ABSTRACT
The Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs, M. Hymans, presented his government’s claims to the Council of Ten on February 11. The Belgian claims to Malmedy and other districts caused the Committee more difficulty, partly because the Belgian claims were only gradually unfolded, partly because the members continually had to seek more information. Headlam-Morley opposed the cession of Eupen because it was entirely populated by Germans. Sir Eyre Crowe doubted that the economic reasons for the transfer could counterbalance the potential danger to Belgium of annexing Germans. The Belgian argument was that Moresnet would be valueless without the works of mines located in Eupen. Tardieu urged the simplest solution was to attach the mining territory to Belgium. At the Commission’s session on March 12 the Anglo-American opposition to the Belgian claim to Eupen collapsed. Headlam-Morley saw the close economic ties between Eupen and Belgium as the main justification for the transfer, provided that the majority of the inhabitants were not opposed.
