443] THE PLEBISCITES IN THE PEACE TREATIES 1 45 



The Allied answer claims the territory as predominantly 

 Lithuanian in origin and in speech. Hence the cession does 

 not conflict " with the principle of nationality " and " the 

 fact that the city of Memel itself is in large part German 

 is no justification for maintaining the district under German 

 sovereignty, particularly in view of the fact that the port of 

 Memel is the only sea outlet for Lithuania." 



In this answer we have in the first part a rejection of the 

 German charge that the transfer conflicts with the principle 

 of nationality, in the second part the assertion that the prin- 

 ciple of nationality cannot be invoked by the largely Ger- 

 man city of Memel, because it is the only sea outlet for 

 Lithuania. 



Other transfers of German territory without a plebiscite 

 are stipulated in Article 83. Germany renounces in favor 

 of the Czecho-Slovak State all rights and title over a por- 

 tion of Silesian territory, and in case the final demarcation 

 of the Polish-German frontier leaves part of the Kreis 

 Leobschiitz isolated from Germany, this district is to fall, 

 without vote, to Czecho-Slovakia. 



Here, as in the case of German cessions to Poland, the 

 Treaty recognizes the fact that the territories transferred 

 contain a considerable German population by the guarantee 

 given in Article 86 that "the Czecho-Slovak State accepts 

 and agrees to embody in a Treaty with the Principal Allied 

 and Associated Powers such provisions as may be deemed 

 necessary by the said Powers to protect the interests of in- 

 habitants of that State who differ from the majority of the 

 population in race, language or religion." 



The right of option is provided. 



The Peace Treaty of Versailles requires of Germany the 

 renunciation of her sovereignty over all her colonial pos- 

 sessions in favor of the Principal Allied and Associated 

 Powers. 



The German reply considers this regulation as " in irre- 

 concilable contradiction to Point 5 of the Address to Con- 



10 



