Journal de Genève
- Swiss Wheat
- Letter from Paris
- Passing Remarks
This page of the Journal de Genève carried an editorial on Switzerland's dwindling wheat self-sufficiency. It argued that home production had fallen from 300 days of bread a year in 1840 to just 60 before the war, and it put the main blame on the growth of the non-farming population. A Paris correspondent weighed rumors that the Italian ambassador had sounded out Aristide Briand about broad Franco-Italian talks, and he noted Rome's complaint that Paris would talk with everyone but Italy. A causerie looked back at Jean-Baptiste Féronce von Rotenkreutz, the Brunswick finance minister who cut the duchy's debts largely by hiring out its subjects to Britain as soldiers against the American colonies.
Translation
Swiss Wheat
There was a time when our country still produced all the wheat it needed. That was about a hundred years ago. Since then, things have changed completely. Still sufficient in 1840 for 300 days of the year, and in 1870 for 150 days, our production supplied us with only 60 days' worth of bread before the war. What were the causes of this decline? There is one that must be named before any other, because it is beyond remedy. It is the growth of our non-agricultural population. From 1870 to 1910, the Swiss population increased from 2.65 to 3.75 million, while the farming class remained stationary and even declined slightly, from 1.14 to 1.04 million. That is the primary cause of the shortfall in our supply.
Letter from Paris
Since the return to Paris, some ten days ago, of Baron Romano Avezzana, there has been talk of the possibility of a broad Franco-Italian negotiation covering all the problems that concern or divide the two countries. It was said that the Italian ambassador, who went to see M. Briand, had instructions to sound out the ground and see whether a conversation of this kind was possible. How much truth is there in these rumors? It is rather difficult to know. What is certain, however, is that more than once Rome has expressed, more or less explicitly, the wish to see France agree to the opening of talks, and that the Italian press has often reproached the Paris government, perhaps unjustly, for being ready to talk with everyone except the cabinet in Rome. Thoiry and its aftermath seemed to sharpen a feeling that had already been voiced on more than one occasion.
Passing Remarks
A member of this family, Jean-Baptiste Féronce von Rotenkreutz (1723–1799), played a prominent role at the court of Duke Charles of Brunswick. He became its finance minister in 1773 and kept that post under the regency of Charles William Ferdinand. He reorganized the finances of the duchy, utterly discredited by Duke Charles's prodigality, and from 1773 to 1780 he succeeded in reducing that State's debts from 12 to 5 million écus. It must be said, however, that his chief resource was the hiring out to Great Britain of Brunswick subjects as soldiers against the rebellious American colonies (cf. Spehr, article "Féronce", in Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, vol. VI, pp. 717–719).
Context
The grain vote a month after the wheat editorial
The editorial's figures on falling self-sufficiency, from 300 days of bread in 1840 to 60 days before the war, are the paper's own, and so is its view that a growing non-farming population was the cause. The paper printed them as Switzerland neared a national decision on the question. On 5 December 1926, a month after this issue, Swiss voters were asked whether to add Article 23bis to the federal constitution, which concerned the state's grain supply. Because the vote was a mandatory referendum, it needed a double majority: a majority of the popular vote and a majority of the cantons. The proposal was rejected by a majority of voters and of cantons. The excerpt does not mention the ballot. Even so, its argument that Switzerland could no longer feed itself from its own fields bears directly on what voters were deciding: how the Confederation should secure its bread grain.
What the 1896 conventions gave Italians in Tunisia
The Paris letter speaks of all the problems that "concern or divide" France and Italy without listing them. One long-running issue was the legal position of Italians in French-protected Tunisia. On 28 September 1896, three Italo-Tunisian conventions were concluded for nine years, with tacit renewal once that period ran out. One of them covered consular matters and set the condition of Italians in the Regency. Under these arrangements, Italy also kept the right to maintain its national schools in Tunisia. A French writer in 1937 called that right essential because the schools sustained Italian national feeling within the colony. This was the kind of standing grievance that a broad Franco-Italian negotiation, as rumored in the letter, would have had to address.
Why the Tunisian question was still open in 1926
The letter reports that Rome had repeatedly sought talks and that the Italian press accused Paris of avoiding them. A French account published in 1937 shows that one key Franco-Italian file was formally pending. The Franco-Italian arrangement of 12 September 1919 included a denunciation in principle of the 1896 consular convention. While negotiations to settle the future condition of Italians in Tunisia were awaited, however, the 1896 convention was extended every quarter. That quarterly extension continued until the 1935 agreements, known as the Laval agreements. When this letter was written in 1926, then, the status of Italians in Tunisia rested on a provisional arrangement renewed every three months. That helps explain why Rome had an interest in the comprehensive talks the correspondent described.
Original
Le blé suisse
Il fut un temps où notre pays produisait encore tout le blé qu'il lui fallait. C'était il y a cent ans environ. Depuis, les choses ont changé du tout au tout. Suffisante en 1840 pour 300 jours de l'année encore et en 1870 pour 150 jours, notre production ne nous fournissait plus que pour 60 jours de pain avant la guerre. Quelles furent les causes de ce recul? Il y en a une qu'il faut nommer avant toute autre parce qu'elle est sans remède. C'est l'accroissement de notre population non agricole. De 1870 à 1910, la population suisse augmenta de 2, 65 à 3, 75 millions tandis que la classe agricole restait stationnaire et diminuait même légèrement, soit de 1, 14 à 1, 04 million. Voilà la cause première du déficit dans notre approvisionnement.
Lettre de Paris
Depuis le retour à Paris, voici une dizaine de jours, du baron Romano Avezzana, il était question de l'éventualité d'une vaste négociation franco - italienne portant sur tous les problèmes qui intéressent ou qui divisent les deux pays. On disait que l'ambassadeur d'Italie, qui est allé voir M. Briand, avait pour instructions de tâter le terrain pour voir si une conversation de ce genre était possible. Qu'y a-t-il de vrai dans ces rumeurs? C'est assez difficile à savoir. Il est certain toutefois que, plus d'une fois, on a manifesté plus ou moins explicitement à Rome le désir de voir la France accepter l'ouverture de pourparlers et que la presse italienne a souvent reproché au gouvernement de Paris, d'une façon peut-être injuste, d'être prêt à causer avec tout le monde sauf avec le cabinet de Rome. Thoiry et ses suites ont paru accentuer un sentiment qui s'était déjà exprimé à plus d'une reprise.
Menus propos
Un membre de cette famille, Jean-Baptiste Féronce von Rotenkreutz (1723-1799), joua un rôle marquant à la cour du duc Charles de Brunswick. Il en devint le ministre des finances en 1773 et conserva ce poste sous la régence de CharlesGuillaume-Ferdinand. Il réorganisa les finances du duché, complètement discréditées par la prodigalité du duc Charles, et il réussit, de 1773 à 1780, à réduire de 12 à 5 millions d'écus les dettes de cet Etat. Il est vrai de dire que sa principale ressource fut la location à la Grande-Bretagne de sujets brunsvicois comme soldats contre les colonies américaines révoltées (cf. Spehr, article Féronce, dans Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, t. VI, pp. 717-719).