Chapter VII: Front Matter (7)

These events produced a great change on the character of the German opposition. It became more and more avowedly racial; the defence of German nationality was put in the front of their programme. The growing national animosity added bitterness to political life, and destroyed the possibility of a strong homogeneous party on which a government might depend. The beginning of this movement can be traced back to the year 1870. About that time a party of young Germans had arisen who professed to care little for constitutionalism and other "legal mummies," but made the preservation and extension of their own nationality their sole object. As is so often the case in Austria, the movement began in the university of Vienna, where a _Leseverein_ (reading club) of German students was formed as a point of cohesion for Germans, which had eventually to be suppressed. The first representative of the movement in parliament was Herr von Schoenerer, who did not scruple to declare that the Germans looked forward to union with the German empire. They were strongly influenced by men outside Austria. Bismarck was their national hero, the anniversary of Sedan their political festival, and approximation to Germany was dearer to them than the maintenance of Austria. After 1878 a heightening of racial feeling began among the Radicals, and in 1881 all the German parties in opposition joined together in a club called the United Left, and in their programme put in a prominent place the defence of the position of the Germans as the condition for the existence of the state, and demanded that German should be expressly recognized as the official language. The younger and more ardent spirits, however, found it difficult to work in harmony with the older constitutional leaders. They complained that the party leaders were not sufficiently decisive in the measures for self-defence. In 1885 great festivities in honour of Bismarck's eightieth birthday, which had been arranged in Graz, were forbidden by the government, and the Germans of Styria were very indignant that the party did not take up the matter with sufficient energy. After the elections of 1885 the Left, therefore, broke up again into two clubs, the "German Austrian," which included the more moderate, and the "German," which wished to use sharper language. The German Club, _e.g._, congratulated Bismarck on his measures against the Poles; the German Austrians refused to take cognizance of events outside Austria with which they had nothing to do. Even the German Club was not sufficiently decided for Herr von Schoenerer and his friends, who broke off from it and founded a "National German Union." They spoke much of _Germanentum_ and _Unverfaelschtes Deutschtum_, and they advocated a political union with the German empire, and were strongly anti-Hungarian and wished to resign all control over Galicia, if by a closer union with Germany they could secure German supremacy in Bohemia and the south Slav countries. They play the same part in Austria as does the "pan-Germanic Union" in Germany. When in 1888 the [v.03 p.0034] two clubs, the German Austrians and the Germans, joined once more under the name of the "United German Left" into a new club with eighty-seven members, so as the better to guard against the common danger and to defeat the educational demands of the Clericals, the National Germans remained apart with seventeen members. They were also infected by the growing spirit of anti-Semitism. The German parties had originally been the party of the capitalists, and comprised a large number of Jews; this new German party committed itself to violent attacks upon the Jews, and for this reason alone any real harmony between the different branches would have been impossible.

[Sidenote: The agreement with Bohemia.]

Notwithstanding the concessions about language the Czechs had, however, made no advance towards their real object--the recognition of the Bohemian kingdom. Perhaps the leaders of the party, who were now growing old, would have been content with the influence they had already attained, but they were hard pressed at home by the Young Czechs, who were more impatient. When Count Thun was appointed governor of Bohemia their hopes ran high, for he was supposed to favour the coronation of the emperor at Prague. In 1890, however, instead of proceeding to the coronation as was expected, Taaffe attempted to bring about a reconciliation between the opposing parties. The influence by which his policy was directed is not quite clear, but the Czechs had been of recent years less easy to deal with, and Taaffe had never really shown any wish to alter the constitution; his policy always was to destroy the influence of parliament by playing off one party against the other, and so to win a clear field for the government. During the month of January conferences were held at Vienna, with Taaffe in the chair, to which were invited representatives of the three groups into which the Bohemian representatives were divided, the German party, the Czechs, and the Feudal party. After a fortnight's discussion an agreement was made on the basis of a separation between the German and the Czech districts, and a revision of the electoral law. A protocol enumerating the points agreed on was signed by all who had taken part in the conference, and in May bills were laid before the diet incorporating the chief points in the agreement. But they were not carried; the chief reason being that the Young Czechs had not been asked to take part in the conference, and did not consider themselves bound by its decisions; they opposed the measures and had recourse to obstruction, and a certain number of the Old Czechs gradually came over to them. Their chief ground of criticizing the proposed measures was that they would threaten the unity of the Bohemian country.[18] At the elections in 1891 a great struggle took place between the Old and the Young Czechs. The latter were completely victorious; Rieger, who had led the party for thirty years, disappeared from the Reichsrath. The first result was that the proposed agreement with Bohemia came to an end. But the disappearance of the Old Czechs made the parliamentary situation very insecure. The Young Czechs could not take their place: their Radical and anti-clerical tendencies alarmed the Feudalists and Clericalists who formed so large a part of the Right; they attacked the alliance with Germany; they made public demonstration of their French sympathies; they entered into communication with other Slav races, especially the Serbs of Hungary and Bosnia; they demanded universal suffrage, and occasionally supported the German Radicals in their opposition to the Clerical parties, especially in educational matters; under their influence disorder increased in Bohemia, a secret society called the _Umladina_ (an imitation of the Servian society of that name) was discovered, and stringent measures had to be taken to preserve order. The government therefore veered round towards the German Liberals; some of the ministers most obnoxious to the Germans resigned, and their places were taken by Germans. For two years the government seemed to waver, looking now to the Left, now to Hohenwart and his friends; for a time Taaffe really had the support of all parties except the Young Czechs.

[Sidenote: Electoral reform.]

After two years he gave up his cautious policy and took a bold move. In October 1893 he introduced a reform bill. Universal suffrage had long been demanded by the working men and the Socialists; the Young Czechs also had put it on their programme, and many of the Christian Socialists and anti-Semites desired an alteration of the franchise. Taaffe's bill, while keeping the _curiae_ of the feudal proprietors and the chambers of commerce as they were, and making no change in the number of members, proposed to give the franchise in both towns and rural districts to every one who could read and write, and had resided six months in one place. This was opposed by the Liberals, for with the growth of socialism and anti-Semitism, they knew that the extension of the franchise would destroy their influence. On this Taaffe had probably calculated, but he had omitted to inquire what the other parties would do. He had not even consulted Hohenwart, to whose assistance he owed his long tenure of power. Not even the pleasure of ruining the Liberals was sufficient to persuade the Conservatives to vote for a measure which would transfer the power from the well-to-do to the indigent, and Hohenwart justly complained that they ought to have been secure against surprises of this kind. The Poles also were against a measure which would give more influence to the Ruthenes. The position of the government was hopeless, and without waiting for a division Taaffe resigned.

[Sidenote: The coalition ministry, 1893.]

The event to which for fourteen years the Left had looked forward had now happened. Once more they could have a share in the government, which they always believed belonged to them by nature. Taught by experience and adversity, they did not scruple to enter into an alliance with their old enemies, and a coalition ministry was formed from the Left, the Clericals and the Poles. The president was Prince Alfred Windisch-Graetz, grandson of the celebrated general, one of Hohenwart's ablest lieutenants; Hohenwart himself did not take office. Of course an administration of this kind could not take a definite line on any controversial question, but during 1894 they carried through the commercial treaty with Russia and the laws for the continuance of the currency reform. The differences of the clubs appeared, however, in the discussions on franchise reform; the government, not strong enough to have a policy of its own, had referred the matter to a committee; for the question having once been raised, it was impossible not to go on with it. This would probably have been fatal to the coalition, but the final blow was given by a matter of very small importance arising from the disputes on nationality. The Slovenes had asked that in the gymnasium at Cilli classes in which instruction was given in Slovenian should be formed parallel to the German classes. This request caused great excitement in Styria and the neighbouring districts; the Styrian diet (from which the Slovene minority had seceded) protested. The Slovenes were, however, members of the Hohenwart Club, so Hohenwart and his followers supported the request, which was adopted by the ministry. The German Left opposed it; they were compelled to do so by the popular indignation in the German districts; and when the vote was carried against them (12th June 1895) they made it a question of confidence, and formally withdrew their support from the government, which therefore at once resigned.

[Sidenote: Badeni's ministry.]

After a short interval the emperor appointed as minister-president Count Badeni, who had earned a great reputation as governer of Galicia. He formed an administration the merit of which, as of so many others, was that it was to belong to no party and to have no programme. He hoped to be able to work in harmony with the moderate elements of the Left; his mission was to carry through the composition (_Ausgleich_) with Hungary; to this everything else must be subordinated. During 1896 he succeeded in carrying a franchise reform bill, which satisfied nearly all parties. All the old categories of members were maintained, but a fifth _curia_ was added, in which almost any one might vote who had resided six months in one place and was not in domestic service; in this way seventy-two would be added to the existing members. This matter having been [v.03 p.0035] settled, parliament was dissolved. The result of the elections of 1897 was the return of a House so constituted as to make any strong government impossible. On both sides the anti-Semitic parties representing the extreme demagogic elements were present in considerable numbers. The United German Left had almost disappeared; it was represented only by a few members chosen by the great proprietors; in its place there were the three parties--the German Popular party, the German Nationalists, and the German Radicals--who all put questions of nationality first and had deserted the old standpoint of the constitution. Then there were the fourteen Social Democrats who had won their seats under the new franchise. The old party of the Right was, however, also broken up; side by side with forty-one Clericals there were twenty-eight Christian Socialists led by Dr Lueger, a man of great oratorical power, who had won a predominant influence in Vienna, so long the centre of Liberalism, and had quite eclipsed the more modest efforts of Prince Liechtenstein. As among the German National party, there were strong nationalist elements in his programme, but they were chiefly directed against Jews and Hungarians; Lueger had already distinguished himself by his violent attacks on Hungary, which had caused some embarrassment to the government at a time when the negotiations for the _Ausgleich_ were in progress. Like anti-Semites elsewhere, the Christian Socialists were reckless and irresponsible, appealing directly to the passions and prejudices of the most ignorant. There were altogether 200 German members of the Reichsrath, but they were divided into eight parties, and nowhere did there seem to be the elements on which a government could be built up.

The parliamentary situation is best explained by the following table showing the parties:--

_German Liberals_-- 1897. 1901.
Constitutional Landed Proprietors 28 28
German Radicals 49 41
German Popular Party 42 51
Schoenerer Group 5 21
Kronawetter 1 ..
Democrat 1 ..
-- 126 -- 141
_Social Democrats_ 14 10

_German Conservatives_--
German Clericals 30} 37
German Popular Party 15}
Christian Socialists 28 23
-- 73 -- 60
_Federalist Great Proprietors_ 16 16

_Czechs_--
Young Czechs 60 53
Radical Young Czechs 1 4
Clerical Czechs 1 2
Agrarian Czechs 1 6
-- 63 -- 65

_Poles_--
Polish Club 59 60
Stoyalovski Group 6 ..
Popular Polish Party 3 11
-- 68 -- 71

_Slovenes_--
Clerical Slovenes 11 ..
Radical " 5 ..
-- 16 -- 16

_Italians_--
Liberal Italians 14 ..
Clerical " 5 ..
-- 19 -- 19
_Croatians_ 11 9
_Serbs_ 2 2
_Ruthenes_--
Ruthenes 6 ..
Young Ruthenes 5 ..
-- 11 -- 11
_Rumanians_--
Rumanians 5 ..
Young Rumanians 1 ..
-- 6 -- 5
--- ---
Total 425 425

The most remarkable result of the elections was the disappearance of the Liberals in Vienna. In 1879, out of 37 members returned in Lower Austria, 33 were Liberals, but now they were replaced to a large extent by the Socialists. It was impossible to maintain a strong party of moderate constitutionalists, on whom the government could depend, unless there was a large nucleus from Lower Austria. The influence of Lueger was very embarrassing; he had now a majority of two-thirds in the town council, and had been elected burgomaster. The emperor had refused to confirm the election; he had been re-elected, and then the emperor, in a personal interview, appealed to him to withdraw. He consented to do so; but, after the election of 1897 had given him so many followers in the Reichsrath, Badeni advised that his election as burgomaster should be confirmed. There was violent antipathy between the Christian Socialists and the German Nationalists, and the transference of their quarrels from the Viennese Council Chamber to the Reichsrath was very detrimental to the orderly conduct of debate.

[Sidenote: Socialism.]

The limited suffrage had hitherto prevented socialism from becoming a political force in Austria as it had in Germany, and the national divisions have always impeded the creation of a centralized socialist party. The first object of the working classes necessarily was the attainment of political power; in 1867 there had been mass demonstrations and petitions to the government for universal suffrage. During the next years there was the beginning of a real socialist movement in Vienna and in Styria, where there is a considerable industrial population; after 1879, however, the growth of the party was interrupted by the introduction of anarchical doctrines. Most's paper, the _Freiheit_, was introduced through Switzerland, and had a large circulation. The anarchists, under the leadership of Peukert, seem to have attained considerable numbers. In 1883-1884 there were a number of serious strikes, collisions between the police and the workmen, followed by assassinations; it was a peculiarity of Austrian anarchists that in some cases they united robbery to murder. The government, which was seriously alarmed, introduced severe repressive measures; the leading anarchists were expelled or fled the country. In 1887, under the leadership of Dr Adler, the socialist party began to revive (the party of violence having died away), and since then it has steadily gained in numbers; in the forefront of the political programme is put the demand for universal suffrage. In no country is the 1st of May, as the festival of Labour, celebrated so generally.

Badeni after the election sent in his resignation, but the emperor refused to accept it, and he had, therefore, to do the best he could and turn for support to the other nationalities. The strongest of them were the fifty-nine Poles and sixty Young Czechs; he therefore attempted, as Taaffe had done, to come to some agreement with them. The Poles were always ready to support the government; among the Young Czechs the more moderate had already attempted to restrain the wilder spirits of the party, and they were quite prepared to enter into negotiations. They did not wish to lose the opportunity which now was open to them of winning influence over the administration. What they required was further concession as to the language in Bohemia. [Sidenote: The language ordinances of 1897.] In May 1897 Badeni, therefore, published his celebrated _ordinances_. They determined (1) that all correspondence and documents regarding every matter brought before the government officials should be conducted in the language in which it was first introduced. This applied to the whole of Bohemia, and meant the introduction of Czech into the government offices throughout the whole of the kingdom; (2) after 1903 no one was to be appointed to a post under the government in Bohemia until he had passed an examination in Czech. These ordinances fulfilled the worst fears of the Germans. The German Nationalists and Radicals declared that no business should be done till they were repealed and Badeni dismissed. They resorted to obstruction. They brought in repeated motions to impeach the ministers, and parliament had to be prorogued in June, although no business of any kind had been transacted. Badeni had not anticipated the effect his ordinances would have; as a Pole he had little experience in the western part of the empire. During the recess he tried to open negotiations, but [v.03 p.0036] the Germans refused even to enter into a discussion until the ordinances had been withdrawn. The agitation spread throughout the country; great meetings were held at Eger and Aussig, which were attended by Germans from across the frontier, and led to serious disturbances; the cornflower, which had become the symbol of German nationality and union with Germany, was freely worn, and the language used was in many cases treasonable. The emperor insisted that the Reichsrath should again be summoned to pass the necessary measures for the agreement with Hungary; scenes then took place which have no parallel in parliamentary history. To meet the obstruction it was determined to sit at night, but this was unsuccessful. On one occasion Dr Lecher, one of the representatives of Moravia, spoke for twelve hours, from 9 P.M. till 9 A.M., against the Ausgleich. The opposition was not always limited to feats of endurance of this kind. On the 3rd of November there was a free fight in the House; it arose from a quarrel between Dr Lueger and the Christian Socialists on the one side (for the Christian Socialists had supported the government since the confirmation of Lueger as burgomaster) and the German Nationalists under Herr Wolf, a German from Bohemia, the violence of whose language had already caused Badeni to challenge him to a duel. The Nationalists refused to allow Lueger to speak, clapping their desks, hissing and making other noises, till at last the Young Czechs attempted to prevent the disorder by violence. On the 24th of November the scenes of disturbance were renewed. The president, Herr v. Abrahamovitch, an Armenian from Galicia, refused to call on Schoenerer to speak. The Nationalists therefore stormed the platform, and the president and ministers had to fly into their private rooms to escape personal violence, until the Czechs came to their rescue, and by superiority in numbers and physical strength severely punished Herr Wolf and his friends. The rules of the House giving the president no authority for maintaining order, he determined, with the assent of the ministers, to propose alterations in procedure. The next day, when the sitting began, one of the ministers, Count Falkenhayn, a Clerical who was very unpopular, moved "That any member who continued to disturb a sitting after being twice called to order could be suspended--for three days by the president, and for thirty days by the House." The din and uproar was such that not a word could be heard, but at a pre-arranged signal from the president all the Right rose, and he then declared that the new order had been carried, although the procedure of the House required that it should be submitted to a committee. The next day, at the beginning of the sitting, the Socialists rushed on the platform, tore up and destroyed all the papers lying there, seized the president, and held him against the wall. After he had escaped, eighty police were introduced into the House and carried out the fourteen Socialists. The next day Herr Wolf was treated in the same manner. The excitement spread to the street. Serious disorders took place in Vienna and in Graz; the German opposition had the support of the people, and Lueger warned the ministers that as burgomaster he would be unable to maintain order in Vienna; even the Clerical Germans showed signs of deserting the government. [Sidenote: Badeni resigns.] The emperor, hastily summoned to Vienna, accepted Badeni's resignation, the Germans having thus by obstruction attained part of their wishes. The new minister, Gautsch, a man popular with all parties, held office for three months; he proclaimed the budget and the Ausgleich, and in February replaced the language ordinances by others, under which Bohemia was to be divided into three districts--one Czech, one German and one mixed. The Germans, however, were not satisfied with this; they demanded absolute repeal. The Czechs also were offended; they arranged riots at Prague; the professors in the university refused to lecture unless the German students were defended from violence; Gautsch resigned, and Thun, who had been governor of Bohemia, was appointed minister. Martial law was proclaimed in Bohemia, and strictly enforced. Thun then arranged with the Hungarian ministers a compromise about the Ausgleich.

[Sidenote: Renewed conflict between Germans and Czechs.]

The Reichsrath was again summoned, and the meetings were less disturbed than in the former year, but the Germans still prevented any business from being done. The Germans now had a new cause of complaint. Paragraph 14 of the Constitutional law of 1867 provided that, in cases of pressing necessity, orders for which the assent of the Reichsrath was required might, if the Reichsrath were not in session, be proclaimed by the emperor; they had to be signed by the whole ministry, and if they were not laid before the Reichsrath within four months of its meeting, or if they did not receive the approval of both Houses, they ceased to be valid. The Germans contended that the application of this clause to the Ausgleich was invalid, and demanded that it should be repealed. Thun had in consequence to retire, in September 1899. His successor, Count Clary, began by withdrawing the ordinances which had been the cause of so much trouble, but it was now too late to restore peace. The Germans were not sufficiently strong and united to keep in power a minister who had brought them the relief for which they had been clamouring for two years. The Czechs, of course, went into opposition, and used obstruction. The extreme German party, however, took the occasion to demand that paragraph 14 should be repealed. Clary explained that this was impossible, but he gave a formal pledge that he would not use it. The Czechs, however, prevented him passing a law on excise which was a necessary part of the agreements with Hungary; it was, therefore, impossible for him to carry on the government without breaking his word; there was nothing left for him to do but to resign, after holding office for less than three months. The emperor then appointed a ministry of officials, who were not bound by his pledge, and used paragraph 14 for the necessary purposes of state. They then made way for a ministry under Herr v. Koerber. During the early months of 1900 matters were more peaceful, and Koerber hoped to be able to arrange a compromise; but the Czechs now demanded the restoration of their language in the internal service of Bohemia, and on 8th June, by noise and disturbance, obliged the president to suspend the sitting. The Reichsrath was immediately dissolved, the emperor having determined to make a final attempt to get together a parliament with which it would be possible to govern. The new elections on which so much was to depend did not take place till January 1901. They resulted in a great increase of the extreme German Nationalist parties. Schoenerer and the German Radicals--the fanatical German party who in their new programme advocated union of German Austria with the German empire--now numbered twenty-one, who chiefly came from Bohemia. They were able for the first time to procure the election of one of their party in the Austrian Delegation, and threatened to introduce into the Assembly scenes of disorder similar to those which they had made common in the Reichsrath. All those parties which did not primarily appeal to national feeling suffered loss; especially was this the case with the two sections of the Clericals, the Christian Socialists and the Ultramontanes; and the increasing enmity between the German Nationalists (who refused even the name German to a Roman Catholic) and the Church became one of the most conspicuous features in the political situation. The loss of seats by the Socialists showed that even among the working men the national agitation was gaining ground; the diminished influence of the anti-Semites was the most encouraging sign.

Notwithstanding the result of the elections, the first months of the new parliament passed in comparative peace. There was a truce between the nationalities. The Germans were more occupied with their opposition to the Clericals than with their feud with the Slavs. The Czechs refrained from obstruction, for they did not wish to forfeit the alliance with the Poles and Conservatives, on which their parliamentary strength depended, and the Germans used the opportunity to pass measures for promoting the material prosperity of the country, especially for an important system of canals which would bring additional prosperity to the coal-fields and manufactures of Bohemia.

(J. W. HE.)

[Sidenote: Public works policy.]

The history of Austria since the general election of 1901 is the [v.03 p.0037] history of franchise reform as a crowning attempt to restore parliament to normal working conditions. The premier, Dr von Koerber, who had undertaken to overcome obstruction and who hoped to effect a compromise between Germans and Czechs, induced the Chamber to sanction the estimates, the contingent of recruits and other "necessities of state" for 1901 and 1902, by promising to undertake large public works in which Czechs and Germans were alike interested. These public works were chiefly a canal from the Danube to the Oder; a ship canal from the Danube to the Moldau near Budweis, and the canalization of the Moldau from Budweis to Prague; a ship canal running from the projected Danube-Oder canal near Prerau to the Elbe near Pardubitz, and the canalization of the Elbe from Pardubitz to Melnik; a navigable connexion between the Danube-Oder Canal and the Vistula and the Dniester. It was estimated that the construction of these four canals would require twenty years, the funds being furnished by a 4% loan amortizable in ninety years. In addition to the canals, the cabinet proposed and the Chamber sanctioned the construction of a "second railway route to Trieste" designed to shorten the distance between South Germany, Salzburg and the Adriatic, by means of a line passing under the Alpine ranges of central and southern Austria. The principal sections of this line were named after the ranges they pierced, the chief tunnels being bored through the Tauern, Karawanken and Wochein hills. Sections were to be thrown open to traffic as soon as completed and the whole work to be ended during 1909. The line forms one of the most interesting railway routes in Europe. The cost, however, greatly exceeded the estimate sanctioned by parliament; and the contention that the parliamentary adoption of the Budget in 1901-1902 cost the state L100,000,000 for public works, is not entirely unfounded. True, these works were in most cases desirable and in some cases necessary, but they were hastily promised and often hastily begun under pressure of political expediency. The Koerber administration was for this reason subsequently exposed to severe censure.

[Sidenote: Koerber's parliamentary difficulties.]

Despite these public works Dr von Koerber found himself unable to induce parliament to vote the Budgets for 1903, 1904 or 1905, and was obliged to revert to the expedient employed by his predecessors of sanctioning the estimates by imperial ordinance under paragraph 14 of the constitution. His attempts in December 1902 and January 1903 to promote a compromise between Czechs and Germans proved equally futile. Koerber proposed that Bohemia be divided into 10 districts, of which 5 would be Czech, 3 German and 2 mixed. Of the 234 district tribunals, 133 were to be Czech, 94 German and 7 mixed. The Czechs demanded on the contrary that both their language and German should be placed on an equal footing throughout Bohemia, and be used for all official purposes in the same way. As this demand involved the recognition of Czech as a language of internal service in Bohemia it was refused by the Germans. Thenceforward, until his fall on the 31st of December 1904, Koerber governed practically without parliament. The Chamber was summoned at intervals rather as a pretext for the subsequent employment of paragraph 14 than in the hope of securing its assent to legislative measures. The Czechs blocked business by a pile of "urgency motions" and occasionally indulged in noisy obstruction. On one occasion a sitting lasted 57 hours without interruption. In consequence of Czech aggressiveness, the German parties (the German Progressists, the German Populists, the Constitutional Landed Proprietors and the Christian Socialists) created a joint executive committee and a supreme committee of four members to watch over German racial interests.

[Sidenote: Baron Gautsch premier.]

By the end of 1904 it had become clear that the system of government by paragraph 14, which Dr von Koerber had perfected was not effective in the long run. Loans were needed for military and other purposes, and paragraph 14 itself declares that it cannot be employed for the contraction of any lasting burden upon the exchequer, nor for any sale of state patrimony. As the person of the premier had become so obnoxious to the Czechs that his removal would be regarded by them as a concession, his resignation was suddenly accepted by the emperor, and, on the 1st of January 1905, a former premier, Baron von Gautsch, was appointed in his stead. Parliamentary activity was at once resumed; the Austro-Hungarian tariff contained in the Szell-Koerber compact was adopted, the estimates were discussed and the commercial treaty with Germany ratified. In the early autumn, however, a radical change came over the spirit of Austrian politics. For nearly three years Austria had been watching with bitterness and depression the course of the crisis in Hungary. Parliament had repeatedly expressed its disapproval of the Magyar demands upon the crown, but had succeeded only in demonstrating its own impotence. The feeling that Austria could be compelled by imperial ordinance under paragraph 14 to acquiesce in whatever concessions the crown might make to Hungary galled Austrian public opinion and prepared it for coming changes. In August 1905 the crown took into consideration and in September sanctioned the proposal that universal suffrage be introduced into the official programme of the Fejervary cabinet then engaged in combating the Coalition in Hungary. It is not to be supposed that the king of Hungary assented to this programme without reflecting that what he sought to further in Hungary, it would be impossible for him, as emperor of Austria, to oppose in Cisleithania. His subsequent action justifies, indeed, the belief that, when sanctioning the Fejervary programme, the monarch had already decided that universal suffrage should be introduced in Austria; but even he can scarcely have been prepared for the rapidity with which the movement in Austria gained ground and accomplished its object.

[Sidenote: Franchise reform.]

On the 15th of September 1905 a huge socialist and working-class demonstration in favour of universal suffrage took place before the parliament at Budapest. The Austrian Socialist party, encouraged by this manifestation and influenced by the revolutionary movement in Russia, resolved to press for franchise reform in Austria also. An initial demonstration, resulting in some bloodshed, was organized in Vienna at the beginning of November. At Prague, Graz and other towns, demonstrations and collisions with the police were frequent. The premier, Baron Gautsch, who had previously discountenanced universal suffrage while admitting the desirability of a restricted reform, then changed attitude and permitted an enormous Socialist demonstration, in support of universal suffrage, to take place (November 28) in the Vienna Ringstrasse. Traffic was suspended for five hours while an orderly procession of workmen, ten abreast, marched silently along the Ringstrasse past the houses of parliament. The demonstration made a deep impression upon public opinion. On the same day the premier promised to introduce by February a large measure of franchise reform so framed as to protect racial minorities from being overwhelmed at the polls by majorities of other races. On the 23rd of February 1906 he indeed brought in a series of franchise reform measures. Their main principles were the abolition of the _curia_ or electoral class system and the establishment of the franchise on the basis of universal suffrage; and the division of Austria electorally into racial compartments within which each race would be assured against molestation from other races. The Gautsch redistribution bill proposed to increase the number of constituencies from 425 to 455, to allot a fixed number of constituencies to each province and, within each province, to each race according to its numbers and tax-paying capacity. The reform bill proper proposed to enfranchise every male citizen above 24 years of age with one year's residential qualification.

At first the chances of the adoption of such a measure seemed small. It was warmly supported from outside by the Social Democrats, who held only 11 seats in the House; inside, the Christian Socialists or Lueger party were favourable on the whole as they hoped to gain seats at the expense of the German Progressives and German Populists and to extend their own organization throughout the empire. The Young Czechs, too, were favourable, while the Poles reserved their attitude. Hostile [v.03 p.0038] in principle and by instinct, they waited to ascertain the mind of the emperor, before actively opposing the reform. With the exception of the German Populists who felt that a German "Liberal" party could not well oppose an extension of popular rights, all the German Liberals were antagonistic, some bitterly, to the measure. The Constitutional Landed Proprietors who had played so large a part in Austrian politics since the 'sixties, and had for a generation held the leadership of the German element in parliament and in the country, saw themselves doomed and the leadership of the Germans given to the Christian Socialists. None of the representatives of the _curia_ system fought so tenaciously for their privileges as did the German nominees of the _curia_ of large landed proprietors. Their opposition proved unavailing. The emperor frowned repeatedly upon their efforts.

[Sidenote: Baron Beck premier.]

Baron Gautsch fell in April over a difference with the Poles, and his successor, Prince Konrad zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfuerst, who had taken over the reform bills, resigned also, six weeks later, as a protest against the action of the crown in consenting to the enactment of a customs tariff in Hungary distinct from, though identical with, the joint Austro-Hungarian tariff comprised in the Szell-Koerber compact and enacted as a joint tariff by the Reichsrath. A new cabinet was formed (June 2) by Baron von Beck, permanent under secretary of state in the ministry for agriculture, an official of considerable ability who had first acquired prominence as an instructor of the heir apparent, Archduke Francis Ferdinand, in constitutional and administrative law. By dint of skilful negotiation with the various parties and races, and steadily supported by the emperor who, on one occasion, summoned the recalcitrant party leaders to the Hofburg _ad audiendum verbum_ and told them the reform "must be accomplished," Baron Beck succeeded, in October 1906, in attaining a final agreement, and on the 1st of December in securing the adoption of the reform. During the negotiations the number of constituencies was raised to 516, divided, according to provinces, as follows:--

Bohemia . . . . . . . . 130 previously 110
Galicia . . . . . . . . 106 " 78
Lower Austria . . . . . . . 64 " 46
Moravia . . . . . . . . 49 " 43
Styria. . . . . . . . . 30 " 27
Tirol . . . . . . . . . 25 " 21
Upper Austria . . . . . . . 22 " 20
Austrian Silesia . . . . . . 15 " 12
Bukovina . . . . . . . . 14 " 11
Carniola . . . . . . . . 12 " 11
Dalmatia . . . . . . . . 11 " 11
Carinthia . . . . . . . . 10 " 10
Salzburg . . . . . . . . 7 " 7
Istria. . . . . . . . . 6 " 5
Goerz and Gradisca. . . . . . 6 " 5
Trieste and territory . . . . . 5 " 5
Vorarlberg. . . . . . . . 4 " 4

In the allotment of the constituencies to the various races their tax-paying capacity was taken into consideration. In mixed districts separate constituencies and registers were established for the electors of each race, who could only vote on their own register for a candidate of their own race. Thus Germans were obliged to vote for Germans and Czechs for Czechs; and, though there might be victories of Clerical over Liberal Germans or of Czech Radicals over Young Czechs, there could be no victories of Czechs over Germans, Poles over Ruthenes, or Slovenes over Italians. The constituencies were divided according to race as follows:--

Germans of all parties. . . . . 233 previously 205
Czechs of all parties . . . . . 108 " 81
Poles . . . . . . . . . 80 " 71
Southern Slavs (Slovenes, Croats,
Serbs) . . . . . . . . 37 " 27
Ruthenes . . . . . . . . 34 " 11
Italians . . . . . . . . 19 " 18
Rumanians . . . . . . . . 5 " 5

These allotments were slightly modified at the polls by the victory of some Social Democratic candidates not susceptible of strict racial classification. The chief feature of the allotment was, however, the formal overthrow of the fiction that Austria is preponderatingly a German country and not a country preponderatingly Slav with a German dynasty and a German facade. The German constituencies, though allotted in a proportion unduly favourable, left the Germans, with 233 seats, in a permanent minority as compared with the 259 Slav seats. Even with the addition of the "Latin" (Rumanian and Italian) seats the "German-Latin block" amounted only to 257. This "block" no longer exists in practice, as the Italians now tend to co-operate rather with the Slavs than with the Germans. The greatest gainers by the redistribution were the Ruthenes, whose representation was trebled, though it is still far from being proportioned to their numbers. This and other anomalies will doubtless be corrected in future revisions of the allotment, although the German parties, foreseeing that any revision must work out to their disadvantage, stipulated that a two-thirds majority should be necessary for any alteration of the law.

[Sidenote: General election 1907.]

After unsuccessful attempts by the Upper House to introduce plural voting, the bill became law in January 1907, the peers insisting only upon the establishment of a fixed _maximum_ number or _numerus clausus_, of non-hereditary peers, so as to prevent the resistance of the Upper Chamber from being overwhelmed at any critical moment by an influx of crown nominees appointed _ad hoc_. The general election which took place amid considerable enthusiasm on the 14th of May resulted in a sweeping victory for the Social Democrats whose number rose from 11 to 87; in a less complete triumph for the Christian Socialists who increased from 27 to 67; and in the success of the extremer over the conservative elements in all races. A classification of the groups in the new Chamber presents many difficulties, but the following statement is approximately accurate. It must be premised that, in order to render the Christian Socialist or Lueger party the strongest group in parliament, an amalgamation was effected between them and the conservative Catholic party:--

_German Conservatives_-- Total.
Christian Socialists. . . . . . . . 96
German Agrarians. . . . . . . . . 19
_German Liberals_--
Progressives. . . . . . . . . . 15
Populists . . . . . . . . . . 29
Pan-German radicals (Wolf group). . . . . 13
Unattached Pan-Germans . . . . . . . 3
" Progressives . . . . . . . 2
_Czechs_-- -- 177
Czech Agrarians . . . . . . . . . 28
Young Czechs. . . . . . . . . . 18
Czech Clericals . . . . . . . . . 17
Old Czechs . . . . . . . . . . 7
Czech National Socialists . . . . . . 9
Realists. . . . . . . . . . . 2
Unattached Czech. . . . . . . . . 1
_Social Democrats_-- -- 82
Of all races. . . . . . . . . . 87 87
_Poles_--
Democrats . . . . . . . . . . 26
Conservatives . . . . . . . . . 15
Populists . . . . . . . . . . 18
Centre . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Independent Socialist . . . . . . . 1
_Ruthenes_-- -- 72
National Democrats . . . . . . . . 25
Old or Russophil Ruthenes . . . . . . 5
_Slovenes_-- -- 30
Clericals . . . . . . . . . . 17
_Southern Slav Club_--
Croats . . }
Serbs . . .} . . . . . . . . 20 37
Slovene Liberals }
_Italians_--
Clerical Populists . . . . . . . . 11
Liberals. . . . . . . . . . . 4
-- 15
_Rumanians_--
Rumanian Club . . . . . . . . . 5 5
_Jews_--
Zionists. . . . . . . . . . . 4
Democrats . . . . . . . . . . 1 5
--
Unclassified, vacancies, &c. . . . . . 6 6
---
516

[v.03 p.0039] The legislature elected by universal suffrage worked fairly smoothly during the first year of its existence. The estimates were voted with regularity, racial animosity was somewhat less prominent, and some large issues were debated. The desire not to disturb the emperor's Diamond Jubilee year by untoward scenes doubtless contributed to calm political passion, and it was celebrated in 1908 with complete success. But it was no sooner over than the crisis over the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is dealt with above, eclipsed all purely domestic affairs in the larger European question.

(H. W. S.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--1. _Sources_. A collection of early authorities on Austrian history was published in 3 vols. folio by Hieronymus Pez (Leipzig, 1721-1725) under the title _Scriptores rerum Austriacarum veteres et genuini_, of which a new edition was printed at Regensburg in 1745, and again, under the title of _Rerum Austriacarum scriptores_, by A. Rauch at Vienna in 1793-1794. It was not, however, till the latter half of the 19th century that the vast store of public and private archives began to be systematically exploited. Apart from the material published in the _Monumenta Germ. Hist_. of Pertz and his collaborators, there are several collections devoted specially to the sources of Austrian history. Of these the most notable is the _Fontes rerum Austriacarum_, published under the auspices of the Historical Commission of the Imperial Academy of Sciences at Vienna; the series, of which the first volume was published in 1855, is divided into two parts: (i.) _Scriptores_, of which the 9th vol. appeared in 1904; (ii.) _Diplomataria et Acta_, of which the 58th vol. appeared in 1906. It covers the whole range of Austrian history, medieval and modern. Another collection is the _Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte, Literatur und Sprache Oesterreichs und seiner Kronlaender_, edited by J. Hirn and J. E. Wackernagel (Graz, 1895, &c.), of which vol. x. appeared in 1906. Besides these there are numerous accounts and inventories of public and private archives, for which see Dahlmann-Waitz, _Quellenkunde_ (ed. 1906), pp. 14-15, 43, and suppl. vol. (1907), pp. 4-5. Of collections of treaties the most notable is that of L. Neumann, _Recueil des traites conclus par l'Autriche avec les puissances etrangeres depuis 1763_ (6 vols., Leipzig, 1855: c.), continued by A. de Plason (18 vols., Vienna, 1877-1905). In 1907, however, the Imperial Commission for the Modern History of Austria issued the first volume of a new series, _Oesterreichische Staatsvertraege_, which promises to be of the utmost value. Like the _Recueil des traites conclus par la Russie_ of T. T. de Martens, it is compiled on the principle of devoting separate volumes to the treaties entered into with the several states; this is obviously convenient as enabling the student to obtain a clear review of the relations of Austria to any particular state throughout the whole period covered. For treaties see also J. Freiherr von Vasque von Puettlingen, _Uebersicht der oesterreichischen Staatsvertraege seit Maria Theresa bis auf die neueste Zeit_ (Vienna, 1868); and L. Bittner, _Chronologisches Verzeichnis der oesterreichischen Staatsvertraege_ (Band G, 1526-1723, Vienna, 1903).

2. _Works_.--(a) _General._ Archdeacon William Coxe's _History of the House of Austria, 1218-1792_ (3 vols., London, 1817), with its continuation by W. Kelly (London, 1853; new edition, 1873), remains the only general history of Austria in the English language. It has, of course, long been superseded as a result of the research indicated above. The amount of work that has been devoted to this subject since Coxe's time will be seen from the following list of books, which are given in the chronological order of their publication:--J. Majlath, _Geschichte des oesterreichischen Kaiserstaates_ (5 vols., Hamburg, 1834-1850); Count F. von Hartig, _Genesis der Revolution in Oesterreich im Jahre 1848_ (Leipzig, 1851; 3rd edition, enlarged, _ib._, 1851; translated as appendix to Coxe's _House of Austria_, ed. 1853), a work which created a great sensation at the time and remains of much value; W. H. Stiles, _Austria in 1848-1849_ (2 vols., New York, 1852), by an eye-witness of events; M. Buedinger, _Oesterreichische Gesch. bis zum Ausgange des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts_, vol. i. to A.D. 1055 (Leipzig, 1858); A. Springer, _Geschichte Oesterreichs seit dem Wiener Frieden_, 1809 (2 vols. to 1849; Leipzig, 1863-1865); A. von Arneth, _Geschichte Maria Theresias_ (10 vols., Vienna, 1863-1879); the series _Oesterreichische Gesch. fuer das Volk_, 17 vols., by various authors (Vienna, 1864, &c.), for which see Dahlmann-Waitz, p. 86; H. Bidermann, _Gesch. der oesterreichischen Gesamtstaatsidee_, 1526-1804, parts 1 and 2 to 1740 (Innsbruck, 1867, 1887); J. A. Freiherr von Helfert, _Gesch. Oesterreichs vom Ausgange des Oktoberaufstandes_, 1848, vols. i.-iv. (Leipzig and Prague, 1869-1889); W. Rogge, _Oesterreich von Vilagos bis zur Gegenwart_ (3 vols., Leipzig and Vienna, 1872, 1873), and _Oesterreich seit der Katastrophe Hohenwart-Beust_ (Leipzig, 1879), written from a somewhat violent German standpoint; Franz X. Krones (Ritter von Marchland), _Handbuch der Gesch. Oesterreichs_ (5 vols., Berlin, 1876-1879), with copious references, _Gesch. der Neuzeit Oesterreichs vom 18ten Jahrhundert bis auf die Gegenwart_ (Berlin, 1879), from the German-liberal point of view, and _Grundriss der oesterreichischen Gesch_. (Vienna, 1882); Baron Henry de Worms, _The Austro-Hungarian Empire_ (London, 2nd ed., 1876); Louis Asseline, _Histoire de l'Autriche depuis la mort de Marie Therese_ (Paris, 1877), sides with the Slavs against Germans and Magyars; Louis Leger, _Hist. de l'Autriche-Hongrie_ (Paris, 1879), also strongly Slavophil; A. Wolf, _Geschichtliche Bilder aus Oesterreich_ (2 vols., Vienna, 1878-1880), and _Oesterreich unter Maria Theresia, Joseph II. und Leopold I._ (Berlin, 1882); E. Wertheimer, _Gesch. Oesterreichs und Ungarns im ersten Jahrzehnt des 19ten Jahrhunderts_ (2 vols., Leipzig, 1884-1890); A. Huber, _Gesch. Oesterreichs_, vols. i. to v. up to 1648 (in Heeren's _Gesch. der europ. Staaten_, Gotha, 1885-1895); J. Emmer, _Kaiser Franz Joseph I., fuenfzig Jahre oesterreichischer Gesch_. (2 vols., Vienna, 1898); F. M. Mayer, _Gesch. Oesterreichs mit besonderer Ruecksicht auf das Kulturleben_ (2 vols. 2nd ed., Vienna, 1900-1901); A. Dopsch, _Forschungen zur inneren Gesch. Oesterreichs_, vol. i. 1 (Innsbruck, 1903); Louis Eisenmann, _Le Compromis austro-hongrois de 1867_ (Paris, 1904); H. Friedjung, _Oesterreich von 1848 bis 1860_ (Stuttgart, 1908 seq.); Geoffrey Drage, _Austria-Hungary_ (London, 1909).

(b) _Constitutional._--E. Werunsky, _Oesterreichische Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte_ (Vienna, 1894, &c.); A. Bechmann, _Lehrbuch der oesterreichischen Reichsgesch_. (Prague, 1895-1896); A. Huber, _Oesterreichische Reichsgesch_. (Leipzig and Vienna, 1895, 2nd ed. by A. Dopsch, _ib._, 1901); A. Luschin von Ebengreuth, _Oesterreichische Reichsgesch_. (2 vols., Bamberg, 1895, 1896), a work of first-class importance; and _Grundriss der oesterreichischen Reichsgesch_. (Bamberg, 1899); G. Kolmer, _Parlament und Verfassung in Oesterreich_, vols. i. to iii. from 1848 to 1885 (Vienna, 1902-1905). For relations with Hungary see J. Andrassy, _Ungarns Ausgleich mit Oesterreich, 1867_ (Leipzig, 1897); L. Eisenmann, _Le Compromis austro-hongrois de 1867_ (Paris, 1904).

(c) _Diplomatic._--A. Beer, _Zehn Jahre oesterreichischer Politik, 1801-1810_ (Leipzig, 1877), and _Die orientalische Politik Oesterreichs seit 1774_ (Prague and Leipzig, 1883); A. Fournier, _Gentz und Cobenzl: Gesch. der oest. Politik in den Jahren 1801-1805_ (Vienna, 1880); F. von Demelitsch, _Metternich und seine auswaertige Politik_, vol. i. (1809-1812, Stuttgart, 1898); H. Uebersberger, _Oesterreich und Russland seit dem Ende des 15ten Jahrhunderts_, vol. i. 1488 to 1605 (Kommission fuer die neuere Gesch. Oesterreichs, Vienna, 1905). See further the bibliographies to the articles on METTERNICH, GENTZ, &c. For the latest developments of the "Austrian question" see Andre Cheradame, _L'Europe et la question d'Autriche au seuil du XX^e siecle_ (Paris, 1901), and _L'Allemagne, la France et la question d'Autriche_ (76, 1902); Rene Henry, _Questions d'Autriche-Hongrie et question d'orient_ (Paris, 1903), with preface by Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu; "Scotus Viator," _The Future of Austria-Hungary_ (London, 1907).

(d) _Racial Question._--There is a very extensive literature on the question of languages and race in Austria. The best statement of the legal questions involved is in Josef Ulbrith and Ernst Mischler's _Oesterr. Staatswoerterbuch_ (3 vols., Vienna, 1894-1897; 2nd ed. 1904, &c.). See also Dummreicher, _Suedostdeutsche Betrachtungen_ (Leipzig, 1893); Hainisch, _Die Zukunft der Deutsch-Oesterreicher_ (Vienna, 1892); Herkner, _Die Zukunft der Deutsch-Oesterreicher_ (_ib._ 1893); L. Leger, _La Save, le Danube et le Balkan_ (Paris, 1884); Bressnitz von Sydacoff, _Die panslavistische Agitation_ (Berlin, 1899); Bertrand Auerbach, _Les Races et les nationalites en Autriche-Hongrie_ (Paris, 1898).

(e) _Biographical._--C. von Wurzbach, _Biographisches Lexikon des Kaisertums Oesterreich_ (60 vols., Vienna, 1856-1891); also the _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_.

Many further authorities, whether works, memoirs or collections of documents, are referred to in the lists appended to the articles in this book on the various Austrian sovereigns and statesmen. For full bibliography see Dahlmann-Waitz, _Quellenkunde_ (ed. 1906, and subsequent supplements); many works, covering particular periods, are also enumerated in the bibliographies in the several volumes of the _Cambridge Modern History_.

(W. A. P.)

[1] Rudolph V. as archduke of Austria, II. as emperor.

[2] Thus, while the number of recruits, though varying from year to year, could be settled by the war department, the question of the claim of a single conscript for exemption, on grounds not recognized by precedent, could only be settled by imperial decree.

[3] Forbidden books were the only ones read, and forbidden newspapers the only ones believed.

[4] In Hungary the diet was not summoned at all between 1811 and 1825, nor in Transylvania between 1811 and 1834.

[5] For the separate political histories of Austria and Hungary see the section on II. _Austria Proper_, below, and HUNGARY; the present section deals with the history of the whole monarchy as such.

[6] Baron H. de Worms, _The Austro-Hungarian Empire_ (London, 1876), and Beust's _Memoirs_.

[7] See General Le Brun, _Souvenirs militaires_ (1866-1870, Paris, 1895); also, Baron de Worms, _op. cit_., and the article on BEUST.

[8] Josef, Freiherr Philippovi['c] von Philippsberg (1818-1889), belonged to an old Christian noble family of Bosnia.