THE FRENCH CLAIM.
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—I am not infrequently amazed at the lack of logic, the prejudice and the evident pull, pris of some of the con- tributors to your letter department, and more especially when the situation and the interests of France are discussed. " Biitannicus " and Mr. M. E. Hubbard (I presume the writer to be masculine), in your number of September 8th, have renewed my amazement. It is true that both of them reflect in some degree your own views regarding France and Germany and Great Britain in the Reparations controversy, but without the sophistical fluency of your potent and facile pen.
" Britannicus " holds that France is far richer and more powerful commercially and industrially than before the War. If this were really so, it would be entirely due to her own splendid efforts, and not at all to any aid or even encouragement that she may have received from other nations. But the sole fact that " Britannicus " cites in corroboration is the increase of pig-iron production from 5,000,000 to 11,000,000 tons, " thanks to her having got, with our assistance, Alsace-Lorraine." How gracious is that final phrase ! Is it not thanks to the co-operation of the French that Great Britain is not to-day under the thumb of the august German Imperator and the German grabbers of trade and industrial advantages ? But if the increase of pig-iron production is due to France's recovery of Alsace- Lorraine, does that necessarily add anything to the wealth of Alsace-Lorraine itself ; and, if it does not, how does it add to the per capita wealth of France as a whole ? The only way to judge safely of the wealth of a country is to inform one's self of the per capita ratio of that wealth. Of course, Alsace- Lorraine represents an addition to the taxable property which is a partial basis of the French Government's revenues. But, in probably equal proportion, it represents also an addition to the governmental expenses.
" Britannicus " reveals his disdain of hard facts by his characterization of the devastated territory of France as merely a " strip " and a " corner," and at the same time he betrays his utter lack of sympathy for a stricken people. Does he really know what he is talking about ? Does he dispute the fact that this devastation, with the attendant horrors of pillage and massacre and outrage, is to the charge of the Government and nation which perpetrated it ? If he does, he stands convicted of inhuman callousness and of contempt for the plainest principles of justice.
Again, as to renewal of the ruined factories and mines. Would " Britannicus " desire that they should be restored according to mechanical standards which have now been largely superseded ? Naturally, that would be more favour- able to the German greed of industrial and commercial dominance, to which a certain selfish group of Anglo-Cosmo- politan financiers and speculators, and those Britons who are blind to their own interests as well as to those of humanity, are intent upon paying tribute. But it is highly probable that restoration of the industrial plants as nearly as possible in the same state as that in which they were when the Germans set fire to them or bombed them and deliberately wrecked both machinery and buildings would cost much more at this time than their reconstitution according to more modern methods, for the simple reason that up-to-date mechanical appliances are more easily available. Furthermore, part of the apparent increase of cost is more nominal than real,
since the purchasing power of money, which in the long run, as to actual value, is self-compensating, has greatly lessened since the Armistice. If there are, in some instances, " profiteering prices," who, I pray you, is primarily responsible for them ? War, you will say ; but Germany is responsible for the War, in spite of all knowingly false asseverations to the contrary. If " there is profiteering always in such cases," then it might seem that the evil can never in such cases be wholly prevented. Then, who is to suffer from this unpre- ventable profiteering ? Is it the party that was the victim of the aggression or the aggressor ? But all this is aside from the Versailles agreement. Must one exclaim in this connexion in imitation of Maitre Francois Villon : " Where are the scraps of paper of yester-year ? "
" Britannicus " makes requisition again of that banal argument of the suffering of Great Britain through unemploy- ment. But it has been shown that unemployment was as serious in England before the War as it is now. And who is responsible for the absurd policy of " unemployment doles " —otherwise, premiums upon non-employment ?
Mr. Hubbard is a resident of France and so am I, and that for many years past. The rise in the cost of living in this country has no relation whatever to the occupation of the Ruhr, except in the very slight extent to which it may be affected by a relatively small increase of taxation due to that fact. The real causes of the dearness of living are, as in most other countries, (1) increased cost of production, due chiefly to the shortened hours and the exaggerated pay of labour ; (2) the housing congestion, due to the increased demand for premises by speculators in business and finance and to the fact that millions of working men, prompted by their increase of pay, have rented or bought abodes of a much larger and much better sort than they formerly occupied ; also that a vast number of farmers who enriched themselves during the War have flocked to the cities to live at their ease ; (3) Government obstacles to importation ; and (4) monetary inflation. For, as remarked • in reference to reparations, a considerable part- of the increase in living costs is due to the lessened purchasing power of money.
The Spectator, in my opinion, and I regret to have to say it in all frankness, has been on the wrong side of the Repara- tions controversy, both from the standpoint of right and justice and from that of British economic interests. If Germany does not pay the piper, Britain, as well as France and the other wartime Allies, will have to pay. And even if Germany does pay the piper, it will not be many years before she will cut into British industry and trade much more seriously even than she did before the War. Already she is giving a foretaste of her ability in this direction by the astonishingly rapid rebuilding of her merchant marine.
Why do you jump so eagerly to the conclusion that Dr. Stresemann is going to do the right thing ? Why not just wait a little and see.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Brie-Comte-Robert, France. R. BRIGGS DAVENPORT, Author of The Genesis of the Great War.
Previous page
