590    THE PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE, 1919, VOLUME V


M. DE MARTwNO explained that the Clause (last paragraph of Arti-
cle 45) had no political bearing and was irrespective of the fate of
the Adriatic ports in question. Before the war there existed a
regime of tariffs which favoured Austrian and Hungarian ports on
the Adriatic as compared with German, etc., ports. Now in place
of Austria as the hinterland to those ports there will be a variety of
States, and unless the pre-war arrangements as a whole were main-
tained there would be a state of anarchy as regards railway rates,
etc., which Germany would doubtless be able to utilise for her
benefit. It was to prevent this that the Italians had suggested the
clause in question which would maintain a pre-war tariff system.
It did not fix the rates of freight, but merely the existing railway
arrangements as a whole. If this was to be revised after five years
the results would be deplorable to the States owning the Adriatic
ports. The clause was of benefit to the whole of the former Austro-
Hungarian monarchy; and as Italy formally declares that she is
ready to give reciprocity in the matter she desires that the possibility
of revision after five years should be avoided.
MR. LLoYD GEORGE understood that the intention of the Italian
Delegate was to make the clause (last paragraph of Article 45)
permanent.
PRESIDENT WILsoN drew attention to Article 61 (now Article 41)
under which the Council of the League of Nations could recom-
mend the revision of any clauses relating to a permanent adminis-
trative regime. It did not, however, appear to him that this would
affect the matter since a railway tariff regime could in all prob-
ability not be considered as a permanent administrative regime. He
saw no danger to Italy for the possible reconsideration after five
years.
MB. LLOYD GEORGE agreed. He thought it would be difficult, if not
impossible, to maintain pre-war rates for more than five years, even
if they could be maintained as long. Railway wages had doubled
and increases in other costs would of necessity involve increases of
railway rates unless the railways were to become bankrupt.
M. DE MARTINO said that they did not want to fix the rates of rail-
way tariffs but only to keep the system as a whole in being. It was
a matter of proportion.
MR. LLoYD GEORGE thought that in practice the establishment of
proportion would be very difficult.
He said that the British Delegation on the Commission on Ports,
Waterways and Railways had gone into the matter very carefully
and that they would never have agreed to this if they had thought
that it was going to be permanent.