Part 42 (2/2)
In 1903 General Bobrikoff procured for himself dictatorial powers in Finland, of which he availed himself freely. Among other things, more than fifty Finlanders, many of them belonging to the most prominent citizens of the Grand Duchy, were exiled or deported to Russia. Some of the deportations, however, happened after the death of General Bobrikoff.
On June 16, 1904, a young official, Eugen Schauman, who had never been known to take an active interest in politics, shot General Bobrikoff dead, and immediately afterwards killed himself. A few weeks later, on July 28, M. de Plehve fell the victim of a plot of Russian revolutionaries, aided and abetted, it appears, by agents of the Russian secret police. M. de Plehve combined with his office of Russian Minister of the Interior the post as Secretary of State for Finland, which, by the way, also was illegal, as this post should be filled by a Finlander.
Thus two of the most prominent enemies of Finland were no longer among the living. M. de Plehve's immediate successor, Prince Sviatopolsk-Mirski, was a humane and liberal-minded man. The new Governor-General in Finland, Prince Obolenski, also was a man of a far less aggressive type than General Bobrikoff. Shortly after his arrival in Finland more lenient methods in dealing with Finland were adopted. In the autumn of 1904 the Diet was convoked, and those of the exiles who were either members by right of birth of the House of n.o.bles, or had been elected to either of the other Houses, were allowed to return.
At this time Russia was involved in the disastrous war with j.a.pan. The grave difficulties which the Government experienced from the repeated defeats in the Far East were further enhanced by the revolutionary movement at home. At the end of October 1905 a general strike was proclaimed in Russia, which resulted in the Tzar's manifesto of October 30, in which the establishment of a Const.i.tutional Government in Russia was promised. The same day a general strike broke out in Finland. All government offices, schools, industrial establishments, restaurants, public-houses, and shops were closed. The railway service, and to a great extent the steams.h.i.+p service, stopped; so also the telephones and the supply of electric light. Only a few telegraph lines were in operation. In the towns, the tramways and cabs no longer moved in the streets. Only the water and food supply was kept going. In Helsingfors, a deputation of leading citizens went to Prince Obolenski, and urged him to resign his post. The same demand was directed to the members of the Senate, who were too much compromised on account of their submissiveness to General Bobrikoff's _regime_.
On December 31, 1904, the Diet had adopted a ”Humble Pet.i.tion” to the Tzar for the rest.i.tution of Finland's const.i.tutional rights, but no answer had been forthcoming. This pet.i.tion was now brought to the Tzar's notice, and on November 4, 1905, he signed a Manifesto, in which he granted the pet.i.tion and repealed all the more important of the previous unconst.i.tutional measures. The Manifesto of February 15, 1899, was to be ”suspended until the questions therein contained shall be arranged by an act of legislation.” At the same time, the Diet was convoked for December 20, 1905.
The importance of this Diet is only surpa.s.sed by that held at Borg in 1809, almost a century before, and it is equalled only by the Diet of 1863. It was the last Diet held under the system of four Estates, sitting in separate houses, and the last remnant of this time-honoured, venerable, but certainly somewhat c.u.mbrous Swedish system of representation disappeared. For at this Diet the new law of the Diet, of which a brief account is given above, was adopted in May 1906. During the ”Bobrikoff era,” or ”Era of Oppression,” as the preceding years were called in Finland, women had done excellent service in the organisation of the pa.s.sive resistance movement, and largely for this reason men were ready and willing that the suffrage should be extended to women on the same conditions as to men themselves. No vulgar rioting was necessary.
Finnish men were wide-minded enough to see that as regards brains, employment, and politics, there should be no such question as s.e.x.
The proportional system of voting was also adopted without any opposition.
The same year the principles of the freedom of the Press, of a.s.semblies, and of a.s.sociations were guaranteed by a law, invested with the sanct.i.ty of fundamental laws, which, for their repeal or alteration, require a qualified majority.
We can now return to the question of parties in Finland. Already before the commencement of the ”Bobrikoff era,” the Fennoman party had split up into two groups known as the Old-Finnish and the Young-Finnish party.
The latter professed more liberal views on various questions, as in regard to religion and social problems. The Svecoman party had to a considerable extent abandoned its opposition to the Finnish claims, but it still remained as representing the interests of the Swedish population in Finland. When the Russian attacks first commenced, all party divergences were sunk into oblivion, and the country provided the spectacle of a completely united nation. General Bobrikoff was too much of a tactician to be pleased with this state of affairs, and he began to play up to the Old-Finns, not without success. Among other things, he filled all public posts, vacated by their former occupants, who had either resigned on const.i.tutional grounds or had been dismissed, exclusively with Old-Finns.
The Swedish and Young-Finnish parties now entered on a powerful party alliance, and formed the ”const.i.tutional” _bloc_, which was also joined by many influential members of the Old-Finnish party, and strongly supported by the great ma.s.ses, who had previously exercised very little political influence, and from the ranks of which the recent Social Democratic party was later on to be recruited.
It was by this _bloc_ that the pa.s.sive resistance campaign was princ.i.p.ally carried on. The leaders of the Old-Finnish party adopted a policy of yielding to General Bobrikoff's demands, by which they hoped to save some remnants of the Finnish rights. The party was to some extent disfigured by a number of office hunters, but on the whole it was actuated by patriotic motives. General Bobrikoff was well aware that the Old-Finns at heart were much opposed to his policy, but from their submissive att.i.tude, and their readiness to waive const.i.tutional objections in return for temporary advantages, he took occasion to represent to the Tzar that his policy had the ”support of the ma.s.s of the people.”
When by the law of 1906 the suffrage was extended to the great ma.s.ses of the people, two new parties arose. The most numerous of all parties in Finland is now the Social Democratic party, which is strongly opposed to the Russian demands. So also is the Agrarian Reform party, which takes up a radical platform in questions of land legislation, and is closely allied to the Young-Finns, with some leanings towards Socialism. A small group is formed by the ”Christian Labourers.”
Since 1906 no less than five elections have been held, and their results may be seen from the following table:--
Agrarian Social Swedish Reform Christian Democrats. Old-Finns. Young-Finns. Party. Party. Labourers.
1907 80 59 26 24 9 2 1908 83 54 27 25 9 2 1909 84 48 29 25 13 1 1910 86 42 28 26 17 1 1911 80 43 28 26 16 1
The reason why so many elections have taken place--practically every year--though the members are elected for three years, is that the Diets have been dissolved by Imperial command, because they have protested against new breaches of the Const.i.tution. Some of the more important instances may here be recorded. In June 1908 the Russian Council of Ministers was invested with far-reaching powers to interfere in the business both of the Finnish Senate and the Diet. In 1910 the Russian Legislature adopted a proposal, presented by the Tzar, and sanctioned by him on June 30, which provided that a vast number of questions, specified in the new law, were withdrawn from the competence of the Finnish Diet. Legislation on such questions was henceforward transferred to the Russian Legislature, and the Diet was placed in a position to give its opinion on them only. When a law relating to Finland was to be discussed in the Russian Duma or Council of State, Finland was to be represented by four members in the former, and two members in the latter Chamber. The Finnish Diet declared that it could not recognise the new law as legal, since it was unconst.i.tutionally enacted, and in substance const.i.tuted a breach of Finnish laws.
In February 1912 the Russian Legislature pa.s.sed a law, by which Russians coming to Finland were to enjoy all the rights accruing to Finns without acquiring Finnish citizens.h.i.+p. A serious question of principle is involved in this new measure, since it amounts to the negation of a separate Finnish citizens.h.i.+p, which has. .h.i.therto been recognised by the Russian rulers even in their dealings with foreign powers. One of the obvious motives for this law is to make it possible to appoint Russian officials to Finnish posts. Several such appointments have already taken place. In August 1912 the members of the Wiborg Town Court were arrested, and brought to St. Petersburg to be tried before a Russian Court for having refused to apply the law just mentioned.
The people of Finland are awaiting with grave anxiety further developments in the present Russian policy.
I am only an outsider, but I have travelled a little both in Finland and Russia. It seems to me that the characters of the two peoples are so fundamentally different, they should each have free hands; and that Russia, while retaining Finland as part of the Russian Empire, should allow her the administration of her own affairs, which she has always shown herself so capable of exercising.
THE END.
FOOTNOTES:
[F] _Journal for Literature and General Instruction in Civic Affairs._
ESTABLISHED 1798
[Ill.u.s.tration]
<script>