Part 42 (1/2)

The national consciousness gathered fresh impulse from the appearance of the great national epic, _Kalevala_, songs descending from heathen times, written down by Elias Lonnrot from the lips of the people, as described in a former chapter. In no less degree was the national feeling intensified by the great poet, Johan Ludvig Runeberg. In his poems, inspired by a glowing love for the Finnish fatherland, he glorified the courage, faithfulness, and honour of the Finnish people.

Although written in Swedish, the poems, successfully translated, have become the property of the whole population.

With the awakening national feeling it is natural that special attention should be directed to the cause of the long neglected Finnish language. One of the earliest and most important champions of this language was Johan Wilhelm Snellman, who advocated his cause with great vigour and skill in his two journals, first the _Saima_ (1844-1847), and _Literaturblad for allman medborgerlig bildning_[F] (1847-1863).

Snellman's activity was of epoch-making importance for Finland. With much penetration he proved that the existence of the Finnish people depended on the preservation and development of the language spoken by the bulk of the population. He maintained that the West-European civilisation, that had been imparted to the Finnish nation, would never take firm root if only supported by a small upper cla.s.s--it ought to become the property of the whole people. An educated, Finnish-speaking cla.s.s must be created, and to this end schools established in which the pupils could receive their instruction in Finnish. The Finnish language must be introduced in government offices, courts of justice, and so on.

Snellman's ideas were embraced with enthusiasm by large portions of the educated cla.s.ses, particularly so by University students. Snellman's campaign was not conducted without opposition. His career commenced at the period of bureaucratic reaction characteristic of the _regime_ of Nicholas I. In 1850 the draconic edict was issued by which the publication of all other books than those of a religious or economic nature in the Finnish language was forbidden. This somewhat preposterous edict had soon to be repealed, and Snellman's work gained more recognition. He was appointed Professor of Philosophy in 1856, and a member of the Senate in 1863. In the same year an ordinance was issued by which the Finnish language was admitted to Government offices and Courts of Justice, but it was not as yet recognised as a language with equal rights with Swedish. In the meantime the language question came to form the dividing line between the two princ.i.p.al parties in the home politics of Finland.

As explained in Chapter VII., the champions of the Finnish language were dubbed _Fennomans_, while those who advocated the position of Swedish were known as _Svecomans_. The strife between the two parties was at times very bitter, especially between the extreme wings of the parties.

The extremists on the Finnish side wanted the Finnish tongue to supersede the Swedish, which was to be reduced to the position of a tolerated local language. The moderates on both sides found a _modus vivendi_ in the equality of rights of the two languages. On the whole, the Svecoman party recognised the justness of the Finnish claims, but advocated vigorously the necessity of preserving the Swedish language, which, besides being the mother tongue of a considerable portion of the peasantry in Finland, possessed historic rights as the language of the higher culture in the country, and forms the link of communication with Scandinavian, and the whole West European civilisation. The Svecomans gave a warning against a too hasty introduction of the Finnish language into official use before its undoubted lack of an official terminology had been properly filled. The Fennomans, again, admitting the soundness of this objection, set to work at the development of Finnish, and their untiring efforts have borne excellent fruits, so that at the present time it not only is well equipped with a legal phraseology, but is capable of serving the demands of cultured literature and science. One point of difference between Fennomans and Svecomans consisted in this, that the former, naturally impatient to effect a full recognition of their language, insisted that the language question should be settled by means of an administrative ordinance, which could be done much quicker than by a law duly pa.s.sed by the Diet. This latter procedure might take years, considering the long intervals at that time between the sessions of the Diet, even if the Diet, in which then the Swedish element predominated, would pa.s.s such a Bill. The Svecomans, again, preferred the second course, as being const.i.tutionally sounder, and they also pointed to the dangerous precedent an administrative procedure would involve. The opposition of the Svecomans was also to some degree at least based on their reluctance, especially on the part of officials belonging to an older generation, to acquire knowledge of an extremely difficult language, and a language which was still in official making.

The resistance offered by the extremists of the Svecoman party to the establishment of new Finnish secondary schools was certainly not to their credit.

It is impossible to follow here the language struggle in Finland in all its vicissitudes. At present, Finnish and Swedish form the two official languages in Finland, with a natural preponderance of Finnish, as the language of the majority. Every one aspiring to an official position in Finland must possess a sufficient knowledge of both languages. In some posts, Russian is also required, and the plan is now contemplated in St.

Petersburg to supersede both Swedish and Finnish with Russian in all the more important Departments, though the Russian-speaking population in Finland only amounts to a few thousand people.

To a stranger like myself this seems a curious idea, hardly worthy of so great a country as Russia.

The language question is no longer the dominant factor in Finnish party politics; but before we proceed to an account of the new party divisions, it will be necessary to give a brief sketch of the recent political history of the Grand Duchy.

Whereas under Alexander II. the Const.i.tution of Finland had been respected, and its liberties even to some degree extended, attempts were made under Alexander III. to over-ride the Finnish laws, but these did not affect questions of greater importance. At that time not only was Finland at peace, but Russia herself had not begun that terrible struggle which later kept her in an iron grip--the universal socialistic unrest from which the whole world is suffering.

When, in 1894, Nicholas II. ascended the throne, he signed, as had all his august predecessors, the Act of a.s.surance, in which he promised to maintain the Const.i.tution.

For some time everything went on smoothly, until 1898, when General Bobrikoff was appointed Governor-General of the Grand Duchy, and grave misgivings began to be entertained in Finland. General Bobrikoff was preceded by a reputation of being the princ.i.p.al agent in the Russification of the Baltic Provinces, and it soon appeared that he was sent to Finland on a similar mission.

Simultaneously with General Bobrikoff's appointment, the Finnish Estates were summoned to an extraordinary session in January 1899, and in the summons it was said that a Bill for a new military law would be presented to them. The Bill, when it arrived in the Diet, turned out to be entirely subversive of the existing military organisation, and tended to a complete denationalisation of the Finnish army; it contained no provision as to the limitation of recruits to be taken out annually for service with the colours, and their number might be increased five or even six times, as compared with the number taken out under the old law.

It soon became evident that the Diet would not accept this Bill, and while the deliberations were still in a preliminary stage, an event happened which was to mark a new epoch in the recent history of Finland.

A ”Gracious Manifesto,” dated February 15, 1899, was published, by which the legislative competence of the Finnish Diet was limited to minor local affairs, and the general effect of which was an overthrow of the Finnish Const.i.tution. It is impossible to describe adequately the excitement created in Finland by this entirely unexpected measure.

Meetings of protest were held everywhere, and in the course of a few weeks a monster address was signed by over half a million people, or about half of the adult population. A ma.s.s deputation of five hundred persons, representing all the parishes in Finland, went to St.

Petersburg to present the address to the Tzar.

But it was not received by him.

The immediate effect of the ”February Manifesto” was that the Finnish Diet was no longer required to exercise its legislative powers on the Army Bill, but it was declared that the Estates had only to give their ”opinion” on the matter.

The Diet refused to submit to this curtailment of the const.i.tutional rights of the country, and drew up a counter proposal, which, while maintaining the national character of the army, provided for a considerable increase of the Finnish troops. This proposal, as may have been expected, did not receive the Sovereign's sanction, and in 1901 a new Military Law was issued by means of an Imperial Decree, based almost entirely on the original Bill, which had been refused by the Diet.

When this new Army Edict was to be enforced it met with a vigorous opposition. The would-be recruits, summoned to the annual levies, failed in large numbers to put in their appearance. One of the effects of this opposition was the disbandment of the existing Finnish regiments.

In the meantime--both before and after the promulgation of the Army Edict--a long series of ordinances were issued, and other measures taken which were not only unconst.i.tutional in principle, but also in direct conflict with the common law of the land, too numerous to be recorded in detail in this brief summary. We may here mention only the introduction of the Russian language in public departments, the appointment of Russians to important public posts, such as provincial governors.h.i.+ps, the transfer of administrative powers from the Senate to the person of the Governor-General. To all these measures a ”pa.s.sive resistance” was organised in Finland.

It was inculcated on the minds of the people that every Finnish citizen, whether in an official position or not, affected by any illegal measures, should refuse to comply, and should act in accordance only with the indisputably legal rights of the country, irrespective of threats of punishment. Finland was struggling for her rights.

That this resistance would provoke repressive measures was fully expected, and the expectations were amply fulfilled. Scores of officials, though legally irremovable except by trial and sentence, were summarily dismissed; judges equally summarily removed; numerous domiciliary visits were paid by the Russian police and gendarmes to persons suspected of tendencies of opposition; illegal arrests were effected.

The newspapers were ruthlessly persecuted. In the years 1899 to 1901 scores of newspapers were suspended for short periods, and twenty-four were permanently suppressed.