NOT only the prestige which our nation enjoys, but the very strength of the President's personality, had already made him the commanding figure long before the signing of Peace. The remarkable part which he had taken in shaping the course of the events of the war, beginning long before our own entrance, had deeply laid the foundations for his eminent position when he should come in person to France. Nearly a year before his arrival that trenchant reflector of independent public opinion, Mr. H. G. Wells, in commenting upon the lack of leadership in England, had written:(2) "The bulk of British opinion cannot go on being represented forever by President Wilson. We cannot always look to the Americans to express our ideas and do our work for democracy." Such a sentiment too I know existed in many of the higher circles of French thought.

Soon after the signing of the Armistice, it had fallen to my lot to make arrangements for the temporary residence of the members of the American Peace Mission.

President and Mrs. Wilson themselves had accepted the hospitality of Prince and Princess Murat, head of the distinguished family of that name, who put at the President's disposal their own handsome residence on the rue de Monceau during his first visit. In the year 1919, upon his return from America, he occupied the home of M. Francis de Croisset on the Place des Etats-Unis, which I had thought of taking for my Embassy when I arrived in Paris.

The choice of the home for the Peace Mission and its entourage fell upon the Hôtel Crillon; and in pursuance of instructions from the Department of State I secured its exclusive use.

Whatever may be charged to the account of red tape in the actions of the French Government had no application in this case. My request for the requisition of the hotel was made on Wednesday; on the following Saturday it was turned over, from top to bottom, for occupancy by this Mission. What matter if several hundred roomers were put out on the street to find accommodation as best they might, and that, too, at a time when all the other Allied Powers were seeking similar accommodations for their representatives at the Conference?

"C'est la guerre" was sufficient excuse.

The next few days I found my hands full, being compelled to intercede with a fortunately tender-hearted hotel manager to make exceptions to the stern rule for immediate evacuation, in the cases of those whose situation rendered its enforcement too harsh. Even my good friend of long standing, M. Jules Cambon, former French Ambassador to the United States and at the time in the Ministry of War,(3) being temporarily disabled by an attack of pneumonia at the Crillon, had to write me a letter making a personal appeal to be allowed to retain his room.

As a man is wont to regard with feelings akin to affection the place which he has been permitted to call his home during times of stress, so I shall remember with sentimental regard the Hôtel Crillon, with its columned façade of the architecture of a century and a half ago. From the large front windows of my suite of rooms overlooking the Place de la Concorde, which I had occupied for some months at the beginning of the war, a sky-line lay before me to the south of unrivalled interest and charm, embracing a wide sweep of some of the most notable structures in the world.

Extending from right to left, one may see, in succession with but a slight turn of the head, in a line sweeping away to the east, the towers of the Trocadéro, with its beautiful gardens sloping to the Seine; the Eiffel Tower, so lofty that its flagpole is often lost in the impenetrable mists of a Paris fog-conceived as a folly of fancy, but in the crisis of the nation, to be the instrument for revealing untold secrets of the greatest value; the gilded dome, of such striking beauty, above the Tomb of Napoleon; the Chamber of Deputies, with its Grecian front, behind whose great columns events of historic interest have so often occurred; the twin-spired church of Ste. Clotilde; then the massive St. Sulpice with a façade so unlike any other I have known, and the keys of whose sweet-toned organ, touched by the wizard fingers of the great Widor, sent forth music such as I had never heard before; and finally, in the extreme east of my picture, above the tops of the trees of the garden of the Tuileries, the towers of the Cathedral of Notre Dame, which attracts, more than any other sacred edifice in France, the interest of the visitor to Paris.

If such were the monuments which greeted my eyes when looking from my window Seine-ward, the scene below was scarcely less interesting. There, at one glance, I could see the centre and the four corners of the Place de la Concorde. No spot in any other city in the world has been the scene of human action so reflective of the history of its people. Whether looked upon as the place of the execution of the unhappy King Louis XVI and his faithful Queen, Marie Antoinette; or the scene of the excesses of the Revolution; or the burning of the Palace of the Tuileries by maddened Communists at a later epoch; or as the place of many a gala fête or the exhibition of the trophies of a triumphant war, the spot possesses an unrivalled interest. Through its interesting highways, from all points of the compass, throbs the daily life of Paris.

Ruskin has deeply lamented the decadence of his beloved Venice, the crumbling of whose stones has measured the extent of her decline from her first proud position. More fortunate these monuments of Paris whose foundations but grow deeper with the lengthening of their traditions, and whose crests gain added beauty from the wondrous power of the rejuvenation of their environment.

The recent great conflict with its chapter of horrors, relieved only by so many examples of heroic sacrifices, had made it imperative that the statesmen of the different countries should adopt a course such that so heavy a price should not again have to be paid for peace. France in particular had exhibited throughout the war a backbone of steel which had never weakened, but on the contrary she had shown the greatest spirit in days that seemed the darkest.

She came to have a profound admiration for America on account of our help. Tangible evidence of this fraternal feeling towards Americans was shown immediately upon the arrival of President Wilson as he passed along the avenues of the French capital. Premier Clemenceau remarked to me: "I have never before witnessed such a demonstration in Paris." For my part, I may say that I have attended many public celebrations, but I never saw anywhere greater enthusiasm or larger crowds.

On Thursday, December 12, I had left Paris for Brest to meet President Wilson, accompanied by my son and a distinguished party including Miss Margaret Wilson, M. Georges Leygues, Minister of Marine, Admiral de Bon, M. André Tardieu, Commissioner for Franco-American Affairs, Generals Pershing and Bliss, and Admiral Benson. A very luxurious train, with salon cars and special apartments, had been put at my disposal by the French Government,

Arriving at Brest the next morning at about half past eleven, I went with my party immediately to the wharf to board a lighter. We must have presented a strange spectacle to the hundreds watching us along the waterfront, as we stood with our high silk hats on the deck of this boat which was very far from large, until we took refuge from the spray by entering the tiny cabin where our hats kept knocking against the ceiling.

When finally the George Washington arrived we went immediately on board and were there greeted by the President and Mrs. Wilson, near whom we found the Secretary of State, French Ambassador Jusserand, former Ambassador Henry White, and Mr. John W. Davis, recently appointed American Ambassador to Great Britain. After we had all shaken hands with the President, M. André Tardieu was the spokesman for a speech to which the President replied in a very happy tone. He was, indeed, very affable, and his cordiality delighted the French who had been prepared to find in him a rather stern if not gruff sort of person. My good friend M. Georges Leygues profited by an opportunity to have a private word with me, expressing his genuine enthusiasm, confirming what was already well known to me, that he was a true friend of the United States.

At the landing place, President Wilson was greeted by the Mayor of Brest as well as by brass bands and a Socialist Delegation, to the accompaniment of the Presidential salute fired from the cannon of the fort, in which all the foreign warships in the harbour joined.

Driving through the streets of Brest, we found the city arrayed in gala attire. Breton peasant women in their native costumes, and the men with their old-fashioned and picturesque hats, mingled with soldiers and sailors both French and American.

At about half-past nine next day, Saturday, December 14, our special train reached the Gare du Bois de Boulogne, the station generally selected for such official arrivals and departures because of its natural beauty, situated as it is on the very edge of the Bois, and standing furthermore at one end of the broad and noble Avenue leading up to Napoleon's Arch of Triumph and thence down the Champs-Elysées to the Place de la Concorde. No first glimpse of Paris could be more enchanting, and nowhere could equal space be found for the gathering of holiday crowds to receive the distinguished guests of France.

The President immediately stepped out and greeted President and Madame Poincaré, Premier Clemenceau, the Members of the Cabinet and all high officials both French and foreign, who had gathered to do him honour and to form the magnificent cortège whose course through Paris has left undying memories with all who witnessed it.

The scene was, indeed, all the more imposing because of the unquestionably spontaneous nature of every gesture made by the crowd and every shout raised by those thousands of voices. I know how deeply the President was touched by the tributes paid to him on that day, which certainly counted among the busiest as well as the happiest in his official life. For not only was the exchange of visits with the President of the Republic immediately necessary, in accordance with the etiquette established by the French Protocol on such occasions, but that very day was the date fixed for the banquet given in his honour by the President of the French Republic, at which were delivered the first of the speeches marking President Wilson's mission to France, and in the afternoon at half-past three there was a Labour Parade in the President's honour, followed by the reception of a delegation of Socialist Members of the Chamber of Deputies, and a speech made by them.

I may here remark that this episode, which in the sequel gave rise to some criticism as a spontaneous occurrence which might have been avoided, it being even intimated in some quarters that the President should have refused to receive them for fear of "misunderstandings," was, as a matter of fact, inscribed in the programme drawn up in writing four days in advance of the President's arrival. It indicated no espousal of "Socialist policies," as some went so far as to allege, but it was highly symbolical of the President's love for the people and his constant thought for them in all his plans for Peace. I believe that the people of France as a whole understood this well.

Another feature inscribed on that programme dated December 10, awaiting the President's arrival, was a visit to Northern France and Belgium occupying the dates of December 26 to 28 inclusive. Further misunderstandings, or rather misinterpretations, arose over a change in this detail,

The President perfectly realized the difficulties of his position in Europe. He was to take his first direct personal contact with statesmen who already knew each other intimately through the various Inter-Allied Conferences which had so frequently been held. Having known them only by correspondence, or through reports concerning them, he was now to converse with them to reach verbally decisions which, when put in writing, would make or unmake the Peace won by heroic achievement and unparalleled sufferings. The prime consideration for him was to get to know the psychology of these men in close informal gatherings before the official meetings should begin. Compared with this, the visit to the ravaged and devastated regions, for which he had felt so strongly and concerning which he had protested so energetically to Germany down to the very signing of the Armistice, might well wait. He both wished and intended to visit them. But he knew of their condition by the frequent and ample reports he had been reading throughout the war. The gesture which his heart commanded him to make was therefore of a less urgent nature than the necessity for him to know the men who were to decide with him how to assure future safety for those regions.(4)

The way in which these plain and logical facts were distorted brought the first evidence of a campaign organized to do the President harm in the public eye. It was asserted that he refused to visit the scenes of desolation from fear that they might prejudice him against Germany, and lead him to make conditions too drastic for her liking. The proof of the injustice of the charge brought against him was that when informed by the Embassy of the depth of feeling on the subject and the use being made of it, he immediately altered his personal plans and made not one but two visits, one to Rheims, and another of longer duration and wider extent through the devastated regions.

Tuesday, December 17, was the date fixed for the dinner given by Mrs. Sharp and myself for the President and Mrs. Wilson, followed by a reception to which all the American members of the Peace Commission were invited, together with the members of the French Government and leading statesmen and members of Parliament. Of course the presence, at such a function, in a foreign capital, of a President of the United States during his tenure of office, gave it a character as unique as it was unprecedented.

Certainly at no other time since the beginning of my mission had there been at the Embassy a social function of this importance. The party at dinner included notably, in addition to President and Madame Poincaré: Premier Clemenceau; the British, Italian, Japanese, and Spanish Ambassadors to France and their wives; the President of the Senate, M. Antonin Dubost; the President of the Chamber and Madame Paul Deschanel; the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Madame Pichon; the Minister of Marine and Madame Leygues; Marshal and Madame Joffre; Marshal and Madame Foch; General Pershing; Marshal Pétain; the Secretary of State and Mrs. Lansing; French Ambassador and Madame Jusserand; Miss Margaret Wilson; Colonel and Mrs. House; former Ambassador Henry White; General Bliss; General Harts; Admiral and Mrs. Benson; and Mrs. Gordon Auchincloss, daughter of Colonel House, one of the youngest women in the Peace party at the Conference, her husband being with Colonel House as Special Assistant.

In addition to the dinner guests, comprising the dignitaries whom I have mentioned, five hundred other guests were bidden, representative of the diplomatic and social life of Paris, including my own Embassy staff and such distinguished foreigners as M. Gabriel Hanotaux, former Cabinet Minister and President of the France-Amérique Society; M, Alexandre Millerand, the former Minister of War, who was soon after to be appointed French High Commissioner in Alsace and Lorraine and who was later elected President of the Republic; M. Maurice Herbette of the Foreign Office, since appointed French Ambassador to Belgium; the Serbian Minister to France and Madame Vesnitch; the Norwegian Minister to France and Baroness Wedel-Jarlsberg; etc.

Gowns and jewels of great splendour were worn on that occasion for one of the first times since the beginning of the war. With that thoughtfulness which the officials of the municipality of Paris constantly showed to me, directions unasked by me had been given to turn on the great searchlights at the top of the Eiffel Tower, which stands across the Seine near by, directly in line with the Avenue d'Eylau. During the arrival and departure of our noteworthy guests, these lights were directed down the avenue, and darkness was turned into the light of day. I am sure that never before had this thoroughfare received such distinction.

No less impressive than President Wilson's arrival was the scene which I witnessed on February 14 when the President, in a plenary session of the Conference, nearly all the nations of the earth being represented, gave forth the articles agreed upon in reference to the establishment of the League of Nations. That speech was epochal and left a lasting memory with all who heard it. Even if I had not previously known, as I so well did, the value which would attach to President Wilson's presence in Paris, I could not have failed from that moment to feel the greatest confidence in his wisdom and courage in dealing with the all-important questions before the Peace Conference.

To all carpers who complained that the President should never have come to Paris, I could put the question: How did they expect America to be represented otherwise? We have in America no Cabinet Member equivalent to the European Premier or President of the Council, to represent us at a conference where such dignitaries, and not the accredited Ambassadors, were to be the plenipotentiaries. Such a detail may not count for much among us, but it does have weight in European eyes. Yet that was not the only question which arose, and not the most important one. Secondly it must be asked: How would information of these complicated proceedings have reached our Chief of State in Washington? Not only were the problems raised the most highly involved which the world had ever been called upon to deal with, but they were so new that fresh impressions and additional information were coming in at every moment. If the Transatlantic cables and the resources of wireless transmission had been multiplied tenfold, they would still not have sufficed to carry such voluminous reports to Washington, and the study of them in such form to reach swift and irrevocable decisions would have been beyond the powers of any man.

The European statesmen had the advantage of being in constant touch with their Cabinets and their Chiefs of State. M. Clemenceau could call a Cabinet meeting at any time, and his telephone put him in immediate communication with his colleagues or with President Poincaré. The same was true of the telephone for the British, Belgian, and Italian delegates. Furthermore, if Mr. Lloyd George or Signor Orlando found it necessary to call a Cabinet meeting to discuss some delicate point before their country was committed, they could readily find a pretext for a short journey home, during which the Conference could be engaged on other matters without a formal meeting for a few days.

All these advantages would obviously have been denied to any Chief American delegate appointed by the President and remaining responsible to him. And as for constant trips to America to report upon the proceedings and secure instructions, we all know what happened when President Wilson felt compelled to take contact with the American public, though only once.(5)

It was a situation in which he saw no alternative but to take the responsibilities directly on his own shoulders, and having done this he was fearless as in all things when his mind was made up on a course. Those who criticized him in the sequel, for any difficulties which may have arisen through his presence in Paris, would do well to give some moments of thought to those graver and more far-reaching complications which would have become inevitable if he had not been in Paris.(6)

There was, indeed, no parallel in history for a Conference of so extensive and so complicated a nature. Looking back through the events in Europe for slightly over a century, one could find only three Conferences which might be taken as furnishing any sort of precedent. There had been the Congress of Vienna, held from November 1, 1814, to June 9, 1815, to reorganize Europe subsequent to the Napoleonic Wars; there had been the Congress of Paris, February 25 to April 16, 1856, after the Crimean War; and there had been the Congress of Berlin, June 13 to July 13, 1878, subsequent to the Russo-Turkish War, called by Germany to settle the affairs of the Orient.

Of the three, only the Congress of Vienna could be compared with the Conference to deal with the consequences of the 1914-1918 World War, by the amplitude of the problems raised and the number of small as well as great States represented. There were at Vienna no less than three different groups of Powers. First came the eight signatories of the Treaty of Paris of May 30, 1814 Austria, France, Great Britain, Portugal, Prussia, Russia, Spain, Sweden---and of these Spain eventually refused to sign the final act. Next came all the non-signatory States parties to the war; and finally the German States whose Constitution was to be carried out. It will thus be seen that a similarity could be found there, although no real parallel was furnished; and one might also note the brilliant names chronicled among the representatives of the Powers---Metternich and Talleyrand, and Lord Castlereagh, later replaced by the Duke of Wellington.

But it is to be noted that at the 1814-1815 Congress, the Treaty signed in Paris four months prior to its opening served as basis for the discussions. The same was true of the two subsequent Congresses I have named, The Congress of Paris, in which Count Walewski was the central figure, had as its basis the Protocol signed at Vienna February 1, 1854, three weeks and a half prior to the opening; and the Congress of Berlin, which brought Bismarck and Disraeli into opposition, had as its basis of discussions the Treaty of San Stefano, signed three months before, on March 3, 1878.

Now, no such general and concerted Treaty stipulations, properly speaking, could be cited as basis for the discussions to be held in Paris and in Versailles at the close of the World War, There had been not a preliminary Treaty signed but an Armistice concluded successively with the four enemy Powers, Bulgaria, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Germany; and on the Allied side there was as a collective declaration, concerted and agreed upon by all the parties concerned, the common Declaration of the European Allies in reply to President Wilson's Note asking to know their War aims: and this supplied a programme rather than a formal basis for debates at the Conference, since the various Armistice stipulations had to be furthermore taken strictly into account. At the root of the whole lay the Fourteen Points.

For the above reasons alone, the necessity for the presence in Paris of the President of the United States, as the only person authorized by our Constitution to negotiate Treaties,(7) appeared as the sole means for handling an involved situation which would have become inextricable, if disadvantages had been added on our side such as separation by the entire stretch of the Atlantic, and the necessity to commit all explanations, inquiries, and instructions, to writing.

The history of the Conference will be written by others, in the light of the records kept and the memories of those who took an active part in the whole. I had been called to America by the grave illness and death of my brother, George W. Sharp, a few days before Christmas, returning to my post only on the 1st of February, and having resolved to withdraw from it in April, for reasons which I will shortly state. Nevertheless, there were aspects about which I would say my word, having been in a position to observe what was occurring at that critical period in the affairs of the world.

If all was not destined to go smoothly with the Conference, it was not from lack of goodwill shown on many sides or of very great efforts exerted by all.(8) Early in January, attacks began to be made in certain organs of the Paris Press against the President's policy, sometimes going to an extent and being couched in such terms as were unprecedented, I was told, in editorials on a visiting foreign Chief of State. This could not facilitate the reaching of an agreement, where questions so numerous and so complicated, with so many divergent interests, were concerned.

The occasion for these attacks was not always very clear, since points touched upon were sometimes extraneous to matters under discussion, and I even noticed criticisms often passed upon President Wilson for views which I knew not to be his. But furthermore, there were not lacking persons, usually of a wide and accurate scope of information, who assured me that there was a concerted and possibly interested movement to instigate these attacks and to influence accordingly the outcome of the Peace Conference. There were particularly certain periods when this was very marked, notably in February and in April. Not only was grave concern then revealed as to the proceedings of the Conference and the outcome to be foreseen, but simultaneous opposition against the President appeared at Washington, where the articles published in the Paris Press were being actively exploited.

It was my firm conviction that it was this campaign which exercised its effect upon public opinion in France, and not public opinion itself which turned spontaneously against the President of the United States, who had crossed the ocean to continue and conclude his effort of years to establish world peace on a sound and lasting basis. At the beginning of the year, it had been evident that French public opinion was, whole-heartedly in support of the President. By the middle of March a change was noticeable in the public, but the majority of French opinion was still with him. At the time, I remarked as significant, in several papers of wide circulation and considerable importance, the tendency to pay compliments to President Wilson in one column while attacking him in another.

The obstacles put in the way of the proceedings were sometimes of a surprising nature. I may mention as one detail that M. Jules Cambon was unsuccessful in his efforts to obtain an authorized and officially recognized text of a translation into French of President Wilson's Fourteen Principles on which the greater part of the debates turned.(9) As far as I know, no such official text was ever made available either to the Peace Conference or to the French Parliament itself.

The Press criticisms of President Wilson which became frequent early in February subsided somewhat, as if from inanition, in the latter half of that month. But it was then during his brief visit home, that one might note the profit to which the attacks of the French Press were being turned in Washington by political adversaries of the President. This situation as it developed in our Senate was watched particularly closely by the Washington correspondent of L'Echo de Paris, who kept French readers fully informed of the opposition to the League being organized in the United States. On February 25 this paper announced that a number of Republican leaders were to make addresses throughout the country, fighting the League and demanding a return to "traditional Americanism," although the League had been given the support of ex-President William H. Taft.(10)

On March it was the turn of Le Matin to draw attention to the opposition against the League in America, supplementing the report published the previous day of Senator Lodge's speech in the Senate saying that before twelve months had passed, the very nations which had signed the project for the League would be quarrelling to know what it meant.

With all this, concern was expressed over the proceedings of the Conference itself,(11) particularly from the point of view of the damages from Germany which should devolve to France's share; and here anyone cognizant of France's efforts and her sacrifices could not but be in sympathy with much that was written.

L'Action Française published on February 25 an article by M. Charles Maurras drawing attention to the statement of an American economist according to which America would lose 4.5% of her wealth, England 32%, and France 62% as their respective sacrifices attributable to the war; figures which had been confirmed by the French Deputy, M. Pierre Rameil. M. Maurras argued that an indemnity of a thousand billions collected from Germany should consequently be divided in this proportion. On all sides, he said, people in France were asking: "Why should not German capital pay first?"

President Wilson's return from America was warmly applauded by Le Gaulois, which declared on March 15 that he was "all the more welcome because he had proclaimed in America principles of international policy which have dispersed the anxiety sometimes caused by his attitude during the first part of the Conference."

It was to be observed on March 28 that the Paris papers published the President's statement about the League of Nations almost without comment. On that day, Le Matin complained of the slowness of the Big Four as well as the Ten, in reaching solutions, and L'Echo de Paris remarked that even to write the peace is not to make it."

The Paris Press of April 5 was particularly significant from the dual point of view of the grave concern being felt in France and the concerted opposition to the President in Washington.

Notably "Pertinax," writing in L'Echo de Paris, said that the League of Nations was lying in pieces on the floors of the Crillon, Two opposed conceptions of peace were in presence; one mercantile and ideological, the other realist and truly humane. It would be better for the Four to say that they were unable to agree(12) and would refer the matter to their Parliaments. The French were confident in the verdict of the Chambers of London, Washington, and Paris.

It was on this same day, that L'Echo de Paris published a long telegram from its Washington correspondent, discussing the stand taken by Mr. Root and Mr. Hitchcock about the amendments to the League of Nations Pact.(13)

On April 12, Le Matin cast upon the United States the entire blame for all delays in the Peace Preliminaries, and emphasis was laid upon the fact that although there still appeared to be doubts as to the figures of Germany's debts to the Allies, exact data were not lacking. France had lost Frs. 316,000,000,000 or Frs. 10,000 per capita; England had spent something like Frs. 125,000,000,000 or about Frs. 3,000 per capita; the United States had spent Frs. 100,000,000,000, or Frs. 900 per capita. The conclusions reached were that entirely too much leniency was being shown to Germany, and it was stated that profound unrest was being caused in France by the slowness of the Council and the silence of the Four as to their work. A front-page cartoon showed a diplomat in the office of a chief of police, engaged in a conversation as follows: "You would like to recover your stolen money?" I should like to very much." "What is the amount of the theft? " "Oh! I don't dare tell!"

By the time April 14 came, the papers pretty well agreed that the American Delegation must bear the responsibility for setting aside the propositions of the French.(14)

L'Echo de Paris published cabled reports from Washington informing the French public of the continued dissatisfaction of the Republican Party, led by Senator Lodge, over the developments of the League of Nations. One of these telegrams mentioned that President Wilson might withdraw from the Conference; the George Washington was being held in readiness for himself and his party at Brest; this was interpreted as being nothing less than "an attempt at intimidation."(15)

On April 12, the Socialist organ Le Populaire had, on the other hand, devoted six columns of its first page to articles in praise of President Wilson, and especially of his "move" in commanding the George Washington to be held in readiness. This was stated to suggest that President Wilson intended to maintain his programme of a democratic peace in the face of opposition, or to withdraw from the Council of Four rather than witness any violation of his solemn word as given to the Peoples. This, said Le Populaire, was but another logical expression of his nobility of purpose, for he remained the sole hope of the Peoples.

But meanwhile at least the future of the League of Nations had been assured, whatever its critics might have to say about it. That crisis had come and passed, two full months before, although the inside story, as told me at the time, came out only in the sequel, and fragmentarily. The part played by Mr. Oscar Straus, of New York, in particular, does not yet seem to be generally known.

I profited by a conversation which I held with him in Washington, in 1921, to secure confirmation of what he had said to me in Paris more than two years previously.

Memorandum by Mr. Sharp.

Shoreham Hotel, Washington, D.C.

December 16, 1921.

In conversation at the breakfast table this morning with Mr. Oscar Straus of New York, he again told me the story of his own part in regard to saving the League of Nations provisions at Paris, in substantially the following words:

"I saw Colonel House a few days before the final announcement that the League of Nations had been adopted, the announcement being made by President Wilson in the Hall of the Clock on the 14th of February, 1919. When I saw Mr. House it must have been within forty-eight hours of that time. He said to me, 'The League of Nations is on the rocks! ' I said to him, ' Will you permit me to see Léon Bourgeois whom I have known for many years as a friend of International Peace?' Mr. House said, 'We would welcome any such help.' I then quickly made an appointment with M. Léon Bourgeois, using the good offices of my friend Baron d'Estournelles de Constant, also a man friendly to International Peace. Together we had a talk with M. Bourgeois and I said to him, in answer to his declaration that he favoured the establishment of an international army, that that would be impossible, and I asked him if he would not rather have the adoption of the League of Nations than the failure of everything looking to International Peace and stability. M. Bourgeois replied, that with such an alternative he personally would certainly favour the adoption of the principles of the League of Nations, but that he would have to consult Clemenceau and the Committee himself. This was done, and a report came back that while certain qualifications would be necessitated upon the principles involved, that the League of Nations would be accepted, Clemenceau giving his word to that effect. I then promptly telephoned Mr. House that the League of Nations was 'off the rocks,' Clemenceau later seeing me said to me then, 'You see I have kept my word.' "

It was only much later that M. André Tardieu published his interesting book, The Truth about the Peace Treaty, which I had the good fortune to read in America. In a very masterly way he dealt with the complex conditions immediately following the close of the war. Added weight was, of course, attached to the value which M. Tardieu's opinions would have had for their own sake, because of the introduction which M. Clemenceau wrote, unconsciously furnishing to the reader an accurate pen-picture of himself in characteristically virile phrases---truths hewn out with an axe. No one familiar with M. Clemenceau's remarkable make-up, and the commanding part which he played in the Great War and later in framing the Treaty, could fail to realize that M. Tardieu had become in reality the spokesman of M. Clemenceau. But the author had written the book with an intimate personal knowledge of facts.

When coming to the Armistice and all the events that led up to it, M. Tardieu paid to President Wilson the high degree of praise which the far-reaching results of the President's achievement must ever accord him. That notable service enabled Marshal Foch to declare: "Our aims being accomplished, no one has the right to shed another drop of blood." And M. Tardieu closed this chapter with the words: "The Armistice marked the capitulation of the enemy, a capitulation which was an unconditional surrender."

But it was when M. Tardieu dealt with the theme of "The Peace Conference" that his readers were permitted to know, for the first time---and that from the pen of one who, better than any other person on the French side, was in a position to state the facts---the inside secrets of the deliberations of the noted figures who finally shaped the conclusions into form. What might not the Paris Press, which at times had been so impatient and critical, merely conjecturing as to the nature of these conferences and the decisions arrived at, have given to secure advance sheets of M. Tardieu's book!

At no time wavering in his loyal devotion to the Treaty, and expressing full confidence in the motives of those who framed it, M. Tardieu yet rarely used the soft pedal when vigorous language was needed to deal with men or with things. Absorbing as was the interest of the story itself, I found it still more remarkable as furnishing a keen analysis of the human traits of the men who composed this distinguished triumvirate of Treaty makers. Of course such an account must deal almost exclusively with M. Clemenceau, Mr. Lloyd George, and President Wilson. Replete with documentary matter bearing upon their deliberations, including copious quotations from statements made by these conferees, the author vividly revealed the attitude of this or that one among the chief actors. Having myself enjoyed a personal and indeed cordial acquaintance with these chief characters, I can vouch for the fidelity and the true-to-nature cast of these living actors in the great drama presented by M. Tardieu,

For myself, the part I had been called upon to play in France had come to an end on the evening of April 14, 1919, when I left Paris to board the Leviathan at Brest, returning home with my wife and children.

It was inevitably with some feeling of sadness that I said farewell to the country for which all my life I had felt such a genuine admiration, and which I had been so very happy to serve to the utmost of my abilities in years which history will reckon among those of her greatest need for friends, but at the same time of her utmost display of the many great qualities for which France has been known to the civilized world throughout the centuries. And I would say that never in all my life have I been more deeply touched than by the sight of the number of friends, including many high officials, who had gathered at the Montparnasse station in Paris to bid me good-bye in spite of the very inclement weather.

My resignation, which had been a matter of public knowledge for some two months, had in fact been tendered to President Wilson exactly five months before,

On November 14, 1918, the third day after the signing of the Armistice, I had written privately to the President, explaining the reasons of a personal nature which compelled me to relinquish the post of American Ambassador to France. Both my health and my means had suffered to an extent upon which I had no desire to insist, although I was anxious to avoid causing any embarrassment to the President. It was for this reason that no announcement was made until February 14, 1918, when by common agreement with President Wilson the formal letters which we had exchanged in December, just before my hurried visit home to the bedside of my dying brother, were made public.

Ambassador Sharp to President Wilson.

Paris, November 14, 1918.

MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT,

The momentous events occurring within the past week have hastened the coming of a time to which I have long looked forward, as determining me to tender to you my resignation from the post with which you honored me and which I have filled during now four years.

Beginning my services almost coincident with the breaking out of the war, I have consistently thought to end them approximately with its close. Now that that time has come, I have not altered my mind from my original purpose. I would be pleased, therefore, if you would kindly accept my resignation, to take effect soon after the beginning of the coming New Year---say at some time within the month of February.

Regretting for many reasons, as I shall, to lay down the work which, arduous at times though it has been, nevertheless has always been agreeable to me on account of its pleasing associations and the important character of its duties, yet, after such a long absence from home, I feel that I must now give my attention to my business affairs. I am led to believe that by the time set for my departure, we shall all have the satisfaction of seeing at least the most important of the large questions settled by the Peace Conference.

The acquiescence in principle by all the Allies, as well as by the Central Powers, to the fourteen conditions enunciated by you last January has indeed done much to prepare the way for the solution of such questions. But I am persuaded that if the assurance of a lasting peace is sought, then emphatically the condition imposed in No, 4 calling for a reduction of national armaments---they should ultimately cease to exist except for enforcing domestic order-and the principle of the League of Nations involved in No. 14 must be written in ineffaceable letters in the Treaty. These alone can guarantee the performance of all the other conditions so wisely laid down by you for governing the future relations of peoples toward each other.

I cannot thus tender my resignation---that you may have sufficient time in which to consider the selection of my successor---without expressing to you my deep appreciation for the words of confidence and goodwill which you have sent over to me. They have been very precious to me, and have afforded that kind of encouragement that every man needs at times in order to go ahead with the desired assurance.

I must also express to you my admiration for the remarkable vision displayed by you from the very beginning of the war, in forecasting the events which have so transformed old conditions, and for the high order of constructive ability which you have shown in shaping such events to their final fruition. You have made the world your debtor as no other man in history.

With every good wish for the unbounded success of all your undertakings, and for the vouchsafing to you of good health for the completion of the high mission for which Providence has appointed you, I am, believe me, my dear Mr. President,

Very sincerely yours,           
                WM. G. SHARP,

 

Telegram from President Wilson to the Ambassador.

Washington, November 30, 1918.

AMERICAN AMBASSADOR,
       Paris.

President sends you following: "Thank you very much for your message. I hope when I reach the other side to tell you how much I have appreciated your uniform co-operation. It is delightful to rejoice together over the great consummation."

LANSING.

 

Ambassador Sharp to President Wilson,

Paris, December 19, 1918.

THE PRESIDENT,
        Palais Murat,
                rue Monceau,
                        Paris,

MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:

Referring to my letter written to you in November soon after the signing of the Armistice, in which I asked you to accept my resignation as Ambassador to France, to take effect at some date early in the coming year, I wish now to renew in a more formal manner that request. A long absence from my business affairs seemed to make such action wise, but, as I then wrote you, only the ending of the war finally prompted me to tender my resignation.

It has always been my consistent purpose to serve at my post until the coming of that long hoped-for event. Subject to your own desires in the matter, however, it will be agreeable to me to remain in charge of this mission until my successor is appointed and ready to assume his duties.

All through a period of unusually trying conditions, into which the events of a century seem to have been crowded, I have deeply appreciated the constant support of our Government at Washington. Your own great part in shaping the destiny of those far-reaching events(16) has given a new importance---one already decreed to be permanent---to American diplomacy abroad, and I must express to you my grateful recognition of the aid which it has brought to me in meeting the problems of the work of this Embassy. It has been such as to make Americans hold higher their heads in just pride of their country.

While a rest from such exacting labors will have its compensation for me, yet it is with feelings of sincere regret that I sever my relations with a country whose Government has been so helpful and generous to me and this quite as much before our entrance into the war as afterwards. For the masses of its people I came long ago to have a warm affection born of an understanding of their real qualities of mind and heart. As such traits of character made France so heroic in her time of stress and sacrifice, so now in the hour of victory and the peace to follow they will serve to knit together all the more closely the common interests of our two peoples.

Will you please accept, Mr. President, my earnest thanks for the confidence which you have reposed in me, and my best wishes for the success of your administration in the important work with which it is charged.

Very sincerely yours,         
                WM. G. SHARP.

 

President Wilson to Ambassador Sharp.

The President of the United States
        of America,

Paris, December 21, 1918.

MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR:

In view of what you have so fully explained to me with regard to the circumstances which make you feel it your duty to retire from your present post and give your close personal attention to business affairs which depend upon you, I cannot in conscience refuse to accept your resignation as Ambassador of the United States to the Government of France, and I do so with the understanding that the resignation is to take effect when your successor qualifies.

I am sincerely obliged to you that you are willing to make this arrangement and to remain in France until your successor can actually take your place. It is an arrangement which relieves me of a good deal of anxiety, because I should not wish the highly important post in Paris to be vacant for even a short time.

Let me tell you again how highly I have valued the unusual services which you have rendered our government. They have at every turn of the critical events of recent years been of the highest value, and it has been a source of confidence and of strength to feel that we had such a representative here. I am expressing not only my personal feeling but the feeling of all those who have been familiar with your services here. You are certainly entitled to your release, and I assure you that you carry with you the affectionate regard and confidence of those who have had the pleasure of being your co-laborers in our Government.

Cordially and sincerely yours,
                        WOODROW WILSON.

 

Acting Secretary Polk to Ambassador Sharp.

Washington,

February 18, 4 P.M.

AMERICAN EMBASSY,
            Paris.

The President having selected Hugh C. Wallace of Tacoma, Washington, as your successor, you will please obtain the agreement of the French Government to his appointment. Mr. Wallace is 56 years of age, he has always been a student of foreign affairs and has rendered distinguished service to the Government of the United States in several important matters of an international character.

POLK,               
Acting Secretary of State.

 

Ambassador Sharp to the State Department.

Paris, February 20, 1919.

SECRETARY OF STATE,
        Washington.

This afternoon I took up in person with M. Pichon at the Foreign Office the subject of securing the consent of the French Government to the selection of Mr. Hugh Wallace as my successor, taking at the same time the opportunity warmly to commend him for the post. M. Pichon said that merely as a matter of form he would have to take the matter up with the President of the Republic, but would give me his answer later this evening or in the morning. Of course there will be no difficulty whatever.

I am planning to remain in Paris in charge of this Mission until within a few days before the arrival of Mr. Wallace. Discussing the matter with the President before his departure I told him that I would set the date of my leaving some time in April.

SHARP.

 

Foreign Minister Pichon to Ambassador Sharp.

FRENCH REPUBLIC,         
        Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

MR. AMBASSADOR:

You have been kind enough, under date of February 20th, and in accordance with instructions received from your Government, to express the desire of obtaining the consent of the Government of the Republic for the appointment of Mr. Hugh C. Wallace, who has been designated to be your successor at the Embassy of the United States at Paris.

The Government of the Republic learns with great regret the official announcement of your departure. It cannot forget the tragic circumstances which prevailed at the time when Your Excellency assumed his diplomatic functions in France, and still less the distinguished manner in which Your Excellency carried them through, during these four years of war when the noble American Republic, after giving to France her invaluable moral support and the powerful help of her good-will, came to take her place beside her and fought with heroism for the same cause. The French Government has deeply appreciated the tact, the competency, the sympathy, and the spirit of inter-Allied "entente" of which Your Excellency has shown innumerable proofs. The Republic will keep a grateful remembrance of these, and I am happy to be its official interpreter to express such sentiments.

The personality designed by your Government to be at the head of the Embassy in France will be received with all the attention and friendship that the representative of the United States can always be assured to find in Lafayette's country.

The French Government hastens to give its consent to the appointment of Mr. Hugh Wallace, whose eminent qualities you have been kind enough to tell me.

Kindly accept, Mr. Ambassador, the assurances of my high consideration and my own devoted sentiments,

Paris, February 21, 1919.

S. PICHON.

 

French Ambassador Jusserand to Ambassador Sharp.

28, Avenue du Président Wilson,            
Paris, February 17, 1919.

MY DEAR COLLEAGUE AND FRIEND:

I am greatly beholden to the American Club for the honor of their invitation and I should have been very happy to celebrate in their company this grand anniversary, dearer, as years pass, to every American and every French heart. Most unfortunately for me an engagement which I cannot waive will prevent my being present.

As I shall be at the same moment in military company we shall all associate ourselves in thought with our American friends, honoring the memory of the great man who first led American and French troops to victory: both our countries shall ever rejoice that what the ancestors had done has been renewed by the descendants, with the same valor, the same self-sacrifice, the same warmth of affection between our compatriots. May that affection, of so much value to our two countries, grow and continue till the end of time.

Allow me, my dear Colleague, to add a word, and express our heartfelt regret at your impending departure. Your souvenir will prove a lasting one among us; all those who have seen you and heard you, or know of your work and sympathy through those dark years, are unanimous in your praise and in the expression of their gratitude.

My wife joins me in assuring Mrs. Sharp and yourself that our good wishes will follow you to America where we hope to see you---they will follow you indeed wherever you go.

Believe me with my best regards,                         
Sincerely yours,                 
JUSSERAND.

 

General Pershing to Ambassador Sharp.

American Expeditionary Forces                                
Office of the Commander-in-Chief,         
France, April 7, 1919.

HONORABLE WILLIAM G. SHARP,
        American Embassy,
                Paris.

MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR:

I must apologize for not having answered your letter of March 24th sooner, but can only plead my constant tours of inspection, which make it hard for me to keep up with my personal correspondence. I trust, however, that the photograph which I enclose herewith will cause you to excuse my belated reply.

I hope that I may have the pleasure of seeing you before your departure from France, but if I am not fortunate enough to have such an opportunity, may I tell you how much I have appreciated your consistent friendship and your unfailing support since the arrival of the first members of the American Expeditionary Forces in France. It is with a sincere feeling of personal regret that I see you leave your post, which you have filled so ably during the arduous days of the war. I shall always treasure your co-operation and counsel, and shall hope that good fortune will permit me to meet you often in the States.

Please extend to Mrs. Sharp my very best regards. Her wise leadership and her dignified and friendly attitude toward all Americans, especially of the Army, will always be remembered by those of us who have had the honor to know her.

With kindest personal regards to yourself and your family, l am,

Sincerely yours,         
                JOHN J. PERSHING.

 

Marshal Foch to Ambassador Sharp.

Office of Marshal Foch,

14-4-19.

DEAR SIR,

I am detained by obligations which prevent me from going to the station to salute you on your departure with Mrs. Sharp.

But I wish to tell you once again of the deep memory we retain of the loyal and cordial relations maintained between us, and consequently of the great services you have rendered to the common cause.

Please present to Mrs. Sharp, with the best remembrances of the Maréchal Foch, my most respectful homage and receive the assurance of my devoted sentiments.

F. FOCH.

It was a source of great gratification to me to know that the charge I was relinquishing under such conditions of international importance was to be taken over by Mr. Hugh C. Wallace. His own eminent personal qualities, and his many years of devotion to the cause of President Wilson, left no doubts in my mind, or for that matter in the mind of anyone who knew him, as to both his aptness for the post and the success with which he would discharge duties difficult in themselves, but rendered all the more delicate by the political developments even then evident on the international horizon.(17) But what gave me the highest sense of personal satisfaction in having Mr. Wallace as my successor was that I knew he was a man who would, at all times and in all circumstances, be loyal to his illustrious chief.

I did not, however, by any means consider that my own utility was ended, as concerned either the President or France. There remained notably all that I could say to my own country-people on behalf of the French, their aims, their ideals, their qualities and characteristics, all too little known even by many among us who felt genuine affection for them. But there remained most of all what should be done for President Wilson's great work, the League of Nations, which he had fostered and which he had introduced into the Treaty of Versailles.

It was in a spirit of undying loyalty to my old Chief, and of unbounded confidence in his ideal, that on January 10, 1921) I made a plea for the League of Nations Covenant during a conference with President-elect Harding. I must say that I left with a distinct impression that the next President would have none of the League, though I surmised that he might agree to the Treaty divorced from the League; but the League itself did not exist so far as the plans of the next Administration were concerned.

I spoke with frankness to my old neighbour, presenting the view that, while the nations of Europe wanted to please the United States, they would be much embarrassed by any demand for the death of the League. I urged that the provisions of the Treaty and the provisions of the Covenant were so intertwined that it would be almost impossible to disentangle the two. I therefore hoped that the coming Administration would find a way to preserve the good features of the Covenant, while rejecting the parts that were thought to infringe on American sovereignty. I added that France would prefer to see the League preserved, and would welcome American participation.

If I received little comfort from Senator Harding on these lines, there was a good deal of hope in the general principles for a world association that he had thought out, to bring the nations into much closer friendship, but without any ties that would commit them to such action as might embarrass their peoples. I found that the Senator looked confidently to the Hague Tribunal and to a World Court, and that partial disarmament was a feature of his plan. I was especially pleased to hear his views as to disarmament. Now is the time, if ever, to begin that reform, and it is up to the United States to show the world that she is sincere.

Senator Harding's general idea of an establishment of international relationships, as outlined to me, while not agreeing with the League as I have favoured it, yet embraced some of the most useful and important features of the League---a permanent Court of International Arbitration and an Association of Nations, and a useful means of counsel.

I recognize in view of the issue as drawn in the last campaign, and of the result at the polls, that the League of Nations, so far as this country is concerned, is not to be. On the other hand, I am most gratified to have learned from my conversation with the President-elect that, so far as he is concerned, there is no danger of this country lapsing into a state of splendid isolation such as we might have feared if a conception of American aloofness from the affairs of Europe were dominating his mind. He entertains no such ideas. He is keenly alive to the fact that America cannot be aloof; that it must carry its part of the world burden, and that there exists a mutuality of interests between it and its Allies in the late struggle which we cannot fail to recognize.

No man wanted peace more than President Wilson. Long before the United States entered the war, he strove on its behalf, and never did he cease striving. His love of peace, the shrewdness with which he handled the delicate problems of internationalism at the Peace Conference, his wisdom and counsel, won for him the love and admiration of all Europe.(18)

But the French people, naturally, after the experience of the last half-century and the two fearful wars from which they have suffered, find their first and overwhelming concern in their necessity for securing guarantees against a repetition of these experiences. The security of France is at the heart of the European situation, if European peace is to be reasonably insured; and I hope strongly that our country will develop a programme along lines that will help to accomplish these results.

I would now speak as an American manufacturer who has given considerable thought to the question of our trade relations before the war and since the war began and who, because of three years of service in Congress on the House Committee on Foreign Relations before going into the diplomatic corps, had occasion to consider particularly the matter of our trade abroad.

It is world commerce that little by little is going to be rehabilitated, not merely the trade of this or that country; and the United States, the country with the greatest purchasing power and the strongest industry, and the strongest financial and natural resources, is not going to be left out of the reckoning. It is against human nature to put or try to put burdens on the man who is not only your best customer, but who also has so much that you, in your turn, must buy from him. And human nature has not been destroyed by this war.

Furthermore, the group characteristics, the special manifestations of human nature in this country or that, have not been eradicated. The Germans of the future will be the same as the Germans of 1914, and so it will be with the French, the English and all the rest. They were all doing the best they knew how before the war in the way of trade or industry, and they will gradually resume those ways after the war. The last few years have taught them no new ways, so far as the peaceful pursuits of trade and commerce are concerned.(19) No people can shed their national characteristics any more than they can change the prevailing colour or texture of their skin.

I am enough of an optimist to believe that the bitterness itself still reigning between some nations will be temporary. Bitterness and hatred are not normal. To put the case on higher ground, they will not survive, cannot survive the comity that is essential to world trade.

Bitterness and hatred will melt away in the eagerness of the business revival that is coming to Europe, and in the sense of security that peace is going to bring to all of them.