The Governments of Europe Part 43

[Footnote 709: An English version of the statute of 1868 regulating the status of Croatia-Slavonia is printed in Drage, Austria-Hungary, 767-783. For extended discussions of the subject see Drage, _op.

cit._, Chap. ii; Geosztanyi, in P. Alden (ed.), Hungary of To-day, Chap. ii; G. Horn, Le Compromis de 1868 entre la Croatie et la Hongrie (Paris, 1907); G. de Montbel, La condition politique de la Croatie-Slavonie dans la monarchie austro-hongroise (Toulouse, 1909); and R. Gonnard, Entre Drave et Save; etudes economiques, politiques, et sociales sur la Croatie-Slavonie (Paris, 1911). See also R.

Henry, La Hongrie, la Croatie, et les nationalites, in _Questions Diplomatiques et Coloniales_, Aug.

16, 1907; J. Mailath Hongrie et Croatie, ibid., Nov. 1, 1907.]

CHAPTER XXVII (p. 509)

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: THE JOINT GOVERNMENT

*561. The Ausgleich.*--The unique political relation which subsists to-day between the Empire of Austria and the kingdom of Hungary rests upon the Ausgleich, or Compromise, of 1867, supplemented at certain points by agreements of more recent date. The fundamental terms of the arrangement, worked out by the Emperor Francis Joseph, Deak, and Baron Beust, were incorporated in essentially identical statutes enacted by the Hungarian Parliament and the Austrian Reichsrath December 21 and 24 of the year mentioned. Between the demand of Hungary, on the one hand, for independence (save only in respect to the crown), and that of Austria, on the other, for the thoroughgoing subordination of the Hungarian to an Imperial ministry, there was devised a compromise whose ruling principle is that of dualism rather than that of either absolute unity or subordination. Under the name Austria-Hungary there was established a novel type of state consisting of an empire and a kingdom, each of which, retaining its ident.i.ty unimpaired, stands in law upon a plane of complete equality with the other. Each has its own const.i.tution, its own parliament, its own ministry, its own administration, its own courts. Yet the two have but one sovereign and one flag, and within certain large and important fields the governmental machinery and public policy of the two are maintained in common. The laws which comprise the basis of the arrangement are the product of international compact. They provide no means by which they may be amended, and they can be amended only in the manner in which they were adopted, i.e., by international agreement supplemented by reciprocal parliamentary enactment.[710]

[Footnote 710: Drage, Austria-Hungary. Chap. 12; H.

Friedjung, Der Ausgleich mit Ungarn (Leipzig, 1877); Count Andra.s.sy, Ungarns Ausgleich mit osterreich von Jahre 1867 (Leipzig, 1897); L.

Eisenmann, Le compromis austro-hongroise (Paris, 1904). The Austrian and Hungarian texts of the Ausgleich laws, with German versions in parallel columns, are printed in I. Zolger, Der staatsrechtliche Ausgleich zwischen osterreich und Ungarn (Leipzig, 1911). English versions are in Dodd, Modern Const.i.tutions, I., 114-122, and Drage, Austria-Hungary, 744-750, 753-766. In a speech in the Hungarian Chamber November 23, 1903, Count Istvan Tisza sought to demonstrate that, properly, there is no such thing as an Austro-Hungarian Ausgleich--that the two instruments of 1867 are not only of different date but are essentially independent, each being revocable at will by the power by which it was enacted. An able polemic in opposition to the views of Tisza is to be found in F. Tezner, Ausgleichsrecht und Ausgleichspolitik (Vienna, 1907). Tezner is an Austrian publicist.]

I. THE COMMON ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT (p. 510)

*562. The Emperor-King.*--Of organs of government which the two dominions possess in common, and by which they are effectually tied together administratively, there are three: (1) the monarch; (2) the ministries of Foreign Affairs, War, and Finance; and (3) the Delegations. The functions and prerogatives of the monarch are three-fold, i.e., those which he possesses as emperor of Austria, those which belong to him as king of Hungary, and those vested in him as head of the Austro-Hungarian union. In theory, and largely in practice, the three sets of relationships are clearly distinguished.

All, however, must be combined in the same individual. The law of succession is the same, and it would not be possible for Francis Joseph, for example, to vacate the kingship of Hungary while retaining the Imperial office in the co-ordinated state. But there is a coronation at Vienna and another at Budapest; the royal t.i.tle reads "Emperor of Austria, King of Bohemia, etc., and Apostolic King of Hungary"; and the relations of the sovereign with each of the two governments are most of the time conducted precisely as if the other of the two were non-existent. In the capacity of dual sovereign the monarch's princ.i.p.al functions comprise the command of the army and navy,[711] the appointment of heads of the joint ministries, the promulgation of ordinances applying to the states in common, and the giving of a.s.sent to measures enacted by the dual legislative body.

[Footnote 711: As an ill.u.s.tration of the sensitiveness of the Hungarians in the matter of their Austrian relations the fact may be cited that in 1889, after prolonged effort, an arrangement was procured in accordance with which the joint sovereign, in the capacity of commander of the armed forces, is known as Emperor _and_ King, not as Emperor-King.]

*563. The Joint Ministries.*--By the Compromise of 1867 the three departments of administration which most obviously require concentration and uniformity were established upon a basis of community between the two governmental systems. The first of these is the ministry of Foreign Affairs. Neither Austria nor Hungary as such maintains diplomatic intercourse with other powers; Under the direction of the Foreign Minister (known, until 1871, as the Imperial Chancellor) are maintained all relations with foreign governments, through a diplomatic and consular service which represents in every respect the monarchy as a whole. Commercial treaties, and treaties (p. 511) stipulating changes of territory or imposing burdens upon the state or upon any part of it, require the a.s.sent of both the parliament at Vienna and that at Budapest.

The second common ministry is that of War. With respect to military and naval administration there has been no little misunderstanding, and even ill-feeling, between the two states. The instruments of 1867 vest the supreme command of the army and navy in the joint monarch, yet the armed establishments of the states are maintained on the basis of separate, even if approximately identical, laws, and each is placed under the immediate supervision of a separate minister of national defence. Each country maintains its independent arrangements for the raising of the yearly contingent of recruits. It is only after the quotas have been raised that the dual monarch can exercise his power of appointing officers and regulating the organization of the forces.

The authority of the joint war minister is confined largely to matters of secondary importance, such as equipment and the commissariat. Only a close understanding between the ministries at Vienna and Budapest can be depended upon, in the last a.n.a.lysis, to avert an utter breakdown of the admittedly precarious military establishment.[712]

[Footnote 712: V. Duruy, L'Armee austro-hongroise, in _Revue de Paris_, Jan. 15, 1909; M. B., L'Armee autrichienne, in _Annales des Sciences Politiques_, May, 1909; Com. Davin, La marine austro-hongroise, in _Questions Diplomatiques et Coloniales_, Aug.

16, 1909.]

The third common ministry is that of Finance. Each of the two states maintains an independent finance ministry and carries its own budget, because, within certain limitations, the administration of fiscal matters is left to the states in their separate capacities; but questions of joint expenditure, the establishment of the joint budget, and the examination of accounts are committed to a common ministry at Vienna. The powers of the joint minister of finance are, in point of fact, limited. Like the other joint ministers, he may not be a member of either the Austrian or the Hungarian cabinet, nor may he have access to the separate parliaments. His function is essentially that of a cashier. He receives the contributions made by the two states to the common expenses and hands them over to the several departments.

Until the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in 1908, it devolved upon him, by special arrangement, to administer the affairs of these semi-dependent territories.

*564. Fiscal and Economic Arrangements.*--In 1867 it was agreed that the common expenditures of Austria and Hungary should be met, in so (p. 512) far as possible, from the joint revenues, especially the customs, and that all common outlays in excess of these revenues should be borne by the states in a proportion to be fixed at decennial intervals by the Reichsrath and the Hungarian Parliament. Other joint interests of an economic nature--trade, customs, the debt, and railway policy--were left likewise to be readjusted at ten-year intervals. In respect to contributions, the arrangement hit upon originally was that all common deficits should be made up by quotas proportioned to the tax returns of the two countries, namely, Austria 70 per cent and Hungary 30 per cent. As has been pointed out, the periodic overhauling of the economic relationships of the two states has been productive of frequent and disastrous controversy. The task was accomplished successfully in the law of June 27, 1878, and again in that of May 21, 1887. But the readjustment due in 1897 had the curious fortune not to be completed until the year in which another readjustment was due, i.e., 1907. To the parliamentary contests, at both Vienna and Budapest, by which the decade 1897--1907 was filled some allusion has been made.[713] They involved distinctly the most critical test of stability to which the Ausgleich has been subjected since its establishment. During the period various features of the pre-existing arrangements were continued in force by royal decree or by provisional parliamentary vote, but not until October, 1907, were the economic relation of the two states put once more upon a normal basis.

Throughout the decade the Emperor-King exercised repeatedly the authority with which he is invested by law of 1867 to fix the ratio of contributions for one year at a time, when action cannot be had on the part of the legislative bodies. The ratio prevailing during the period was Austria 66-46/49 per cent and Hungary 33-3/49 per cent.

[Footnote 713: See pp. 479-481, 502-504.]

By the agreement of 1907, concluded for the usual ten-year period, the Hungarian quota was raised from the figure mentioned to 36.4 per cent.

The customs alliance, established in 1867 and renewed in 1878 and 1887, was superseded by a customs and commercial treaty, in accordance with which each state maintains what is technically a separate customs system, although until the expiration of existing conventions with foreign powers in 1917 the tariff arrangements of the two states must remain identical. Under the conditions which have arisen the customs unity of the monarchy is likely to be disrupted in fact, as already it is in law, upon the advent of the year mentioned. Thereafter commercial treaties with foreign nations will be negotiated in the name of the two states concurrently and will be signed, not merely by the common minister of foreign affairs, but also by a special (p. 513) Austrian and a special Hungarian representative.[714]

[Footnote 714: L. Louis-Jaray, Les relations austro-hongroises et le nouveau compromis economique, in _Questions Diplomatiques et Coloniales_, Jan. 16 and Feb. 1, 1908; and Les dispositions economiques du nouveau compromis austro-hongrois, in _Revue economique Internationale_, March, 1908.]

*565. The Delegations: Organization and Sessions.*--All legislative power of the Reichsrath and of the Hungarian Parliament, in so far as it relates to the joint affairs of the states, is exercised by two "delegations," one representing each of the two parliaments. The Austrian Delegation consists of sixty members, twenty of whom are chosen by the Herrenhaus from its own members, and the other forty of whom are elected by the Abgeordnetenhaus in such manner that the deputies from each province designate a number of delegates allotted to them by law. The Hungarian Delegation consists likewise of sixty members, twenty elected by and from the upper, forty by and from the lower, chamber, with the further requirement that there shall be included four of the Croatian members of the Chamber of Deputies and one of the Croatians in the Chamber of Magnates. All members of both Delegations are elected annually and may be re-elected. They must be convoked by the Emperor-King at least once a year. Every device is employed to lay emphasis upon the absolute equality of the two Delegations, and of the states they represent, even to the extent of having the sessions held alternately in Vienna and Budapest. The two bodies meet in separate chambers, each under a president whom it elects, but the proposals of the Government are laid before both at the same time by the joint ministry. In the Austrian Delegation all proceedings are conducted in the German tongue; in the Hungarian, in Magyar; and all communications between the two are couched in both languages. Sittings, as a rule, are public. In the event of a failure to agree after a third exchange of communications there may be, upon demand of either Delegation, a joint session. Upon this occasion there is no debate, but merely the taking of a vote, in which there must partic.i.p.ate an absolutely equal number of members of the two organizations.

*566. The Delegations: Powers.*--The members of the common ministry have the right to share in all deliberations of the Delegations and to present their projects personally or through deputies. They must be heard whenever they desire. Each Delegation, on the other hand, has a right to address questions to the joint ministry, or to any one of its members, and to require answers and explanations. By concurrent vote of the two bodies a joint minister may be impeached. In such a (p. 514) case the judges consist of twenty-four independent and legally trained citizens representing equally the two countries, chosen by the Delegations, but not members thereof. The power is one very unlikely to be exercised; in truth, the responsibility of the ministers to the Delegations is more theoretical than actual.

The functions of the Delegations are severely restricted. They extend in no case beyond the common affairs of the two states; and they comprise little more than the voting of supplies asked by the Government and a certain supervision of the common administrative machinery. Of legislative power, in the proper sense, the two bodies possess virtually none. Practically all law in the dual monarchy takes the form of statutes enacted concurrently by the separate parliaments of Austria and Hungary. The system is not ideal. It involves delay, confusion, and an excess of partisan wrangling. Probably upon no other basis, however, would even the semblance of an Austro-Hungarian union be possible. The existing arrangement operates somewhat to the advantage of Hungary, because the Hungarian Delegation is a body which votes solidly together, whereas the Austrian is composed of mutually hostile racial and political groups.

II. THE TERRITORIES OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

*567. Annexation of the Provinces, 1908.*--By the Congress of Berlin, in 1878, Austria was authorized, ostensibly in the interest of the peace of Europe, to occupy and administer the neighboring provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina; and from that date until 1908, although the provinces continued under the nominal sovereignty of the Sultan of Turkey, their affairs were managed regularly by the Austro-Hungarian minister of finance. The eventual absorption of the territories by the dual monarchy was not unexpected, but it came in virtue of a _coup_ by which the European world was thrown for a time into some agitation.

The revolution at Constantinople during the summer of 1908, accompanied by the threatened dissolution of European Turkey, created precisely the opportunity for which the authorities at Vienna had long waited. October 5, Prince Ferdinand of Bulgaria proclaimed the complete separation of Bulgaria from the Sultan's dominions and a.s.sumed the t.i.tle of king. Two days later Emperor Francis Joseph proclaimed to the inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina the immediate extension of Austro-Hungarian sovereignty over them, alleging that the hour had arrived when they ought to be raised to a higher political level and accorded the benefits of Austro-Hungarian const.i.tutionalism.

Among the population of the annexed provinces the Roman Catholic (p. 515) element approved the union, but the Greek Orthodox and Mohammedan majority warmly opposed it. The people of the provinces are Servian in race, and in the interest of the Servian union which it was hoped at some time to bring about Servia and Montenegro protested loudly, and even began preparations for war. The annexation const.i.tuted a flagrant infraction of the Berlin Treaty, and during some weeks the danger of international complications was grave. Eventually, however, on the understanding that the new possessor should render to Turkey certain financial compensation, the various powers more or less grudgingly yielded their a.s.sent to the change of status.

*568. The Const.i.tution of 1910: the Diet.* At the time of the annexation it was promised that the provinces should be granted a const.i.tution.

The pledge was fulfilled in the fundamental laws which were promulgated by the Vienna Government February 22, 1910. The const.i.tution proper consists of a preamble and three sections, of which the first relates to civil rights, the second to the composition of the Diet, and the third to the competence of the Diet. Under the terms of the preamble the pre-existing military and administrative arrangements are perpetuated. The civil rights section extends to the annexed provinces the princ.i.p.al provisions of the Austrian const.i.tution in respect to equality before the law, freedom of personal movement, the protection of individual liberty, the independence of judges, freedom of conscience, autonomy of recognized religious communities, the right of free expression of opinion, the abolition of restrictive censorship, the freedom of scientific investigation, secrecy of postal and telegraphic communications, and the rights of a.s.sociation and public meeting.

The second section creates a diet of seventy-two elected and twenty _ex-officio_ representatives, fifteen of the latter being dignitaries of the Mohammedan, Servian, Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic religious communities. The presidential bureau, consisting of one president and two vice-presidents, is appointed annually by the crown at the opening of the session. Each creed is regularly to be represented in the bureau, the presidential office being held by a Servian, a Mohammedan, and a Croat in annual rotation. To be valid, the decisions of the Diet require the presence of a majority of the members, except when ecclesiastical matters are under discussion. Upon such occasions the presence of four-fifths of the Diet, and a two-thirds majority, is required.

The third section excludes from the legislative competence of the Diet all joint Austro-Hungarian affairs and questions pertaining to the armed forces and to customs arrangements. The Diet is, however, (p. 516) empowered to elect a national council of nine members and to commission it to lay the views of the Diet before the Austro-Hungarian Government. In all other matters, such as civil, penal, police and commercial law, industrial and agrarian legislation, sanitation, communications, taxation, the provincial estimates, the issue and conversion of loans, and the sale or mortgaging of provincial property, the Diet has a free hand. Government measures to be submitted to the Diet require, however, the previous sanction of the Austrian and the Hungarian cabinets, whose a.s.sent is also necessary before bills pa.s.sed by the Diet can receive the sanction of the crown.

*569. The Electoral System.*--Subsequent statutes regulate the franchise and electoral procedure. First of all, the seventy-two elective seats in the Diet are divided among the adherents of the various religious denominations, the Servians receiving 31, the Mohammedans 24, and the Catholic Croats 16. One seat is reserved for a representative of the Jews. The seats are divided, furthermore, into three curiae, or electoral cla.s.ses, eighteen being allotted to a first cla.s.s composed of large landed proprietors and the heaviest taxpayers, twenty to a second cla.s.s composed of urban electors, and thirty-four to a third cla.s.s composed of rural electors. The franchise is bestowed upon all subjects of the crown, born in the provinces or possessing one year's residential qualification, who are of the male s.e.x and have completed their twenty-fourth year. In the first of the three cla.s.ses women possess the franchise, although they may exercise it only by male deputy. Candidates for election must have completed their thirtieth year and must be of the male s.e.x and in full enjoyment of civil rights. Civil and railway servants, as well as public school teachers, are not eligible. In the first and second cla.s.ses votes are recorded in writing, but in the third, or rural, cla.s.s, voting, by reason of the large proportion of illiterates, is oral. In the second and third (urban and rural) cla.s.ses the system of single-member const.i.tuencies has been adopted. The provinces are divided into as many Servian, Mohammedan, and Catholic const.i.tuencies, with separate registers, as there are seats allotted to the respective creeds. For the Jews all the towns of the two provinces form a single const.i.tuency.[715]

[Footnote 715: The texts of the organic acts of 1910 are printed in K. Lamp, Die Rechtsnatur der Verfa.s.sung Bosniens und der Herzegowina vom 17 Februar 1910, in Jahrbuch des offentlichen Rechts (Tubingen, 1911), V.; L. Geller, Bosnisch-herzegowinische Verfa.s.sungs und politische Grundgesetze (Vienna, 1910); and in Zeitschrift fur Volkerrecht und Bundesstaatsrecht, IV., No. 5. See also F. Komlossy, Das Rechtsverhaltniss Bosniens und des Herzegowina zu Ungarn (Pressburg, 1911).]

PART VII.--THE LOW COUNTRIES (p. 517)

CHAPTER XXVIII

THE GOVERNMENT OF HOLLAND

I. A CENTURY OF POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT

Geographical juxtaposition, combined with historical circ.u.mstance, has determined that between the two modern kingdoms of Holland and Belgium, widely as they differ in many fundamental characteristics, relations should be continuous and close. Both nations have sprung from groups of provinces comprised within the original Low Countries, or Netherlands. Following the memorable contest of the Dutch with Philip II. of Spain, the seven provinces to the north achieved their independence at the beginning of the seventeenth century and, under the name of the United Provinces, built up a system of government, republican in form though in operation much of the time really autocratic, which survived through more than two hundred years. The ten provinces to the south continued under the sovereignty of Spain until 1713, when by the Treaty of Utrecht they were transferred to Austria. They did not attain the status of independent nationality until 1831.

*570. The French Domination, 1793-1814.*--The const.i.tutional arrangements operative in the Holland and Belgium of to-day are to be regarded as products largely of the era of the French Revolution and of the Napoleonic domination. Between 1795 and 1810 both groups of Low Country provinces were absorbed by France, and both were forced quite out of their accustomed political channels. The provinces comprising the Austrian Netherlands were overrun by a French army early in 1793.

By decree of October 1, 1795, they were incorporated in the French Republic, being erected into nine departments; and by the Treaty of Luneville, February 9, 1801, they were definitely ceded by Austria to France.[716] February 1, 1793, the French Republic declared war upon Holland. During the winter of 1794--1795 the Dutch provinces were (p. 518) occupied, and by the Treaty of The Hague, May 16, 1795, they were erected into a new nationality known as the Batavian Republic, under the protection of France.[717] The const.i.tution of the old republic was thoroughly overhauled and the stadtholderate, long in the possession of the house of Orange, was abolished. To the considerable body of anti-Orange republicans the coming of the French was, indeed, not unwelcome. May 24, 1806, the Batavian Republic was converted by Napoleon into the kingdom of Holland, and Louis Bonaparte, younger brother of the French Emperor, was set up as the unwilling sovereign of an unwilling people. Nominally, the new kingdom was both const.i.tutional and independent; practically, it was an autocracy and a dependency of France. King Louis labored conscientiously to safeguard the interests of his Dutch subjects, but in vain. After four years he abdicated, under pressure; whereupon, July 9, 1810, an Imperial edict swept away what remained of the independent status of the Dutch people and incorporated the kingdom absolutely with France. The ancient provinces were replaced by seven departments; to the Dutch were a.s.signed six seats in the French Senate, three in the Council of State, and twenty-five in the Legislative Body; a lieutenant-general was established at the head of the administrative system; and no effort was spared to obliterate all survivals of Dutch nationality.

[Footnote 716: L. Delplace, La Belgique sous la domination francaise, 2 vols. (Louvain, 1896); L.

de Lanzac de Laborie, La domination francaise en Belgique, 2 vols. (Paris, 1895).]

[Footnote 717: L. Legrand, La revolution francaise en Hollande: la republique batave (Paris, 1894).]

*571. The Settlement by the Congress of Vienna: the Const.i.tution of 1815.*--With the overthrow of Napoleon the fate of both the Dutch and the Belgian provinces fell to the arbitrament of the allied powers. In the first Treaty of Paris, concluded May 30, 1814, between the Allies on the one side and France on the other, it was stipulated that the Belgian territories should be joined with Holland and that the whole, under the name of the Kingdom of the United Netherlands, should be a.s.signed to the restored house of Orange, in the person of William I., son of the stadtholder William V. Already, consequent upon the Dutch revolt which followed the defeat of Napoleon at Leipzig, William had been recalled from his eighteen-year exile. December 1, 1813, he had accepted formally the sovereignty of the Dutch provinces, and early in 1814 a const.i.tution had been drawn up and put in operation. The desire of the Allies, particularly of Great Britain, was that there should be brought into existence in the Low Countries a state which should be sufficiently powerful to const.i.tute a barrier to possible aggressions of France upon the north. The union of the Belgian with the Dutch provinces, was intended furthermore, to compensate the Dutch in (p. 519) some measure for their losses of colonial possessions to Great Britain during the war. By the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna, June 9, 1815, and by the second Peace of Paris, November 20 following, the arrangement was ratified. With Holland and the Austrian Netherlands were united in the new state the bishopric of Liege, the duchy of Limburg, and the duchy (henceforth to be known as the grand-duchy) of Luxemburg. The last-mentioned territory, while included in the Germanic Confederation, was bestowed upon the Dutch sovereign in compensation for German princ.i.p.alities ceded by him at this time to Prussia.[718] March 15, 1815, William began his reign under the new regime in Holland, and September 27 following he was crowned at Brussels.

[Footnote 718: These ceded territories comprised the ancestral domains of the house of Na.s.sau which lay in Germany--Dietz, Siegen, Hadamar, and Dillenburg. The grand-duchy of Luxemburg was joined with the Netherlands by a personal union only, and in its capital, as a fortress of the German Confederation, was maintained a Prussian garrison.