90 A REVISION OF THE TREATY chap.

and ships. These certainly do not satisfy thecriterion of not competing with our own products ;and I see very little advantage, but on the otherhand some loss and inconvenience, in the Allies receiving these goods direct, instead of Germany selling them in the best market and paying overthe proceeds. In the case of coal in particular, itwould be much better if Germany sold her outputfor cash in the best export markets, whether to France and Belgium or to the neighbouring neutrals, andthen paid the cash over to France and Belgium , thanthat coal should be delivered to the Allies for whichthe latter may have no immediate use, or by transportroutes which are uneconomical, when neutrals needthe coal and what the Allies really require is theequivalent cash. In some cases the Allies have re-soldthe coal which Germany has delivered to them,— aprocedure which, in the case of an article for whichfreight charges cover so large a proportion of thewhole value, involves a preposterous waste.

If we try to stipulate the precise commodities inwhich Germany is to pay us, we shall not secure fromher so large a contribution, as if we fix a reasonablesum which is within her capacity, and then leaveher to find the money as best she can. If, moreover,the sum fixed is reasonable, the annual paymentswill not be so large, in proportion to the total volumeof international trade, that we need be nervouslest the payments upset the normal equihbrium of