the Agent for Reparation Payments through the receiving offices immediately on receipt. The amounts required to meet the reparation charges in the budget will be retained and the balances periodically released to the German Government (p. 62). Any defaults in payments for the service of the railway bonds or industrial debentures may be deducted from the assigned revenues (pp. 106 and 109). These revenues will be supervised by a commissioner to be appointed by the Reparation Commission who may be selected from a neutral country, and who will be assisted by an advisory committee on which each of the interested Allied countries will be represented. The general functions of the commissioner will be to ascertain that all assigned revenues are properly obtained from the public and flow through the control administration (pp. 62–63).

If the economic precautions against default are distasteful to Germany, we have the assurance of General Dawes in his covering letter to the Reparation Commission that:

The thorough effectiveness of these safeguards should not embarrass the normal economic functioning of Germany, and is of fundamental importance to her creditors and to Germany.

Great care has been taken in fixing conditions of supervision over Germany's internal organization so as to impose the minimum of interference consistent with proper protection. This general plan, fair and reasonable in its nature, if accepted, leads to an ultimate and lasting peace. The rejection of these proposals by the German Government means the deliberate choice of a continuance of economic demoralization, eventually involving her people in hopeless misery (p. 3).

The foregoing summary of such an extensive and complicated subject naturally omits many detailed provisions necessary to complete and round out the plan in its entirety; but it will give a general idea of the solution of the reparations problem which General Dawes said in his covering letter to the Reparation Commission "if accepted, will lead to an ultimate and lasting peace."

The plan is not considered to be in the nature of a political

compromise, for General Dawes states in his letter to the Reparation Commission: "In speaking of my colleagues and as bearing upon the value of this report, I feel that I should make it known to your Commission and to the world, that their governments have in no case limited their complete independence of judgment and action, either before or after their appointment by you. Limited only by the powers granted by your Commission, each has performed his arduous and responsible work as a free agent. These men, searching for truth and advice thereon, were answerable only to conscience" (p. 4).

In this respect the plan corresponds to the suggestion made by Secretary of State Hughes in his speech at New Haven, Connecticut, on December 29, 1922, that "the first condition of a satisfactory settlement is that the question [of German reparations] should be taken out of politics. If statesmen cannot agree why should they not invite men of the highest authority in finance in their respective countries-men of such prestige, experience and honor that their agreement upon the amount to be paid, and upon a financial plan for working out the payments, would be accepted throughout the world as the most authoritative expression obtainable? Governments need not bind themselves in advance to accept the recommendations, but they can at least make possible such an inquiry with their approval and free the men who may represent their country in such a commission from any responsibility to foreign offices and from any duty to obey political instructions. In other words, they may invite an answer to this difficult and pressing question from men of such standing and in such circumstances of freedom as will insure a reply prompted only by knowledge and conscience.""

On April 11, 1924, the Reparation Commission decided that the experts' reports "offer a practical basis for the rapid solution of the reparations problem," but reserved its approval and action until Germany declared its willingness 2 Current History, Feb., 1923, pp. 844-845.

to collaborate in the execution of the experts' plans. To this end it ordered a hearing of the German delegates on April 17.22 On April 16 the German Government sent to the Reparation Commission a note declaring its willingness to collaborate in the execution of the experts' plans.23

On April 17 the Reparation Commission unanimously decided "to approve within the limits of its powers the conclusions set forth in these reports and to adopt the methods therein recommended." On the same day the Commission officially transmitted the reports to the governments concerned recommending the conclusions coming within their jurisdiction "in order that the plans proposed might be brought into full operation without delay." At the same time the Commission asked the German Government to submit the drafts of laws, decrees and other measures intended to insure the complete execution of the plans and to notify the Commission of the names of the German members of the various committees provided in the Dawes report.24

Replies to the Reparation Commission were received from the Belgian, British and Italian Governments under date of April 24, and from the French Government under date of April 25, 1924.25 The Belgian and Italian Governments expressed their willingness to accept the experts' conclusions in their entirety.

The British Government replied that, since the plan does not involve any reduction in the total of the German reparation debt and as any necessary modifications of the schedule of payments of May, 1921, are within the competence of the Reparation Commission, specific authority from the governments represented on the Commission is not required on these points under Article 234 of the Treaty 22 Text of communiqué in the London Times, April 12, 1924, p. 12. Text in the London Times, April 17, 1924.

24 Text of communiqué in the New York Times, April 18, 1924, p. 1, and of the letter of the Reparation Commission to the Allied Governments, April 17, 1924, in L'Europe Nouvelle, May 3, 1924, p. 582.

25 French text in L'Europe Nouvelle, May 3, 1924, pp. 582-3. English texts in the New York Times, April 27, 1924, pp. 1, 3.

of Versailles. The recommendations of the experts coming within the jurisdiction of the Allied Governments were stated in the British reply as follows: "(a) restoration of the economic and fiscal authority of the German Government over the whole of the German territories; (b) the steps necessary to give binding effect to new guarantees and controls so far as these may not be clearly covered by the existing provisions of the Treaty of Versailles; (c) the inclusion of all the financial liabilities of Germany under the peace treaty in a single annuity." Concerning these points and upon any other recommendations of the experts which the Reparation Commission may hold will require the endorsement or action of the Allied Governments, the British Government expressed its willingness to do anything in its power to give practical effect to the recommendations of the committee.

The French reply expressed satisfaction with the report of the experts which, it said, would enable the Reparation Commission to consider, in conformity with the provisions of Article 234 of the Treaty of Versailles, the resources and capacity of Germany and to pronounce a definite decision which will embody the conclusions contained in the reports and give them practical form. Until this has been done and the Allied Governments have ascertained whether the German Government has taken the necessary measures to carry out the Commission's decisions, they will not be able, the French reply stated, to take useful action. Regarding the recommendation of the experts that the economic and financial unity of the Reich should be restored as soon as the plan is put into execution, the French reply stated that "the governments will have to consider together under what conditions the guarantees at present held by France and Belgium shall be merged into or exchanged for those which will be handed over as an undivided whole to all the Allies. These operations cannot, however, take place until Germany has effectively put the plan into execution. It is for the governments to determine by com

mon agreement the guarantees which these operations may render necessary."

On April 28 the German Government communicated to the Reparation Commission the names of its representatives to serve on the currency commission, the railways commission, and the economic commission to be set up under the Dawes report.26 A conference of Allied Premiers will meet in London on July 16 to discuss the execution of the Dawes plan. The American Government has been invited to take part in the conference, and the American Ambassador at London has been instructed by the State Department to attend "for the purpose of dealing with such matters as affect the interests of the United States, and otherwise for purposes of information."27

One matter involved in the execution of the Dawes plan which very definitely affects the interests of the United States is the payment of the costs of its armies of occupation formerly in the Rhine territories. By the agreement signed at Paris on May 25, 1923, between the United States and the Allies, it was provided in substance that the amount due to the United States shall be paid in twelve annual installments out of future cash payments credited to Germany. 28 Another matter which may affect the interests of the United States is the payment of American claims against Germany now being adjudicated by the Mixed Claims Commission established under the Treaty of Berlin of August 10, 1922, for which German property in America in the control of the Alien Property Custodian is being held as security under the Joint Resolution of July 2, 1921, and the treaty of peace with Germany of August 25, 1921.29

In making public the instructions to the American Ambassador to attend the conference of Premiers in London,

26 London Times, April 29, 1924, p. 12.

7 Washington Post, June 26, 1924, p. I.

28 See summary of this agreement in The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 17, 1923, pp. 513-517.

29 These two treaties are printed in the Supplement to The American Journal of International Law, 1922, Vol. 16, pp. 10 and 171. The treaty of peace incorporates the pertinent provisions of the Joint Resolution of July 2, 1921.