34 A REVISION OF THE TREATY chap.

carefully and precisely drawn up, and probably re-presented the full maximum that Germany couldhave performed, if not more.

But the offer, as I have said, made very littleimpression ; it was largely ignored in the press, andscarcely commented on anywhere. For in the twomonths which elapsed between the First and SecondConferences of London there were two events ofgreat importance, which modified the situationmaterially. 1

The first of these was the result of the Silesianplebiscite held in March 1921. The earlier GermanReparation offers had all been contingent on herretention of Upper Silesia ; and this condition wasone which, in advance of the plebiscite, the Allies were unable to accept. But it now appeared thatGermany was in fact entitled to most of the country,and, possibly, to the greater part of the industrialarea. But this result also brought to a head theacute divergence between the policy of France and the policy of the other Allies towards thisquestion.

The second event was the decision of the Repara-tion Commission, communicated to Germany onApril 27, 1921, as to her aggregate liabilities underthe Treaty . Allied Finance Ministers had fore-shadowed 300 milliard gold marks ; at the time of

1 After the enforcement of the Sanctions and the failure of the counter-proposals, the Cabinet of Herr Fehrenbach and Dr. Simons was succeededby that of Dr. Wirth.