Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

German Industry and Reparations

  • Chapter
The Cuno Government and Reparations 1922–1923

Part of the book series: Studies in Contemporary History ((SICH,volume 1))

  • 47 Accesses

Abstract

The reparation problem, complicated as it was, was made even more so by the heightened role of industry in domestic politics, its attitude towards party government, and its intervention into areas of foreign policy. However, this development was not only the result of industrial pressure upon different German governments; rather politicians were only too willing to allow the participation of industrial and banking experts in the formulation of reparation initiatives. This development had of course started under the Scheidemann cabinet. Demobilization, food supply, the delivery of the merchant fleet, allied demands upon Germany, in short, the reconstruction of the peace economy necessitated a close cooperation between the ministerial bureaucracy, labor and industry. In the pursuit of a domestic and foreign peace policy, Weimar governments depended heavily upon the expertise of bankers and industrialists. On one hand, the fact that the representatives of special interests acted as governmental advisers, predetermined the search for feasible solutions; on the other hand, since the majority of the Reichstag supported or at least did not have the power or will to reject the influence of different interest groups upon governmental decision making, the search for German reparation programs remained a source of constant frustration for the Allies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. For a discussion of these problems see: Lothar Albertin, Liberalismus und Demokratie am Anfang der Weimarer Republik. Eine vergleichende Analyse der Deutschen Demokratischen Partei und der Deutschen Volkspartei. (Düsseldorf, 1972), pp. 41–45. Krüger, op. cit., 68–75; Laubach, op. cit.; Maier, op. cit.;

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hans Schieck, “Der Kampf um die deutsche Wirtschaftspolitik nach dem Novembersturz 1919,” Phil. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1958), pp. 140–155,

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hans Schieck, “Der Kampf um die deutsche Wirtschaftspolitik nach dem Novembersturz 1919,” Phil. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1958), 220 f; Kab. Fehrenbach, No. 168, February 2, 1921; No. 1, No. 6, June 1920; Kohlhaus, op. cit., pp. 48–49.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Richard Lewinsohn, Die Umschichtung der europäischen Vermögen (Berlin, 1925), pp. 116 ff. Kab. Müller I, No. 18, April 7, 1920; No. 66, April 26, 1920; No. 70, April 28, 1920; No. 77 May 3, 1920 and passim.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Julius Hirsch, Die deutsche Währungsfrage (Jena, 1924), pp. 58–69.

    Google Scholar 

  6. David Felix, Walther Rathenau and the Weimar Republic. The Politics of Reparations (Baltimore, 1971);

    Google Scholar 

  7. Leo Haupts, Deutsche Friedenspolitik 1918–1919. Eine Alternative zur Machtpolitik des Ersten Weltkrieges? (Düsseldorf, 1976);

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gerald D. Feldmann/Heidrun Homberg, Industrie und Inflation. Studien und Dokumente zur Politik der deutschen Unternehmer 1916–1923 (Hamburg, 1977); Georges Soutou, “Problèmes concernant le Rétablissement des Relations Economiques Franco-Allemandes après la Première Guerre Mondiale,” Francia 2 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Duisberg, “Die wirtschaftliche Lage der deutschen Industrie,” Duisberg, op. cit., pp. 28–35;

    Google Scholar 

  10. “Die wirtschaftliche Lage der chemischen Industrie 1921–1922,” Duisberg, Abhandlungen, Vorträge und Reden aus den Jahren 1882–1921 (Berlin und Leipzig, 1923), pp. 605–621.

    Google Scholar 

  11. “Das internationale Wirtschaftsproblem unter dem Gesichtswinkel der Machtpolitik und der objektiven ökonomischen Erfordernisse,” Hermann Bücher, Finanz- und Wirtschaftspolitik Deutschlands 1921–1925 (Berlin, 1925), pp. 167–173.

    Google Scholar 

  12. “Die internationale Wirtschaftslage in ihren Beziehungen zu Deutschland,” Veröffentlichungen des Rdl, 17. Oktober 1921, Die deutsche Industrie und die Wiedergut-machungsfrage. Bericht über die dritte Mitgliederversammlung des Rdl in München, September 1921 (Berlin, 1921), pp. 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  13. “Wiederaufbau und Steuerpolitik,” ibid., pp. 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Soutou, Problèmes, pp. 580 ff.; Georges Soutou, “Die deutschen Reparationen und das Seydoux Projekt 1920–1921,” VjhZG (1975);

    Google Scholar 

  15. Feldmann/Homburg, op. cit., pp. 67 ff.; Maier, op. cit., pp. 194 ff.; Reichert-Simons, February 24, 1921. “Erst dann, wenn Frankreich nicht mehr weiß, was es mit dem Überfluß an Erzen und Eisen machen kann…” an acceptable agreement will perhaps be possible. PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, vol. I; also Klöckner January 14, 1921, Aufzeichnung über die Besprechung im Auswärtigen Amt, ibid., vol. 3. Vereinbarungen mit Frankreich über die Lieferung von Koks und Kohle gegen Minette, Cuno Nachlaß, Friedensverhandlungen 1919 ff. Niederschrift Vorstands-sitzung Rdl, May 28, 1920, HA GHH 30019320/00.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Reusch-Haniel von Haimhausen, May 1, 1921, HA GHH 300193000/11. “Meines Erachtens wäre es das Beste, wenn wir die Herrschaften ganz Deutschland besetzen lassen würden. Auf diese Weise hätten wir einige schwere Jahre vor uns, kämen aber am schnellsten aus der ganzen Misere heraus.”

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rdl-Ministerium für Wiederaufbau, February 12, 1922,: ibid., 300120/5; Jakob W. Reichert, Rathenaus Reparationspolitik (Berlin, 1922; Maier, op. cit., pp. 262 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  18. “Die deutschen Sachlieferungen,” November 25, 1922, HA GHH, 300193023/0. For criticism of the AEG, the Siemens-Schuckert Werke and the MAN which delivered electrical equipment and machinery to Yugoslavia, see: Zweckverband Nordwestdeutscher Wirtschaftsvertretungen, “Rundschreiben,” March 25, 1922, ibid., 300120/10; Schmerse-Reusch, March 10, 1922, ibid., 300193023/0; Schmerse-Dr. Koettgens (Siemens), October 25 and Dr. Koettgens-Schmerse, October 31, 1922,: ibid., 300120/10.

    Google Scholar 

  19. PA AA, W. Rep. Lieferungsabkommen zwischen de Lubersac und Stinnes, K 246248–246251; letter Hoch-Tief-AG. — Ministerium für den Wiederaufbau, January 23, 1923, K. 246595 ff. For positive French reactions see: Le Petit Parisien, September 7, 1922 “Le premier accord.” Echo de Paris, September 7; Victoire, September 7; Eclair, September 7; Le Temps, September 8; the agreements were criticized in L’Ere Nouvelle, November 14, 17 and 29.

    Google Scholar 

  20. “Gründung einer Brikettverkaufsgesellschaft in Frankreich,” October 10, 1922, Silverberg Nachlass, 60.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Constantino Bresciani-Turroni, The Economics of Inflation. A Study of Currency-Depreciation in Postwar Germany (London, 1937), pp. 227–230;

    Google Scholar 

  22. Karl Elster, Von der Mark zur Reichsmark. Die Geschichte der deutschen Währung in den Jahren 1914–1924 (Jena, 1928), pp. 454–455.

    Google Scholar 

  23. For the differences between industries see: Hermann Hesse, Die deutsche Wirtschaftslage von 1914–1923. Krieg, Geldblähen und Wechsellagen (Jena, 1928); pp. 227–234,

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hermann Hesse, Die deutsche Wirtschaftslage von 1914–1923. Krieg, Geldblähen und Wechsellagen (Jena, 1928); pp. 287–290. Also “Monatliche Berichte der Niederrheinischen Handelskammer Duisburg.” The reports for 1921–1923 are in HA GHH, 300123/6, 7. The monthly reports of the Ministerium für Handel und Gewerbe 1920–1925 are in WWA, Klc, Abt. II, 1a.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Carl Ludwig Holtfrerich, “Internationale Verteilungsfolgen der deutschen Inflation 1918–1923,” Kyklos vol. 30 (1977), P- 280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hesse, op. cit., p. 367; Bergmann, op. cit., p. 139.

    Google Scholar 

  27. For Silverberg see: “Die gegenwärtige Gesamtlage und ihre Auswirkungen auf die Politik der Verbände,” October 12, 1922, Silverberg Nachlaß, vol. 1. Stinnes himself accepted an invitation by de Lubersac to visit Northern France once reconstruction was under way with material provided by him. Other industrialists (von Borsig, von Siemens, Deutsch, Vogler, Riepert, ten Hompel, Reusch, Duisberg, and Klopfer) were expected to join him. PA AA, W. Rep. Lieferungsabkommen… K 246507 ff. The participation of other interested groups was rejected. Cf. Reusch-Bücher, October 2, 1922 and Bücher-Hermann, September 25,1922, HA GHH, 30019320/7. Emil Guggenheimer, “Das Stinnes-Lubersac Abkommen,” November 24, 1922, speech held at the Überseeklub Hamburg, Guggenheimer Nachlaß, K 71/1922/23, Houghton-Department of State, September 15, 1922, Houghton Papers, Berlin correspondence. Report of a meeting with Sorge. According to Sorge, later meetings with other French industrialists (Eugene Schneider) were to follow. Under the precondition that 1) the occupied territory would be evacuated, 2) the Saar valley be returned to Germany and 3) all trade restrictions imposed at Versailles be removed, Ruhr industry would not only reconstruct Northern France, but would also form one “great cartel” with French heavy industry. These preconditions were of course totally unrealistic.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Duisberg, Abhandlungen, 1882–1921, pp. 587 ff. and

    Google Scholar 

  29. Duisberg, Abhandlungen, 1882–1921, 606 ff. For Stinnes’ attempts to contact Eugene Schneider through Silverberg and Emile Mayrisch see the correspondence in Silverberg Nachlaß, vol. 403.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Laubach, op. cit., p. 86. Cf. also: Veröffentlichungen des Rdl, Die deutsche Wirtschaft und die Wiedergutmachungsfrage. Bericht über die dritte Mitgliederversammlung des Rdl, München 27–29 September 1921 (Berlin, 1921); Verein Deutscher Eisen und Stahl Industrieller, Bericht über die Hauptversammlung der Mitglieder des Gesamtvereins am 6. 5. 1921 (Berlin, 1921), pp. 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Verein deutscher Eisen- und Stahlindustrieller, Bericht über die Hauptversammlung des Gesamtvereins am 2. 5. 1922 (Berlin, 1922). Dr. J. Herle, “Ziele der deutschen Industrie,” Veröffentlichungen des Rdl 1921, op. cit., pp. 59–60;

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gert von Klaas, Albert Vogler (Tübingen, 1958), p. 158. This is an uncritical study of Vögler, but it contains some material which is not available elsewhere.

    Google Scholar 

  33. The quotations are from a speech held at a meeting of the Zweckverband Nordwestdeutscher Wirtschaftsvertretungen und Handelsvereinigungen in Essen on June 6, 1922, Silverberg Nachlaß, vol. 312.

    Google Scholar 

  34. “Grundsätzliche Besprechung der vom Reichsverband zu befolgenden Wirtschaftspolitik,” June 28, 1922, Silverberg Nachlass, vol. 312; also in Guggenheimer Nachlaß, K 71/Rdl. The members of the committee were Būcher, Duisberg, Flechtheim, Frowein, Funcke, Guggenheimer, Jordan, Krämer, Lammers, von Raumer, Silverberg, Sorge, Stinnes, Vögler. Stinnes never attended the meetings.

    Google Scholar 

  35. “Niederschrift über die erste Sitzung des Sonderausschusses,” July 21, 1922, ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  36. “Entwurf Bücher,” August 31, 1922, ibid. Now printed in: Feldmann/Homburg, op. cit., pp. 328–332.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ibid. A similar view had been held by Bücher’s predecessor. Veröffentlichungen des RdI, Heft 8, 1920, pp. 34–35.

    Google Scholar 

  38. “Niederschrift über die 2. Sitzung,” August 9, 1922, Silverberg Nachlass, vol. 312; now Feldmann/Homburg, op. cit., pp. 332–334.

    Google Scholar 

  39. “An die Herren Mitglieder des Sonderausschusses für ein Wirtschaftsprogramm,” September 11. 1922, Silverberg Nachlass, vol. 312.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ibid. Detailed reports do not exist.

    Google Scholar 

  41. HA GHH, 3001240/4; cf. Feldmann/Homburg, op. cit., pp. 313–323.

    Google Scholar 

  42. HA GHH, 40012290/351. The plan was probably developed in November 1922 and sent to the Chancellor, the Minister of Economics and the Minister of Finance apparently at the latter’s request. Silverberg Nachlass, vol. 412, fol. 112; Kempner-Hamm, January 6, 1923, BA, R43I/1333.

    Google Scholar 

  43. “Stinnes Niederschrift 14. Oktober 1922,” Houghton Papers, Correspondence, Misc. 1922. The plan was handed over to the American Ambassador. Some basic demands are the return of the occupied territory to Germany, payment of reparations through longer work hours for 10 years and the liberation of the economy from all restrictions. Kempner-Hamm, January 6, 1923, BA, R 43I/1333. Silverberg-Hermes, December 26, 1922, ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Gossweiler, op. cit., pp. 106–108.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Duisberg-Silverberg, January 12, 1923; Reusch-Silverberg, January 13, 1923, Silver-berg Nachlass, vol. 412.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Reusch-Bücher, August 30,1922, HA GHH, 30019320/2. Reusch-Silverberg, January 13, 1923, Silverberg Nachlass, vol. 412. Reusch-Karl Haniel, June 19, 1922, HA GHH, 300193/6.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Von Rosenberg-de Lubersac, November 30, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM Reparationen, 5 secr., D 736179 f.

    Google Scholar 

  48. “Aufzeichnung Stinnes,” October 23, 1922, ibid., D 736236 f, de Lubersac-Wirth, October 30, 1922, D 736162 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Mayer-AA, December 5, 1922, ibid., D 736166 ff. von Rosenberg also intended to send Stinnes, Silverberg and Klöckner. If financial problems were discussed Max Warburg would join them.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ibid. Rosenberg-Mayer, December 7, 1922, ibid., D 736168 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Rosenberg-Mayer, December 13, 1922, ibid., D 736175.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Bergmann-Reichsfinanzministerium, November 21, 1922, BA, R 43I/32.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Charles E. Hughes Papers, Box 175, Folder 76b, Great Britain, December 18, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Fischer-AA, November 27, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718379 f.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Bergmann-Reichsfinanzministerium, November 24,1922, Kab. Cuno, No. 5, pp. 8 ff; Wassermann-Cuno, November 30, 1922, BA, R 43I/33.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Meyer-AA, October 28, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718 392 ff. Poincaré knew that Germany was temporarily unable to pay and proposed a loan both for Germany and France. But there was one important precondition: interallied debts had to be adjusted first.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Bergmann-Reichsfinanzminister, November 24, 1922, Kab. Cuno, No. 5, pp. 12 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ibid., pp. 13 fr.

    Google Scholar 

  60. November 29, 1922, BA, R 43I/32.

    Google Scholar 

  61. “Kabinetssitzung 6. Dezember 1922,” Kab. Cuno, NO. 12, p. 37 f. Industry and banking did not participate in the formulation of the note. Cf. Note Hamm December 1, 1922, BA, R 43I/32.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Bergmann-Reichskanzler, December 7, 1922, Kab. Cuno, No. 15. For other Belgian hints cf. Landsberg-AA, November 29, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718379 ff. and November 14, 1922. For British suggestions: Fischer-AA, December 5,1922, ibid., D 718399 f.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Sthamer-Cuno, December 8, 1923, ibid., D 718423.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Landsberg-AA, December 10, 1922, ibid., D 718429.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Already on November 29, the Belgian Foreign Minister had warned that only an offer supported by German industry could stop Poincaré. Ibid., D 718377. Bergmann reported about Delacroix’s and Bradbury’s opinion in a letter to Cuno on December 10, 1922. BA, R 2/3124.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Bergmann-Cuno, December 10, 1922, ibid. Also Sthamer-Cuno, December 10, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718423. Whether Cuno’s proposal to use part of the Reichsbank reserves for stabilization could succeed is doubtful. The President of the Reichsbank, Rudolf Havenstein, had already warned on November 23 against such a policy. BA, R 43I/32; Bergmann, op. cit., pp. 200–201.

    Google Scholar 

  67. FO. 371/7489, C 16897 f., Notes of Allied meeting, December 9, 1922. Bariety, op. cit., p. 108 also believes that the Anglo-French conferences of December and January were of no importance for the development of French plans.

    Google Scholar 

  68. FO., 371/7489, C 17026, December 10,1922.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Cab., 23/32, December 11, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Harold Nicolson, Curzon: The Last Phase (London, 1934), pp. 212–214,

    Google Scholar 

  71. Harold Nicolson, Curzon: The Last Phase (London, 1934), pp. 275–304. Cab., 23/30, August 1, 1922; cf. also DBFP, vol. XVII, No. 508.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Weill-Raynal, op. cit., II, pp. 323–324.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Sthamer-AA, December 1, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718383. For Norman’s objections to French reparation policy see: Andrew Boyle, Montagu Norman. A Biography (London, 1967), pp. 138–148,

    Google Scholar 

  74. Andrew Boyle, Montagu Norman. A Biography (London, 1967), 150–155,

    Google Scholar 

  75. Andrew Boyle, Montagu Norman. A Biography (London, 1967), 166–169.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Rosenberg-Mayer, December 15,1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen D 736179 f.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Mayer-Rosenberg, December 16, 1922, ibid., D 736182/183.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Mayer-Rosenberg, December 22, 1922, ibid., D 736187.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Bergmann-Cuno, December 10, 1922, ibid., D 718432. Apparently the British delegate intended to submit a compromise proposal according to which Germany would have been granted a moratorium for 3 months. During this period the German government should issue a domestic loan. If 1 billion gold marks were signed, or, if industry and banking guaranteed the loan, Germany would receive a moratorium for three years. But the plan was never submitted.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Bergmann-Cuno, December 11,1923, Kab. Cuno, No. 19. The British plan is in Cab. 24/140. CP. 4376; FO., 371/8625, C 133, January 2, 1923 with slight modifications.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Meyer-AA, December 23, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718612 f. Cf. Landsberg-AA, December 21, 1922, D 718572 about a meeting with the Belgian Foreign Minister.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Dufour-Feronce-AA, December 27, 1922, ibid., D 718655 f.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Ibid., D 718653.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Ibid., D 717949, July 21, 1922. Cf. ibid., D 718612, December 23, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Ibid., D 718658–659, December 27, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Reichstagsdrucksache, Nr. 2911, March 22, 1922, RT, vol. 356, the respective paragraph reads: “Si la Commission des Réparations constatait au cours de l’année 1922 que les livraisons en nature demandées…, n’étaitent pas effectuées par suite d’une obstruction du Gouvernement allemand ou de ses organismes ou par suite d’infraction à la Commission des Réparations, des paiements supplémentaires équivalents en espèces seront exigés de l’Allemagne à la fin de l’année 1922 en remplacement des livraisons effectuées.”

    Google Scholar 

  89. Logan-Hoover, December 22, 1922, James A. Logan Papers, Correspondence, October 1922-March 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Logan-Hoover, December 1, 1922, ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Warren G. Harding Papers, Microfilm, Roll 234, fol. 64–68, June 6, 1922, copy of a report from the American Ambassador to Brussels. Theunis had declared: “… Germany cannot live up to the London Schedule of Payments, and he estimated to me [Henry P. Fletcher] that M. de Lasteyrie, the French Minister of Finance, is of the same opinion, but as this question in France is political rather than practical, he believes that a settlement at the time along the lines recommended by the Committee of Financiers cannot be reached, and that some time gaining expedient will have to be found, if possible.” Cf. also Logan-Hughes, March 1, 1923, Henry P. Fletcher Papers, Box 10 for a detailed analysis of Belgian difficulties.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Meyer-Cuno, December 29, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718688.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Theunis, January 5, 1922, ibid., W. Rep. Besetzung des Ruhrgebiets, H 276533 ff.; cf. Landsberg-AA, January 10, 1923, ibid., H 276603.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Fischer-AA, December 20, 1922, ibid., H 276489.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Bergmann-AA, January 4, 1923, ibid., H 276531; Fischer-AA, January 18, 1923, ibid., H 276724f.; cf. Bergmann, op. cit., p. 217. Bergmann reports that Delacroix was of the same opinion. But material which would support this statement could not be located.

    Google Scholar 

  96. DBFP, First Series, vol. X, pp. 226–227; cf. Fletcher-Hughes, August 20, 1923, Hughes Papers, Correspondence, Box 21 for a report on discussions in Britain.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Wiederaufbauministerium-AA, January 25, 1923, PA AA, W. Rep. Besetzung des Ruhrgebietes, H 276787 f.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Mayer-Rosenberg, November 27, 1922, ibid., Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718371.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Kab. Cuno, No. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  100. DAZ, December 11, 1922. Cf. Cuno-Bergmann, December 10, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718430 for industrial opposition towards a preliminary settlement.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Georg Bernard, “Cuno’s Gegner,” Vossische Zeitung, December 10, 1922, No. 584.

    Google Scholar 

  102. This statement was made at a meeting of the board of directors of the Rdl on September 6, 1922, Silverberg Nachlass, vol. 257.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Kab. Cuno, No. 20, December 20, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  104. WTB, No. 2429, December 14, 1922, BA, R 43I/33.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Keynes-Melchior, December 1, 1922 and Melchior-Cuno, December 5, 1922, BA, R 43I/185. Max Warburg-Cuno, November 24, 1922, ibid., R 43I/32; Richard Merton-Cuno, November 29, 1922, ibid., R 43I/63, Schacht-Cuno, December 24, 1922, ibid., R 431/33.

    Google Scholar 

  106. BA, R 2/3158. Another proposal by Helphand fixed the German debt at 35 billions. Except reparations, all other liabilities (costs of occupation, indemnities for lost property, etc.) were to be cancelled. Eighteen billions should be guaranteed by the Reich through mortgages, the rest should be made available through an international loan; 10% of the loan should be assigned to stabilization. Kastl’s plan was sent to Paul Reusch of the Gutehoffnungshütte. Cf. Kastl-Reusch, December 28, 1922, HA GHH, 300 193008/11.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Rosenberg-Washington, December 13, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718462 f., Wiedfeldt-AA, December 19, 1922, ibid., D 718550 f.; Link, op. cit., pp. 160–162. For the Chamber of Commerce action cf. PA AA, Sonderreferat W. Die Aktion der amerikanischen Handelskammer with letters of Max Warburg, Mendelssohn and Melchior.

    Google Scholar 

  109. “Niederschrift über eine Sachverständigenbesprechung wegen der Reparations-frage,” December 13, 1922, BA, R. 38/181 Also ibid., R 43I/33.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Wassermann-von Brandt, December 14, 1922, ibid., R 2/3168; cf. also R 2/2900 for other estimates.

    Google Scholar 

  112. “Niederschrift…,” December 13, 1922, BA, R 38/181, p. 5, pp. 5–7, p. 14.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Ibid., p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Ibid., p. 16.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Ibid., p. 17. Copies of Urbig’s letters and the answer of de Lasteyrie are in BA, R 2/3175. Urbig-de Lasteyrie, November 15, and de Lasteyrie-Urbig, November 30, 1922. De Lasteyrie wrote: “J’ai également pris connaissance de vos suggestions, en ce qui concerne la solution dont le problème des réparations vous paraît susceptible, mais vous comprendrez qu’il ne me soit pas possible de les discuter actuellement.”

    Google Scholar 

  116. “Niederschrift …,” December 13, 1922, ibid., R 38/181, p. 18. Keynes estimates are in BA, R 2/3159. The sum was not 20 but 21 billions payable in annuities of 1.260 million gold marks.

    Google Scholar 

  117. “Niederschrift über eine Sachverständigenbesprechung,” December 16, 1922, ibid., R 38/181.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Ibid., pp. 14, 17, 21–23, 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Ibid., pp. 17–18, 37 f.; Gossweiler, op. cit., p. 185 argues that Wassermann wanted to make a profit himself and thus spoke against the participation of foreign bankers.

    Google Scholar 

  120. “Niederschrift…,” November 16, 1922, p. 28, BA, R 38/181, p. 37.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Ibid., p. 38.

    Google Scholar 

  122. “Aktennotiz Kempner,” December 16, 1922, BA, R 43I/33. A record about the meeting does not exist. According to information received from the Deutsche Zentralarchiv Potsdam the documents in the DZA do not contain any information either. Letter of May 15, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Ibid., p. 32.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Ibid., p. 35.

    Google Scholar 

  125. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Ibid., p. 37 f.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Ibid., pp. 38–40.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Ibid., pp. 42–44.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Ibid., p. 45. When this motion was accepted, Louis Hägen, who just previously had objected to any preconditions, now even demanded the evacuation of Duisburg, Düsseldorf and Ruhrort.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Melchior-Hermes, December 18,1922, ibid., also PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718559 f.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Wassermann-Hermes, December 20, 1922, ibid., D 718564 f.

    Google Scholar 

  133. Wassermann-Hermes, December 23, 1922, ibid., D 718599 f; also BA, R 2/3168.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  135. “Votum der Redaktionskommission,” PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718708. Cuno mentioned the meeting in the cabinet on December 22, but no report was found. Cf. BA R 43I/1381. Apparently it was attempted to contact trade union leaders, but they could not be reached in time. A meeting took place on December 28. Cf. Kab. Cuno, No. 30.

    Google Scholar 

  136. “Zehn Punkte Stinnes,” BA R 2/2900. The document is undated.

    Google Scholar 

  137. PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718708 f.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Ibid., D 718715, D 718716, D 718720.

    Google Scholar 

  139. “Letzte Fassung Duisberg-Flechtheim,” BA, R 2/3168.

    Google Scholar 

  140. “Plan Trendelenburg/Becker,” December 29, 1922, ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  141. Silverberg-Hermes, December 26, 1922, ibid., R 43I/1333.

    Google Scholar 

  142. Reusch-Cuno, December 31, 1922, BA, R 43I/33- It contains further suggestions for an offer.

    Google Scholar 

  143. “Letzter Plan Melchior 29. 12. 22,” BA, R 2/3168; cf. “Plan Duisberg, Wassermann, Flechtheim,” PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718645 f.

    Google Scholar 

  144. BA, R 431/1346.

    Google Scholar 

  145. “Letzter Plan Melchior…,” BA, R 2/3168. “Zehn Punkte Stinnes,” BA, R 2/2900. Apparently the last draft was written by Kastl. Cf. PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718651 f. For D’Abernon’s suggestion see “Aufzeichnung” December 28, 1922, D 718620 and D 718700 f.

    Google Scholar 

  146. Printed in Kab. Cuno, No. 34.

    Google Scholar 

  147. Ibid., No. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  148. Rosenberg-Wiedfeldt, December 13, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718462 f.

    Google Scholar 

  149. Houghton-Hughes, October 22,1922, Coar-Houghton, August 13,1922, Houghton-Coar, August 15, S.D. Weyer-Houghton, October 7, Houghton-Dwight, May 24, 1923, Houghton Papers, Correspondence.

    Google Scholar 

  150. Hughes Papers, Box 174, Folder 74 a, France, December 14, 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  151. Ibid., December 21 and 26,1922; MAE, Allemagne 477, December 23 and December 26, 1922, fol. 136–137, fol. 175–76. David G. White, Einige Kapitel aus der großen Politik zur Zeit der Ruhrbesetzung. Phil. Diss. (Berlin, 1939), pp. 30–32.

    Google Scholar 

  152. Houghton-Hughes, January 3, 1923, Hughes Papers, General Correspondence Box 46. Kab. Cuno, No. 32.

    Google Scholar 

  153. Houghton-Hughes, January 3, 1923, ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  154. Rosenberg-London, December 30, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718694 f. The notes to the other countries are in the same volume.

    Google Scholar 

  155. Sthamer-Rosenberg, December 30, 1922, ibid., D 718703 f.

    Google Scholar 

  156. Mayer-AA, January 1, 1923, ibid., D 718730 f. On January 1, Rosenberg cabled Bergmann to explain the financial aspects of the note and submit it if asked for.. Ibid., D 718734 f.

    Google Scholar 

  157. Documents diplomatiques, Conférence de Paris (Paris, 1923), p. 75.

    Google Scholar 

  158. De Margerie-MAE, January 1, and 2, 1923, MAE, Allemagne 478, fol. 1 f., 47 f.

    Google Scholar 

  159. Mayer-AA, December 22, 1922, PA AA, Büro RM, Reparationen, D 718584 f.

    Google Scholar 

  160. Bergmann-Cuno, January 2, 1923, ibid., D 718750 f; Bergmann-AA, January 4, 1923, ibid., D 718818.

    Google Scholar 

  161. “Vermerk Maltzan,” December 30,1922, ibid., D 718700. Mussolini recommended the acceptance of his proposal. Neurath-AA, January 3, 1923, ibid., D 718812.

    Google Scholar 

  162. Documents diplomatiques, op. cit., pp. 104–112. Lucien Petit, Histoire des Finances

    Google Scholar 

  163. Extérieures de la France. Le Règlement des Dettes Interalliées (Paris, 1932), pp. 417–423. For the development of British opinion and contacts with Paris FO., 371/7491, C 17594, C 17747, C 17656, C 17814; Cab., 24/140, CP. 4344, 4345, 4348, 4376, FO., 8625/C 133, January 2 with the British plan. Cf. Saint-Aulaire, December 24, 1922, MAE, Ruhr 3, fol. 246 f. for his estimate of British policy.

    Google Scholar 

  164. Documents diplomatiques, op. cit., p. 187. Cf. Weill-Raynal, op. cit., II, pp. 325–368. Also Poincaré in a cable to Jusserand, December 23, 1922, MAE, Allemagne 477, fol. 175. “Nous sommes dans l’impossibilité de confier à des financiers l’examen des solutions dont nous devrons compte à notre Parlement.”

    Google Scholar 

  165. PA AA, W. Rep., Besetzung des Ruhrgebietes, January 7, 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  166. Logan-Hoover, January 5, 1923, Logan Papers, Correspondence, October 1922-March 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  167. These estimates are based upon an evaluation by Gaston A. Furst, De Versailles aux Experts (Paris, 1927), p. XXIV. Fürst was a member of the Belgian Reparation Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  168. Kab. Cuno, No. 144.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Hermann J. Rupieper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1979 Martinus Nijhoff

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rupieper, H.J. (1979). German Industry and Reparations. In: The Cuno Government and Reparations 1922–1923. Studies in Contemporary History, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9284-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9284-9_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-247-2114-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-9284-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation