May 21.
Smuesta deserves to be called the curse of Europe. The theft of it from Maria Theresa by Frederick the Great, a crime which was aggravated by the blackest treachery, caused the Seven Years' War. To-day it has almost imperilled, and has certainly brought grave friction into, the most valuable Alliance of all time. As an example of the fatuousness of attempting to dispose in a few days by democratic means of a grievance that has been festering for generations it could hardly be equalled, Under the Treaty of Versailles the future of Upper Silesia was to be decided by plebiscite. The voting took place on March 20 and appears to have been conducted in the manner least calculated to give a trustworthy result. We read of special trainloads of Germans being rushed in to pose just for the day as permanent residents, of nuns, even, being mobilized to cast a vote for the Fatherland and its retention of the rich coal mines. Nor do the Poles appear to have been backward in similar manceuvres. At least we read that Korfanty (of whom more presently) who had the organizing of the plebiscite on the Polish side, was removed from his post by the Allied Commissioners the day before the voting.
The first news of the plebiscite were overwhelmingly in favour of Germany and Berlin was festooned with flags. But later intelligence put a different complexion on things and now Warsaw began to hoist her bunting. To this day it is difficult to tell exactly what hae occurred. A
French wireless message of March 26 said that out. of the twenty-one districts which constitute Upper Silesia Germany obtained a majority in the nine forming the western part and contiguous to Germany, while Poland obtained 381,000 votes as against Germany's 361,000 in the twelve eastern districts (a large number of the German voters were said to be residents for the day only), these including the coal mines, which have an annual output of 41,000,000 tons. But the division does not appear to have been quite so clear-cut as this would imply. In. actual fact one gathers that Germav and Polish majorities were dotted here and there like spots on @ leopard's skin. For practical guidance the plebiscite was worthless, as might have been foreseen from the outset, in view of the richness of the prize, the unreckoned movement of the population during the best part of two hundred years and the absolute impossibility of preventing the methods which were flagrantly adopted by both sides to secure a majority. The responsibility was thrown back upon the Supreme Council. It is hardly surprising that the Poles should have a mean opinion of that body and should mistrust the probable outcome of its elephantine contortions. Their long experience of German methods has taught them the wisdom of the maxim that possession is nine points of the law and on May 5 Korfanty, the discharged organizer of the plebiscite, raised the flag of revolt, marched into Upper Silesia and occupied the whole of the plebiscite area up to the Oder. The situation was complicated by the fact that the Allies were at the time awaiting Germany's reply to their ultimatum on the reparations issue. There is said to be no doubt that the Polish Government connived at Korfanty's movement, and it also appears that Germany immediately set to work to prepare an armed expedition against Kor-
Tarts 12 rer ANNUM. fanty's Poles. On May 14, Germany having in the meantime submitted to the Allies' terms, Mr. Lloyd George made his famous speech in the House of Commons in which he said that the Supreme Council could not accept dictation from Korfanty, that he must be suppressed and that if necessary Germany, must be allowed a free hand to suppress him. It was this last statement which roused such instant dismay and wrath in France.
On ethical grounds it is difficult to find fault with Mr. Lloyd George's general attitude. But ethics and human facts do not always agree as they should. It has to be confessed that there are people in England who. have never made sufficient allowance for the French feeling towards Germany, which indeed the sheltered circumstances of their own lives have made them incapable of appreciating properly. Such people are not popular with their fellow-countrymen and they are assuredly not a majority. But being very noisy, they are able in these democratic days to exert an influence beyond their real importance. France was bitterly disappointed over the results of the Peace Treaty as she had cause to be. It cannot but have occurred to her that a strong Poland would prove a useful thorn in Germany's side: and now she has seen, not only demur among her allies to, her plan for the allocation of Upper Silesia, but an open declaration by the British Prime Minister that Germany, who has never yet been adequately disarmed, should be allowed to organize an army to beat the Poles into subjection. And to what magnitude, says France, might not that German army ultimately swell? There is this final complication. Mr. Lloyd George does speak in obedience to the little crowd of peevish shouters mentioned above. But he does to some extent voice the growing opinion in Great Britain that, if peace is really to come back to Europe, we must accept the word
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.