A SORT OF WAR IN CARINTHIA
But the German-Austrians in Carinthia, seeing how the Slovenes were being treated by the Italians, could not resist attacking on their own account; and here the most tragic feature was that in the German ranks were many Germanized Slovenes. This had been the case at Maribor in Styria, where the population rose against the 70 Slovene soldiers during the visit of an American mission. Many of those who were afterwards questioned were obliged to admit that they were of Slovene or of partly Slovene origin, but Austria had taken care of their national conscience. Had they been freely left to choose between the two nationalities, and had they, out of admiration for the German, selected that one—you would not endeavour now to make them Slovenes; but of course these people were never given the choice, and therefore every effort should be used to make to dance that portion of their blood which is Slovene, and sometimes all your efforts will be fruitless. That those who fought in Carinthia against the Slovene troops were of this origin can be seen by the names of the officers of the so-called "Volkswehralarmkompagnien" (i.e. the People's Emergency Defence Companies). A document, marked W. No. 101, and signed by a Captain Sandner, fell into Slovene hands on February 21. It gives very full arrangements for these companies in Wolfsberg and the neighbourhood. At St. Paul, for instance, men are to gather from three other regions, to wit 40 from St. Paul itself, 120 from Granitzthal, 60 from Lagerbuch and 30 from Eitweg; the officers of this St. Paul contingent are called Kronegger, Andrec, Klötsch and Gritsch—the last three are of Slovene origin. These Defence Companies consisted largely of ex-soldiers, under the command, very often, of a schoolmaster or some such person; and if they had done nothing more than to defend their own soil, one would have less to say about them; but as a matter of fact they sent arms across to their adherents in the territory occupied by the Slovenes. Thus at Velikovec (Völkermarkt) and Donji Dravograd (Unter-Drauburg) shots were fired from houses which had been armed in this way. Incursions were made into Yugoslav territory, where the people were urged to rise; and as these Defence Companies did not wear any uniform their members could, if captured, protest their innocence. The officers were given 20 crowns a day, the men six crowns, with 5.44 a day for their keep during the time of emergency, and four crowns daily in addition if they went outside the garrison town. As it would not be possible to get the commissariat at once into working order the men were asked to bring at least sufficient bread with them for a few days. Most of the men had their own guns; those who had not would be lent one at the village office on the understanding that it was brought back there when the emergency was over. These Defence Companies were joined in the spring by 2000 of the proletariat of Vienna who, at the railway station before they started, were cheered by speeches on the subject of plunder; at Graz they were joined by some students who proposed to maintain order.... It was in April that the Germans began nearly every day to fire on the Yugoslav troops, regardless of the Americans, who said that any infringement of the Armistice would be severely punished. The Slovene bridgehead around Velikovec was, towards the end of April, bombarded for several days with heavy artillery, and the local commander, on his own initiative, crossed the Armistice line in order to seize this artillery; he did, in fact, carry off some twenty pieces, with which he returned to his old positions. This caused the Germans to send through Zurich most indignant telegrams to the Entente Press, denouncing the Yugoslavs for having flagrantly crossed the Armistice line by 10 kilometres (cf. Le Journal, for example, of May 5). In the same report they were held up as villains for having crossed the river Drave at several points and cut the railway line; as a matter of fact their infantry was at least 11 kilometres to the south of the Drave, and the artillery, of course, still farther off. This railway line, which was the means of communication between Austrians and Italians, was the subject of very fierce talk on the part of the latter. All this time, be it remembered, the Slovenes had feeble forces; and their own officers do not pretend that they approach the Serbs as combatants. After centuries of servitude—a more insidious servitude than if their masters had been Moslem—they have now awakened to devote themselves, and with great success, to agriculture and industry. Nevertheless the old fighting spirit of the Slav has not been quite extinguished in them. Their opponents on May 2 made a big attack upon Celovec (Klagenfurt) and Beljak (Villach), where they had at their disposal the munitions of the entire 10th Austrian army. Several battalions had come down from Vienna, as well as 340 unemployed Austrian ex-officers, who were clothed as infantry privates. These officers were serving for the love of their country—up to May 1 at all events they were in receipt of no pay. The Slovene ranks were somewhat depleted by Bolševik tracts, telling them to go home, as there would be no more war; and yet at Gutenstein sixty men with three machine guns, under Lieut. Maglaj, a Slovene from Carinthia, kept 1500 men at bay from 9 a.m. till 3.30, after which they slowly withdrew until the fighting ceased at six; a corporal and two men of a machine-gun detachment were cut off and concealed themselves in the shrubs of a defile. Suddenly they heard a German company come down the road, singing as they marched. The three men opened fire—the Germans in perplexity stood still and then retired in disorder. The whole German-Austrian movement was checked by General Maister. And when the Serbian veterans, men of all ages, with uniforms of every shade, marched through the streets of Maribor, it was felt that there need be no more anxiety as to that particular frontier of Yugoslavia.
YUGOSLAVIA BEGINS TO PUT HER HOUSE IN ORDER
It was not until now that Great Britain (on May 9) and France (on June 5) formally recognized the new Serbo-Croat-Slovene State.[33] As the Times said, two years afterwards,[34] "it was not the Allies who created Czecho-Slovakia or brought about the establishment of Yugo-Slavia. These events were the inevitable result of the previous history which the Allies could not, even if they had desired to do so, prevent." The Americans had not been so extremely considerate to Italy, for they had recognized the Yugoslav State on February 7, a few days after Norway and Switzerland.... And how necessary it was for the Yugoslavs to have some leisure for their home affairs, which presented so many complications. Here one system of laws and there another—with the best will in the world and waiving to the uttermost one's own idiosyncrasies, the Serbs and Croats and Slovenes were faced, at the beginning of their union, by most arduous problems. The Agrarian question was regarded generally as one of the most urgent. In Serbia itself, with practically the whole country in the hands of small peasant proprietors, this question did not arise; but in the provinces which had been lately under Austria-Hungary no time was to be lost, and yet a good deal of time would be needed to cope with a problem so full of complications. One difficulty was that each political party was inclined to solve this matter in accordance with its own interests. Among the three Slovene parties, for example, the Socialists would naturally work for their own principles, the Christian-Socialist party, whose supporters were chiefly the small farmers, would prefer to legislate for them, while the Liberal party, having in its ranks the larger landowners, would wish that all, except the very largest, should if possible be left intact; the very large landowners, moreover, will with the spread of democratic ideas lose their influence over the voters. There are several points on which all parties are agreed: thus, it is most undesirable that a man's holdings should, as now, be separated from each other, often by considerable distances, so that half his time may be spent in going to and from his fields and a good deal of the other half in the disputes which naturally spring from such a scattered ownership.... In Bosnia, where the Agrarian troubles had produced such frequent outbreaks and savage repression, the Austrians were given the mandate in 1878 in the hope that they would regulate this matter. They did not do very much; all that they really did was to modernize a little. They wrote down in a book who was the landlord and who were the kmets, and a copy of these details was available for each one of the kmets. He had the right to remain where he was—unless his conduct was exceptionally bad—and to retain two-thirds of the produce of the land. This kmet-right was not hereditary in the female line; but the kmet could buy his portion—this was an old right, which Austria regulated—and become a free man, a beg. He would sometimes be a free man in one place and a kmet in another. In Bosnia there are, of course, some extremely large landowners; but most of the begs are poor folk, who live on the third part of a few farms. It would be better if these men were not compensated with cash, but rather that they should be established on farms which they would work themselves, the distinction between the small begs and the kmets thus disappearing.
THE PROBLEM OF AGRARIAN REFORM
A special Ministry was created to supervise, throughout Yugoslavia, the question of Agrarian Reform; but the Cabinet was frequently engaged in discussing this important topic and, many months afterwards, when the ownership of a good deal of the land had been changed, it was acknowledged that the problem had been attacked more often than it had been solved. Mr. Pašić, who does not believe in hasty legislation, pointed out that the Austrians had in forty years done really very little in Bosnia. He was told, however, that in Croatia, for example, the revolutionary spirit at the end of the War was so intense that if the Government were to postpone the necessary reforms then the people would simply seize whatever land they wished to have. It is true that violence was rampant in those parts—the peasants believed that with Austria's collapse there would arrive the Earthly Paradise, and in order to bring this about they ravaged a good many fine estates and set fire to various castles. They were going to stand no nonsense. At a place called Lubišica in Croatia—where the 350 families lived in 260 houses—the landowner, out of the goodness of his heart, bestowed twenty "joch" of meadowland on the village in 1864. A law was passed which obliged him to devote a certain amount of land to the support of the church and the school—he gave the identical twenty joch. And at the end of the War the peasants maintained that at last this land was going to be restored to them; they drove their cattle on to it, but the priest with the help of gendarmerie drove them off again. Once more the cattle came back and then the priest seized a gun; he fired at his parishioners and wounded in the head a sixteen-year-old boy, as well as three other persons. This so enraged the village that they went in a body and slew the priest.... And the authorities, although at that period they were faced with so many problems, attempted to settle right away this very complicated question. The Dobrovoljci—volunteers with the Yugoslav forces who had come home from the United States, Canada and Australia or who had managed to escape from the Austro-Hungarian army—had been promised so many acres, each of them, after the War. And these Dobrovoljci and the agitated peasants found that the land was, so to speak, thrust upon them. A lawyer-politician would take a map, would assign a certain area to A, another to B, and imagine he had done a good morning's work; but unhappily the lawyer often forgot that a farm, to be of any use to its tenant, must have a road leading to it, must have a well, a cart, a horse, some oxen and so forth—to say nothing of a dwelling-place. Thus it would happen that the new tenant would go to look at his holding and in disgust would go away, or—contrary to law—would sublet it or sell it back to the original owner. If, on the other hand, he remained the State would, from an economical point of view, only benefit in those regions where the land had hitherto been more or less uncultivated; where it had been cultivated by the moderately large or the very large landowner it always returned a harvest more considerable than that which the new tenant, insufficiently equipped and experienced, was able to achieve. Not only would there be this diminished production—frequently in the proportion of six to ten—but a large number of employees were thrown out of employment: sometimes a clever Czech overseer, whose family of six children had almost become Croat, and sometimes a native farmer whose house was wanted for the Dobrovoljci. The Czech would return to his own country and the dispossessed farmer would become a Communist. Yet these material and human losses to the State might have been endured if there had been a compensating political advantage, that is to say if the new tenants had been satisfied. But in far too many instances they were not. And one cannot help thinking that, in the vast majority of cases, they themselves would have preferred to wait until the Peasants' Co-operative Associations—such as flourish in Denmark—had been established. It need scarcely be said that, from the point of view of the peasant and of the State, these associations are an absolute necessity. The most deplorable example of the measures that were taken in such haste is seen, of course, in a model-property, such as that of Count Čekonić in the north of the Banat, where the new tenants, seeking as elsewhere to satisfy only their own wants and paying no heed to any possible exports, allow a highly developed property to go in a retrograde direction. If the Dobrovoljci had been skilled agriculturists there would have been no harm in settling them on this excellent estate; and with a Co-operative Association the 3000 joch of sugar that were grown there during the War would not now be reduced to 88 joch. But as it is, what with the unfortunate inexperience of most of the new tenants and their lack of means, and what with the stupidity of the local authorities who left to the previous owner one field here and one field there in the most absurd fashion, it would have been better both for Count Čekonić and for the State if he had simply presented to the Dobrovoljci half his land. A great many mistakes have been made in this question of Agrarian Reform, one of the most cardinal being—as Radić, the spokesman of the Croat peasants, has pointed out—to bestow the land not on people because they can farm it, but because they were heroes in the War.[35] It is a matter for congratulation that the measures now in force are not definite—the final dispositions will be taken in two or three years.[36] And perhaps then some part of the counsel of Radić may be adopted—Radić, whose critics are never weary of denouncing him for being a demagogue, a firebrand and various other things, but who by that time may very likely be a Cabinet Minister. He advises that there should be a compromise, that the ownership of land in Yugoslavia should not be strictly individualist nor strictly communist, but that while preserving the spirit of the zadruga (ownership by the community) there should also be the mobility of individual ownership.
But in the field of Agrarian Reform there has been one excellent plan, the transference of men from the unfertile districts of Montenegro and Lika, also of landless men from the Banat and Bačka, as also Serbs from Hungary and Slovenes from Istria, to those parts of Kossovo and Macedonia which were lying ownerless. The Albanians in Kossovo are mostly shepherds, and the land, which by Turkish law had belonged to "God and the Sultan," was now at the disposal of the Yugoslav authorities. Down to the spring of 1922 they had placed some 35,000 persons in these regions, the Montenegrins being generally allocated to an Albanian neighbourhood, for they are accustomed to the idiosyncrasies of the Shqyptart. At first the Albanians viewed the new settlers with disfavour, but now so great a sympathy has developed between them that on various occasions the Montenegrins have remonstrated with the gendarmes for the excessive order they enforce and which, the Montenegrins say, you really cannot ask of an Albanian. Against the Montenegrins the Albanians do not care to use their rifles, since the custom of blood-vengeance is in the Montenegrin blood. In fact, these Albanians are very fair neighbours, the most unruly of them living in the mountains of the frontier. And the Montenegrins have been showing that when they are not compelled to live with weapons in their hand they can be quite industrious. There has, till now, been more colonization of Kossovo than of Macedonia; but there are wide tracts of country around Skoplje which will be settled, once they have been freed from malaria. The political consequences that this will have on Macedonia, by the stabilization of economic conditions, the supersession of the wooden plough by the steam plough—in fact, the advent of a new European spirit need scarcely be enlarged upon. In Serbian Macedonia, or South Serbia as it is now officially called, more than seven million acres of good soil are as yet not being used.
FRENZY AT RIEKA
As the months rolled on at Rieka the Italianists became more frantic. Their telegrams to Rome, in which they begged for instant annexation, were in vain, and after all, what was the use of adopting the system of Lieut.-Colonel Stadler, their energetic podestà at Abbazia, who would go into the hills, accost the peasants and instruct them that they must not say: "It will be settled by the Paris Conference," but rather—"It has been settled by the Paris Conference." All the world was learning what was the position of affairs at Rieka; one of the most important of these plaguy Allied officers had said that when he first came to the town he thought it was Italian, but he had soon perceived that it was all a comedy, and the Italianists were dreadfully afraid that memoranda and statistics and what not had been dispatched to Paris and that there was the faintest, awful possibility that one could say: "It has been settled by the Paris Conference." Everyone, alas! was studying the case—one heard that Cardinal Bourne, in the course of being fêted at Zagreb, was reported to have shown himself quite intimate with Croatian history and to have discussed especially the story of Rieka. But by far the shrewdest blow to the Italianists was Wilson's Declaration. What had his emissaries, who had listened with such care to everybody, told him? One must have a grand procession through the town to show the whole world what the people wanted! As for Wilson, it was good to hear the lusty shouts of the "Giovani Fiumani": "Down with Wilson! down with redskins!" Some of the demonstrators, after shouting that Wilson was a donkey, a horse, a ruffian, would acclaim the new suggestion, that their enemy was not Wilson at all but Rudolf of Austria, who was still alive. Another very good idea would be to have great posters made with Wilson's head crowned by a German helmet, and now, of course, the Hotel Wilson must become the Hotel Orlando. Let them put a large black cross on all the Croat houses of Rieka—well, on second thoughts, next morning, that was not a very brilliant idea, because the crosses were too numerous; so let the soldiers rub them out again. And where the Croat names on banks and shops and elsewhere had been effaced, demolished—one could hide them by long strips of paper which they were so busy printing: "Either Italy or death!" "Viva Orlando!" "Viva Sonnino!"—those papers were the best reply to people who were asking if the entire Italian Cabinet was in harmony with Sonnino. Not merely in harmony—the Cabinet was Sonnino and more particularly Orlando was Sonnino. An Italian major came out on to a balcony one evening, in uniform, and opened his Italian heart to the crowd. What would the Allies say to that? The Dante Alighieri, the great dreadnought, manœuvring with her searchlights, let them rest awhile upon the Schley, an American destroyer. What would the Yankees do? "Avanti Savoia!" Perhaps in the old days they would have sent a shot or two into the searchlights, just for luck, but now they did nothing. And what a scene at the Opera when André Chenier was performed and one of the singers came to the word "Traitor!" and some one shouted "Wilson!" and the whole house shouted "Wilson!" and the singer, forced to repeat the blessed word, added amid indescribable enthusiasm the name of the President, that ignominious President concerning whom it was revealed by one of their newspapers that he must obviously have pocketed Yugoslav money, perhaps a million, and who most probably had a Yugoslav mistress—when that opera-singer had emended the phrase, did that very exalted Italian officer leave his box? Why, no—he stayed until the end of the performance.... Did any Italian in Rieka read to the end a small and lucid American book, Italy and the Yugoslavs, A Question of International Law, by C. A. H. Bartlett of the New York and United States Federal Bar? "It is an admitted fact," says Mr. Bartlett, "that Italy at the outbreak of hostilities had no rights to, or in, the territory to which she now makes claim. Her title, therefore, has arisen since the commencement of the War, and must be founded on either effective possession legally acquired or on documentary evidence or some other right recognized by international law." And quoting Professor Westlake (International Law, Part I. p. 91) as to the four grounds on which a State may vindicate its sovereignty over new domain, he discusses the position in the Adriatic, and concludes that Italy can claim no title by occupancy, cession, succession or self-determination. We refer elsewhere to Mr. Bartlett's commentary on the London Treaty, which is the instrument invoked by the Italians for their claims to Dalmatia. With regard to Rieka, which, as everybody knows, was not included even in the London Treaty, Mr. Bartlett says that while "admitting, for the purpose of argument, that the seizure has since resulted in an effective possession, yet, as that is not sufficient in itself to give title, it has no legal or effective force, but can be compared with nomads squatting on the roadside and then claiming a right to the soil. Italy was ashamed to assume the responsibility for the original appropriation of Rieka, which was made in violation of every legal right of those to whom it belongs, and she might well be, for a more audacious, unjustifiable proceeding in violation of every principle of international law it is difficult to imagine." ... As for the Italian National Council, listen to the stirring sentences of Mr. Grossich, its old President, after they had unanimously voted on May 17, and with passionate conviction, an order of the day directed to Orlando. In that order it was stated that they looked upon the plebiscite of October 30, 1918, as an indestructible, historical and legal fact. Grossich exposed the situation and was then for some instants mute. His voice was trembling when he spoke: "The sacrifice which circumstances may demand is tremendous, but if it is required by the supreme interests of Italy we will know how to support it. More than a citizen of Fiume, I feel myself an Italian" ("Primo che fiumano mi sento italiano"). At this point the old patriot broke into tears. "Fiume will defend herself with arms against all those who desire to violate her will, her national conscience. Seeing that her tenacious, indestructible Italianity is a grave impediment for Italy in the attaining of other objects, let Fiume be left to look after herself, sure as she is of her sons, prepared as she is, to-day more than ever, to sacrifice herself. She will defend herself against all and from wherever they come." Those who listened thought that this must mean that either the Pester Lloyd of April 29 was lying when it printed an official message stating that General Segré, the Italian representative at Vienna, had in the name of his Government requested the Hungarian Soviet Republic to undertake the care of Italian subjects in Rieka, or else that the Magyars had told him that the 22,000 or 23,000 Italian soldiers in Rieka ought to be sufficient, as this was practically one soldier for every person who had been described as an Italian. But the I.N.C. had now resolved to take no risks; they entered into negotiations with Sem Benelli, a well-known poet of the school which some critics call enlivening and other critics call inflammatory. Anyhow, on the afternoon of June 13, Mr. Benelli was made a citizen of Rieka, a member of the central committee and was entrusted with the portfolio of Minister of War, that is to say Commissary for Defence. He thanked the I.N.C. in a long speech, and declared that his appointment was the wedding of Rieka and Italy. Then Dr. Vio proposed a law, respecting the defence to the uttermost of Italian rights—that an army should be created and that the expenses should be met by the issue of bonds for a hundred million lire. The citizen Benelli was asked to undertake the organization and the command of the army.
ADMIRAL MILLO EXPLAINS THE SITUATION