L’Écho d’Alger
- The incidents in the Rhineland
- Chancellor Marx delivers a major speech at Essen
- Our debt to America
This front page of L'Écho d'Alger was dominated by Franco-German tension and war debts. Georges Wagner, writing from Mainz, urged calm over the clashes between French occupation troops and Germans at Germersheim, Trier and Koblenz, arguing that the Rhineland's economic recovery had turned the once well-fed French soldier into the poor and humiliated party. A report from Essen gave Chancellor Marx's speech insisting that the incidents must not undo the Thoiry understanding and defending Germany's entry into the League of Nations, with a caption on Seeckt's resignation. A press review showed the Paris papers divided over ratifying the American debt agreement, from L'Ère nouvelle's attack on veterans' intimidation to L'Œuvre's 'We will not pay!' Short items noted Poincaré's arrival in Metz and a Marseille protest against closing the Tarascon court.
Translation
The incidents in the Rhineland
(From our special correspondent) Mainz, 8 October. – Before passing judgment on the incidents that have just occurred at Germersheim, Trier and Koblenz between French soldiers of the occupation troops and Germans, it is proper to await the results of the inquiry being conducted jointly by the occupation authorities and the German police. Those who, in advance and without knowing the facts exactly, lay all the blame on the soldiers, or all the blame on the Germans, according to their political preferences, are criminals or fools. The first thing to do in such a case is to calm one's nerves and to make a great effort – a rather creditable one, I admit, in certain cases – not to depart from the utmost calm: whoever loses his temper is always in the wrong. What must above all be avoided is bringing into this affair, on either side, a question of national pride, which would distort the inquiry. That would only succeed in inflaming passions and provoking new and ever more regrettable incidents.
First of all, one must understand the general situation in which our troops find themselves with respect to the Germans. Never, no doubt, has the situation been so delicate. Military occupation is always a double-edged weapon. While it may be regarded as guaranteeing the security of the victorious nation and the execution of the treaty's clauses, it nonetheless remains a measure of coercion that breeds hatred and piles up the small wounds to pride that snowball and soon make incidents inevitable.
My missions to the Army of the Rhine have allowed me to follow the evolution of the German mentality and, by a kind of rebound, the evolution of the spirit of the occupation troops and their officers, from the standpoint of a Frenchman who possesses his full independence and free will, who is neither an official nor in anyone's pay, and who has no personal interest in the matter.
At the start of the occupation, the prestige of our victory was great; we overawed these dazed populations, stunned by an unforeseen defeat. But what most impressed the Rhinelanders was not our prestige; it was... our food supplies. The belly question plays a considerable role in every country, and particularly in Germany. We were dealing with a population deprived of all wholesome food, living on "ersatz" for two years. Germany was beaten, and the French soldier came to live under the roof of the vanquished; that was obviously very humiliating, but this soldier – jovial by nature, besides, happy to have finished the war and therefore well-disposed – had good bread, meat and chocolate in his haversack, his canteen was full of good red wine, and his pockets full of tobacco. This earned him the regard of families and the friendship of children, and won him the hearts of the girls. What poilu was not somewhat moved by the spectacle of the misery then reigning in Germany, and did not, with that good French heart which he hides too well under his greatcoat but which dictates his actions, share "à boule" his snack and his meat ration with his host's family? That is why the first years of our occupation were marked by rather friendly demonstrations on the part of the Rhineland population. Naive people, politicians, historians, poets, out of interest or ideology, mistook this sympathy – "gastronomic" sympathy, if I may say so – for sympathy pure and simple. They spoke of Napoleon, of his vivid memory, of some sort of racial kinship between the Rhinelanders and us. The French people were fooled with this nonsense, and the military chiefs could believe for a moment that this happy situation was due to their prestige, to the parades and torchlight tattoos. Castles were built... in the Rhineland.
But the situation has since changed progressively, until it has become exactly the reverse. German finances have been restored. The shops are overflowing with provisions, those who profited from the collapse of the mark are enjoying themselves to their heart's content, and the people themselves live decently. On the other hand, the poor one – and therefore the humiliated one – is us: it is the French poilu who, with his five sous, cannot even buy himself a glass of beer; it is the officer and his family, who never go out and live meagerly under the proud reign of the mark at ten francs. Let us add that the young soldiers and the young officers are no longer haloed by past suffering, heroism and victory. They are no longer good fathers who have tact and reserve and command respect, but kids. These young men have needs that one can guess. Hence stories about "chicks," which create incidents in which, at the outset, nationality plays no part. And all this degenerates and creates a deplorable atmosphere. It is in this atmosphere that one must place the incidents that are being so much talked about, and which certain newspapers are exploiting for well-known political ends. In France we have steady nerves, but in Germany people get more worked up, by the natural reaction of the vanquished who is rising again.
For today, and while awaiting the impartial inquiry, let us content ourselves, after these general reflections – blunt, but sincere – with wishing everyone the mastery of their nerves.
Georges WAGNER.
M. Poincaré in Alsace-Lorraine
Metz, 11 October. – M. Poincaré arrived last night at 11:12 p.m. Today he will visit several schools.
At the General Council of the Bouches-du-Rhône
Marseille, 11 October (from our own correspondent). – During the last session of the General Council of the Bouches-du-Rhône, the departmental assembly adopted a resolution protesting against the abolition of the Tarascon court and asking the department's senators and deputies to oppose it by every means in their power.
Chancellor Marx delivers a major speech at Essen
a major speech
VON SEECKT, one of the creators of the Reichswehr, who has now resigned
GERMANY'S FOREIGN POLICY
Essen, 11 October. – Chancellor Marx delivered a long speech at Essen on the general situation of Germany. After setting out the program of the government's coming work, the chancellor, turning to the latest international events, declared in particular, regarding the conclusion of the iron pact, that one cannot conclude economic pacts of this kind and continue hostilities in the field of foreign policy.
The incidents in the Rhineland
On the subject of the Rhineland incidents, the chancellor declared: "Whether the question of responsibility for these painful incidents is cleared up one way or another, one fact is certain: the aim that was the subject of the Thoiry negotiations cannot and must not be diminished by such incidents.
Germany and the League of Nations
Regarding Germany's entry into the League of Nations, the speaker declared in particular: Those who, ever since Chancellor Wirth inaugurated the policy of reparations in 1921, have shown the most violent opposition must at last admit that this policy of understanding was favorable to Germany. In the ranks of the opposition, people are gradually beginning to view Germany's entry into the League of Nations more calmly.
"We will collaborate," said M. Marx, "honestly and loyally in the League of Nations, in a spirit of idealism which is a law for it. We hope in this way to defend the interests of Germany, as well as those of the German minorities abroad, who, now that we have become members of the League of Nations, must expect from
Our debt to America
On the intervention of the veterans
From L'ÈRE NOUVELLE:
The National Union of Veterans, which has missed no opportunity to show its sympathy for the Bloc National, has just taken a position on the question of the inter-Allied debts and has handed M. Poincaré a note of a threatening character. The veterans valiantly did their duty during the war. But their service records, which the Nation takes care not to forget, do not confer on them any special competence in finance; their opinion in this domain has neither more nor less value than that of other categories of citizens or other groups. The veterans further announce their firm intention to vote systematically against the members of parliament who would accept ratification, and in the covering letter accompanying their note they declare themselves ready to undertake vigorous action against this ratification, even if a ministerial crisis should result. That is clear enough. If our deputies and our ministers do not obey the injunctions of certain reactionary veterans' groups, the former risk losing their seats and the latter their portfolios. These methods of intimidation, which have, it seems, had some success in Italy, are intolerable in the French Republic.
From L'ŒUVRE (M. Gustave Téry):
Public opinion has just expressed itself, for the second time, in the moving approach made yesterday to our Prime Minister by those who represent the National Union of Combatants. These men have already paid, they have paid too much, but they are not asking for a rebate. We stand behind them, with them, as regards the so-called American debt. We think, we feel, we will as they do, and all France has the same heart. Whatever is said, whatever is done, she will not let herself be reduced to slavery for sixty-two years. We will not pay! The war was an excellent piece of business for the "businessmen" of the United States. Generally speaking, their fortunes grew by seventy-five percent. It must be said, and it will have to be repeated to certain American geniuses, since they pretend not to hear it, that they have fattened themselves on the blood of our seventeen hundred thousand dead. For them, the frightful heap of French corpses has become an enormous heap of dollars. Let them profit from their good fortune, let them enjoy their victory in peace, for they are the true, the only victors. But we have already paid these eleventh-hour laborers: we will pay them no more!
From L'ACTION FRANÇAISE (M. Charles Maurras):
The United States and England refused to put their signature at the bottom of a pact drafted by their heads of state and heads of government, Mr. Woodrow Wilson and Lloyd George in person. Why should France feel any scruple about rejecting the wording of a mere senator or a mere finance minister? The whole of postwar international jurisprudence absolutely authorizes rejections of this kind, and if anyone in London or Washington is indignant about it, we can easily reply: "Who started it?"
From LA LIBERTÉ (M. Camille Aymard):
All the rest of the government's program – the economy decrees, the judicial reform, the restrictions, etc. – would have been voted without difficulty, if not without speeches. But the ratification of the debts: the government knows well that neither the country nor parliament will accept it, and I may even add that if there is one government in France that could not ask for this ratification, it is precisely the present government. That those who overthrew the Briand cabinet on this question should come today to ask Parliament to ratify the London and Washington agreements, etc.! No, gentlemen, you are going too far! The manifesto of the Republican Federation, which we reported here on Saturday, has been followed by an identical declaration from the Union of Economic Interests and from the federations of veterans and of producers. The moderate parties are officially taking a stand against ratification of the debts. The entire extreme left has already affirmed its irreducible opposition. On this question, then, the cabinet seems unable to obtain much more than 200 votes. Is this where M. Poincaré wanted to end up? It is said that the chambers will reconvene on 2 November: that is All Souls' Day, a very bad omen.
Context
How the Germersheim shooting was finally judged
Writing from Mainz on 8 October, Georges Wagner asked readers to wait for the joint inquiry of the occupation authorities and the German police, and he traced the clashes to an atmosphere of reversed fortunes and young troops rather than to nationality. In the end the Germersheim case went before French military justice. TIME reported in January 1927 that a French officer had been tried by a French court martial at Landau for killing a German citizen and wounding two others at Germersheim the previous September. The court acquitted Lieutenant Rouzier on the grounds that he had fired in self-defense after Germans attacked him with canes. The two Germans he wounded were sentenced respectively to two years and to two months in prison, four other Germans were also sentenced, and the lieutenant went free. The German press called the verdict a blow with the fist in the face of the German people, and after Berlin protested officially, President Doumergue pardoned the six sentenced Germans. The affair thus became exactly the kind of national-pride dispute Wagner had urged both sides to avoid.
What Thoiry promised, and why Marx guarded it
Marx's statement that the aim of the Thoiry negotiations must not be diminished by the Rhineland incidents referred to a very recent bargain. Germany had just been admitted to the League of Nations and given a permanent seat on its council, the step Marx defended against his domestic opposition in the same speech. Aristide Briand and Gustav Stresemann, the French and German foreign ministers, then met in the French village of Thoiry. Stresemann pledged material support to stabilize the franc, and Briand agreed to return the Saar Basin to Germany early and to bring an early end to the military control and occupation of the Rhineland. Every brawl between French soldiers and Rhinelanders therefore touched the very occupation that Thoiry was meant to shorten. The bargain was fragile: the scope of the Thoiry resolutions was soon reduced by objections from both the German and French governments. Marx's insistence that responsibility for the incidents should not affect the Thoiry goal reads as an effort to keep that settlement alive.
The general behind the caption on Seeckt
The Essen report carried a caption describing Hans von Seeckt as one of the creators of the Reichswehr who had now resigned. Seeckt had been commander in chief of the German Army since 1920, and in that period he reorganized the army and laid the foundation for its doctrine, tactics, organization and training. He was forced to step down as head of the army command at the insistence of Defence Minister Gessler and Reich President Hindenburg. The immediate cause was the participation of the Hohenzollern Prince Wilhelm in a Reichswehr maneuver that the minister and the president had not approved. Relations between Seeckt and the Reich leadership had already deteriorated because of his open opposition to the government's Locarno policy. The page therefore set the departure of a prominent critic of Locarno beside Marx's defense of the League of Nations policy.
Why the American debt settlement met such hostility
The press review headed 'Our debt to America' concerned the Mellon–Bérenger agreement, dated 29 April 1926, which fixed the amount and rate of France's repayment of its wartime debt to the United States. Ambassador Henry Bérenger had signed it subject to ratification by the French parliament, which is why the veterans' note to Poincaré threatened deputies with electoral reprisals and ministers with a cabinet crisis. The agreement greatly reduced what France owed and set relatively easy terms, yet most French people felt the United States should waive its claims. France had also wanted repayments linked to German reparations, a link Washington refused. That grievance runs through L'Œuvre's 'We will not pay!'; its figures on American profits and its talk of sixty-two years of slavery are that paper's polemical assertions. Veterans also took to the streets, with 20,000 demonstrating in Paris against the agreement. Successive governments delayed ratification, and the Chamber of Deputies finally ratified the 1926 agreement only on 21 July 1929, after an all-night session, by 300 votes to 292.
Original
Les incidents de Rhénanie
(De notre envoyé spécial) Mayence, 8 octobre. - Il convient, avant de porter un jugement sur les accidents qui viennent de se produire à Germersheim, à Trèves et à Coblence, entre soldats français des troupes d'occupation et Allemands, d'attendre les résultats de l'enquête à laquelle procèdent de concert les autorités d'occupation et la police allemande. Ceux qui, d'avance, et sans connaître exactement les faits, donnent, suivant leurs préférences politiques, tous les torts aux militaires, ou tous les torts aux Allemands, sont des criminels ou des imbéciles. La première chose à faire en pareil cas, est de calmer ses nerfs et de faire un grand effort, je l'avoue assez méritoire, dans certains cas, pour ne pas se départir du plus grand calme: celui qui se met en colère a toujours tort. Ce qu'il faut éviter surtout, c'est de mettre dans cette affaire, de part et d'autre, une question d'amour-propre national, qui fausserait l'enquête. On ne réussirait qu'à exciter les passions et provoquer des incidents nouveaux et de plus en plus regrettables. Et d'abord, il faut se rendre compte de la situation générale dans laquelle se trouvent nos troupes, vis-à-vis des Allemands. Jamais, sans doute, la situation n'a été aussi délicate. L'occupation militaire est toujours une arme à deux tranchants. Si elle peut passer pour assurer la sécurité de la nation victorieuse et l'exécution des clauses du traité, elle n'en reste pas moins une mesure de coercition qui engendre les haines, accumule les petites blessures d'amour-propre qui font boule de neige et ne tardent pas à rendre les incidents inévitables. Mes missions à l'armée du Rhin m'ont permis de suivre l'évolution de la mentalité allemande et l'évolution, pour ainsi dire par ricochet de l'esprit des troupes d'occupation et de leurs officiers, en me plaçant au point de vue du Français possédant sa pleine indépendance et son libre arbitre, qui n'est ni fonctionnaire, ni à la solde de qui que ce soit, et n'a aucun intérêt personnel dans l'affaire. Au début de l'occupation, le prestige de notre victoire était grand, nous en imposions à ces populations hébétées, stupéfaites par la défaite imprévue. Mais ce qui en imposait le plus aux Rhénans, ce n'était pas notre prestige, c'était... notre ravitaillement. La question ventre joue un rôle considérable dans tous les pays, et plus particulièrement en Allemagne. Nous avions affaire à une population sevrée de toute nourriture saine, au régime «ersatz» depuis deux ans. L'Allemagne était vaincue, le soldat français venait habiter sous le toit du vaincu; c'était évidemment bien humiliant, mais ce soldat, de caractère jovial, d'ailleurs, heureux d'avoir fini la guerre, et de ce fait, bienveillant, avait dans sa musette du bon pain, de la viande, du chocolat, et son bidon était plein de bon vin rouge, ses poches de tabac. Cela lui attirait la considération des familles, l'amitié des enfants et lui donnait le cœur des filles. Quel est le poilu qui n'ait pas été un peu attendri par le spectacle de la misère qui régnait alors en Allemagne, et qui n'ait, avec ce bon cœur français qu'il cache trop sous sa capote, mais qui dicte ses actes, partagé «à boule», son cassecroûte, sa ration de viande, avec la famille de son logeur. C'est la raison pour laquelle les premières années de notre occupation furent marquées par des manifestations plutôt sympathiques de la population rhénane. Des naïfs, des politiciens, des historiens, des poètes, par intérêt ou par idéologie, prirent cette sympathie, si j'ose dire «gastronomique», pour de la sympathie tout court. Ils parlèrent de Napoléon, de son souvenir vivace, je ne sais quelle communauté de race entre les rhénans et nous. On berna le peuple français avec ces sornettes, et les chefs militaires purent croire un moment que cette heureuse situation était due à leur prestige, aux revues et retraites aux flambeaux. On bâtit des châteaux... en Rhénanie. Mais la situation, depuis, a progressivement changé, jusqu'à devenir exactement l'inverse. Les finances allemandes sont rétablies. Les magasins regorgent de victuailles, les bénéficiaires de la faillite du mark s'en donnent à cœur joie, et le peuple lui-même vit convenablement. Par contre, le pauvre, l'humilié, par conséquent, c'est nous, c'est le poilu français qui, avec ses cinq sous, ne peut même pas prendre un bock, c'est l'officier et sa famille, qui ne sortent jamais, vivent chichement, sous le règne orgueilleux du mark à dix francs. Ajoutons que les jeunes soldats, les jeunes officiers, ne sont plus auréolés par leur souffrance passée, leur héroïsme, leur victoire. Ce ne sont plus de bons pères qui ont du tact, de la réserve, et qui imposent le respect, mais des gamins. Ces jeunes gens ont des besoins que l'on devine. Delà des histoires de «poules», qui créent des incidents dans lesquels, à l'origine, les nationalités n'ont aucune part. Et tout cela dégénère, crée une ambiance déplorable. C'est dans cette ambiance qu'il faut situer les incidents dont on parle tant, et que certains journaux exploitent pour des fins politiques connues. En France, nous avons les nerfs solides, mais en Allemagne on s'excite davantage, par une réaction naturelle du vaincu qui se redresse. Pour aujourd'hui, et en attendant l'enquête impartiale, contentons-nous, après ces réflexions générales, brutales, mais sincères, de souhaiter à tous de maîtriser leurs nerfs. Georges WAGNER. M. Poincaré en Alsace-Lorraine Metz, 11 octobre. - M. Poincaré est arrivé hier soir, à 23 h. 12. Il visitera aujourd'hui plusieurs écoles. Au Conseil général des Bouches-du-Rhône Marseille, 11 octobre (de notre correspondant particulier). - Au cours de la dernière séance du Conseil général des Bouches-du-Rhône, l'assemblée départementale a adopté un vœu protestant contre la suppression du tribunal de Tarascon, et demandant aux sénateurs et aux députés du département de s'y opposer par tous les moyens en leur pouvoir.
Le chancelier Marx prononce, à Essen, un grand discours
un grand discours VON SEECKT, un des créateurs de la Reichswehr, aujourd'hui démissionnaire LA POLITIQUE ETRANGERE DE L'ALLEMAGNE Essen, 11 octobre. - Le chancelier Marx a prononcé, à Essen, un long discours sur la situation générale de l'Allemagne. Après avoir développé le programme des prochains travaux du gouvernement, le chancelier, abordant les derniers événements internationaux, a déclaré notamment, à propos de la conclusion du pacte du fer, qu'on ne peut pas conclure de pactes économiques de cette nature et continuer des hostilités dans le domaine de la politique étrangère. Les incidents de Rhénanie Au sujet des incidents de Rhénanie, le chancelier a déclaré: «Que la question de la responsabilité de ces incidents douloureux soit éclaircie d'une façon ou d'une autre, un fait est certain: c'est que le but qui a fait l'objet des négociations de Thoiry ne peut et ne doit pas être diminué par de tels incidents. L'Allemagne et la S. D. N. A propos de l'entrée de l'Allemagne dans la S. D. N., l'orateur déclare notamment: Ceux qui, depuis l'inauguration, par le chancelier Wirth, en 1921, de la politique des réparations, ont marqué la plus violente opposition, doivent enfin convenir que cette politique d'entente fut favorable à l'Allemagne. On commence peu à peu, dans les rangs de l'opposition, à considérer avec plus de calme l'entrée de l'Allemagne dans la Société des Nations. «Nous collaborerons, à dit M. Marx, honnêtement, loyalement dans la Société des Nations, dans un esprit d ' idéalisme qui est, pour celle-ci, une loi. Nous espérons, de cette manière, défendre les intérêts de l'Allemagne, ainsi que ceux des minorités allemandes à l'étranger, qui, maintenant que nous sommes devenus membres de la Société des Nations, doivent attendre de
Notre dette envers l'Amérique
A propos de l'intervention des anciens combattants De l'ÈRE NOUVELLE: L'Union nationale des anciens combattants, qui n'a manqué aucune occasion de manifester sa sympathie pour le Bloc National, vient de prendre parti sur la question des dettes interalliées et de remettre, à M. Poincaré, une note d'un caractère comminatoire. Les anciens combattants ont fait vaillamment leur devoir pendant la guerre. Mais leurs états de services, que la Nation n'a garde d'oublier, ne leur confèrent pas une compétence spéciale pour les finances; leur opinion dans cet ordre d'idées, n'a ni plus ni moins de valeur que celle d'autres catégories de citoyens ou d'autres groupements. Les combattants annoncent, en outre, leur intention formelle de voter systématiquement contre les parlementaires qui accepteraient la ratification et, dans la lettre d'envoi qui accompagne leur note, ils se déclarent prêts à entreprendre une action, énergique, à l'encontre de cette ratification, dût-il même en résulter une crise ministérielle. Voilà qui est clair. Si nos députés, si nos ministres, n'obéissent pas aux injonctions de certains groupements réactionnaires d'anciens combattants, les premiers risquent de perdre leur siège et les seconds leur portefeuille. Ces procédés d'intimidation, qui ont eu, paraît-il, quelque succès en Italie, sont intolérables dans la République française. De l'ŒUVRE (M. Gustave Téry): L'opinion publique vient de s'exprimer, pour la seconde fois, dans l'émouvante démarche faite hier auprès de notre Président du Conseil, par ceux qui représentent l'Union nationale des combattants. Ceux-là ont déjà payé, ils ont trop payé, mais ils ne réclament pas de ristourne. Nous sommes derrière eux avec eux, pour ce qui est de la prétendue dette américaine. Nous pensons, nous sentons, nous voulons comme eux et toute la France a le même cœur. Quoi qu'on dise, quoi qu'on fasse, elle ne se laissera pas réduire pour soixante-deux ans en esclavage. Nous ne paierons pas! La guerre a été pour les «Businessmen» des Etats-Unis une excellente affaire. D'une façon générale, leurs fortunes se sont accrues dans la proportion de soixante-quinze pour cent. Il faut dire, il faudra répéter à certains Américains de génie, puisqu'ils feignent de ne pas l'entendre, qu'ils se sont engraissés du sang de nos dixsept cent mille morts. Pour eux, l'effroyable tas de cadavres français est devenu un énorme tas de dollars. Qu'ils profitent de leur bonne fortune, qu'ils jouissent en paix de leur victoire, car ils sont les véritables, les seuls vainqueurs. Mais nous avons déjà payé ces ouvriers de la onzième heure: nous ne les paierons plus! De l'ACTION FRANÇAISE (M. Charles Maurras): Les Etats-Unis et l'Angleterre ont refusé de mettre leur signature au bas d'un pacte rédigé par leurs chefs d'Etat et leurs chefs de gouvernement, M. Woodrow Wilson et Lloyd George en personne. Pourquoi la France se gênerait-elle pour rejeter la rédaction d'un simple sénateur ou d'un simple ministre des finances? Toute la jurisprudence internationale de l'après-guerre autorise absolument les rejets de cet ordre, et si quelqu'un, à Londres ou à Washington, s'en indigne, nous avons beau jeu pour répondre: «Qui est-ce qui a commencé?» De LA LIBERTÉ (M. Camille Aymard): Tout le reste du programme gouvernemental: les décrets d'économie, la réforme judiciaire, les restrictions, etc., tout aurait été voté sans difficulté sinon sans discours. Mais la ratification des dettes, le gouvernement sait bien que ni le pays, ni le parlement ne l'accepteront, et je puis même ajouter que s'il est en France un gouvernement qui ne saurait demander cette ratification, c'est bien le gouvernement actuel. Que ceux qui ont renversé le cabinet Briand sur cette question viennent aujourd'hui demander au Parlement la ratification des conventions de Londres et de Washington, etc. Non, messieurs, vous exagérez! Le manifeste de la Fédération républicaine que samedi nous relations ici même, a été suivi par une déclaration identique de l'Union des intérêts économiques et des Fédérations d'anciens combattants, et des producteurs. Les partis modérés prennent officiellement position contre la ratification des dettes. Toute l'extrême-gauche a déjà affirmé son opposition irréductible. Le cabinet, sur cette question, ne semble donc pouvoir obtenir guère plus de 200 voix. Est-ce là où voulait en venir M. Poincaré? On dit que les chambres rentreront le 2 novembre: c'est le Jour des Morts, c'est un bien mauvais présage.