Journal de Genève
- Belgian stabilisation
- The Franco-German conversations
- The wheat question
On 27 October 1926 the Journal de Genève weighed three developments in post-war Europe. An editorial signed W. M. called the hundred million dollars behind Belgium's stabilisation a considerable sum that had been raised with little difficulty. It argued that by giving the new gold-based belga a value different from the gold franc, Belgium was cutting its fate loose from the French franc and accepting its losses. A news item played down hopes that Ambassador von Hoesch's meetings with Berthelot and Briand meant quick progress on the Thoiry talks, and predicted months of negotiation. A column signed J. M. backed Professor Steiger's campaign against a Swiss wheat monopoly, which it presented as a step toward State socialism that the socialists welcomed.
Translation
Belgian stabilisation
One hundred million dollars represents more than three billion Belgian francs, or about a third of the country's total circulation. It is a considerable sum. If it was obtained without much difficulty, that is because all countries, Germany included, have realised the economic advantage that a further step along the road to Europe's financial stabilisation would represent for them. The information we have about the new gold-based Belgian currency, the belga, is too brief for a definitive opinion to be expressed. Will it be a money of account or a money of payment? What is certain is that by giving the belga a value that is not that of the gold franc, Belgium deliberately detaches its fate from that of the French franc. It records the loss it has suffered and resolves to establish its economic life on a new basis.
The Franco-German conversations
M. von Hoesch, the German ambassador, who recently returned to Paris, conferred at length at the end of last week, first with M. Philippe Berthelot, secretary-general of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and then with M. Briand himself. This has been seen as the resumption of the Franco-German negotiation begun at Thoiry. In one sense that is correct, but only on condition that one does not lose sight of the fact that these are talks still at their very beginnings, which, should they lead to a positive result, will last a very long time and will continue not for weeks but for months.
The wheat question
Professor Steiger has waged a vigorous fight against the wheat monopoly and has come out in favour of the popular initiative¹ (encouraging wheat growing without a monopoly). Why this position? — For the following reasons: the wheat monopoly leads us straight to State socialism. The extreme left is delighted at the opportunity offered to it to accomplish a very important part of its programme. One of its leaders, M. Schneider, acknowledged this explicitly: doctrine is not the only thing that has led the socialists to support the wheat monopoly, and they must secure the nationalisation of this or that branch of the national economy even if, for the moment, it is influenced only indirectly by the working class. The socialists do not look solely at the immediate result: they look further ahead, and they know that the wheat monopoly would bring grist.... to their mill.
Context
What the belga was: a gold unit for foreign transactions
W. M. wrote that the information on the belga was too thin to say whether it would be a money of account or a money of payment. The later record points mainly to the first answer. Belgium introduced the belga in 1926 as a new gold currency for international transactions, worth 5 Belgian francs, and fixed it against sterling at 35 belgas, that is 175 francs, to the pound. The franc remained in use alongside it: from 1927 the National Bank of Belgium issued notes whose denominations were given in both francs and belgas. The belga thus served as a gold yardstick for Belgium's dealings abroad, while franc values stayed on the country's banknotes next to it.
How Belgium broke with the French franc and the Latin Monetary Union
The editorial said Belgium was 'deliberately' separating its fate from the French franc, and that judgement rests on an old tie. In 1865 Belgium, France, Switzerland and Italy created the Latin Monetary Union, whose national units were freely exchangeable at a rate of 1:1. In 1926 Belgium, like France, suffered depreciation and an abrupt collapse of confidence. Belgium answered with the belga, and the change came together with its withdrawal from the union, which ceased to exist at the end of that year. The 'loss' W. M. described was large. The historian Gabriel Tortella credits the firmness of the banker Émile Francqui, as minister, for Belgium's return to the gold standard in 1926, but at a parity almost seven times lower than the earlier one. Francqui was a director of the Société Générale de Belgique and had taken part in drawing up the Dawes Plan in 1924.
What Thoiry had promised and why the report urged patience
The report treated von Hoesch's meetings with Berthelot and Briand as the resumption of the negotiation begun at Thoiry, while insisting it would take months. At Thoiry on 17 September 1926, according to a Weimar Republic chronology, Stresemann pledged material support to stabilise the French franc, and Briand agreed to return the Saar Basin to Germany early and to put an early end to the military control and occupation of the Rhineland. The same chronology notes that the scope of these resolutions was soon reduced by objections from both the German and the French governments, and the historian Gerhard Rempel writes that U.S. and French politicians prevented the bargain from succeeding. The final evacuation of the Rhineland came only in 1930, five years before the deadline, in line with the report's warning that any result would be slow in coming.
How the Swiss wheat vote of 5 December 1926 ended
J. M.'s column, printed less than six weeks before the vote, sided with Professor Steiger and portrayed a state wheat monopoly as a step toward State socialism that the socialists welcomed for reasons beyond doctrine. The question went to the people on 5 December 1926 as a federal decree inserting a new Article 23bis on the state's grain supply into the Federal Constitution. The vote was a mandatory referendum and required a double majority, of the popular vote and of the cantons. The proposal was rejected by a majority of voters and of cantons, though the popular margin was narrow: 372,049 votes against and 366,507 for. The outcome matched the opposition the column voiced. The column's account of the socialists' motives, including its paraphrase of M. Schneider, is the writer's polemical reading.
Original
La stabilisation belge
Cent millions de dollars représentent plus de trois milliards de francs belges, soit environ le tiers de la circulation totale du pays. C'est une somme considérable. Si elle a été obtenue sans grand'peine, c'est que tous les pays, y compris l'Allemagne, se sont rendu compte de l'avantage économique que représenterait pour eux un nouveau progrès dans la voie de la stabilisation financière de l'Europe, Les renseignements que nous possédons sur la nouvelle monnaie belge, à base or, le belga, sont trop succincts pour qu'on puisse exprimer une opinion définitive. Sera-ce une monnaie de compte ou une monnaie de paiement? Ce qui est certain, c'est qu'en fixant au belga une valeur qui n'est pas celle du franc-or, la Belgique détache délibérément son sort de celui du franc français. Elle enregistre la perte éprouvée et se résout à établir sa vie économique sur une base nouvelle.
Les conversations franco-allemandes
M. von Hœsch, ambassadeur d'Allemagne, qui est rentré récemment à Paris, a conféré longuement, à la fin de la semaine dernière, d'abord avec M. Philippe Berthelot, secrétaire général du ministère des affaires étrangères, puis avec M. Briand lui-même. On a vu là la reprise de la négociation franco-allemande engagée à Thoiry. Dans un sens c'est exact, mais à la condition qu'on ne perde pas de vue qu'il s'agit de pourparlers qui sont encore à leurs premiers débuts et qui, dans l'hypothèse où ils aboutiraient à un résultat positif, dureront très longtemps, et se poursuivront non pas pendant des semaines, mais pendant des mois.
La question du blé
M. le professeur Steiger a engagé une lutte énergique contre le monopole du blé, et s'est prononcé en faveur de l'initiative populaire¹ (encourageant la culture du blé sans monopole). Pourquoi cette position? - Pour les raisons que voici: Le monopole du blé nous achemine directement au socialisme d'Etat. L'extrême gauche est enchantée de l'occasion qui lui est offerte d'accomplir une partie très importante de son programme. L'un de ses chefs, M. Schneider, l'a reconnu de façon explicite: la doctrine n'est pas seule à avoir engagé les socialistes à appuyer le monopole du blé, et ils doivent assurer l'étatisation de telle ou telle branche de l'économie nationale même si, pour le moment, elle n'est influencée qu'indirectement par la classe ouvrière. Les socialistes ne voient pas exclusivement le résultat immédiat: ils regardent plus loin, et ils savent que le monopole du blé amènerait de l'eau.... à leur moulin.