The draft resolution enclosed with my letter No. 5585 of December 5,9 provides for an exception to this rule only as far as the Russian Armies are concerned, their military situation being exceptionally serious and their needs urgent. The military situation of Finland does not seem to me to justify such an exception. If the Supreme Council shares this view of the matter, I shall advise Colonel Etievant of this decision. By order of the Major General: [Enclosure] Telegram HELSINGFORS, December 1, 1919. At 19:50. Representative of Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs informs that Engleberg, director munition factory Ruhimaki, Finland, left for Germany October 4 to place order for 25 million Russian cartridges. He is supposed to have placed this order between October 10th and 15, probably with the house of Burtmuller of Greusen-inHarz, which had offered 100 million cartridges, setting forth the need of Finland to obtain without delay these cartridges, and the political situation of the German Government which makes it impossible to conclude such contracts openly. Representative asks Minister of Finances and me to take the necessary steps that the factory of Ruhimaki may receive the munitions in question. I have replied I am studying matter. These contracts seem to me to be contrary to the spirit of the Treaty of Peace. I would ask you to let me have your instructions. ⚫ Supra. Paris Peace Conf. 180.03501/110 HD-110 Notes of a Meeting of the Heads of Delegations of the Five Great Powers Held in M. Pichon's Room, Quai d'Orsay, Paris, on Tuesday, December 9, 1919, at 10:30 a. m. The following were also present for items in which they were concerned: AMERICA, UNITED STATES OF Rear-Admiral McCully Mr. Ellis L. Dresel Dr. J. B. Scott Dr. Bowman Mr. A. W. Dulles Capt. Madison, U. S. N. Lt. Cdt. Koehler, U. S. N. Colonel J. A. Logan BRITISH EMPIRE Capt. Fuller Capt. MacNamara Cdt. Dunne Gen. Sackville-West Gen. Mance M. Leeper M. Carr Sir J. Bradbury FRANCE M. Leygues M. Cambon M. Henry Simon Gen. Le Rond M. Laroche Cdt. Levavasseur M. Kammerer M. Fromageot ITALY M. Bertolini Col. Castoldi M. Vannutelli-Rey Cmdt. Ingianni M. Antonucci JAPAN M. Shigemitsu M. Nagaoka 1. (The Council had before it a modified text dated December 9th [8th] of the British proposal of November 14th /See Appendix "A”/, as well as draft orders for the Inter Allied Naval Commission dated December 9th /See Appendix "B"/). Distribution of M. LEYGUES stated that the Naval Experts had asked the Council to define various resolutions taken by the Conference at its last meetings. Paragraph 1 of the resolution of November 29th (H. D. 102, Minute 1)1 should have the following words added thereto: "Under the superintendence of the Inter-Allied Naval Commission". The following paragraph should be substituted for paragraph 2 of the resolution of December 2d (H. D. 104, Minute 6 [9]):2 "that the submarines already distributed to the Principal Allied and Associated Powers for propaganda purposes should not be made the subject of further attribution and should be allowed to remain in charge of those Powers now holding them but that those submarines should be demolished by the said Powers in the same way as the other submarines, under the supervision of the Inter-Allied Naval Commission." M. MATSUI said that the new text did not correspond exactly to the proposal he had made. He would, however, if all the Powers agreed to adopt the same, recommend its acceptance by his Government. For the time being he could only accept it whilst making that reservation. M. LEYGUES said that in the first paragraph of the resolution of December 4th (H. D. 106, Minute 2) it would be advisable to delete the last part of the sentence: "such ships ... for police work". Belgium might therefore use in any way she saw fit the ships in question. Paragraph 2 of the same resolution should be modified as follows: "to allocate a certain number of small enemy warships, chosen. from amongst those which would otherwise be broken up by the Allied and Associated Powers, to Poland and to Yugo-Slavia, those vessels to be used for police purposes only." SIR EYRE CROWE asked whether it would not be advisable to give the same privilege to Portugal which had suffered losses during the war. Portugal, as a matter of fact, had already made repeated efforts to that effect. M. LEYGUES said that Portugal, like Greece and Roumania, had already received a warship in compensation of her losses at sea. SIR EYRE CROWE said that Portugal had suffered losses at sea, which was not the case with Roumania. It therefore had good reason to ask for more. M. LEYGUES said that if they granted the request of Portugal, Greece and Roumania would also ask for something, and it would be difficult not to give them satisfaction. MR. POLK asked whether a share could not be allocated to Brazil. M. DE MARTINO said that 22 Powers had asked for the attribution of warships. M. LEYGUES said it was understood that those ships should be employed for the policing of the coast and that they should be delivered without armament. On the other hand some modifications had been made to the British proposal of November 14th which the Council had accepted in principle on November 29th." The British note proposed a distribution of the proceeds of the sale of materiel accruing from the breaking up of enemy warships. It was now agreed that the materiel itself should be distributed. On the other hand, new time limits had been accepted for the breaking up of surface warships allocated for propaganda purposes. The time limit for the breaking up had been lengthened to 5 years, but at the end of 18 months those ships should already be out of commission. The naval experts had decided upon 6 units as the number of ships to be allocated to Poland and Yugo-Slavia for naval policing; that figure was perhaps too small. SIR EYRE CROWE said that the proposal provided that the allocation should be open to reconsideration by the Powers: was it at that time necessary to fix final figures. M. CLEMENCEAU said that it would be too late to do so once these ships were broken up. A decision should be taken immediately. M. LEYGUES said that he proposed to allocate 12 small vessels to Yugo-Slavia and 6 to Poland. Brazil, Portugal, Greece and Roumania would also receive 6 vessels. It was decided: (1) to accept the British proposal modified as contained in Appendix "A", it being understood that the American reservations concerning paragraph 2 thereof remains; and to adopt Appendix "B" proposal; (2) that paragraph one of the resolution of November 29, 1919 (H. D. 102, Minute 1) should be completed as follows: "Under the superintendence of the Interallied Naval Commission;" and Paragraph 2 should be modified as follows: "That every Power receiving enemy warships to be sunk or broken up should sink them or dismantle them within a period of 18 months; and every such Power should complete the breaking up of such ships within a period of 5 years after their arrival in one of its home ports"; (3) that paragraph 2 of the resolution of December 2nd (H. D. 104, Minute 6 [9]) should be modified as follows: "with the reservation of Mr. Matsui's acceptance; "That the submarines already distributed to the Principal Allied and Associated Powers for propaganda purposes should not be made the subject of further attribution, but should be allowed to remain in charge of those Powers now holding them. But that these submarines should be demolished by the said Powers in the same way as the other submarines, under the supervision of the Inter-Allied Naval Commission." (4) that paragraph one of the resolutions of December 4, 1919 (H. D. 106, Minute 2) be modified as follows: "To authorize Belgium to keep the small enemy warships which are in her ports." (5) that paragraph 2 of the same resolution should read as follows: "To allocate a certain number of enemy warships, chosen from amongst those which would otherwise be broken up by the Allied and Associated Powers, to certain other Powers; those vessels to be used for police purposes only;" that allocation should be made as follows: Poland .. 6 enemy torpedo boats Serb-Croat-Slovene State . . . 12 enemy torpedo boats. "The following States: Brazil, Greece, Portugal, Roumania should, if they should so desire, receive 6 similar enemy torpedo boats each;" that no other enemy warship be allocated to another State with the exception of those above mentioned and those figuring in Appendices "A" and "B". 2. M. BERTHELOT said that from the telegrams they had received from Bucharest, M. Vaida Voevod had given instructions to the Rou |