v LEGALITY OF CLAIM FOR PENSIONS 145

authors to admit, so soon after they had been given,that they were contrary to our engagements.

The discussion opened with the delegations, otherthan the American, claiming that we had not com-mitted ourselves to anything which precluded ourdemanding from Germany all the loss and damage,direct and indirect, which had resulted from the war." One of the Allies, " says Mr. Baruch, " went evenfurther, and made claim for loss and damage result-ing from the fact that the Armistice was concludedso unexpectedly that the termination of hostilitiesinvolved it in financial losses."

Various arguments were employed in the earlystages, the British delegates to the Separation Com-mittee of the Beace Conference, namely, Mr. Hughes,Lord Sumner and Lord Cunliffe , supporting thedemand for complete war costs and not merelyreparation for damage. They urged (1) that oneof the principles enunciated by Bresident Wilsonwas that each item of the Treaty should be just, andthat it was in accordance with the general principlesof justice to throw on Germany the whole costs ofthe war ; and (2) that Great Britain 's war costs hadresulted from Germany 's breach of the Treaty ofNeutrality of Belgium, and that therefore GreatBritain (but not necessarily, on this argument, allthe other Allies ) was entitled to complete repaymentin accordance with the general principles of Inter-national law. These general arguments were, I think,

L