L’Écho d’Alger
- FOR ALGERIA
- Mr. Poincaré delivers a major speech at Bar-le-Duc on the Government’s work to restore the public finances
- The Italo-Spanish agreement
L’Écho d’Alger attacked Viollette’s handling of agricultural credit, accusing his inner circle of secrecy, describing settler opposition as forcing him to narrow his plans, and crediting Algerian parliamentarians with securing discount facilities. Poincaré defended new taxes as essential to avert financial collapse and challenged the supposed advantages of selling state monopolies. A Tangier dispatch relayed British press concern that a proposed Italian-Spanish naval demonstration could strengthen Spain’s demands and unsettle the international zone.
Translation
FOR ALGERIA
a trifle, as you can see, but how revealing! Here is one of those examples in which Mustapha bypasses the department heads and has no qualms about arranging his little affairs directly with subordinates.
The Agricultural Bank affair is on a different scale.
It was through this project that we came to understand why Mr. Viollette had equipped himself with such a large and costly private office. When it was pointed out that his predecessor had made do with much less—and how!—Mr. Viollette replied: “I need it to work.” Obviously, since henceforth the various departments of the Government-General were to be excluded from decisions and were no longer even to be consulted. Two august personages were to handle everything [?] within the private office—two people… and a third whom we shall identify no further, because it is rather humiliating for Algeria to be governed in this fashion.
Mustapha’s deliberations over the Agricultural Bank never leaked out, even in the sweltering heat. Those concerned could go seeking information: the Agriculture Department knew nothing, the Finance Department likewise, and the Secretary-General knew nothing. Our three luminaries alone, though the director of the Bank of Algeria was also in on the secret, staged the play in great secrecy. The script and scenery were magnificent and were meant to unleash enthusiasm that would give the authors every reason to feel proud.
It was an utter flop, and Mr. Frioux had just enough time to dive into the prompter’s box. Settlers and producers, through their associations and their press organs, expressed the fiercest hostility. So much so that Mr. Viollette gave up the struggle, withdrew the play, and ultimately confined his ambitions to securing the discount facilities the settlers were asking for.
Let us add that it was the Algerian parliamentarians who obtained them. Indeed, Mr. Viollette appeared so inadequate, so pathetic before the Bank’s director, Mr. Moreau, that the new proposal would again have collapsed without the timely intervention of Algeria’s parliamentary representatives. [?]
Mr. Poincaré delivers a major speech at Bar-le-Duc on the Government’s work to restore the public finances
[?]
NEW TAXES
“The common good is not, as people too readily believe, simply the sum of individual interests:
“Individual interests, however respectable, are measured from day to day; they are limited in time as well as in space. The common good reaches far above the present to embrace the future.
“We knew that in pursuing it we would inevitably encounter fierce opposition. But our only choice was between imminent catastrophe and a period of severe sacrifices. We did not hesitate.
“Our first duty was to restore a stable balance to the budget, whose deficit had been widened by rising prices, growing expenditure and insufficient revenue.
“Without parliamentary approval of substantial new taxation, we stood on the eve of financial collapse. The Chambers understood that we were on the brink of the precipice; they spontaneously imposed discipline upon themselves; they corrected defective procedures and, in a few sittings, voted the necessary billions with remarkable alacrity.
THE DISPOSAL OF MONOPOLIES
“We have heard certain people tell us, with the best [?], [?] that [?] if [?] we had agreed to lease or sell one or another of these state monopolies, we could have spared taxpayers all or part of these new burdens [?]
“I have often told the Chambers that, for my part, I have no preconceived position either for or against monopolies; I judge them in practice according to whether or not they benefit the State. But I must make clear that, as I speak, no proposal has been made for either the sale or the operation of any of them that [?] was judged advantageous by competent and disinterested experts.
“And did not most of these proposals—which sometimes concealed unacceptable arrangements beneath initially attractive appearances—come from foreign groups that would not have been displeased to lay their hands on part of our national production? [?]”
The Italo-Spanish agreement
[?] London, September 27.—A report from Tangier states:
Two Italian battleships now at Gibraltar will anchor in Tangier’s roadstead during the week, where the flagship Alphonse XIII will join them for a naval demonstration.
This action, writes the Westminster Gazette’s correspondent, is significant in view of the recent Spanish-Italian treaty and Madrid’s demand for predominance in the government of the international zone.
The Daily Chronicle’s special correspondent, who disclosed the Italo-Spanish maneuver and predicted this chance encounter between the two squadrons, telegraphs from Tangier:
The purpose of this demonstration is to make the native inhabitants, as well as France and Great Britain, understand that General Primo de Rivera was not speaking idly when he declared that Spain wanted Tangier.
The same newspaper’s diplomatic writer states that this visit has revived memories of Agadir in London. He maintains that, despite Madrid’s denial, the Italo-Spanish pact has taken shape and the ambassadors will have their work cut out for them.
He reminds the British government, which has so far taken no direct interest in the question, that it must not lose sight of the repercussions throughout the Muslim world that could result from a peremptory act changing Tangier’s status.
He adds that the sovereignty of the Sultan of Morocco cannot be infringed and that, even supposing the interested party himself agrees to a new distribution of powers [?] under the 1923 convention, the problem is so thorny that considerable tact will be needed to avoid incidents. [?]
Context
Agricultural credit and the struggle over who delivered it
The editorial assigns distinct roles to producer associations, parliamentarians and the Banque de l’Algérie: the associations opposed the agricultural bank project, the parliamentarians secured discount facilities, and negotiations with the bank determined access to finance. An earlier North African conference report, published on May 25, 1926, recorded the bank’s agreement to discount agricultural credit institutions’ paper up to 75 million while retaining the right to assess its value. It also recorded an initial loan of 5 million at 2% to establish an agricultural bank for medium- and long-term credit. These arrangements explain why the bank’s discretion mattered: a proposed institution and access to discounted paper were distinct forms of support. The report also recorded the Tunisian resident-general’s praise for Viollette’s efforts. Against that earlier official recognition, the September editorial’s allocation of credit to producer opposition and parliamentary intervention reveals a dispute over who represented agricultural interests and deserved credit for obtaining finance.
How new taxes and monopoly revenues served debt repayment
Poincaré’s speech presents taxation as an emergency choice between immediate sacrifice and financial collapse, while judging monopoly proposals by their practical benefit to the State. The measures already adopted give that argument substance: Parliament authorized 11 billion francs in new tax resources on August 3, 1926, and the August 7 law enabled the creation of a public debt amortization fund using tobacco and match monopoly proceeds. Those receipts were to help retire national defense bills and repay or convert older government debt. Keeping monopoly revenues therefore served an identifiable debt-repayment mechanism, which helps explain why a sale or lease had to offer more than immediate cash to appear advantageous. This financial connection gives substance to the speech’s discussion of alternative ways to relieve taxpayers.
Spain’s ambitions confronted Tangier’s international arrangements
The reported naval demonstration mattered because Spain was seeking control of an internationally administered zone. In an August 15, 1926 diplomatic telegram, the American ambassador in Spain recorded Spanish proposals to incorporate Tangier into Spain’s protectorate or obtain a temporary mandate, as well as negotiations over Italian participation in the administration. Spain’s foreign minister nevertheless denied that the recent Italian treaty went beyond arbitration and neutrality in the event of an attack. The dispatch thus places the newspaper’s account of naval pressure alongside an existing diplomatic effort to redistribute authority. The 1923 statute prohibited military establishments, operational bases and installations usable for war within the zone; Spain’s proposals likewise offered guarantees against fortifications and naval bases. Control of Tangier therefore involved both the distribution of administrative power and the preservation of neutrality, explaining why the correspondents anticipated difficult negotiations rather than a simple change of ownership.
Original
POUR L'ALGÉRIE
un rien, comme vous voyez, mais combien significatif! Voilà un de ces exemples où Mustapha court-circuite les chefs de service et ne craint pas d'arranger directement ses petites affaires avec des subalternes. L'affaire de la Banque Agricole est d'une autre envergure. C'est à l'occasion de ce projet que nous avons pu saisir les raisons qui ont amené M. Viollette à se pourvoir d'un cabinet si abondant numériquement et si coûteux. Quand on lui faisait observer que son prédécesseur se contentait à beaucoup moins, et comment! M. Viollette répondait: «J'en ai besoin pour travailler». Evidemment, puisque, désormais, les diverses directions du Gouvernement Général devaient être tenues à l'écart des décisions prises et ne devaient plus même être consultées. Deux augustes personnes devaient suffire à tout [?] du cabinet, deux personnes... et une troisième que nous ne désignerons pas autrement parce qu'il est plutôt humiliant pour l'Algérie d'être gouvernée de la sorte. Les cogitations de Mustapha, à propos de la Banque Agricole, ne transpirèrent jamais, même en pleine canicule. Les intéressés purent aller aux informations; la Direction de l'Agriculture ignorait tout, celle des Finances également et le Secrétaire Général ne savait rien. Seules, nos trois sommités, le directeur de la Banque de l'Algérie étant pourtant dans la confidence, montèrent la pièce en grand secret. Le texte et les décors étaient mirifiques et devaient déchaîner un enthousiasme bien propre à enorgueillir les auteurs. Ce fut un four noir et M. Frioux eut juste le temps de s'engouffrer dans le trou du souffleur. Colons et producteurs, dans leurs syndicats et par leurs organes de presse, manifestèrent la plus vive hostilité. Si bien que M. Viollette abandonna la partie, retira la pièce, et finit par limiter ses ambitions à faire obtenir aux colons les facilités d'escompte que ceux-ci demandaient. Disons d'ailleurs que ce sont les parlementaires algériens qui les ont obtenues. M. Viollette apparut, en effet, si insuffisant, si piteux en face du Directeur de la Banque, M. Moreau, que le nouveau projet allait encore s'effondrer sans l'intervention opportune de la représentation algérienne. [?]
M. Poincaré prononce, à Bar-le-Duc, un grand discours sur l'œuvre de redressement financier du Gouvernement
[?] LES IMPOTS NOUVEAUX «Le bien général n'est pas, comme on le croit trop volontiers, une simple addition des intérêts particuliers: «Les intérêts particuliers, si respectables qu'ils soient, se mesurent à la journée; ils sont limités dans le temps comme dans l'espace. Le bien général passe très haut par dessus le présent pour atteindre l'avenir. «Nous n'ignorions pas que dans cette recherche nous rencontrerions fatalement de vives oppositions. Mais nous n'avions à choisir qu'entre la catastrophe prochaine et une période de sacrifices sévères. Nous n'avons pas hésité. «Notre premier devoir était de remettre en équilibre stable le budget dont la hausse des prix, l'accroissement des dépenses et l'insuffisance des recettes avaient élargi le déficit. «Sans un vote massif d'impôts nouveaux, nous étions à la veille de l'effondrement financier. Les Chambres ont compris que nous étions au bord du précipice; elles se sont spontanément disciplinées; elles ont corrigé les méthodes défectueuses et ont voté, en quelques séances, avec un empressement remarquable, les milliards nécessaires. L'ALIENATION DES MONOPOLES «Nous avons entendu certaines gens nous dire, avec les meilleures [?], [?] que [?] si [?] avions consenti à affermer ou à aliéner l'un ou l'autre de ces monopoles d'Etat, nous aurions pu épargner aux contribuables tout ou partie de ces charges nouvelles [?] «J'ai déclaré souvent aux Chambres que je n'avais, pour mon compte, de parti pris, ni pour, ni contre les monopoles, je les juge en fait suivant qu'ils sont ou non profitables à l'Etat; mais je dois préciser qu'à l'heure où je parle, il n'a été fait, ni pour la cession, ni pour l'exploitation d'aucun d'eux, aucune proposition qui [?] jugée avantageuse par des experts compétents et désintéressés. «Et encore la plupart de ces propositions, qui cachaient parfois, sous des aspects séduisants au premier abord, des combinaisons inacceptables, émanaient-elles de groupements étrangers qui n'auraient pas été fâchés de mettre la main sur une partie de notre production nationale? [?]
L'accord italo-espagnol
[?] Londres, 27 septembre. - On mande de Tanger: Deux cuirassés italiens actuellement à Gibraltar mouilleront, dans le courant de la semaine, en rade de Tanger où le vaisseau amiral «Alphonse XIII» les rejoindra en vue d'une démonstration navale. Cette action, écrit le correspondant de la Westminster Gazette, est significative en raison du récent traité hispano-italien et de la revendication de Madrid réclamant la prépondérance dans le gouvernement de la zone internationale. Le correspondant spécial du Daily Chronicle, qui révéla la manœuvre italo-espagnole et prédit cette rencontre fortuite des deux escadres, télégraphie de Tanger: Cette démonstration a pour but de faire comprendre aux indigènes que, comme à la France et à la Grande-Bretagne, le général Primo de Rivera n'a pas parlé en vain lorsqu'il a déclaré que l'Espagne voulait Tanger. Le rédacteur diplomatique du même journal déclare que cette visite a fait revivre à Londres le souvenir d'Agadir. Il maintient que, malgré le démenti de Madrid, le pacte italo-espagnol a pris corps et que les ambassadeurs auront du pain sur la planche. Il rappelle au gouvernement britannique qui, jusqu'à présent, ne s'est pas intéressé directement à la question, qu'il ne doit pas perdre de vue les répercussions que pourrait avoir sur le monde musulman un acte péremptoire qui modifierait le statut de Tanger. Il ajoute qu'on ne peut atteindre la souveraineté du sultan du Maroc, et qu'à supposer que l'intéressé lui-même consente à une nouvelle répartition des pouvoirs [?] de la convention de 1923, le problème est si épineux qu'il faudra faire preuve de beaucoup de doigté si l'on veut éviter des incidents. [?]