The Governments of Europe Part 39

In Hungary this programme was received with favor by the conservative magnates, but the Liberals, led by Deak, refused absolutely to approve it, save on the condition that the const.i.tutional regime of the kingdom, abrogated in 1849, should be regarded as completely restored.

At Vienna there had been no intention that the proposed innovation should entail such consequences, and within four months of its promulgation the diploma of 1860 was superseded by a patent of February 26, 1861, whereby the terms demanded by the Deak party were specifically denied. In this patent--the handiwork princ.i.p.ally of Anton von Schmerling, Goluchowski's successor in the office of Minister of the Interior--was elaborated further the plan of the new Reichsrath. Two chambers there were to be--an upper, or House of Lords, to be made up of members appointed by the Emperor in consideration of birth, station, or merits and a lower, or House of Representatives, to consist of 343 members (Hungary sending 85 and Bohemia 54), to be chosen by the provincial diets from their own membership. Sessions of the body were to be annual. The new instrument differed fundamentally from the old, not simply in that it subst.i.tuted a bicameral for a unicameral parliamentary body, but also in that it diverted from the local diets to the Reichsrath a wide range of powers, being designed, indeed, specifically to facilitate the centralization of governmental authority.

*506. The Hungarian Opposition.*--By reason chiefly of the refusal of the Deak party to accept for Hungary anything short of the autonomy which had been enjoyed prior to 1849, the new scheme of government was for a time only partially successful. In one after another of the component parts of the Empire the provincial diets were called back to life, and the Reichsrath itself was started upon its career. But the Hungarians held aloof. The position which they a.s.sumed was that Hungary had always been a separate nation; that the union with Austria lay only through the person of the monarch, who, indeed, in Hungary was king only after he should have sworn to uphold the ancient laws of Hungary and should have been crowned in Hungary with the iron crown of St. Stephen; that no change in these ancient laws and practices could legally be effected by the emperor-king alone; that the const.i.tution of 1861 was inadequate, not only because it had been "granted" and might as easily be revoked, but because it covered both Austria and Hungary; reduced Hungary to the position of a mere province, and was not at all identical with the Hungarian fundamental law abrogated in 1849. April 6, 1861, the Hungarian Diet was a.s.sembled for the first time since the termination of the revolution of 1848, and the (p. 458) patent of the preceding February 26 was laid forthwith before it.

After four months of heated debate the body refused definitely to accept the instrument and, on the contrary, adopted unanimously an address drawn up by Deak calling upon the Vienna authorities to restore the political and territorial integrity of the Hungarian kingdom. The sovereign's reply was a dissolution of the Diet, August 21, and a levy of taxes by military execution. Hungary, in turn, refused to be represented in the Reichsrath, or in any way to recognize the new order.

*507. Influences toward Conciliation.*--Through four years the deadlock continued. During the period Hungary, regarded by the authorities at Vienna as having forfeited the last vestige of right to her ancient const.i.tution, was kept perpetually in a stage of siege. As time went by, however, it was made increasingly apparent that the surrender by which concord might be restored would have to be made in the main by Austria, and at last the Emperor was brought to a point where he was willing, by an effectual recognition of Hungarian nationality, to supply the indispensable condition of reconciliation. In June, 1865, the sovereign paid a visit to the Hungarian capital, where he was received with unexpected enthusiasm, and September 20 the patent of 1861, which the Hungarians had refused to allow to be put into execution, was suspended. For the moment the whole of the Hapsburg dominion reverted to a state of absolutism; but negotiations were set on foot looking toward a revival of const.i.tutionalism under such conditions that the demands of the Hungarians might be brought into harmony with the larger interests of the Empire. Proceedings were interrupted, in 1866, by the Austro-Prussian war, but in 1867 they were pushed to a conclusion. In antic.i.p.ation of the international outbreak which came in June, 1866, Deak had reworked a programme of conciliation drawn up in the spring of 1865, holding it in readiness to be employed as a basis of negotiation in the event of an Austrian triumph, as an ultimatum in the event of an Austrian defeat. The Austrians, as it proved, were defeated swiftly and decisively, and by this development the Hungarians, as Deak had hoped would be the case, were given an enormously advantageous position. Humiliated by her expulsion from a confederation which she had been accustomed to dominate, Austria, after the Peace of Prague (August 20, 1866), was no longer in a position to defy the wishes of her disaffected sister state. On the contrary, the necessity of the consolidation of her resources was never more apparent.

*508. The Compromise Effected, 1867.*--July 3 occurred the disaster at Sadowa. July 15 the Emperor summoned Deak to Vienna and put to (p. 459) him directly the question, What does Hungary want? Two days later he accorded provisional a.s.sent to the fundamentals of the Deak _projet_ and designated as premier of the first parliamentary ministry of Hungary Count Julius Andra.s.sy. The working out of the precise settlement between the two states fell princ.i.p.ally to two men--Deak, representing the Hungarian Liberals, and Baron Beust, formerly chief minister of the king of Saxony but in 1866 brought to Vienna and made Austrian chancellor and minister-president. After prolonged negotiation a _projet_, differing from the original one of Deak in few respects save that the unity of the monarchy was more carefully safeguarded, was made ready to be acted upon by the parliaments of the two states. February 17, 1867, the Andra.s.sy ministry was formed at Budapest and May 29, by a vote of 209 to 89, the terms of the Ausgleich, or Compromise, were given formal approval by the Diet. At Vienna the Reichsrath would probably have been disposed to reject the proposed arrangement but for the fact that Beust held out as an inducement the re-establishment of const.i.tutionalism in Austria. The upshot was that the Reichsrath added some features by which the _projet_ was liberalized still further and made provision at the same time for the revision and rehabilitation of the Imperial patent of 1861. During the summer two deputations of fifteen members each, representing the respective parliaments, drew up a plan of financial adjustment between the two states; and by acts of December 21-24 final approval was accorded on both sides to the whole body of agreements.

Already, June 8, in the great cathedral at Buda, Francis Joseph had been crowned Apostolic King of Hungary and the royal succession under the terms of the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713, after eighteen years of suspension, had been definitely resumed.[654]

[Footnote 654: On Austro-Hungarian affairs in the period 1860-1867 see Cambridge Modern History, XI., Chap. 15, XII., Chap. 7 (bibliography, pp.

876-882), and Lavisse et Rambaud, Histoire Generale, XI., Chap. 13. The best treatise is L.

Eisenmann, Le compromis austro-hongroise (Paris, 1904). An account by an active partic.i.p.ant is J.

Andra.s.sy, Ungarns Ausgleich mit osterreich von Jahre 1867 (Leipzig, 1897). The best detailed account in English is Leger, History of Austria-Hungary, Chaps. 34-35. Two important biographies are: A. Forster, Francis Deak, a Memoir (London, 1880), and E. Ebeling, F. F. Graf von Beust (Leipzig, 1870-71).]

CHAPTER XXV (p. 460)

THE GOVERNMENT AND PARTIES OF AUSTRIA

I. THE CONSt.i.tUTION

*509. Texts.*--The fundamental law of the Austrian Empire,[655] in so far as it has been reduced to writing, exists in the form of a series of diplomas, patents, and statutes covering, in all, a period of some two hundred years. Of these instruments the most important are: (1) the Pragmatic Sanction of the Emperor Charles VI., promulgated originally April 19, 1713, and in final form in 1724, by which is regulated the succession to the throne; (2) the Pragmatic Patent of the Emperor Francis II., August 1, 1804, in accordance with which the sovereign bears in Austria the Imperial t.i.tle; (3) the diploma of the Emperor Francis Joseph I., October 20, 1860, by which was introduced in the Empire the principle of const.i.tutional government; (4) the patent of Francis Joseph, February 26, 1861, by which was regulated in detail the nature of this government; and (5) a series of five fundamental laws (_Staatsgrundgesetze_), all bearing the date December 21, 1867, and comprising a thoroughgoing revision and extension of the patent of 1861. In a narrower sense, indeed, the const.i.tution may be said to consist of these five doc.u.ments, all of which were sanctioned by the crown as a portion of the same general settlement by which the arrangements comprehended in the Ausgleich were effected. Of them, one, in twenty articles, is essentially a bill of rights; a second, in twenty-four sections, is concerned with Imperial representation; a third, in six articles, provides for the establishment of the Reichsgericht, or Imperial court; a fourth, in fifteen articles, covers the subject of the judiciary; and the fifth, in twelve articles, deals with the exercise of administrative and executive powers.

[Footnote 655: It should be emphasized that the phrase "Austrian Empire," properly used, denotes Austria alone. Hungary is no part of the Empire.

Throughout the following description effort has been made to avoid inaccuracy of expression by referring to Austria-Hungary as the "dual monarchy," or simply as "the monarchy." The nomenclature of the Austro-Hungarian union is c.u.mbersome, but therein it merely reflects the character of the union itself.]

*510. The Style of Government.*--Under the provisions of these instruments Austria is const.i.tuted a limited monarchy, with a responsible ministry, a bicameral legislative body, and a considerable (p. 461) measure of local self-government. For the exercise, upon occasion, of essentially autocratic power, however, the way was left open through the famous Section 13 of the patent of 1861, become Section 14 of the Law concerning Imperial Representation of 1867. Around no portion of the const.i.tution has controversy raged more fiercely during the past generation. The article reads: "If urgent circ.u.mstances should render necessary some measure const.i.tutionally requiring the consent of the Reichsrath, when that body is not in session, such measure may be taken by Imperial ordinance, issued under the collective responsibility of the ministry, provided it makes no alteration of the fundamental law, imposes no lasting burden upon the public treasury, and alienates none of the domain of the state. Such ordinances shall have provisionally the force of law, if they are signed by all of the ministers, and shall be published with an express reference to this provision of the fundamental law. The legal force of such an ordinance shall cease if the Government neglects to present it for the approval of the Reichsrath at its next succeeding session, and indeed first to the House of Representatives, within four weeks of its convention, or if one of the houses refuses its approval thereto."[656] The prolonged exercise of autocratic power might seem here to be sufficiently guarded against, but in point of fact, as was demonstrated by the history of the notable parliamentary deadlock of 1897--1904[657], the government can be, and has been, made to run year after year upon virtually the sole basis of the article mentioned. It is only fair to add, however, that, but for some such practical resource at the disposal of the executive, const.i.tutional government might long since have been broken down completely by the recurrent obstructive tactics of the warring nationalities.

[Footnote 656: Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 81.]

[Footnote 657: See p. 479.]

*511. Amendment.*--The const.i.tution promulgated March 4, 1849, made provision for a definite process of amendment. Upon declaration by the legislative power that any particular portion of the fundamental law stood in need of revision, the chambers were to be dissolved and newly elected ones were to take under consideration the proposed amendment, adopting it if a two-thirds majority could be obtained in each house.

Upon all such proposals the veto of the Emperor, however, was absolute. Neither the diploma of October 20, 1860, nor the patent of February 26, 1861, contained any stipulation upon the subject, nor did any one of the fundamental laws of 1867 as originally adopted. By act of April 2, 1873, however, pa.s.sed at the time when the lower house (p. 462) of the Reichsrath was being converted into an a.s.sembly directly representative of the people, the Law concerning Imperial Representation was so modified as to be made to include a specific stipulation with respect to const.i.tutional amendment in general. Under the terms of this enactment all portions of the written const.i.tution are subject to amendment at the hand of the Reichsrath. As in European countries generally, no essential differentiation of powers that are const.i.tuent from those that are legislative is attempted. The process of revision is made even easier than that prescribed by the ill-fated instrument of 1849. It differs in no respect from that of ordinary legislation save that proposed amendments require a two-thirds vote in each of the chambers instead of a simple majority. Since 1873 there have been adopted several amendments, of which the most notable were those of 1896 and 1907 relative to the election of representatives.

*512. The Rights of Citizens.*--For all natives of the various kingdoms and countries represented in the Reichsrath there exists a common right of Austrian citizenship. The complicated conditions under which citizenship may be obtained, exercised, and forfeited are prescribed in legislative enactments of various dates. One of the five fundamental laws of 1867, however, covers at some length the general rights of citizens, and certain of its provisions are worthy of mention.[658] All citizens, it is declared, are equal before the law.

Public office is open equally to all. Freedom of pa.s.sage of persons and property, within the territory of the state, is absolutely guaranteed, as is both liberty of person and inviolability of property. Every one is declared free to choose his occupation and to prepare himself for it in such place and manner as he may desire. The right of pet.i.tion is recognized; likewise, under legal regulation, that of a.s.semblage and of the formation of a.s.sociations. Freedom of speech and of the press, under legal regulation, and liberty of religion and of conscience are guaranteed to all. Science and its teaching is declared free. One has but to recall the repression of individual liberty and initiative by which the era of Metternich was characterized to understand why, with the liberalizing of the Austrian state under the const.i.tution of 1867, it should have been deemed essential to put into the fundamental law these and similar guarantees of personal right and privilege.[659]

[Footnote 658: Law concerning the General Rights of Citizens. Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 71-74.]

[Footnote 659: The texts of the fundamental laws at present in operation are printed in E. Bernatzik, Die osterreichischen Verfa.s.sungsgesetze (2d ed., Vienna, 1911), and in a collection issued by the Austrian Government under the t.i.tle Die Staatsgrundgesetze (7th ed., Vienna, 1900). The statutes of 1867 are in Lowell, Governments and Parties, II., 378-404, and, in English translation, in Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 71-89. The best description in English of the Austrian governmental system is Lowell, _op. cit._; II., Chap. 8. The best extended treatise is J. Ulbrich, Lehrbuch des osterreichischen Staatsrechts (Vienna, 1883).

Excellent briefer works are L. Gumplowicz, Das osterreichische Staatsrecht (3d ed., Vienna, 1907); J. Ulbrich, osterreichisches Staatsrecht (3d ed., Tubingen, 1904), in Marquardsen's Handbuch; and R.

von Herrnritt, Handbuch des osterreichischen Verfa.s.sungsrechtes (Tubingen, 1910). On the workings of the governmental system something may be gleaned from G. Drage, Austria-Hungary (London, 1909); S. Whitman, Austria (New York, 1879) and H.

Rumbold, Francis Joseph and his Times (New York, 1909).]

II. THE CROWN AND THE MINISTRY (p. 463)

*513. The Emperor's Status.*--The sovereign authority of the Empire is vested in the Emperor. Duties are a.s.signed to the ministers, and privileges are granted to the legislative bodies; but all powers not expressly conferred elsewhere remain with the Emperor as supreme head of the state. The Imperial office is hereditary in the male line of the house of Hapsburg-Lothringen, and the rules governing the succession are substantially those which were laid down originally in the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713[660] promulgated by the Emperor Charles VI. to render possible the succession of his daughter Maria Theresa.

Females may inherit, but only in the event of the failure of male heirs. By the abdication of the direct heir, the throne may pa.s.s to a member of the royal family who stands farther removed, as it did in 1848 when the present Emperor was established on the throne while his father was yet living. By reason of the unusual prolongation of the reign of Francis Joseph, there has been no opportunity in sixty years to put to a test the rules by which the inheritance is regulated.

Since the death of the Crown Prince Rudolph the heir-presumptive has been the Archduke Francis Ferdinand, son of the Archduke Charles Louis, and nephew of the ruling Emperor. It is required that the sovereign be a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

[Footnote 660: Issued definitely in 1724.]

*514. His Powers.*--By fundamental law it is declared that the Emperor is "sacred, inviolable, and irresponsible." His powers of government are exercised largely, however, through ministers who are at least nominally responsible to the Reichsrath, and through officers and agents subordinate to them. Most important among the powers expressly conferred upon the Emperor, and indirectly exercised by him, are: (1) the appointment and dismissal of ministers; (2) the naming of all public officials whose appointment is not otherwise by law provided for; (3) supreme command of the armed forces, with the power of (p. 464) declaring war and concluding peace; (4) the conferring of t.i.tles, orders, and other public distinctions, including the appointment of life peers; (5) the granting of pardons and of amnesty; (6) the summoning, adjourning, and dissolving of the various legislative bodies; (7) the issuing of ordinances with the provisional force of law, and (8) the concluding of treaties, with the limitation that the consent of the Reichsrath is essential to the validity of treaties of commerce and political treaties which impose obligations upon the Empire, upon any part thereof, or upon any of its citizens. Further than this, the right to coin money is exercised under the authority of the Emperor; and the laws are promulgated, and all judicial power is exercised, in his name. Before a.s.suming the throne, the Emperor is required to take a solemn oath in the presence of the two houses of the Reichsrath "to maintain inviolable the fundamental laws of the kingdoms and countries represented in the Reichsrath, and to govern in conformity with them, and in conformity with the laws in general."[661] The present Emperor-King has a civil list of 22,600,000 crowns, half of which is derived from the revenues of Austria and half from those of Hungary. The Imperial residence in Vienna, the Hofburg, has been the seat of the princes of Austria since the thirteenth century.

[Footnote 661: Law concerning the Exercise of Administrative and Executive Power, December 21, 1867, -- 8. Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 88.]

*515. The Ministers: Responsibility.*--The Austrian ministry comprises portfolios as follows: Finance, the Interior, Railways, National Defense, Agriculture, Justice, Commerce, Labor, and Instruction and Worship. Three important departments--those of War, Finance, and Foreign Affairs and the Imperial and Royal House--are maintained by the affiliated monarchies in common.[662] And there are usually from one to four ministerial representatives of leading racial elements without portfolio, there being in the present cabinet one such minister for Galicia. All ministers are appointed and dismissed by the Emperor. Under the leadership of a president of the council or premier (without portfolio), they serve as the Emperor's councillors, execute his will, and administer the affairs of their respective branches of the public service. It is provided by fundamental law that they shall be responsible for the const.i.tutionality and legality of governmental acts performed within the sphere of their powers.[663] They are responsible to the two branches of the national parliament alike, and may be interpellated or impeached by either. For impeachment an (p. 465) elaborate procedure is prescribed, though thus far it has not proved of practical utility. Every law promulgated in the Emperor's name must bear the signature of a responsible minister, and several sorts of ordinances--such as those proclaiming a state of siege or suspending the const.i.tutional rights of a citizen--require the concurrent signature of the entire ministry. Every minister possesses the right to sit and to speak in either chamber of the Reichsrath, where the policy of the Government may call for explanation or defense, and where there are at least occasional interpellations to be answered.

[Footnote 662: There is a joint ministry of finance, though each of the monarchies maintains a separate ministry for the administration of its own fiscal affairs. On the joint ministries see p.

510.]

[Footnote 663: Law concerning the Exercise of Administrative and Executive Power, December 21, 1867, -- 9. Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 88-89.]

Nominally, the parliamentary system is in vogue, but at best it operates only indifferently. Supposedly responsible, collectively and individually, to the Reichsrath, the ministers are in practice far more dependent upon the Emperor than upon the chambers. In France the inability of political parties to coalesce into two great opposing groups largely defeats the best ends of the parliamentary system. In Austria the numerous and ineradicable racial divisions deflect the system further still from the lines upon which theoretically it should operate. No political group is sufficiently powerful to rule alone, and no working affiliation can long be made to subsist. The consequence is, not only that the Government can ordinarily play off one faction against another and secure pretty much its own way, but also that the responsibility of the ministers to the chambers is much less effective in practice than on paper it appears to be.[664]

[Footnote 664: W. Beaumont, Cabinets ephemeres et ministeres provisoires en Autriche, in _Annales des Sciences Politiques_, March, 1900; H. Hantich, Nouvelle phase du parlementarisme en Autriche, in _Questions Diplomatiques et Coloniales_, February 1, 1910.]

III. THE REICHSRATH--THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM

*516. The House of Lords.*--The Reichsrath consists of two chambers. The upper is known as the Herrenhaus, or House of Lords; the lower, as the Abgeordnetenhaus, or House of Representatives. The Herrenhaus consists of a somewhat variable number of men who sit in part by _ex-officio_ right, in part by hereditary station, and in part by special Imperial appointment. At the close of 1910 there were in the chamber 266 members, distributed as follows: (1) princes of the Imperial family who are of age, 15; (2) n.o.bles of high rank qualified by the possession of large estates and nominated to an hereditary seat by the Emperor, 74; (3) ecclesiastics--10 archbishops and 8 bishops--who are of princely t.i.tle inherent in their episcopal seats, 18; and (4) persons nominated by the Emperor for life in recognition of special service rendered to the state or the Church, or unusual distinction (p. 466) attained in literature, art, or science, 159. By law of January 26, 1907, the number of members in the last-mentioned group may not exceed 170, nor be less than 150.[665] Within these limits, the power of the Emperor to create life peers is absolute. The prerogative is one which has several times been exercised to facilitate the enactment of measures upon whose adoption the Government was determined. The president and vice-president of the chamber are appointed from its members by the Emperor at the beginning of each session; but the body chooses all of its remaining officers. The privileges and powers of the Herrenhaus are co-ordinate with those of the Abgeordnetenhaus, save that money bills and bills fixing the number of military recruits must be presented first in the lower chamber.

[Footnote 665: It is interesting to observe that this guarantee against the wholesale creation of peers was brought forward with the object of winning for the Government's Universal Suffrage Bill the a.s.sent of the upper chamber.]

*517. The House of Representatives: Composition.*--The lower chamber, as const.i.tuted by fundamental law of 1867, was made up of 203 representatives, apportioned among the several provinces and elected by the provincial diets. The system worked poorly, and a law of 1868 authorized the voters of a province to elect the stipulated quota of representatives in the event that the Diet failed to do so. Still there was difficulty, arising largely from the racial rivalries in the provinces, and by an amendment of April 2, 1873, the right of election was vested exclusively in the enfranchised inhabitants of the Empire.

The number of members was at the same time increased to 353, though without modifying the proportion of representatives of the various provinces. Further amendment, in 1896, brought up the membership to 425, where it remained until 1907, when it was raised to the present figure, 516.

*518. Early Electoral Arrangements: Law of 1873.*--The broadly democratic electoral system which prevails in the Austrian dominions to-day is a very recent creation. With the introduction of const.i.tutionalism in 1867 the problem of the franchise became one of peculiar and increasing difficulty, and the process by which the Empire has been brought laboriously to its present condition of democracy has const.i.tuted one of the most tortuous chapters in recent political history. The conditions by which from the outset the problem was complicated were three in number: first, the large survival of self-a.s.sertiveness on the part of the various provinces among whom parliamentary representatives were to be distributed; second, the keenness of the ambitions of the several racial elements for parliamentary power; and third, the utter lack of experience and of traditions (p. 467) on the part of the Austrian peoples in the matter of democratic government.

When, in 1873, the right of electing deputies was withdrawn from the provincial diets it was conferred, without the establishment of a new electorate, upon those elements of the provincial populations which had been accustomed to take part in the election of the local diets.

These were four in number: (1) the great landowners, comprising those who paid a certain land tax, varying in the several provinces from 50 to 250 florins ($20 to $100), and including women and corporations; (2) the cities, in which the franchise was extended to all males of twenty-four who paid a direct tax of ten gulden annually; (3) chambers of commerce and of industry; and (4) rural communes, in which the qualifications for voting were the same as in the cities. To each of these curiae, or cla.s.ses, the law of 1873 a.s.signed a number of parliamentary representatives, to be elected thereafter in each province directly by the voters of the respective cla.s.ses, rather than indirectly through the diets. The number of voters in each cla.s.s and the relative importance of the individual voter varied enormously. In 1890, in the cla.s.s of landowners there was one deputy to every 63 voters; in the chambers of commerce, one to every 27; in the cities, one to every 2,918; and in the rural districts, one to every 11,600.[666]

[Footnote 666: Hazen, Europe since 1815, 399.]

*519. The Taaffe Electoral Bill of 1893.*--During the period covered by the ministry of Count Taaffe (February, 1879, to October, 1893) there was growing demand, especially on the part of the Socialists, Young Czechs, German Nationalists, and other radical groups, for a new electoral law, and during the years 1893-1896 this issue quite overshadowed all others. In October, 1893, Taaffe brought forward a sweeping electoral measure which, if it had become law, would have transferred the bulk of political power to the working cla.s.ses, at the same time reducing to impotence the preponderant German Liberal party.

The measure did not provide for the general, equal, and direct suffrage for which the radicals were clamoring, and by which the number of voters would have been increased from 1,700,000 to 5,500,000. But it did contemplate the increase of the electorate to something like 4,000,000. This it proposed to accomplish by abolishing all property qualifications of voters in the cities and rural communes[667] and by extending the voting privilege to all adult males who were able to read and write and who had resided in their electoral district a minimum of six months. To avoid the danger of an excess of democracy Taaffe planned to retain intact the curiae of landed proprietors and chambers of commerce, so that it would still be (p. 468) true that 5,402 large landholders would be represented in the lower house by 85 deputies, the chambers of commerce by 22, and the remainder of the nation--some 24,000,000 people--by 246. Impelled especially by fear of socialism, the Conservatives, the Poles, the German Liberals, and other elements opposed the project, and there never was any real chance of its adoption. By reason of its halfway character the Socialists, in congress at Vienna in March, 1894, condemned it as "an insult to the working cla.s.ses." Even in Hungary (which country, of course, the measure did not immediately concern) there was apprehension, the ruling Magyars fearing that the adoption of even a partial universal suffrage system in the affiliated state would prompt a demand on the part of the numerically preponderant Slavic populations of Hungary for the same sort, of thing.

Antic.i.p.ating defeat, Taaffe resigned, in October, 1893, before the measure came to a vote.

[Footnote 667: By a law of 1882 the direct-tax qualification had been reduced to 5 florins.]

*520. The Electoral Law of 1896.*--Under the Windischgratz and Kielmansegg ministries which succeeded no progress was realized, but the cabinet of the Polish Count Badeni, const.i.tuted October 4, 1895, made electoral reform the princ.i.p.al item in its programme and succeeded in carrying through a measure which, indeed, was but a caricature of Taaffe's project, but which none the less marked a distinct stage of progress toward the broad-based franchise for which the radicals were clamoring. The Government's bill was laid before the Reichsrath, February 16, 1896, and was adopted unchanged within the s.p.a.ce of two weeks. The general suffrage which the Socialists demanded was established, for the election, however, not of the 353 representatives already composing the lower chamber, but merely of a body of 72 new representatives to be added to the present membership.

In the choice of these 72 additional members every male citizen twenty-four years of age who had resided in a given district as much as six months prior to an election was to be ent.i.tled to partic.i.p.ate; but elections were to be direct only in those districts in which indirect voting had been abolished by provincial legislation. Votes were to be cast, as a rule, by ballot, though under some circ.u.mstances orally. All pre-existing cla.s.ses of voters were left unchanged, and to them was simply added a fifth. The aggregate number of electors in the Empire was raised to 5,333,000. Of the number, however, the 1,732,000 comprised in the original four curiae were still to elect 353 of the 425 members of the chamber, with the further inequity that many of the persons who profited by the new arrangement were included already in one or another of the older cla.s.ses, and hence were vested by it with a plural vote. Although, therefore, the voting privilege was now (p. 469) conferred upon millions of small taxpayers and non-taxpayers who never before had possessed it, the nation was still very far from a fair and democratic suffrage system.