in THE WIESBADEN AGREEMENT 87

The second set of provisions is, however, of adifferent character, since it interferes with theexisting agreements between the Allies themselvesas to the order and proportions in which each is toshare in the available receipts from Germany , andseeks to secure for France a larger share of the earlierpayments than she would receive otherwise. Apriority to France is, in my opinion, desirable ; butsuch priority should be accorded as part of ageneral re-settlement of Eeparation, in which GreatBritain should waive her claim entirely. Further,the Agreement involves an act of doubtful good faithon the part of Germany . She has been protestingwith great vehemence (and, I believe, with perfecttruth) that the Decisions of London exact from hermore than she can perform. But in such circum-stances it is an act of impropriety for her to entervoluntarily into an agreement which must have theeffect, if it is operative, of further increasing herliabilities even beyond those against which sheprotests as impossible. Herr Rathenau may justifyhis action by the arguments that this is a first steptowards replacing the Decisions of London by moresensible arrangements, and also that, if he can placateGermany 's largest and most urgent creditor in theshape of France , he has not much to fear from theothers. M. Loucheur, on the other hand, may knowas well as I do, though speaking otherwise, that theDecisions of London cannot be carried out, and that