-eminently successful in dealing with the case.  It concluded that there had been in numerous cases an infringement of Articles 75 and 83 of the Geneva Convention.  It asked the Polish Government to furnish before May a detailed statement of the results of the inquiries into these different cases.  It expressed the hope that the Polish Government would abolish all special links existing between the authorities and such associations as the “ Insurgents.”  The decision of the Council was a definite rebuke to the Polish Government, but satisfaction was expressed in Warsaw that no international commission of inquiry was to be set up, that there was no demand for the resignation of any person and that no special guarantees for the future were to be introduced. Many of the inquiries recommended by the League Council had already been undertaken by the Polish authorities.  There is every sign that the Warsaw Government is carrying out the recommendations in a generous way.  If it does so, it will be able to count upon the sympathetic support of many states such as Great Britain, which believe that the liberal treatment of minorities is essential for the establishment of peace in Europe.

 

The Manchester Guardian has done a great service in calling the attention of the world to the treatment of the Ukrainians.  It omitted, however, to give sufficient space to the provocations which led to the Polish pacification.  During centuries the hatred between Ukrainian and Pole has flared up from time to time.  Gogol in his Tarass Bulba describes vividly the wars between the Cossacks in the Ukraine and the Catholic Poles.  The antagonism is not only that between two nations, it is also the jealousy of one social class for another.  In Eastern Galicia the Pole has been the conqueror, the landowner, the administrator, and the Ukrainian peasant has always looked upon him as the oppressor; the peasant wants more land and the land is in the possession of the Poles.  Added to these sources of grievance are the clashes and jealousies of the Catholics and the Uniates.  And so the movement for Independence flourishes. In September, 1930, after a series of fires, caused according to some by Ukrainian revolutionaries and according to others by peasants anxious to receive insurance money, a pacification began.  Troops were sent to villages in Eastern Galicia.  Peasants were flayed; there were burnings and searchings, and deeds of cruelty and brutality were committed.  The oppression of the Ukrainians takes on a more serious aspect when we remember that in that remote corner is the frontier line between Soviet Russia and the rest of Europe.  The five to seven million Ukrainians in Poland have twenty-five to thirty million fellow-countrymen across the border.  On the Soviet side of the frontier, although any anti-Communist independence movement is instantly crushed, every effort is made to encourage the Ukrainian language, literature, schools and art.  The Soviet Press knows how to describe in lurid terms the fate of the oppressed peasants in Poland.  A dissatisfied Ukraine smarting under the memory of the Polish pacification can be no source of strength to Poland.  The recent events have put more barriers than ever in the way of those who support the policy once advocated by Marshal Pilsudski of a Polish-Ukrainian-Lithuanian Federation.  To describe the oppression of the minorities and to go no further does not give a true picture of the situation.  There have been serious provocations.  In the Ukraine the U.M.O., or the Ukrainian Military Organisation, is working by illegal means for independence.  It is accused of receiving funds from Berlin.  Last autumn it started on a campaign which led to the burning of Polish cottages and barns.  The final aim of the other main Ukrainian party, the U.N.D.O., is also an independent Ukrainian national state.

 

The provocation in the German areas was the German propaganda for revision which excited the Polish population.  Another factor which has made conciliation difficult is the psychological attitude of the German towards the Pole.  Until Germany realises that Poland is a nation which has come to stay and until the Germans modify their attitude of cultural superiority, which is so insulting to a sensitive self-conscious people like the Poles, an understanding will be difficult to reach.

 

It is a pleasure to turn from the gloom of Poland’s relations with Russia and Germany to the far brighter prospects of her relations with the agricultural states of Eastern Europe.  The depression among the agrarian countries has speeded up co-operation between them.  As a result largely of Polish initiative a series of conferences was held last year of which the most important were those of Bucharest and Warsaw.  Delegates from Rumania and Yugoslavia rubbed shoulders with their former enemies, Hungary and Bulgaria; Latvia and Esthonia were also present.  The recommendations of the Warsaw Conference included concerted-selling organisations and export institutions in each country. The questions which caused the greatest difficulty to this agrarian bloc were agricultural credits and the disposal of surplus grain stocks.  Agricultural credits have been discussed this year by the League of Nations Financial Committee of grain experts, and surplus grain stocks have been the subject of conferences held under the auspices of the European Commission.  It is significant that agricultural countries stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea should have come together and this has been to no small degree facilitated by the wise and far-sighted efforts of the Polish Government.

 

The Polish Republic is now in its second decade.  Certain events in the storm and stress of last year have not been calculated to strengthen the position of its friends abroad.  The treatment of minorities has been a valuable weapon in the hands of those who wish to change Poland’s frontiers.  The internal methods of the régime have disturbed many of the keenest supporters of Poland.  A recurrence of Brest-Litovsk or of the pacification in the Ukraine or of the mishandling of Germans in Upper Silesia would deal a serious blow to her prestige.  A policy of tolerance towards minorities and towards political opponents would be a powerful argument against Revision, and would restore the confidence of all those millions who rejoice in Poland’s rebirth and who look to her as a Western nation with a vital part to play in the future of Europe.

 

 

 

 

 *******

 

The Western Mail March 22nd 1932

 

 MUSSOLINI HAS SPOKEN

 

 HOW HE HAS TRANSFORMED ITALY. 

By GARETH JONES

 

Mussolini has spoken.  One word from him and Cabinet Ministers fall like ninepins.  This week he has dismissed five of the most outstanding men in the Italian Cabinet, and the unexpectedness of the decision can be judged from the fact that, although I was in Rome within the last fortnight, not a single foreign observer even suspected that such a great change was to take place.

 

This action typical of the Italy of today, which is subjected to discipline and obedience by the Duce.  In each branch of Italian life Mussolini has acted with vigour and ruthlessness.

 

Take railways.  In the beginning of this month I crossed the French-Italian frontier near the Mont Cenis Pass and travelled through Turin to Genoa and Rome.  Every inch of the railway track on this journey was electrified, for Mussolini is now carrying out a great programme of railway building.

 

Effect on Welsh Miners

 

Through this electrification of the railways Mussolini has adversely affected the livelihood of many South Wales miners, tippers, and sailors, for the Italian State Railways become less dependent on imported coal.

 

Looking out of the train between the frontier and Rome, one could see that every patch of land was cultivated and that up to the vary fringe of the mountains the peasants had planted wheat or vegetables.  Mussolini is fighting fox the full use of Italian soil, against the crowding of the masses in the great cities.  A typical expression of his desire to foster agriculture is the following Fascist quotation: “The dark and mysterious earth yields other gifts than harvests: it gives birth to renunciation, sell-sacrifice, and industry, the loftiest and noblest expressions of the human spirit; Fascism seeks and finds in the fields the purest and freshest spiritual reserves of the nation, and gathers and diffuses these forces to revive new energy and poetry in the soul of the people.”

 

His “Liberal “Policy.

 

Mussolini is building roads, bridges, canals, and viaducts in many parts of Italy.  He aims at a re-building of his native country, and it is remarkable that his programme follows the lines laid down by the Liberal party in Great Britain.  What irony that the enemy of Democracy should be carrying out the policy advocated by British Liberals!

 

This programme is being carried out by Mussolini in the same spirit in which he has dismissed his Ministers, and it reveals his impetuous, energetic nature.  He will brook no rivals.  Grandi, the Foreign Minister, who had aroused the admiration of diplomats in all continents, must now go.  Mosconi, the Minister of Finance, is dismissed, and his place is taken by Signor Guido Jung, an energetic, much traveled man, who received me in Rome a fortnight ago.  Little did I think that this keen, grey-haired man who faced me would within fourteen days be Finance Minister of Italy.

 

The Searchlights.

 

Mussolini has through his Dictatorial methods aroused great opposition.  One evening a German foreign correspondent and I, having dined together near the Italian Foreign Office, walked out of the restaurant, looked up, and saw searchlights flashing across the sky. “Do you know what that is?” asked the journalist.

 

“Those searchlights are to prevent anti-Fascist aeroplanes, coming from France and manned by Italian exiles, from dropping a bomb on the Palazzo Venezia, or from dropping pamphlets against Mussolini on the streets of Rome.” Communism also is growing in the North of Italy.

 

 

Copyright reserved 2009